When I was a young scientist working on the fledgling creation that came to be known as the internet, the ethos that defined the culture we were building was characterized by words such as ethical, open, trusted, free, shared. None of us knew where our research would lead, but these words and principles were our beacon. We did not anticipate that the dark side of the internet would emerge with such ferocity. Or that we would feel an urgent need to fix it. How did we get from there to here?

We could try to push the internet back toward its ethical roots. However, it would be a complex challenge requiring a joint effort by interested parties — which means pretty much everyone. We should pressure government officials and entities to more zealously monitor and adjudicate such internet abuses as cyberattacks, data breaches and piracy. Governments also should provide a forum to bring interested parties together to problem-solve. Citizen-users need to hold websites more accountable. Scientists need to create more advanced methods of encryption to protect individual privacy by preventing perpetrators from using stolen databases. We are working on technologies that would hide the origin and destination of data moving around the network, thereby diminishing the value of captured network traffic. Blockchain, the technology that underpins bitcoin and other digital currencies, also offers the promise of irrefutable, indisputable data ledgers. If we work together to make these changes happen, it might be possible to return to the internet I knew.

[Leonard Kleinrock is distinguished professor of computer science at the UCLA Samueli School of Engineering.]

Christopher Terry recently published an article for the Benton Institute that details how the National Broadband Plan has failed. In my opinion, the National Broadband Plan never had the slightest chance of success because it didn’t have any teeth. Congress authorized the creation of the plan as a way for politicians to show that they were pro-broadband. The plan wasn’t much more than a big showy public relations stunt.  If Congress cared about broadband they would have followed up the plan with a vote to force the Federal Communications Commission to implement at least some aspects of the plan.

By now, communities understand good broadband in the simplest form – it’s something their community either has or doesn’t have. Communities now understand the digital divide and the homework gap. Wasting federal dollars to create a new National Broadband Plan wouldn’t move any community one inch closer to better broadband, and I hope we resist the temptation to go down that path.

On Sept 19, 2019, 30 members of Congress wrote to Federal Communications Commission Chairman Ajit Pai requesting the FCC discard any plans for setting an overall cap for the Universal Service Fund (USF) programs, claiming such a proposal would harm broadband deployment, among other things. On Oct 15, Chairman Pai responded saying that the FCC sought comment on a proposed overall annual budget of $11.42 billion, which is more than three billion dollars above current USF program disbursements. Chairman Pai said this amount would be adjusted regularly for inflation.

On July 20, 2019, 13 senators wrote to Federal Communications Commission Chairman Ajit Pai urging him to postpone adoption of a reform order of the Rural Health Care Program that was on the agenda for the FCC's Aug 1, 2019 meeting. The senators claimed the Report and Order "fails to six many of the key issues that must be resolved for the program to operate smoothly." "The proposal, for instance, does not address the need for more funding, set forth the methodology for calculating the rural and urban rates, nor provide adequate maps to determine the rural area boundaries needed to determine pricing," they wrote. 

On Oct 15, 2019, Chairman Pai wrote that in a June 2018 Order, the FCC "adopted the first increase to the program's budget in a generation." "Thanks to these measures, all supported services provided to rural health care provides in the Rural Health Care Program in FY 2018 were fully funded." Further, Chairman Pai wrote that the "we must always ensure that scarce federal funds are being well spent," and that the Aug Report and Order "promotes efficient distribution of limited RHC Program funds, and increases transparency and predictability for Program participants." 

The Federal Communications Commission streamlined rules and procedures to reduce administrative costs and accelerate the successful conclusion of its 800 MHz band reconfiguration program. In 2004, the FCClaunched its 800 MHz reconfiguration program, known as rebanding, to eliminate harmful interference to public safety radio systems and other licensees caused by Sprint and other commercial operators The rebanding process is now nearly complete, with over 2,000 licensees relocated to new channels in the band, and only 19 licensees yet to be relocated.  The FCC has now adopted an Order that streamlines certain rules and procedures to expedite completion of the rebanding process. The FCC also sought comment on eliminating certain responsibilities of the Transition Administrator to help conclude this program.

When it comes to 5G and America’s security, we can’t afford to take a risk and hope for the best. We need to make sure our networks won’t harm our national security, threaten our economic security or undermine our values. That requires a comprehensive effort, one the administration has been undertaking, including through a May 2019 executive order. The Federal Communications Commission, for its part, has been working at home and abroad with federal agencies, including the intelligence community. The next major step comes Nov 19, when we vote on a proposal to prohibit companies that receive money from our $8.5 billion annual Universal Service Fund from using it to purchase equipment or services from companies like Huawei that pose a threat to the security of US communications networks.

We also need to make sure existing networks are secure. Some rural wireless carriers that receive money from the fund have already installed Chinese equipment. That poses an unacceptable risk. So the FCC will consider another proposal the same day that would launch a process to remove and replace such equipment. My plan calls first for an assessment to find out exactly how much equipment from Huawei and another Chinese company, ZTE, is in these networks, followed by financial assistance to these carriers to help them make the transition to more trusted vendors. We’ll seek public input on how big this “rip and replace” program needs to be and how best to finance it. Our goal is to close security gaps in a fiscally responsible manner.

1969 was the year that saw the first host-to-host communication of ARPANET, the early packet-switching network that was the precursor to today’s multibillion-host internet. Heading into the network's 50th anniversary, Pew Research Center and Elon University’s Imagining the Internet Center asked 530 of technology experts how individuals’ lives might be affected by the evolution of the internet over the next 50 years. Some 72% of these respondents say there would be change for the better, 25% say there would be change for the worse, and 3% believe there would be no significant change.

The optimists responding to the better-worse-no change question expressed hope that in the next 50 years digital advances will lead to longer lifespans, greater leisure, more equitable distributions of wealth and power and other possibilities to enhance human well-being. At the same time, nearly all of these experts’ written predictions included warnings about the possibilities of greater surveillance and data-abuse practices by corporations and governments, porous security for digitally connected systems and the prospect of greater economic inequality and digital divides unless policy solutions push societies in different directions. In short, these experts argue the future is up for grabs and some argue key decisions need to be made soon.