Former FCC Chairman: Share Your Wifi for the Good of America

Several years ago during the Arab Spring we saw a few examples of internet blackouts. First, Egypt, where Hosni Mubarak launched a wide-scale internet blackout. In due course, Muammar Gaddafi followed suit and shuttered Libya's internet. More recently, Syria has done the same. These state responses are an acknowledgment that the internet, especially social media like Twitter, can and does accelerate already well-incubated protest movements. The question I've always been interested in—especially thanks to fears about cyberwar—is this: could the same happen in America?

A purely theoretical scenario at this point, but something worth thinking about, especially after former FCC Chairman Julius Genachowski and Jonathan Zittrain authored an article in Technology Review entitled, "Former FCC Chairman: Let’s Test an Emergency Ad Hoc Network in Boston."

In the think piece, Genachowski, with Boston bombing and natural disaster thoughts on his mind, calls for systems that will allow data to flow, even in times of crisis.

"As the Boston Marathon bombings unfolded, thousands of anxious people in the region pulled out their mobile phones to connect with friends and family—and found that calls couldn’t be placed or received," write Genachowski and Zittrain. "Rumors that officials had shut down these mobile networks for security reasons weren’t true. The system was simply overloaded at a time when people needed it most."

"We can start with an idea that needs no additional technology," adds Genachowski. "Many people and companies operate Wi-Fi access points. Each of these points—whether used by apartment roommates, Starbucks patrons, or cell subscribers who get Wi-Fi 'off-load' from their service providers—is connected to the Internet and often remains so even if cellular voice and data towers are out or overloaded."

Genachowski envisions owners of Wi-Fi equipment being able to "quickly fling their digital doors wide in times of trouble, channeling a surge of traffic through broadband with a capacity naturally greater than that of cellular networks." He also notes that smartphone and laptop users would be able to utilize their devices' two-way radios, creating an ad hoc network, even without working cell and Wi-Fi service. A similar mesh network underpins the "internet in a suitcase" project by the Open Technology Institute, and is the basis for the Free Network Foundation's networks, like the kind they erected at Occupy Wall Street.

It makes perfect sense to ensure vital communications systems don't overload and crash in such crises. And Genachowski, with his FCC experience and profile, is well-positioned to kickstart this debate. But he would have done well to expand his vision beyond natural disasters and terrorist attacks.

Governments attempt to plan for all eventualities. So, too, should their citizens. And not just for natural disasters or terrorist attacks. Once functioning and peaceful nations devolve into civil unrest. We don't know how the future will unfold in the US, but regardless of what happens socially or politically, data must flow. Genachowski should have addressed political unrest in his article, because it does fall under "crisis." It may seem a trivial complaint with an otherwise well-conceived idea. But shouldn't our telecommunications systems be safeguarded against any future would-be American Mubarak or Gaddafi too?

He also doesn't mention the simple matter of providing internet access to citizens even during non-emergency times. Free Internet for all is an idea that's been floated not only by free WiFi advocates but by Genachowski's own former agency. Not surprisingly, the Comcasts and the Verizons of the internet do not much like the idea of you sharing your Internet, any more than Netflix likes it when you share your password with friends.

Aside from the cable and Internet companies, there's just one entity that might have an interest in keeping these ad-hoc networks from taking off: the US government itself. Genachowski's suggestion would make it impossible for terrorists to stop communication but they would also make it very hard for Washington to do the same.

In any case—and not to sound overly cynical—but given the way in which people are so easily pacified by the mind-numbing pleasures of cyberspace and television, an internet blackout, if at all possible, might not even be necessary to disable the citizenry's ability to think. If given access to an emergency WiFi network during an emergency, would we use that bandwidth to communicate with loved ones and prepare for the future? Or would we tag our Instagrams #YOLO as we launch our bluetoothed cars, Thelma & Louise-style, out over a Ballardian cliff?