About bandwidth and other questions

By Nelson P. Valdés

On Oct. 29, the Cuban magazine Temas held its monthly meeting/debate on what has been called “Last Thursday,” because the event is held the last Thursday of every month. The discussion dealt with the Internet and Cuban culture.

This is an extremely complex topic, all the more so on the island because access to the Internet and its use have been politicized by the opponents of the Cuban government. At the same time, the Internet has become one of the many instruments used by the government of the United States to project its foreign policy and influence the internal processes of other world nations.

During “Last Thursday,” blogger Yoani Sánchez asked to speak and was granted that privilege. Her first comment was to question the argument that bandwidth is what prevents most Cubans from gaining access to the Internet.

I have dealt with the topic of the Internet and Cuba in a series of articles. I was one of the first to state that the bandwidth is an essential element in the type of topology and architecture a country may have, and that this, in turn, affects the number of users and the speed in the transmission of data.

My theory, of course, was based on the connection costs (digital lines, servers, transponders, etc.); we’d also have to consider whether access is made through satellite or some other means.

In highly industrialized countries, the cost of individual usage would be cheaper, because the necessary infrastructure would be within reach to people with sufficient resources. In other words, a scaled economy would reduce the cost-per-user.

When dealing with a smaller population and lesser income, the connection costs tend to increase drastically. These economic elements are usually not taken into account in the debate over connectivity.

However, on a global level, there is a “digital divide.” That same inequality also appears within many societies. The inequality in high-speed access to the Internet can be found even in the most developed societies.

To these problems we must add the fact that the model of user in the capitalist world is based on the individual user with a computer at home or in his pocket. That user also has a purchasing power that most of the world’s poor people don’t have.

Besides, it should be noted that the Internet, by its own nature, denies a whole series of old parameters. First, it breaks away from logical-sequential thought or argumentation. The hyperconnection destroys the sense of history. There is no beginning, middle or end. Nowadays, we jump from one side to the other, without sequence. It is not always easy to determine if the source of the information is trustworthy or not. The information comes in all types, and almost all the information is commercial. Someone pays to send the information or to receive it. Information of all types is merchandise.

To think that this technology will be a liberating factor is not surprising. Technological determinism is not new. What’s unusual is that conservatives now adopt that theory. As it was said of the radio, the TV set, the telephone and the telegraph, it is said today that the PC, Twitter, Bluetooth, etc., will contribute to the democratization of societies. Such projections entrap the naive, the politicians and the opportunists.

The implications inherent in the Internet have to do with political, social and economic systems, but also affect our own epistemology and cultural evaluations.

There is no equivalence between a personal and social relation between persons occupying a common geographic space and the now-famous “social” networks, which are virtual. To call on the phone is not the same as to “touch someone,” although that’s what the advertisements sell to us.

It is clear that the debate over the Internet inside Cuba assumes levels that are inherent to highly developed countries. I assume that the question about bandwidth will be answered by the Cuban authorities in charge of such problems.

However, it’s worth mentioning that the Obama administration has decided to spend no less than $6.3 billion to improve the broadband penetration that places the U.S. in the 15th place among industrial nations.

Imagine that YouTube, HDTV, among others, require 8 megabits per second in both directions. All of Cuba, using its infrastructure, can download 65 Mbps and uplink 124. Therefore, the virtual dissidents can send their images only by using parallel infrastructures that are not Cuban.

There’s a series of questions that should be posed to the virtual Yoanis who live in Cuba and who apparently have been able to access the Internet even when the bandwidth is not sufficient for the whole country and have had the opportunity to use other technological instruments of the digital era.

We believe that their experiences might have a positive value, from which people with fewer resources might benefit, if they knew how these people have been able to access and utilize these costly technologies.

These, then, are the questions:

1. What exactly is bandwidth? What’s its importance? And how much can it cost? [Note: Thirty-three percent of U.S. Internet users do NOT possess broadband. The reason is simple: the density in the use of broadband lines in rural areas of the U.S. is low, therefore, the cost-per-user is much too high. That’s the reality of the poor countries.]

2. What relation is there between the bandwidth and the number of users who can utilize the Internet simultaneously? The more users, the less the cost of the bandwidth, but only the countries with resources can afford the necessary capital.

3. What is the relationship between bandwidth, use and cost? For example, what is the cost for providing 11 million people concurrently, at the same time, with speeds of T1, T2 or T3? Obviously, that’s a cost that Cuba cannot pay at this time because it would need digital lines, PCs, transponders, servers, etc.

Therefore, the service would be rationed, paid by the entire society for the most utilitarian use or by those who have the capital to accede individually. In other words, access cannot be granted on a “my-turn” basis.

4. Who determines that a country be assigned an IP address? Answer: a foreign institution based in the United States.

5. How many IPs have been assigned to Cuba by InterNIC? They’re assigned by the U.S. institution; this is not controlled by Cuba.

6. If a personal blog originating in Cuba and produced in Spanish is translated into 16 or more languages and gets about 14 million visits per month (according to the foreign press), then:

• Who are the web-page managers in those 16 languages?
• How is that task done?
• How many servers are needed to process the flow of 14 million people?
• What is the cost of such production?

7. How can the rest of Cubans have the equivalent of that capacity of processing per server, and how much would it cost for the population to have access to the same type of service and user time?

8. How much is paid? And what is the mechanism to transfer those payments?

9. We know that in Cuba no one earns enough to afford the cost of services and systems. That we know of, reading those blogs and entering them is free of charge and there are no advertisements. Nevertheless, costs are involved. Who pays them?

Nelson P. Valdés is professor emeritus of sociology at the University of New Mexico and director of Project Cuba-L.