Is Information Technology Like Railroads? If So, What Does That Mean?

For those of you who believe the Internet will be a transforming technology, it might also be helpful to keep in mind that such transformations can be hugely unsettling, and take quite a long time to become obvious.

Still, there is something out of character with job growth coming out of the last handful of recoveries from recessions.

What we historically expect to see is a sort of "shark fin" pattern of job growth. Since 2000, though the fin was almost non-existent after the early 2000s recession.

It is an inverse fin after the "recovery" from the 2008 recession. Does that relate to a broader economic transformation? If so, we are in for a jarring, unpleasant ride, in the medium term.

In 1850, a decade before the Civil War, the United States’ economy was small, in fact not much bigger than Italy’s. Forty years later, it was the largest economy in the world. What happened in-between was the railroads.

Deep changes like this are not unusual. Every so often—every 60 years or so—a body of technology comes along and over several decades, quietly, almost unnoticeably, transforms the economy and creates a different world for business. So the issue is whether mobility, applications and the Internet might be such a wave. The second economy

If so, the changes will take decades to play out.

If something that big is going on with information technology, something that goes well beyond the use of computers, social media, and commerce on the Internet, a second economy is being built. But there will be casualties. When the shift of developed economies "from farm to factory" occurred, there was widespread dislocation. Think of the United Kingdom in the mid-1980s, "A Christmas Carol" and all that.

In the early 20th century, U.S. farm jobs became mechanized and there was less need for farm labor, and some decades later manufacturing jobs became mechanized and there was less need for factory labor.

Now business processes—many in the service sector—are becoming “mechanized” and fewer people are needed, and this is exerting systematic downward pressure on jobs. We don’t have paralegals in the numbers we used to. Or draftsmen, telephone operators, typists, or bookkeeping people.

A lot of that work is now done digitally. We do have police and teachers and doctors; where there’s a need for human judgment and human interaction, we still have that. But the primary cause of all of the downsizing we’ve had since the mid-1990s is that a lot of human jobs are disappearing into the second economy. Not to reappear.

Perhaps that is why recoveries from recessions starting in 2000 have been so different.

UN Gives Governments a Monopoly on Internet Governance

The United Nations Committee on Science and Technology has decided that governments alone would be able to sit on a working group set up to examine improvements to the Internet Governance Forum.

This move has been condemned by the Internet Governance Caucus, the Internet Society, the International Chamber of Commerce and numerous other organizations, who have published a joint letter and launched an online petition to mobilize opposition. Read the letter here: http://isoc.org/wp/newsletter/files/2010/12/IGF-Working-Group-Decision1.pdf

The petition is here: http://isoc.org/wp/newsletter/?p=2710

Official Google Blog: Governments shouldn’t have a monopoly on Internet governance

Apple, as Usual, Provides the Exception to the "Openness" Rule

There is little question but that the "Internet" is not as "open" as it used to be, with countries putting up the equivalent of firewalls, with the growth of opt-in communities and use of mobile and other apps that are not actually "open" in the old sense of the term.

Whether the end user value obtained from the variety of different Web experiences is better or worse is a matter of interpretation. Apple has been a salient exception to the "open" trend. But Apple's achievements also illustrate the fact that "closed" approaches to user experience sometimes are embraced by end users.

Cisco Announces 322-Terabits per Second Router

To support more bandwidth consumption at the edge of the network, one needs to supply more bandwidth in the core of the network. For that reason, Cisco has announced its new CRS-3 Carrier Routing System (CRS), offering three times the capacity of the Cisco CRS-1 Carrier Routing System, which operates at 92, where the CRS-3 operates at up to 322 Terabits per second.

The device offers more than 12 times the traffic capacity of the nearest competing system, Cisco says.

The Cisco CRS-3 offers operational expense savings and up to 60 percent savings on power consumption compared to competitive platforms, Cisco says.

40 Ways the Internet Changed the World

Sometimes you need to put a face on things to understand a technology's impact.

Killer Apps and Devices of 2020 Are Not Knowable

What will the killer apps and devices of 2020 be? About  80 percent of experts surveyed by the Pew Center's  Internet & American Life Project agreed that the “hot gadgets and applications that will capture the imaginations of users in 2020 will often come ‘out of the blue.’”

"The experts’ record is so lousy at spotting key technologies ahead of time that there is little chance they will see the killer gadgets and applications of 2020," Pew says. "If you had asked this question a decade ago, no one would have predicted the iPhone."

In other words, we don't know.

But some trends are clear, because they already have begun: Mobile connectivity and location-based services will grow in the next decade.  Still, it takes a generation to figure out which technologies have real impact and which are just fads, so many other application and device trends we now see might, or might not, be actual "killer apps."

 Significantly, just 61 percent of respondents suggested the Internet would remain a place where any user can communicate directly with any other user. About 33 percent think “the Internet will mostly become a technology where intermediary institutions will control the architecture and content, and will be successful in gaining the right to manage information and the method by which people access it.”

A significant number of respondents they argued there are too many powerful forces pushing towards more control of the internet for the end-to-end principle to survive. Governments
and businesses have all kinds of reasons to control what happens online, Pew reports.
There will be alternative networks for companies and individuals that prefer to have a more controlled environment for sharing and consuming content, many believe.

The future will produce a hybrid environment with a bit more control exercised in the core of the internet for some purposes, but for other purposes will enable end-to-end practices, researchers at Pew conclude, based on the responses. "Some things will have to be managed, especially if the capacity of the current internet becomes strained," Pew analysts say.

"The dictates of business will shape large parts of the online experience and more pay-to-play business models will affect information flows online," Pew says.

"The needs of users themselves will sometimes drive changes that bring more control of online material and less end-to-end activity," Pew notes. There will be “content service providers” who are gatekeepers of many users’ online experiences.

The point, one might argue, is that although the "open, end-to-end" Internet will continue to exist, so will many relatively closed experiences, sites, networks, applications and devices.

Internet Isn't What it Used to Be

Some time ago, the Internet was "controlled" by standards groups.

These days, some think it is controlled by ISPs.

Increasingly, it is controlled and shaped by ecosystems formed about devices or key applications (Click on image to see larger view).

That means our old notions about the "open" or "neutral" Internet have changed.

To some extent, the Internet still is about the ability of any one user to reach other user. To an increasing extent, it is about domains accessible only to members, users and subscribers.

For content owners, advertising and marketing specialists, users and enablers, that means development and business models are based on discrete ecosystems, not the "Internet" in general. And while much attention is paid to the role of ISPs as "gatekeepers," there are all sorts of gatekeepers these days, and application providers or device manufacturers might be more important gatekeepers than ISPs.

Web Use Shows Serious Fragmentation of Attention

In March the average American visited 111 domains and 2,500 web pages, according to Nielsen Online.

The average time spent per page is 56 seconds. Portals and search engines dominate, capturing approximately 12 of the 75 hours spent online in March.

That's what you call fragmentation.

Has the Web Killed Enterprise Intranets?

Between emerging social networking tools and Web browser front ends, it is conceivable that the need for enterprise "intranets" is not so urgent anymore. As the Internet was seen as an external network, intranets were supposed to make internal data bases, information and communication available to enterprise associates.

But email, instant messaging, texting, mobile phones, Saleforce.com and other Web-based tools arguably not allow organizations to do those things without building dedicated intranets.

Instead, we've flipped everything inside out. The big movement now is towards software architectures that allow internal resources to be exposed to users with access to Web browsers.

Broadband Access Revenue: Bad News

Broadband access penetration might be climbing just about everywhere. Unfortunately, it looks like revenue is going to fall significantly, if Yankee Group analyst Vince Vittore is right. He projects Digital Subscriber Line revenue, which represents the overwhelming share of global revenue, is set to fall precipitously.

You might think fiber-to-home (OLT)revenue or cable modem revenue (CMTS) is poised to take up the slack. Vittore doesn't think so.

It looks like broadband access is turning out to be a product just like the Internet: useful, ubiquitous, necessary and something service providers can't make much money on.

Cisco Predicts Exabyte Networks

Cisco's recent forecast of global IP bandwidth consumption suggests a 37 percent cumulative average growth rate between 2006 and 2011, or about five times the 2006 level. That's aggressive, but you might expect that. You might even have expected the prediction that consumer usage will outstrip business usage, though business dominates at the moment. You wouldn't be surprised at all to learn that video will drive overall global usage.

You wouldn't necessarily be surprised to learn that Cisco forecasts at least 60 percent of all traffic will be commercial video delivered in the form of walled garden services. And a significant percentage of the remaining 40 percent of IP bandwidth will be consumed by IP-based video applications.

The next network, in other words, will be a video network that also carries voice and non-real-time data.

That would be a stunning change from the originally envisioned view of the Internet. But I think we have to recognize at this point that virtually none of the key developments in communications technology have developed as industry insiders, public policy proponents, technologists or entrepreneurs had supposed.

To be sure, all of the diligent work on Session Initiation Protocol will have a significant payoff. But that didn't stop Skype by rocketing past SIP using a proprietary approach.

The Telecommunications Act of 1996 was supposed to lead to an explosion of innovation by dismantling restrictions on "who" could be a provider of Class 5 switch services. Instead, innovation came from the Web. Perhaps despite the Telecom Act, all sorts of innovation has happened.

VoIP was supposed to transform the nature of communications. Instead, mobility, instant messaging and social networks are doing so. One might arguably look to all manner of text communications as the disruptive communications development of the past several decades, not voice.

And then there's electronic numbering and voice peering. Perhaps these approaches still will have some dramatic impact on global voice communications prices and ability to circumvent the "public network." But it's starting to look as though ENUM might be a next generation to provide the signaling system 7 function. That's not to say it is unimportant: only to say it was not what many had intended or expected.

So far, it would seem that the most disruptive impact of the whole basket of new technologies has been to disrupt our ability to predict the future. We've been wrong more than right, as we always are. IP networks are not now, and never will be, as closed as the old public network was. Neither are IP networks going to be "open," any-to-any networks in the old manner, with no intelligence or policies operating in the core of the network.

Lots of things can, and should, be done "at the edge." But increasingly, lots of things cannot. The transition of the global IP network to video also means a shift to real time services (and we aren't even talking about the same process at work for voice and visual collaboration). That spells the end of the completely "dumb network."