Senate GOP Budget Bill Has Little-Noticed Provision That Could Hurt Your Wi-Fi (arstechnica.com) 45
An anonymous reader shares a report: Sen. Ted Cruz (R-Texas) has a plan for spectrum auctions that could take frequencies away from Wi-Fi and reallocate them for the exclusive use of wireless carriers. The plan would benefit AT&T, which is based in Cruz's home state, along with Verizon and T-Mobile.
Cruz's proposal revives a years-old controversy over whether the entire 6 GHz band should be devoted to Wi-Fi, which can use the large spectrum band for faster speeds than networks that rely solely on the 2.4 and 5 GHz bands. Congress is on the verge of passing legislation that would require spectrum to be auctioned off for full-power, commercially licensed use, and the question is where that spectrum will come from.
When the House of Representatives passed its so-called "One Big Beautiful Bill," it excluded all of the frequencies between 5.925 and 7.125 gigahertz from the planned spectrum auctions. But Cruz's version of the budget reconciliation bill, which is moving quickly toward a final vote, removed the 6 GHz band's protection from spectrum auctions. The Cruz bill is also controversial because it would penalize states that regulate artificial intelligence.
Instead of excluding the 6 GHz band from auctions, Cruz's bill would instead exclude the 7.4-8.4 GHz band used by the military. Under conditions set by the bill, it could be hard for the Commerce Department and Federal Communications Commission to fulfill the Congressional mandate without taking some spectrum away from Wi-Fi.
Cruz's proposal revives a years-old controversy over whether the entire 6 GHz band should be devoted to Wi-Fi, which can use the large spectrum band for faster speeds than networks that rely solely on the 2.4 and 5 GHz bands. Congress is on the verge of passing legislation that would require spectrum to be auctioned off for full-power, commercially licensed use, and the question is where that spectrum will come from.
When the House of Representatives passed its so-called "One Big Beautiful Bill," it excluded all of the frequencies between 5.925 and 7.125 gigahertz from the planned spectrum auctions. But Cruz's version of the budget reconciliation bill, which is moving quickly toward a final vote, removed the 6 GHz band's protection from spectrum auctions. The Cruz bill is also controversial because it would penalize states that regulate artificial intelligence.
Instead of excluding the 6 GHz band from auctions, Cruz's bill would instead exclude the 7.4-8.4 GHz band used by the military. Under conditions set by the bill, it could be hard for the Commerce Department and Federal Communications Commission to fulfill the Congressional mandate without taking some spectrum away from Wi-Fi.
I feel sorry for the people in the USoA Using wifi (Score:1)
but anything that brings the USoA more in line with the frequency usage in the rest of the world is welcome. You guys go at your own beat, and drag canada, mexico and a fe2w other allies with you, while the rest of the world heeds standars...
Now going back to my channel 13 40Mhz wifi (with higher 5Ghz 120Mhz channel too)
Re: (Score:2)
Dude, keep fighting the power!
Re: (Score:1)
Can't wait for all the other "surprises" in the big beautiful bill. That the people who voted for it "didn't notice" were in it.
FA FO
Existing equiment? (Score:3)
What about existing equipment? Will it be banned? Or will it just interfere the mobile carriers' use of the spectrum?
Where's the budget to compensate owners for this "taking" if the equipment is banned?
Re: (Score:2)
What about existing equipment?
You'd think Broadcom et al. would pitch a fit given the billions they've spent developing Wi-Fi standards that include 6 GHz, developing 6 GHz devices, etc. It's not just owners of existing equipment. It's an entire industry that has been investing in 6 GHz Wi-Fi for years now.
Re: (Score:3)
What about existing equipment?
You'd think Broadcom et al. would pitch a fit given the billions they've spent developing Wi-Fi standards that include 6 GHz, developing 6 GHz devices, etc. It's not just owners of existing equipment. It's an entire industry that has been investing in 6 GHz Wi-Fi for years now.
But think of the profit potential when they have to sell us all new WIFI equipment! Maybe they can convert a segment of ICE into broadband support agents. Door-to-door with new devices in hand. "Pay to switch or be sent to El Salvador!"
I'm meant to be joking, and then I realize which timeline I'm living in and am more hoping that I'm joking.
Re: (Score:2)
>"What about existing equipment? Will it be banned?"
Different countries have different frequency requirements and they do change. Most all modern WiFi routers have frequency tables that can be updated with firmware to enforce restrictions to prevent conflicts and comply with the country in which they are being used.
I suspect the lack of 6Ghz WiFi protection was either a mistake, or something inserted without knowing it would stop on existing WiFi commitments. I guess we shall see.
Re: (Score:2)
Given that 6GHz has such short range and poor penetration through walls, existing equipment probably wouldn't matter much.
It's just a way for them to make you pay to use something that was free. You will have to buy equipment from them and pay a subscription to use it if you want 6GHz for your home or venue.
Let the Breakup Begin (Score:5, Insightful)
Cruz's version of the budget reconciliation bill, which is moving quickly toward a final vote, removed the 6 GHz band's protection from spectrum auctions. The Cruz bill is also controversial because it would penalize states that regulate artificial intelligence.
Increasingly I'm thinking of the country to the immediate south of me as the Divided States of America. The administration's clear favouritism toward the oligarchy, and its penalizing of states which try to hold the corporate sector accountable, are further dividing a country already torn along ideological, class, and income boundaries.
I alternate between anger and sadness, even as I hope America gives its collective head a shake and emerges from the dark place it's fallen into.
Re: (Score:2)
Increasingly I'm thinking of the country to the immediate south of me as the Divided States of America.
I've increasingly been referring to them as the States of America.
Re: (Score:2)
And where they go, we follow. Just look at the crazy stuff happening in Alberta now.
Re: (Score:2)
Shouldn't the Senate parlitarian (Score:3)
Somehow I don't think 1 trillion dollars of Medicaid cuts should be included in a budget bill. That should be considered way too significant a policy change since it basically shuts down medicaid...
In other news 1 trillion dollars of government spending is on track to exit the economy. That's going to result in a hell of a lot of job losses. Not just in healthcare you can't take that much money out of the economy and not have it Go boom.
Re: (Score:2)
Being that he is proposing *selling* the spectrum to the highest bidder(s), it's a grey area as we are talking about government revenue. Trump has praised the 6GHz spectrum for WiFi in the past as well, so I don't think this will go far.
As for government spending propping up the economy, it's not like the money disappears from the market. If anything, cutting $1trillion from the budget outright would possibly lead to a stronger dollar due to the government printing less money. But we all know our government
Re: (Score:2)
Being that he is proposing *selling* the spectrum to the highest bidder(s), it's a grey area as we are talking about government revenue. Trump has praised the 6GHz spectrum for WiFi in the past as well, so I don't think this will go far.
As for government spending propping up the economy, it's not like the money disappears from the market. If anything, cutting $1trillion from the budget outright would possibly lead to a stronger dollar due to the government printing less money. But we all know our government has no incentive to stop wasting money, so I wouldn't count on anything to change until it all catastrophically fails.
Any government spending cuts right now are most likely earmarked to be tax cuts for the 1% and up club.
Re: Shouldn't the Senate parlitarian (Score:3)
In reality, however, the bill would explode the nationâ(TM)s deficits, adding nearly $4 trillion to the debt when including interest, according to the Congressional Budget Office and the Joint Committee on Taxation, Congressâ(TM) official budget scorekeepers. Thatâ(TM)s $500 billion more than the House version of the bill. The cost would rise to nearly $5 trillion if the temporary business tax cuts in the bill were made permanent.
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:3)
I would be beyond shocked if Trump could explain anything about spectrum at all much less which is used for WiFi and what the implications of each is I owuld have to see the clip to think he sees beyond "6 is more than 5".
From that I imagine he would gladly sacrifice the spectrum if it means he gets his bill passe, he doesn't care all that much what's actually in it.
$1T yet still blowing up the debt. Our immigration services are set to be 1/5 of the military budget which is also going up to $1T
After DOGE i
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
I'm going to assume you mean "parliamentarian."
And the answer is "no." The Parliamentarian need do nothing. It's an optional obstructing power. Like cops arresting you.
Fuck his pronouns (Score:5, Insightful)
Rafael Edward Cruz is his real name.
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
He's what Texas thinks a smart person looks like.
KILL BILL (Score:4, Informative)
Low blow to cut taxes for the rich while tariffs amount to a tax increase on the middleclass.
Does anyone you know use Medicaid? They soon might not use Medicaid: https://arstechnica.com/health... [arstechnica.com]
That trillion for defense? don't need it, NATO's 5% spending increase will be going to US weapons which amounts to a multi-trillion increase for US defense: https://www.democracynow.org/2... [democracynow.org] (even if you hate that site, you'll recognize it is the truth)
How to contact senators: https://www.senate.gov/senator... [senate.gov] https://www.reddit.com/r/Optim... [reddit.com]
Re:KILL BILL (Score:4, Interesting)
I'm starting to think Musk's objection was kayfabe to give him a cleaner looking exit from the admin and deflect long term blame. Just like Tucker I am sure he went back to kiss the ring. He isn't actually doing anything substantial to change the bill, he benefits from it's passage either way.
As for the rest of it, I hope it all passes because people need to feel some consequences. Nobody should be surprised, this is 100% "they were who they said they were". The R-Senators get to do what they've always wanted to but were too cowardly until a good strongman gave them cover. Only the people already out the door like Tillis will give any pushback and even that is tepid at best. Good luck folks.
Re: (Score:3)
Interesting that you asked "Does anyone you know use Medicaid...", I think a lot of people don't know what they are using. Each state's Medicaid program is called something different, something other than "Medicaid", after the funds disburse from the federal to the state level. Generally the states name the programs after themselves. I think California calls it Cal-Care or something.
It reminds me of the decision to name private insurance for old people "Medicaid Advantage". It's designed to get people to bl
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
I was going to use my state's program as an example, but then I realized, I don't even know exactly what they call it here. And I know people who have been on it. I know there's some kind of county-run service they call "Gold card" which is some kind of access to county medical facilities, but I don't think they provide full hospital care. This is only for one county, so it's separate from whatever my state renamed Medicaid - I think.
From my short time working in public health, I can tell you that the city
Damn (Score:2)
My latest vaccine shots had the 6G upgrade, to take advantage of the higher-speed web access when the networks upgrade, but if they're selling those frequencies to high-power carriers, then I won't be able to walk into any area that handles AT&T or Verizon. :P
Seriously, this will totally wreck the 6G/WiFi6 specification, utterly ruin the planned 7G/WiFi7 update, and cause no end of problems to those already using WiFi6 equipment - basically, people with working gear may well find their hardware simply n
Re: (Score:2)
And it won't be the politicians who get the blame, despite it being the politicians who are at fault.
Some of this is by design, in this bill as example a lot of the heaviest cuts to government programs are back loaded past 2026 and 2028. Quite convenient eh?
Re: (Score:2)
For that matter, you can already get WiFi 7 equipment... you can get m.2 modules for 20 or 30 bucks, even with master mode. I spent under $30 for a complete MT7925 kit, 802.11a/b/g/n/ac/ax/be 2T2R 2.4/5G/6GHz. It's only a 160 MHz chip but it was cheap and has pretty snazzy bluetooth as well. Anyway, oh well, at least it does all those other things. Anyway, can't vendors "solve" this (except for the customers being pissed off part) with firmware which prevents selecting 6 GHz? That seems like a pretty simple
One question (Score:2)
Why in the fuck are WiFi provisions in the same bill as federal public land sales and tax cuts??
Re: (Score:2, Troll)
Why in the fuck are WiFi provisions in the same bill as federal public land sales and tax cuts??
Because Trump wanted to efficiently fleece the country in one fell swoop versus having to usher multiple bills through... all that time on the phone seriously cuts into his golf schedule.
Re: (Score:3)
Why in the fuck are WiFi provisions in the same bill as federal public land sales and tax cuts??
Because Trump wanted. . ..
Nope. That's how US politics works. If you're not a Trump fan, then consider that Bernie Sanders built a career on adding unrelated riders to bills. He's known and heralded for that among "progressives."
Re: (Score:3)
Because that way of conducting business has been normalized for generations.
Makes you wish the guys in 1800 would have pushed harder when these kind of tie-ins started. Anyone trying to do business like this should have been instantly flagged as dishonest and stonewalled until the end of their term, whereupon an engaged electorate would surely vote them out of office.
Accountability didn't happen, so now they all act like that. Oops.
All-or-nothing bill (Score:2)
Can't have your tax cut if you don't agree with +700 other pieces of new legislation.
Most politicians don't even read the bill because resistance is futile.
Re: (Score:2)
Why in the fuck are WiFi provisions in the same bill as federal public land sales and tax cuts??
Because it's easy to hide a fart in a tornado.
Re: (Score:2)
And ... (Score:2)
... it could make the chickens stop laying! Don't forget that!
Burn the witch!