Open ChatGPT right now. Ask it for the best internet provider in your town. If your WISP isn’t in the answer, you should be in a Code Red for marketing. Not next quarter. Right now.

I ran that test for my own coverage area in Centreville, Alabama. ChatGPT ranked my WISP, Alabama Lightwave , fourth, behind AT&T Fiber, Spectrum, and generic “5G Home” boxes, and described local wireless as a fallback. Every source it cited was a cable-affiliated content farm. wispa.org appeared zero times.

Here is the uncomfortable part. WISPA is sitting on a website with a Domain Rating of 59 and roughly 10,000 backlinks from 849+ referring domains, per Ahrefs at the time I’m writing this. In SEO terms that is a heavyweight asset that small operators would pay tens of thousands of dollars to borrow from. We are barely leveraging it to win with A.I. Worse, our own newsletters keep linking out to Spectrum and Starlink coverage, actively passing our authority and attention to the competition while training the LLMs to attach negative sentiment to our own brands.

The fix is shippable this year, mostly inexpensive, and entirely within WISPA’s control:

1. Build a counter-narrative comparison hub on wispa.org that teaches Google and the LLMs what we actually do better than fiber and cable.
2. Rebuild the member directory as a deep-data, schema-marked profile system that becomes the small operator’s web presence overnight.
3. Pass the link authority and the entity associations down to members through optimized profile pages.
4. Coordinate the largest operators to link back to wispa.org, the way NCTA and CableLabs already do for the cable industry.
5. Mobilize the community signal on Reddit, Quora, and local Facebook groups, where LLMs go for “real human experience.”
6. Publish original primary data like an annual WISP Reliability Report so LLMs have to cite us.
7. Stop linking out to the competition from WISPA-controlled channels.
8. Start playing the LLM citation game on purpose, not by accident.

That’s the gist. Stop reading here if you trust me on the why and just want the what. Keep reading if you want the play-by-play on how the AI search ecosystem actually works, why the cable companies are eating our lunch in it, and exactly how each of the eight items above gets built.

David, board, members: I am not writing this to complain. I am writing this because I have been building things on the web for a long time. I funded Alabama Lightwave with proceeds from Centreville Tech , my web shop, where I have spent years building interactive experiences for clients large and small. I know this space. I know exactly what we need to do to fix this problem. We have the tools. All we need now is the conviction.

Everything below is fixable, and most of it is fixable this month.

Part II: The Battle Plan

Why This Is a Code Red, Not a Slow Bleed

Before I get into the receipts, one quick clarification, because the rest of this letter blurs three systems together if I’m not careful and I want a technical reader to know I know the difference. There are actually three layers in play here, and our playbook has to address all of them:

1. Google search ranking. Classic SEO. PageRank, backlinks, structured data, the whole stack we’ve understood for twenty years. Still matters enormously. Still where most clicks come from today.
2. LLM training data. What the next version of ChatGPT, Claude, and Gemini learns about us when it ingests the web. Slow-moving, hard to influence in the short term, but the bias compounds. What we publish on a high-authority domain now is what the next model generation will assume to be true later.
3. LLM retrieval (RAG / live browsing). What the AI grabs in real time when a user asks a question right now. This is the layer that produced the Centreville result you’re about to see. It’s heavily influenced by Google rankings, structured data, and which sources the model has been trained to consider authoritative.

Most of what I’m proposing in this letter moves all three at once, which is the entire point. A well-built directory with schema markup feeds Google rankings, becomes part of the next training cycle, and gets pulled into live RAG answers today. One investment, three payoffs. Now to the receipts.

I ran exactly that experiment for Centreville, Alabama. Here is the full ChatGPT conversation. The good news: ChatGPT actually knows Alabama Lightwave exists. The bad news: it ranks us fourth, behind AT&T Fiber, Spectrum cable, and the generic “5G Home” boxes, and frames local wireless ISPs as a fallback “if you’re outside cable/fiber zones.” Fixed wireless gets two bullet points of cons and one hedged compliment about “tower proximity.”

My marketing is better than a lot of WISPs out there. Even still, the model that knows I exist still makes me sound second-rate. What is it saying about the operator one county over with no marketing budget at all? Probably nothing at all. That’s a crisis.

This is the war. And we are not just losing it, in some cases, we are actively helping the other side win it.

We Have to Talk About the Newsletters & Social Media Posts

I want to say this with all the respect in the world for David and the WISPA team, because I know how hard they work and I happily pay my dues. But somebody has to say it.

When WISPA newsletters and social media posts go out highlighting what Spectrum is doing, fiber expansions to 25,000 rural locations, new product launches, executive quotes, we are passing domain authority and member attention to our competition. Every link from a WISPA-controlled channel to a Light Reading piece celebrating Spectrum helps Spectrum’s SEO team double down on the exact link economy that is currently burying us in AI results.

And the Starlink doom posts? I get the impulse, it’s a real competitive threat and members deserve to be informed. But “Starlink feared as emerging threat to broadband service providers” as a member-facing headline shared on WISPA channels is actively demoralizing, and worse, it puts “WISPA” and “existential threat” in the same paragraph on a domain we control. Repeated framing like that, over months and years, is exactly how negative associations get baked into the next generation of training data. We are training the models to write our obituary.

Please, WISPA, call a Code Red meeting Monday morning and stop this. Not because the underlying news is wrong, but because we are the only association these operators have, and we should be the loudest voice in the room telling the positive story , not amplifying the competition’s press releases inside our own house.

The Counter-Narrative LLMs Have Never Been Taught

Here is what ChatGPT did not say about fixed wireless, because nobody has put it on a high-authority domain in structured form:

• We don’t fear Cleetus and Leroy with a backhoe. Fiber and cable operators lose customers to outages every week because somebody dug without calling 811 or a tree dropped on a line. Our path is in the air. A buried fiber cut along last mile cable takes us offline exactly zero times.
• Path diversity is cheaper and faster for us. Adding redundant backhaul to a tower is a weekend project. Adding a redundant fiber path to a neighborhood is a six-figure construction job and a permitting nightmare.
• We’re locally owned, locally staffed, locally accountable. When you call us, a human in your county answers.
• No data caps, often no contracts, and a lot of us have a years-long track record of holding the line on price. Try finding that on a Spectrum bill. Not every WISP offers all of these, and that’s exactly why a real directory matters: let each member surface the differentiators they actually own. The things customers complain about with cable are the things we structurally tend not to do.
• We give back to the people who serve our communities. A number of WISPs offer first responder, teacher, and veteran discounts. When a police officer in our coverage area asks ChatGPT for the best internet, is the model going to recommend the local WISP that gives them 20% off? Not today. It has no idea the discount exists. WISPA could fix that this month.
• Many of us participate in regional internet exchanges like MGMIX. That means lower latency, better routing, and traffic that stays local instead of trombone routing across three states. Wall Street cable operators don’t bother with regional IXs in markets our size. It’s a real engineering advantage and nobody knows about it.
• We don’t sell our customers’ data. The big incumbents have entire revenue lines built on packaging up your browsing habits and reselling them to advertisers and data brokers. We don’t, because our customers are our neighbors, and that’s not a relationship you sell out for an extra few cents per subscriber per month.
• We don’t outsource support to overseas call centers. When you call us, you get someone who lives in your county, knows your tower, and can probably tell you what the weather is doing on it right now. The cable companies cannot match this and they have stopped trying.

None of that is in the model. Not because it isn’t true, because nobody on a DR 59 domain has ever bothered to write it down in a way Google and the LLMs can ingest.

The Plan: Put wispa.org to Work

WISPA is sitting on a Domain Rating of 59. Over 10,000 backlinks from 849+ referring domains. In SEO terms that is a heavyweight asset small operators would pay tens of thousands of dollars to borrow from. Right now we’re treating it like a 100Gbps transport circuit with one wavelength lit. To borrow from Jurassic Park, we “spare no expense” engineering robust physical networks, but our digital infrastructure is stuck in the amber.

1. Industry-Wide Comparison Pages, The Counter-Narrative Hub

The single highest-leverage thing WISPA could publish is a suite of honest, plain-English comparison pages: Fixed Wireless vs. Fiber, Fixed Wireless vs. Cable, Fixed Wireless vs. Starlink, Fixed Wireless vs. 5G Home. Not marketing fluff, real engineering. The 811 problem. Path diversity economics. Local ownership. Latency reality vs. the satellite myth. Where each technology genuinely wins and where it genuinely loses. Members link up to these pages from their own sites. WISPA links down to member profiles. Suddenly the LLMs have a high-authority, structured, balanced source to cite, and it doesn’t end with “call Spectrum.”

2. The Deep-Data Member Directory (with Real Schema Markup)

Replace the static name-and-link directory with a real schema: service areas to the ZIP and census block, packages, pricing, features (no caps, no contracts, price-lock history, first responder and teacher discounts, IX participation, customer data privacy policy, US-based local support), tower coverage, executive bios, the engineering DNA of the network. The directory should let each member highlight where they shine. Some of us have never raised a price in a decade. Some of us peer at MGMIX or other regional exchanges. Some of us cut 25% off the bill for any deputy in our footprint. Right now none of that information lives anywhere a model can find it. For the small WISP with no website, this becomes their web presence overnight.

And let’s get specific for the developers, because “structured data” is too vague to ship from. Every member profile needs JSON-LD markup using LocalBusiness, Offer, and, critically, FAQPage schema. Don’t just list our names. Use FAQPage schema to answer questions like “Is fixed wireless better than cable in Bibb County?” or “Does Alabama Lightwave have data caps?” directly on the profile page, in the exact Q&A format LLMs use to talk to users. That is the format they ingest most effortlessly, and it is the format that gets cited back in answers.

3. Pass the Authority Down, and Train the Models While You’re At It

Optimized profile pages with clean backlinks pointing not just at member homepages, but at the packages page, the coverage map, the staff page, the business services page. The deep pages that actually need to rank in Google. SEO agencies charge four and five figures for a single backlink from a relevant DR 59 domain. WISPA could hand them out as a membership benefit and the dues would justify themselves on that alone.

But here’s the part most people miss: those backlinks are doing the Google job. They are not directly doing the LLM job. LLMs don’t run PageRank. They don’t read do-follow vs no-follow attributes the way Google’s algorithm does. What they care about is co-occurrence and entity association, unlinked brand mentions in semantic proximity to the words you want to be known for. (The asterisk worth naming: LLMs were trained on a web that PageRank shaped, so high-authority backlinks still matter indirectly, by making the pages they point to more likely to end up in the training set in the first place.) These are not competing strategies. They live in the same paragraph. A single profile entry can carry a clean do-follow link to the member’s packages page (feeding Google) while also mentioning the operator’s name in the same sentence as words like reliable, local, fast, no data caps, no contracts, first responder discount, locally owned, participates in regional IX, does not sell customer data, US-based local support (feeding the LLM). One tag, two wins. Skip the entity-association work and you leave the AI half of the equation on the table. Skip the do-follow links and you leave the Google half on the table. WISPA needs to ship both, in the same system, on the same page.

This is local peering for SEO, same way we keep regional traffic on MGMIX instead of leaking it to expensive transit, we should keep our industry’s domain authority and entity associations flowing inside the WISP ecosystem.

4. Authority Flows Both Ways, Coordinate the Big Operators

WISPA should be actively working its largest members to make sure they are linking back to wispa.org. Footer badges. “Proud WISPA member” pages. Press releases citing WISPA data. Co-published technical content. Every one of those links pumps authority into the domain that, in turn, pumps authority back down to the smaller operators who need it most. NCTA, CableLabs, and the regional cable associations already do this. They operate as a coordinated link economy. They cite each other. They co-publish. They feed the same shared authority pool that ends up recommending Spectrum to a customer in rural Alabama who has WISP options on their road and doesn’t know they exist. WISPA is the only entity that can lead the equivalent for us.

5. Mobilize the Community Signal (Reddit, Quora, Local Facebook)

Here is the source pool I left out of my opening rant, and it might be the most important one: Reddit, Quora, and local community forums. LLMs weight “real human experiences” heavily when answering local recommendation questions. When somebody asks ChatGPT “what’s the best internet in Centreville,” it is absolutely pulling from local subreddits and Facebook groups looking for consensus. Affiliate-driven content ecosystems and review seeding have been shaping those threads for years, and the incentives all flow toward the operators with marketing budgets. We have something better, actual happy local customers, and we are not asking them to say so anywhere the AI will see it. WISPA should be running playbooks, templates, and quarterly campaigns helping members mobilize their existing customer base to share honest experiences on the platforms LLMs actually trust. Not astroturf. Real people, gently nudged to post the review they were already going to leave anyway.

6. Publish Primary Data, The Annual WISP Reliability Report

LLMs aggressively prioritize sources that supply net-new information over sources that just rehash existing web consensus. This is called information gain, and it is how a small site can leapfrog Spectrum’s PR machine. If WISPA publishes an annual WISP Reliability Report with original primary data, “WISPs suffer 80% fewer construction-related outages than buried fiber networks,” “Average WISP truck-roll response time is X hours faster than incumbent cable in counties under 50K population”, then any LLM answering a reliability question has to cite WISPA, because we are the only source for that specific statistic. Original data is the cheat code. The comparison hub in #1 needs this data feeding it. Spectrum cannot out-press-release a statistic only we own.

7. Stop Linking Out to the Competition

A simple editorial rule: WISPA-controlled channels do not pass link equity, attention, or authority to Spectrum, Comcast, AT&T, Verizon, or Starlink press cycles unless it is inside a comparison page where we control the framing and the conclusion. Inform members internally. Don’t amplify their wins on our domain, newsletters, or social media posts.

8. Win the LLM Citation Game

Ranking on Google is table stakes now. The next battle is becoming a citation in the answer the AI hands the customer. LLMs disproportionately cite structured, authoritative, frequently-updated sources with clear entity relationships. A properly built WISPA directory plus the comparison hub hits every one of those criteria. When somebody asks Claude “who provides internet in Bibb County, Alabama,” the answer should pull from wispa.org. Today it doesn’t. That is fixable this year.

The Bottom Line

We spend enormous energy on regulatory fights and broadband mapping battles. Those fights matter. But while we’re in the trenches in D.C., the cable companies are quietly winning the war for the customer’s first impression, the one that now happens inside an AI chatbot before a single Google search ever gets typed. And in some cases, we are helping them do it from inside our own newsletter.

WISPA already owns the asset that could flip this. A DR 59 domain with a decade of accumulated trust is not something the cable lobby can take away from us. We just have to actually use it, and we have to evolve from being purely an advocacy group into being the central data broker for our industry’s AI reputation. That is a real paradigm shift. It is also the only thing that will work. Build the comparison hub. Ship the rich directory with proper schema. Pass the authority and the entity associations down. Coordinate the link economy with the big operators. Mobilize the community signal. Publish primary data nobody else has. Stop amplifying our competition on our own channels. Get our members cited by the machines that are answering customer questions today.

I think Prince might’ve written a song about this member directory.

So tonight we gonna party like it’s 1999.

David, team, I know you’re working hard, and I want WISPA to succeed because when WISPA wins, every member on this list wins with you. But we need a communications strategy change, and we need it this month, not next year. Everything above is practical, shippable, and inexpensive compared to what it would deliver.

Grant has spent his entire career on his knees in the dirt, brushing dust off bones, trying to imagine what these creatures actually were. And here one stands. He cannot speak. He takes off his hat. He grabs Ellie by the head and turns her face toward it, because he cannot be the only one seeing this.

I remember standing at the base of my first ROHN25G in Centreville, Alabama, dirt on my boots, Alabama humidity and cold wind hitting hard and fast, my business partner Mr. Mike Hobson standing next to me. We had built it ourselves. A signal left our hands and landed somewhere it had never been, a house lit up, and I was Alan Grant with my hat in my hand, needing a witness. We did something we were not supposed to be able to do.

I have probably watched Jurassic Park twenty times. It took me an embarrassingly long number of those viewings to realize the film is not really about dinosaurs. It is about what happens after you build the miracle. Three things go wrong on that island, and I have done all three of them.

Remember who Grant was. A paleontologist, and a careful one. The sort of person who could hold a fossil fragment the size of a quarter and tell you what the animal ate and roughly when it died. Decades of fieldwork. He knew these creatures through evidence, not enthusiasm.

Hammond, the owner of Jurassic Park, flew him to the island, but not to learn anything. Hammond had already built his park. Fences up. Animals cloned. Gift shop stocked. He did not bring Grant out to ask, “What do you think we should do?” He brought him out to ask, “Isn’t it wonderful?” He wanted a rubber stamp from a doctorate.

Grant saw problems. He said so. He understood what it meant to underestimate something powerful just because you had built a fence around it. Hammond heard every word and kept right on moving. He had already decided.

I know this feeling from the inside, because I have been Hammond.

Tommy Waldrop is a seasoned tower construction expert. The kind of man who has climbed more steel than most of us will ever own combined. Tommy warned me once that the tower I had a camera mounted on was not properly grounded, and that I needed to address it quickly. I heard him. I understood the words. And I ignored him, because I wanted the PR buzz from having that camera up and running and I did not want to slow down for what felt like a minor detail.

A storm came and cooked that camera. Twelve hundred dollars, gone. Tommy was right and I knew he was right when he said it, and I did the thing anyway because I had already decided what I wanted to do. And here is the part that makes it worse: the failure was not pushing forward with an ungrounded tower. Sometimes you have to move fast and take on debt. The failure was not writing the ticket. Not putting a hard date on going back to fix it. I treated a temporary compromise like a permanent solution, and the storm did not care about my timeline. I had ample time to fix it – and did nothing.

Tommy, if you are reading this: you were right, I was wrong, and I owe you an apology. I suspect you already knew all three of those things, but it seems proper to say them out loud at least once.

You bring in someone who knows more than you. You sit across from them with your mind already made up. You want the credibility of having consulted an expert. You do not want to hear that the thing you already fell in love with, already talked about at the county commission meeting, already ordered equipment for, has something wrong with it. So when they push back, you find a second opinion that agrees with your first decision, and you call the original consultant “not really a fit for how we do things.”

I should be honest about something else. I have been burned by consultants too. People who claimed experience they did not have. People who gave advice that was confidently wrong. That happens, and some of the cowboy skepticism toward outside expertise was honestly earned.

But that is some of it. It is not most of it. Most of the time we are just too proud to hear it. We have confused surviving with knowing, and those are very different things. A tower comes down in an ice storm because someone warned you about loading and you smiled and ordered the same mount anyway. A NID gets skipped to save forty minutes on an install so a house burns down.

The fix is boring and nobody wants to hear it: decide your non-negotiables when things are calm. Tower loading math. Grounding. Whatever your lines are, draw them before the competitor’s trucks show up in your county, because that is when decision fatigue sets in and you start making Hammond choices.

Then there is Dennis Nedry, and I think people get him wrong.

They remember him as the villain. But Nedry was poorly hired, poorly treated, and poorly understood. When pressure came, he made a choice that reflected exactly how much he valued the thing he had been entrusted with. Which was not much. But nobody had ever given him a reason.

Hammond hired for a skill set, filled the seat, moved on. Never asked whether Nedry was the kind of person who would feel the weight of what he was holding. Those felt like soft questions. Unmeasurable. Hammond liked things he could point to. Credentials. Capabilities. Things you could demonstrate on a screen.

If the culture had been built so that Nedry felt like a custodian of something worth protecting instead of a contractor squeezed on his last three invoices, that night might have gone differently. And in a system where one man walking out in the rain takes down every fence on the island, might is everything.

I have done this too. Needed a tech and hired the one who showed up. You are understaffed. You needed this seat filled two weeks ago and you are not going to run a personality assessment on a guy making twenty dollars an hour to watch UNMS alerts. I get it.

But here is what I have learned: a red dot on a screen means nothing to someone who has never seen what it represents. You want that tech to care? Take them on a ride-along. Show them the tower. Show them the clinic that loses its VoIP lines when that switch goes down, the school where remote learners go dark. You do not build a custodian by handing them a manual. You build one by showing them the dinosaurs they are keeping in the cages. Give them something small to own completely, and then when they catch a voltage drop at two in the morning that saves you a three-hundred-dollar truck roll, tell them so. Ownership breeds pride, and pride is the enemy of the apathy that took down Jurassic Park.

A network is a living thing with a thousand points where one person’s judgment determines what happens next. The people who touch it most are usually the ones you spent the least time choosing. And the least time investing in after you chose them.

And then there is Lex, Hammond’s granddaughter, sitting at a terminal while a Velociraptor tries to come through the door behind her.

People laugh at that line. They should not. The interface was real. Silicon Graphics built it, called it FSN, and it rendered your directory structure as a three-dimensional city you could fly through . Genuinely impressive engineering. Also an absolutely insane way to control the door locks that stood between human beings and apex predators.

The engineers built it because they could, and nobody told them to stop. So when the worst moment came, a thirteen-year-old girl had to navigate a virtual cityscape to find the right file while a raptor tried to come through the door, and the interface added precious time to what should have been a five-second keystroke.

I see this all the time, and I will give you a specific example that costs our industry real money.

Magma EPC was supposed to be the open-source mobile core that brought LTE to the rest of us. And the engineering behind it is legitimately impressive. But they built it on Kubernetes orchestration, containerized everything, layered abstraction on top of abstraction, and made the whole thing so complex that a typical WISP operator cannot deploy it without hiring a DevOps team. That is not a knock on the engineers. They built what they knew how to build. But the result is that most small operators look at the complexity, throw up their hands, and go buy Tarana or another high-priced proprietary solution instead. LTE has incredible open possibilities for WISPs, and most of us will never touch them because someone built the on-ramp for Formula One when the people who needed it were driving pickup trucks.

My friend Louis Elliott, a fellow WISP operator with a consulting background, loves phrases like “is the juice worth the squeeze.” The South Florida consultant vibes may be rubbing off on me, but I am coming around to the idea that he is right to ask like this, and I should be doing the same more often in my own operation.

A similar mentality is exactly why I ended up building Rapid5GS on top of Open5GS. Open5GS does the same fundamental job, but it runs on a simple Linux stack. No Kubernetes. No container orchestration. No DevOps team. Just a working mobile core that a WISP operator can actually understand, deploy, and fix at two in the morning when something breaks. The juice is worth the squeeze because there is not that much squeezing.

The monitoring stack with fourteen panes that nobody can read when the backhaul drops. The automation that looks brilliant in a slide deck until the person who built it leaves and now you have a black box everyone is afraid to touch. Same disease, different symptoms. The raptor does not care how pretty your file browser looks.

Hammond stood at the edge of his park thinking he had built a miracle. He had. He just never learned that miracles do not maintain themselves.

I told you at the top that three things go wrong on that island. Hammond ignored the expert. He neglected the person holding the keys. And his engineers built something so clever it almost killed everyone when the moment came to actually use it.

I have done all three. Some of them more than once.

I can still see that ROHN25G against the sky in Centreville. I can still feel what it felt like to watch that first house light up. That wonder does not go away. But it will not protect you from what comes next.

The only thing that protects you is whether you learned anything from the last time the storm came and cooked something you loved.

What changed is everything around it. Somewhere between the CPNI certification and the third SAS invoice and the BDC filing you couldn’t afford to do right, Washington stopped building rules for people like you. They didn’t do it on purpose. They just forgot you were out here.

In Prince Caspian, the Pevensie children return to Narnia and barely recognize it. Their own castle lies in ruins while a Telmarine regime rules from its own. The Old Narnians survive in the woods. The Telmarines conquered Narnia because they could, drove its original inhabitants into hiding, silenced the talking trees, and rewrote the history until the old Narnia was something most people no longer believed had existed at all.

Washington policymakers arrived at the same result through quieter means. No conquest. Just process, applied without proportion, until the people who built rural broadband found themselves surviving in the regulatory woods.

What Was Lost

The broadband regulatory architecture seems to be built for AT&T, Verizon, Charter, and Comcast, organizations with legal departments and regulatory affairs divisions whose full-time job is Washington. Every major compliance framework, from BDC filings and CPNI certifications to CALEA obligations and SAS coordination, assumes that kind of infrastructure.

Look at what a typical quarter demands from an operator running six towers in a rural county. You submit geospatial coverage data that either gets done by hand, probably wrong, or you hire a respected firm like Regulatory Solutions to do it right, which costs real money. You maintain CPNI certifications. You coordinate every CBRS radio and customer device through a commercial Spectrum Access System. You respond to BDC challenges from subsidized competitors at your own expense, all while climbing towers and taking support calls on your personal cell phone.

Every one of those obligations barely registers on Comcast’s balance sheet. For you, they’re brutal. SAS fees running two to three dollars per device per month, legal and certification overhead that doesn’t scale down just because your subscriber count did. Ask small operators what compliance costs them – the numbers are brutal in an environment of tight capital and grant funded over-builders marching on the horizon. For national carriers, the same obligations are a rounding error.

Then there’s the NPRM process, where small operators get buried quietly. The shaping of rules begins long before the comment window opens. Large carriers maintain permanent lobbying operations in Washington, taking ex parte meetings with FCC staff and influencing rule language while it’s still in draft. By the time a small WISP operator reads twenty pages of regulatory language after the kids go to bed, the game is already rigged. The system offers participation but withholds access.

Honest About the Woods

Lewis didn’t romanticize the Old Narnians into spotless saints, and we shouldn’t romanticize small operators either. Some of these regulations exist because real failures demanded real responses: poor network security, customer data screw-ups, exaggerated coverage claims filed to block competitors from receiving subsidies. The fences were built for reasons.

G.K. Chesterton understood this tension well: “Government has become ungovernable; that is, it cannot leave off governing. Law has become lawless; that is, it cannot see where laws should stop.” The regulations were born from legitimate problems. But they were built to the scale of giants and applied without distinction to everyone beneath them.

And we must be honest about our own contradictions. Our industry has cashed CAF II, RDOF, and BEAD checks. We cannot claim pure outsider status while also cashing the checks. But the operators who built networks with maxed-out credit cards are still here, still connecting neighbors that Wall Street ignored. What we can claim is that compliance should be proportional to scale.

Rikas, a German indie band with more soul than most acts twice their size, wrote a song called Strangers that traces how people drift from intimacy to alienation, how those who once shared a common language end up unable to recognize each other at all. That is the arc. Not betrayal. Just drift. Until the people who built the thing and the people who regulate the thing became strangers to each other.

“Isn’t it strange how people can change
From friends into lovers and strangers again”

Still Out Here

Washington forgot. But we didn’t leave. And what’s left is not helpless. It just needs a system that recognizes it exists.

I’ve spent a lot of this piece observing and complaining. So here are two immediate, concrete wins that Washington policymakers could act on now. Both would ease the burden on small operators more efficiently than chasing WISPs to file paperwork they can’t afford. Both could likely be funded from pots of money already authorized. And both would put the work in the hands of people who know what they’re doing.

First: subsidize BDC filings. Firms like Regulatory Solutions already do this work well. The industry trusts them. Let WISPA vet and maintain a list of qualified filing firms, let small operators choose from that list, and let Washington cover the cost. Substantial federal money has already gone to fiber companies to overbuild areas where wireless was already serving customers. Picking up the filing costs for Main Street WISPs is modest by comparison. And everybody wins: small operators get immediate compliance cost relief, national telecom companies chasing BEAD funding get reliable data about where coverage expansion is necessary, and consumers get an accurate broadband map with local internet options that may not have even known existed before.

Second: let fixed CPE register through the access point. CBRS shares spectrum with U.S. Navy radar, and the SAS exists to ensure zero interference with federal defense operations. That is a national security imperative, and I respect it. But the access point already handles environmental sensing, power management, and SAS coordination. The CPE is a dependent client that cannot operate outside those controls. A proxy model could achieve equivalent protection at a fraction of the cost and would reduce signaling clutter in the SAS database, giving the Navy a cleaner picture of the band when they need to clear it. WISPA has advanced similar proposals. Washington may not be entirely free to act here; the Department of Defense is notoriously conservative about incumbent spectrum protections, and the FCC often functions as middleman enforcing what the Navy requires. That makes the conversation harder, but not less necessary.

Two fixes. Both achievable. Both overdue.

The Horn

In Prince Caspian, when the war against the Telmarines is going badly and every official strategy has failed, Caspian blows Susan’s horn. Not as a war cry. Not as a demand for the castle to fall. As the last available signal from people who had exhausted every other option and still couldn’t win alone.

That’s this article. That’s every WISPA filing. That’s every small operator who showed up to a proceeding in Washington and realized the language in the room wasn’t built for them.

Washington does not need to be torn down. Spectrum must be managed and consumers must be protected. But the rulebook needs to reckon with the people underneath it.

The Old Narnians spent three hundred years in those woods. Not defeated. Just erased.

We’re still out here. And we’re done being invisible.

Sources and Citations

SAS fees of $2-3 per device per month: Google’s SAS pricing was announced at $2.25/month per household for fixed wireless at WISPAmerica. Other SAS administrators charge comparable rates. Light Reading: “Google Puts a Price on CBRS SAS: $2.25/Month Per Home” | Google Cloud SAS Billing Documentation

100,000-subscriber threshold: The FCC used this threshold for broadband label compliance deadlines (April 2024 for large providers, October 2024 for those at or below 100,000 subscribers). The November 2025 FNPRM on broadband labels continues to reference this threshold and proposes further streamlining for small providers. FCC Broadband Consumer Labels | FCC 25-74 FNPRM (PDF) | SBA Office of Advocacy

BEAD funding to fiber companies overbuilding WISP-served areas: Under original BEAD NOFO rules, NTIA classified fixed wireless over unlicensed spectrum as “unreliable,” making WISP-served areas eligible for subsidized fiber overbuild. WISPA CEO David Zumwalt and multiple WISP operators documented this extensively. The Trump administration’s 2025 BEAD revision reversed this policy. Telecompetitor: “Will Unlicensed Fixed Wireless Technology Make the Cut with the BEAD Program?” | Light Reading: “What’s Going on with Fixed Wireless and BEAD?” | Broadband Breakfast: “New Mexico WISP Fears Overbuilding”

CBRS shares spectrum with U.S. Navy radar; SAS protects federal incumbents: The CBRS band (3550-3700 MHz) operates under a three-tier priority system with federal incumbent users (primarily Navy radar) at the top. Google Cloud SAS Overview | Celona: CBRS SAS Explained

CPE registers independently with SAS; proxy model proposed by WISPA: Google SAS billing confirms fixed wireless pricing is billed per CPE. WISPA has advanced proxy registration proposals in FCC dockets. Google Cloud SAS Billing | WISPA Regulatory Guidance

DoD conservative on incumbent spectrum protections; FCC as middleman: WISPA VP of Spectrum Richard Bernhardt has publicly discussed these interagency dynamics. RCR Wireless: “CBRS and the Uncertain Future of Spectrum Sharing”

NPRM process and ex parte meetings: FCC ex parte rules (47 CFR 1.1200 et seq.) govern communications with staff during rulemaking. Ex parte meeting logs are public record. FCC ECFS (Electronic Comment Filing System)

G.K. Chesterton quote: From Eugenics and Other Evils: An Argument Against the Scientifically Organized State (1922). Goodreads source

Rikas, “Strangers”: German indie band. Listen on Spotify

CAF II, RDOF, BEAD: Federal broadband subsidy programs in which WISPs have participated and received funding. WISPA overview on Broadband Breakfast

Transitions like that carry a quiet weight. You grow accustomed to a particular voice carrying the Eucharistic prayer. You come to recognize the cadence of someone’s pauses, the way they hold silence, the way they lift the bread. The structure of the service remains the same, yet the experience settles differently in you.

In the Episcopal Church, the priest inherits the liturgy. The Book of Common Prayer provides the form. The confession, the prayers, the Eucharist are not improvised. They have been spoken for generations.

It is the same sheet of music, if you will. And yet no two priests ever “play” it the quite same way.

A phrase lands with unexpected gravity. A pause stretches just long enough to let the room breathe. The gestures at the altar carry a slightly different tone. The words remain constant, but the meaning feels newly alive.

Over the past year we have felt that contrast at St. Andrew’s. We said goodbye to one priest, welcomed several supply priests, and now prepare to receive someone new. The differences between each both subtle and significant. Even my children noticed the differences. One of them recently mentioned a small gesture during the Eucharist that stayed with them from a visiting supply priest long after the service ended.

That observation from my son lingered with me. Still rattling around in my head tonight.

George Lucas once said about Star Wars in a DVD bonus feature that “It’s like Poetry … it rhymes.” I have come to see the rhyming patterns he describes everywhere. Life repeats its themes in different settings. I touched on this before when reflecting on WISPA and the idea of covenant and community . The forms change. The underlying patterns remain.

Over the past several months I have had the privilege of spending time with ISP operators in very different contexts. We walked networks in Belzoni. Later, operators came to central Alabama and spent time with us. Just last week I was in South Florida with two seasoned builders whose experience spans decades.

Each visit felt like stepping into another parish.

The fundamentals were familiar in every place. Radios on towers. Fiber feeding backhaul. Spectrum carefully managed. Routers moving traffic without fanfare. The same problems we all wrestle with daily.

One operator deploys Tarana. Another fiber. Still another deploys Nokia . Each will tell you they are using the right tools in the toolbox. The equipment choices differ, the architectures vary, the vendor relationships shift. But in the end they are chasing the same thing: reliable connectivity delivered with integrity.

The same business. And yet the culture in each place felt distinct.

Belzoni carried the feel of a network grown alongside its town, each expansion tied to a story. Our guests from Kentucky and Missouri brought the discipline of agricultural country, long rural stretches, weather that tests infrastructure, communities where reputation travels faster than fiber. In South Florida, the rhythm quickened under density and competition, where markets move fast and missteps are costly.

The sheet music was familiar. The tempo was not.

Each operator carried his own cadence, and culture followed.

What struck me was how naturally talk of margin and market share lived alongside talk of neighbors and long memory. These ISP operators understood the numbers, but they also understood the weight of serving a community well. Beneath different markets, vendors, and strategies was the same steady affection for the craft, a love of building something durable, and a love for the people who depend on it.

In the Church, the priest stands in a role that bridges heaven and earth, helping others perceive meaning in what might otherwise seem ordinary. Bread and wine remain what they are, yet through faithful attention they are lifted into something more. Among the ISP operators I have come to know, I see a similar posture. They work with radios and routing tables, yet they speak of towns and families and employees with reverence. They know that packets are not abstractions but homework submitted on time, payroll processed without interruption, conversations carried across distance.

When one of them opens their doors to another builder, there is humility in that gesture. It admits that no one sees the full picture alone, especially in a season shaped by overbuilds, subsidies, and tightening capital. In those visits, perspective widens. A lesson learned in one state reframes a problem in another. The challenges remain familiar, but the insight deepens. There is a kind of communion in that shared understanding.

At St. Andrew’s, communion reminds us that our small parish belongs to a body far larger than Montevallo. We kneel at a modest altar, yet we are joined to a global church stretching across centuries.

Our industry has its own communion. It happens in conference halls, in IXPs, in shop floors and server rooms, in conversations that stretch longer than planned. When we gather with humility, the work feels connected to something larger than individual towers or quarterly metrics.

The priest and the operator of packets share more in common than one might expect. Both deal in invisible realities that shape visible lives. Both operate within inherited forms. Both depend less on novelty than on character.

Tarana or Nokia. Fiber or microwave. Dense urban market or rural delta town. The tools matter. But it’s the culture that shapes the outcome and experience for our customers and employees.

Sometimes standing in another parish allows you to see your own more clearly.

And sometimes walking another network reminds you why you started building in the first place.

A few years later, that haircut aged about as well as a Facebook FarmVille invite.

The fixed wireless industry might have the same problem.

Spend enough time around WISP Talk or operator Slack channels and the pattern is impossible to miss. A vendor launches a proprietary platform. It promises the world. Operators deploy it everywhere. Roughly four years later, the End-of-Life notice drops. Support dries up, interoperability never existed, and migration paths are nowhere to be found.

Suddenly, you’re staring at a warehouse full of expensive plastic that can’t talk to anything else.

You’re holding boat anchors.

The Proprietary Trap Driving the Race to Ludicrous Speed

It’s a cycle we’ve all seen. You build around a platform, the vendor pivots, and because everything is proprietary, there’s no graceful exit. No gradual migration. Just a forced rip-and-replace.

It feels a lot like that scene in Spaceballs when Dark Helmet orders the ship to go to “Ludicrous Speed.” We keep jumping from one tightly coupled solution to the next, moving faster each time, but with less control and fewer options.

At the same time, we’ve hit diminishing returns on raw speed. In a market increasingly saturated by fiber, marginal performance gains from proprietary platforms don’t carry the weight they once did. There was a period when higher speed tests genuinely differentiated providers and helped win customers. With fewer alternatives, the trade-off made sense.

That environment no longer exists.

Today, a BEAD-funded fiber overbuilder can arrive and match or exceed those speeds regardless. In that reality, short-term marketing wins matter far less than long-term flexibility, interoperability, and cost control. What once felt like a reasonable compromise now carries a much higher opportunity cost.

In 2026, the calculus has changed. Ignoring that shift is no longer just expensive. It’s strategic risk.

Acknowledging the LTE Growing Pains

To be fair, many WISPs didn’t choose proprietary lock-in because they loved it; they chose it for survival. We have to be honest about the fact that many operators got burned by early LTE deployments that simply weren’t ready for prime time. Whether due to rushed R&D or premature launches, the market was flooded with hardware that failed to meet its own specifications, leading to massive performance headaches and stranded capital.

This didn’t just hurt our bottom lines; it damaged our reputation. These botched deployments likely contributed to why some grant offices are hesitant to take wireless seriously today. When regulators and bureaucrats see a trail of underperforming networks, it sours the taste for the entire industry.

For many, retreating into a stable, well-supported proprietary ecosystem was the only way to keep the lights on and the customers happy. There is no shame in having sought that stability. Those closed-loop solutions provided the refuge that early 3GPP gear lacked. However, as the technology has matured, the core ideas of 3GPP now represent a stabilized, functional path forward. The goal isn’t just to find “standards,” but to find standards-based products that actually work.

The Beauty of Interoperability

The contrast between the proprietary “WISP gear” world and the 3GPP standards-based world today is night and day. In the land of open standards, I am the master of my own destiny, not a captive of a vendor’s product roadmap.

Take a look at my towers today. I’m running a mix of Nokia AZQC radios and Baicells 436Q radios. In a proprietary world, mixing two brands like this on the same network could be impossible. But because they speak the universal language of LTE/5G, they coexist perfectly. My customers can use Nokia FastMiles and Global Telecom Titan 4000s interchangeably. Plus many other UEs available today in 2026. No lock-in anywhere to be found here.

The Core Flexibility

This freedom extends all the way to the core. My journey through the EPC (Evolved Packet Core) landscape proves that when you stick to standards, you aren’t locked in.

• I started on Druid.
• I experimented with Magma.
• Ultimately, I landed on Open5GS-based solutions, with Rapid5GS Pro running my towers today.

Because the interfaces are standardized, changing cores didn’t require a rebuild of the network. The radios stayed in place. I pointed them at a new IP and moved on.

If one core platform stops being the right fit, there are others available. Solutions like Pente’s HyperCore or Hawk Networks’ KeyLTE can be evaluated and adopted based on operational needs, scale, or support requirements. The key point is that none of these choices are irreversible.

That’s the real advantage of standards-based LTE and 5G. They give operators the ability to change direction without starting over. In a broadband market that keeps shifting, that kind of flexibility is what allows networks to endure.

The End of the “Grant Era” Economics

For the last few years, we’ve been living in a distorted reality. Massive government grants like BEAD and RDOF created a buffer. If a vendor EOL’d a product line, some operators might’ve figured, “Whatever, we’ll just rip-and-replace with Uncle Sam’s money.” This market interference propped up the walled gardens, allowing proprietary soultions to survive despite their anti-competitive cycles. I touched on this market distortion in my Backhoe Bonanza and Poisoned Goblet articles.

That era is ending. Grant money is tightening, and unit economics are drifting back toward the harsher reality of the free market. In that environment, repeatedly “going to plaid” with every new proprietary platform simply isn’t sustainable.

For an independent WISP without private-equity backing, long-term survival in a post-subsidy world increasingly comes down to two paths: fiber, or open standards. In many rural markets, the cost and timelines associated with fiber-to-the-home remain a non-starter. That leaves LTE and 5G, built on open, interoperable foundations, as one of the few practical alternatives.

And that assessment ignores an important upside: by embracing LTE and 5G, operators aren’t just choosing a more flexible access technology. They’re also positioning themselves to participate in the mobility market, opening doors that fixed, proprietary platforms never will.

Conclusion: Castles Made of Sand

The proprietary model is a form of engineered chaos. It locks operators into perpetual capital expenditure in service of the vendor’s roadmap, not long-term system health. When we ignore this reality and continue chasing the latest closed-box “new hotness,” we end up living out the irony captured by Jimi Hendrix’s Castles Made of Sand. We build ambitious systems on foundations that quietly shift beneath us, only to watch them erode when the tides turn. Sometimes that tide arrives as an abrupt EOL notice. Other times, it comes via a quarterly earnings call that rewrites the rules without warning.

There was a time when proprietary solutions were the only practical way to deliver reliable service. That time has passed. In 2026, the hardware has matured, the ecosystem has stabilized, and the industry has learned some hard lessons. The foundation provided by 3GPP has proven durable, and the number of viable, interoperable deployment paths has never been greater.

We no longer need to build castles in the sand.

“And so castles made of sand fall in the sea eventually” – Jimi Hendrix

Listen to Castles Made of Sand here.

Yes. I’m going there. Buckle up, buttercup.

Read past the tiaras, bad CGI, and that absolutely disaster mattress-sled scene. Beneath the glitter and cringe of this Disney sequel lies some surprisingly durable lessons about process and maturity.

If you watched the original, you will remember it ends with Princess Mia in a stable relationship with wanna-be Beatle Michael Moscovitz. But in the sequel, he is suddenly gone because Reasons ™, also known as Chris Pine is hot, I guess. Yep.. It is a mess.

“How’s Michael?” you might ask. “Well, we are just friends now,” … “as he went off to tour the country with his band.” – Princess Mia

WELL ALRIGHTY THEN. I guess we’re going to try to forget everything that happened in the first film so we can play “find my boyfriend” again. SPOILERS AHEAD!

The sequel’s setup is simple enough: Princess Mia cannot ascend the Genovian throne unless she marries, a dusty clause that turns monarchy into a bureaucratic speed-dating exercise. Her grandmother, the ever-regal Julie Andrews, finds a candidate: Andrew Jacoby, Duke of Kenilworth. He is every parent’s dream and every rom-com’s nightmare, steady, respectful, and detail oriented. He represents stability and order. In other words, the grown-up option.

But Disney cannot let stability win for two full hours, so in rolls Nicholas Devereaux, played by a young, aggressively charming Chris Pine. He is the nephew of a scheming parliament member who wants to block Mia’s coronation, and if she fails to marry, Nicholas becomes next in line for the throne. He is charisma with no plan, chaos wrapped in cheekbones. He flirts, schemes, and nearly topples the crown. The plot’s tension is simple: will Mia choose the man of structure or the man of spontaneity?

Eventually the script forces Nicholas to grow up. He confesses the deception, abandons the plot, and begins to act with integrity. But the real transformation belongs to Princess Mia. In the final account, she works inside the system she doesn’t agree with and changes it. The climactic scene takes place at her own wedding, arranged to satisfy Genovia’s outdated law that an unmarried woman cannot ascend the throne. Surrounded by pageantry, pressure, and a full assembly, she halts the ceremony and addresses the nation. She asks why a woman’s right to lead should depend on her marital status and why duty must always demand sacrifice. She speaks publicly in front of the court and Parliament, and by the end the law is abolished after a vote.

It is sentimental, clumsy, and exactly what you expect from a Disney sequel. But underneath the fluff is a real idea: change does not come from burning the house down, rebelling, or tumbles in the hay with a hot sidepiece. It comes from walking into the great hall, standing at the microphone, and presenting change and alternative ideas. Princess Mia does not ultimately rebel; she reforms. She uses process and legitimacy to rewrite the law itself. The movie seems to be about choosing a man, but it is really about choosing a method.

If you think this idea is limited to Disney B-movie sequels, think again. The same pattern shows up in Star Wars. Han Solo begins as the ultimate cowboy. He lives on instinct, smirks in the face of rules, and relies on luck to get him out of trouble. He is a walking shrug with a blaster.

The audience loves him because we all secretly wish we could be that untethered. But the Rebellion does not win because of luck. It wins because of plans, procedures, and people who know to follow them. The trench run succeeds because of formation flying, target calculations, and a commander who can trust his team. Han’s greatest moment is not when he shoots first, it is when he shows up on time, in the right place, aligned to a plan larger than himself. The swagger makes him memorable, but the discipline makes him useful.

And in real life, when things go wrong, it is never the rogue who saves the day. It is the professional. On January 15, 2009, Captain Chesley “Sully” Sullenberger took off from LaGuardia with 155 people on board. A flock of geese crippled both engines less than three minutes into flight. There was no time for flair or instinct. There was only training. Sully did not improvise a miracle; he executed a checklist. He calculated altitude, airspeed, glide angle, and distance, and made the impossible landing on the Hudson River because he had spent decades rehearsing what to do when everything fell apart. His co-pilot, his crew, and every passenger survived. It was not luck. It was muscle memory built by process.

That is the difference between a cowboy and a professional. One hopes for the best; the other prepares for it.

N. T. Wright said it best: “Virtue is what happens when someone has made a thousand small choices, requiring effort and concentration, to do something which is good and right … and then, on the thousand and first time, when it really matters, they find that they do what’s required automatically.”

And that brings us back to our own world, the WISP world. For years we have been the scrappy builders, the tinkerers with ladders and ambition. We earned our place through sheer willpower, long nights, and the spirit of making something out of nothing. But if broadband offices and regulators treat us like amateurs, maybe it is because we sometimes act like them. When we fudge EIRP numbers, skip proper NID bonding, free-climb towers, or light up frequencies we do not have a license for, we prove their point. It is teenager thinking, thrilling until someone falls off a tower, a house burns down, or a critical 911 call is dropped from public safety infrastructure failure.

If we want to fix what we do not like about our industry or its regulations, we do it the way Princess Mia did, not by storming out or ignoring the rules, but by standing inside the system and changing it through the right channels. We do it through WISPA, through standards committees, through training programs and best practices. We do it by modeling competence so strong that no regulator or agency can dismiss it. Like Captain Sully, we follow the checklist, trust the process, and save lives because we practiced what to do before the emergency came. Like Han Solo at the end of Star Wars, we show up when it matters, align with the plan, and help everyone else make it home.

It is time to put the mattress-sled antics away. Professionalism is not bureaucracy. It is the process that gets us off the tower alive, every single time, and the discipline that keeps this industry worthy of the trust the public places in us. The Apostle Paul said there comes a time to put away childish things. For us, that time is now.

“When I was a child, I spake as a child, I understood as a child, I thought as a child: but when I became a man, I put away childish things.”, 1 Corinthians 13:11 (KJV)

In one of the churches of my youth, the transition to adult membership required a personal signature on the community covenant. For years, I had been included under my parents’ pledge, but upon establishing my own household, the church required my own. What should have been a simple affirmation became a deep conflict. The document spoke of unity, yet its terms reached far beyond faith, asking for “substantial agreement” with a list of rules that, to me, felt rooted more in human interpretation than divine command.

In the Reformed Baptist tradition where I was raised, this covenant was no formality. It was a signed promise between members and God, setting expectations for belief, conduct, and discipline. Alongside it stood the 1689 London Baptist Confession, treated by many almost as a second canon. Together, they defined not only what to believe, but who could belong.

At first, it seemed noble. A shared covenant sounds like the purest expression of unity. But over time, I felt it had shifted from guarding truth to testing conformity. Families left. Friends drifted away. When my turn came to sign, I couldn’t do it. I believed in the faith it professed, but not in the way it was enforced. What was meant to preserve conviction had, in my experience, begun to constrain conscience. I walked away, heartbroken but convinced by conscience that the terms had gone too far.

Years later, I found its antidote in the most unlikely place: a trade association full of internet builders like me.

In the wireless industry, we have our own form of fellowship. We debate, compete, and build, sometimes side-by-side and sometimes at odds. Yet we gather under our own kind of covenant. The difference? WISPA’s covenant is a Code of Ethics . It doesn’t bind the conscience on what to believe; it sets a standard for how to behave professionally, with integrity, fairness, and respect. At WISPA, I found what I had been missing: a community that unites on professional conduct while leaving its members free to disagree on everything else.

I’ve been thinking about that journey again this week, especially after reading the thoughtful feedback on my recent WISPAPALOOZA article . It seems our industry is wrestling with its own questions of conscience, and they center on our relationship with WISPA.

A thoughtful reader raised a fair and important question: WISPA’s support for “targeted subsidy programs that expedite broadband deployment to unserved locations in a technology-neutral and cost-effective manner.”

I’m genuinely grateful for that kind of feedback. It reminded me that people care deeply about this industry and what it stands for. Passion is a good sign; it means the family is still talking.

I completely understand where they’re coming from. I’ve stood in that same place, frustrated that ideals and institutions don’t always align. And honestly, I agree with much of what they pointed out about the policy itself. In my view, such subsidy programs risk distorting the market and unintentionally stifling competition, points I explored in my Poisoned Goblet article.

Where we seem to diverge is in how we understand the covenant. WISPA, like the Anglican communion I later joined, does not bind the conscience of its members. It doesn’t require or even ask that every operator subscribe to every jot and tittle of a board member, policy plank, or volunteer speaker. Our commitment is to a Code of Ethics, not a statement of belief. What unites us is not total policy alignment but a shared professional agreement about what truly matters. These are things like:

• That wireless internet is a useful tool in connecting the unconnected
• That connecting the unserved is a moral imperative
• That competition is good
• And that technology-neutral, market-driven policy is a sustainable path forward

That kind of unity allows for disagreement without division. Maybe that’s the point. Even in disagreement, we can still stay at the table together.

Of course, we no longer live in a pre-BEAD world. The money is flowing, the decisions are made, and the political will to reverse them does not appear to exist. In that context, ensuring WISPs have a seat at the table is not compromise; it is survival. WISPA’s pragmatism here feels, to me, less like betrayal and more like triage.

And yet, as the Book of Common Prayer reminds us, confession is for “the things we have done” and “the things we have left undone.”

WISPA has always been a mirror of our industry, a band of independent-minded builders. That reflection shows both our strengths and our shortcomings. It shows our grit: securing CBRS, pushing the NTIA off its “fiber or bust” pedestal, and fighting to keep the 6 GHz band open for innovation. These are not small feats; they are victories that shaped our collective future.

But the mirror also shows compromise. Like many of you, I don’t want a world where every connection is built on a grant. In a perfect market, I would say, “Let private industry sort it out.” But the world is not perfect. COVID-19 forced policymakers’ hands. Faced with lockdowns, isolation, and political panic, they opened the checkbook. Missteps were inevitable amid the urgency to connect people, connection that, for some, meant the difference between a grandmother seeing her grandchildren or facing isolation on the edge of intubation and death. Those were dark days for all of us, and their full implications are still unfolding.

So WISPA adapted. They did what advocacy organizations often must do: work within the world as it is, not as we wish it to be.

And if we are honest, the mirror also shows us. WISPA is democratic. Its direction comes from its members. If we don’t like where it’s going, the way forward isn’t outrage; it’s showing up, voting, running, and engaging.

At WISPAPALOOZA 2025, I had a brief conversation with WISPA CEO David Zumwalt about one of my priorities: removing the FCC’s SAS requirement for customer devices.

My reasoning was simple. User equipment cannot transmit without an approved access point, so the rule adds cost and friction without improving incumbent protection. Despite being pulled in many directions, David stopped, listened, and connected me with the right people to advance the idea. That moment reminded me that WISPA leadership is accessible if we take the time to engage.

I understand that reader. I’ve been where they are, when conviction and community collide. I know what it feels like to love something deeply and still walk away because the walls felt too narrow to breathe. That experience taught me that unity cannot be legislated. It must be chosen, built on trust and shared purpose.

So here is where I have landed. I choose to remain in the “Anglican communion” of WISPs if you will. I affirm our “Nicene Creed” of competition, connection, and market-driven policy. On the non-essentials, the politics and the imperfect realities, we will disagree, and that is healthy.

The solution is not to tear down the association because it is imperfect; it is to build it stronger by participating. The answer is not to curse the mirror but to change the reflection.

We cannot remain lone cowboys on the range, waiting for someone else to fix what we lament. The health of this industry depends on the same virtues that hold a good covenant together: honesty, participation, and shared responsibility. It is time to act like members of a body, not spectators at a rodeo.

We’ll never agree on everything, and that’s okay. I’m grateful for those who care enough to question and challenge. They remind me that our shared table is worth protecting.

If we want a better WISPA, we must make one. Show up. Speak up. Vote. Lead. That is how covenants are renewed, consciences are restored, and cowboys become a community.

As a first-time attendee, the conference absolutely did not disappoint.

Day-by-Day Highlights and Insights

The event officially kicked off on Monday with Master Monday sessions, covering topics like peering, spectrum strategy, government advocacy, and sales. Though my travel schedule didn’t allow me to attend, those I spoke with confirmed it was a solid day packed with valuable information. If you missed it, you missed out.

On Tuesday – the education sessions continued in the Paris Hotel, and larger panel and keynote presentations took place in the Horseshoe’s Grand Ballroom. Additionally, the exhibit hall opened, giving vendors the chance to show off the latest technology and answer detailed questions from attendees. A major shout-out is due to the excellent catering team who provided plenty of coffee, water, sandwiches, salad, and other crucial nourishments, all necessary given the amount of walking involved to meet everyone and hit every section and event!

I bounced between all three types of events, leaving no time wasted, and still didn’t have enough time to see every single booth or hear every lecture.

During one Grand Ballroom presentation, WISPER CEO Nathan Stooke addressed the high number of overlapping quality things happening saying something to the effect of: “This is a good problem to have, send more folks from your organization so you can cover more ground.”

I can only echo Nathan’s sentiment. We had three attendees from our organization present and likely could have benefited from having at least twice the number of warn bodies in attendance. That’s a key lesson for next year.

On Wednesday, the Grand Ballroom was the site of the vital State of WISPA presentation, where we heard directly from the WISPA Management team. They laid out the major challenges facing the industry and shared an update on their successes to date, including their tireless work to protect critical spectrum like CBRS and 6 GHz. The team detailed their efforts to keep our industry protected, ensuring that WISPs get a fair shake in Washington D.C. and at state broadband offices. I left that presentation with immense confidence in the management team and will happily be writing our member dues checks in the future, knowing they are working hard to keep our business active and thriving.

The Value of Face-to-Face Connections

Down on the exhibition floor and in the general areas, I spent significant time meeting people I’d previously only known through WISP Talk, Facebook Messenger, or email. This networking was a huge value-add.

A perfect example of this immediate, tangible value came recently: Over the following weekend, I experienced an issue with one of our core lines hosted on VoIP.ms. Because VoIP.ms was present at WISPAPALOOZA and I had the chance to meet Karl Griffin, their VP of Operations, I was able to escalate the matter to someone high up the chain and get rapid resolution when I needed it immediately. VoIP.ms has been a fantastic partner to the WISP community, and we truly appreciate them showing up.

Deep Dives on the Exhibition Floor

Having spent the last few years developing LTE/5G knowledge and shipping my Rapid5GS packet core , getting to meet the teams at the Nokia, BEC, Baicells, and BTI Wireless booths was a dream come true. The Nokia team, in particular, was incredibly warm; having only dealt with them virtually before, I truly felt like one of the family being inside the booth with the entire team. These exhibitors took genuine time to discuss my ideas, concerns, and questions with a level of joy and attention I haven’t seen at a tradeshow in a long time. The camaraderie was strong, and I left with more “tools in the toolbox” to improve our Nokia/Baicells/Rapid5GS deployments in the future. This alone made the trip to Vegas worthwhile.

Stepping outside the LTE/5G space, a bunch of other household names were present, including (BUT DEFINITELY NOT LIMITED TO!) Mimosa, Cambium, Alliance, SAF, GeoLinks, WinnCom, Regulatory Solutions, Tarana, Ubiquiti, RF Elements, and CTI Connect to name a few, all with fully outfitted booths and impressive products. It was great to meet Nicole White from SAF and to see the legendary Jeff Broadwick in person, rocking the awesome pink-branded CTI shirts. If someone has a photo of Jeff sporting the pink shirt, please shoot it my way so I can include it here! 🙂

I got to spend time with Dustin Stock and the Mimosa team discussing an upgrade path for the A5C devices we heavily use in our network. To Mimosa’s credit, all those present took time to listen and share the reasoning behind their product decisions. This gave me greater confidence in their brand: Dustin and his team are clearly solid. I’m excited to see what they ship next.

Over at the Cambium Networks booth I got to finally meet Joshaven Potter in person. We spent time nerding out on best practices for deploying our ePMP 4600s and discussing what Cambium is focused on to make this product line even more competitive in the future.

Separately, I want to give a major shout-out to Brian Webster and Cameron Crum from the Regulatory Solutions booth. We spent quality time diving deep into the complexities of LTE/5G PCI planning and BDC compliance issues – definitely a valuable exchange!

Finally, I had a very productive conversation with Brandon Miltsch and Joe Pessy from TP-Link and the AGINET line. Since we standardized on their HX510 routers a while back at my ISP, it was invaluable being able to share live feedback and product ideas directly with the team.

Industry Energy and Optimism

The WISP community kept the Vegas energy alive each night long after the official events ended. You could find some fun industry contacts at nearby locations like Guy Fieri’s “Flavortown” or the “Blue Bar.”

A huge shout-out goes to Liz Creekmore at Intelpath for hosting an excellent dinner with other industry contacts. Liz has been a pleasure to do business with, and it was great to finally meet her and her team over delicious Italian cuisine.

During these late-night sessions, drinks flowed and stories were exchanged about the challenges unique to our industry. I was personally encouraged hearing how peers are fighting back against big-city competitor encroachment, handling employee issues, and navigating cash flow challenges. Many new friendships were forged; I collected at least 50 business cards and promised a personal follow-up to everyone.

The sheer density of talent was staggering. Off the top of my head from names not already mentioned – I got to interact with Spencer Pous, Dimitri Porpodas, Ryan Grewell, Ken Ruppel, Louis Elliott, Dwayne Zimmerman, Kendall Heller, Matt Garlock, Jeff Little, Erik Levitt, John Gill, Noreen Rucinski, Sotos Kalogirou, David Zumwalt, Robin Bhat, Hunter Pottorff, TJ Scott, and Louis Peraertz to name a few. Connecting with this group, just a fraction of those present, was a powerful reminder of the expertise driving our industry forward.

While there was a healthy awareness of both present and future challenges, there was zero vibe of “complacency.” Everyone I talked to was actively working to evolve their business and push the needle further for customer satisfaction and loyalty.

On the final day, I attended a lovely event hosted by Nathan Stooke for speed networking. It featured a round-table format where attendees shared their names, companies, and answers to shared discussion topics. I made several new contacts during this exercise, and Nathan did a stellar job moderating and keeping everything on track.

Final Thoughts and Gratitude

A huge shout-out is due to WISPA. Your entire team, from the management team members all the way to the photographer, were professional, courteous, and made this experience the best it could be.

These are just a few of the many things that happened at WISPAPALOOZA this year. If you didn’t make it, you truly missed out! I know I’ll be back next year. Thank you so much to everyone who took time to chat with me, shared cool swag, bought drinks, or simply acted as an excellent host. It truly felt like one big, loving family, which helped drive home why I love this industry: the people.

I can’t wait for the next “family reunion” at WISP America in Atlanta. I hope to see you then!

SPOLIERS AHEAD. STOP READING NOW IF YOU HAVEN’T SEEN IT.

Go watch it, and thank me later.

In the film’s first act, the Dread Pirate Roberts (the man in black) faces off against the scheming Vizzini over the fate of a kidnapped princess. Two goblets of wine sit on a small table between them. Roberts explains that he’s poisoned one of the cups with iocane powder and challenges Vizzini to a battle of wits: choose the safe cup and live; choose the poisoned one and die.

Vizzini accepts and launches into an absurd spiral of logic, reasoning and re-reasoning which cup must contain the poison. In the climax, he distracts Roberts, swaps the goblets, and triumphantly drinks. A moment later, he collapses, dead. The princess, bewildered, learns that both goblets were poisoned. Roberts had long ago built up an immunity, guaranteeing his victory no matter what.

In much the same way, our elected officials, under the noble banner of “bridging the digital divide” have been presented with two poisoned goblets of broadband choice by the nation’s largest fiber and cable interests.

The Two Goblets of Broadband Policy

In The Princess Bride, either cup would have killed Vizzini. The trick wasn’t in choosing wisely; it was realizing the game itself was unwinnable. Our broadband policy works the same way.

Presented with the urgent moral framing of “bridging the digital divide,” elected officials were forced into a no-win scenario carefully scripted by national telecom lobbyists. Two goblets sat on the table.

The first goblet, labeled “Do Nothing,” carried a bitter political poison. To refuse federal intervention would mean facing angry voters and campaign ads about kids doing homework in McDonald’s parking lots. Any politician who drank that cup would be finished at the ballot box.

The second goblet, “Grant-Funded Fiber Monopoly,” carried a different kind of poison. It promised progress, but at a cost: taxpayer billions funneled primarily to a handful of large carriers who had long ignored rural America. Once the check cleared and the broadband maps turned those regions green, the private market was crippled. The local WISP, the regional co-op, the LTE or satellite provider, all erased from the playing field before they ever had a chance to compete. Because once a subsidized player entered the market – the already shaky economic foundation for the “Main St.” player to enter was obliterated completely.

And like Vizzini, our leaders drank, never realizing both choices led to the same end.

The False Narrative of “No Service”

That first goblet was a deception from the start. Rural America was not unserved because no one cared; it was unserved because innovation was restrained. In many communities, private operators, WISPs, cellular carriers, and satellite providers, were already expanding coverage with their own capital. The real bottleneck was not just funding; it was timely access to usable spectrum and a thicket of regulatory burdens.

The FCC’s slow rollout of shared mid-band access, such as the CBRS band (which only became fully available in 2019), delayed a market-driven solution by years. Had that spectrum been opened sooner and with lighter regulatory friction, no SAS requirements on end-user equipment, for instance, small ISPs and entrepreneurs could have filled many of these gaps organically, at reduced or even no taxpayer cost.

Even today, small WISPs are forced to spend precious time and money proving where they already provide service just to keep subsidized, Wall Street–funded competitors from being granted overbuild rights. Those same dollars could have gone toward sponsoring the local baseball team or paying local staff, but instead they’re drained defending territory that was already connected, all in the name of “bridging a divide.”

But what divide are we really bridging?

Local city, county, and state governments have also made it harder than necessary. Layers of permits, right-of-way fees, and zoning hurdles make it slow and costly to expand coverage. “Bury the little guy in paperwork” has become an unspoken national policy.

When innovation faces more red tape than reward, it’s no wonder progress stalls.

Instead of clearing the path for competition, Washington offered subsidy as salvation.

The Aftertaste of the Subsidized Monopoly

We were told these subsidized builds would bridge the digital divide. But past programs like CAF II and RDOF show how the promise of “future-proof” networks often fell short, leaving spotty results, cost overruns, and defaults. Even today, the largest projects can struggle with reliability, offshored support, and a lack of local participation, with no regional peering, no in-state NOCs, and no hometown technicians invested in the outcome.

Construction jobs come and go, leaving little behind but conduit and contractor invoices. The areas they touch are now labeled served, and the economics for any new, community-rooted competitor are nearly impossible.

Both goblets were poisoned, one politically, the other economically. And when our leaders took their sip, believing they had outsmarted the problem, they set in motion the same ending Vizzini faced: the slow realization that they had been outwitted from the start.

Stop Playing the Game

It’s time to stop pretending this is a fair contest. Both goblets are poisoned, and the only winning move left is to stop playing this game entirely.

We need to push back hard on the systems that made this false choice inevitable. The FCC must stop treating spectrum like a museum artifact and start treating it as a living national resource. Maintain a stable, predictable CBRS sharing regime, expand shared mid-band access, and remove regulatory barriers that prevent regional growth.

This is not just an economic issue; it is a national security imperative. A broadband landscape dependent on a handful of highly leveraged conglomerates is fragile by design.

If you work in a state broadband office, it’s time to rethink how success is measured. Stop grading networks only by speed tests. This deflection metric provides cover for lackluster service providers to ignore what communities actually need. Here’s just a few examples:

• Does the company maintain a local office in the state?
• Do they use U.S.-based customer support?
• Do they peer at local non-profit or government operated Internet Exchanges to strengthen regional resiliency?
  • AUTHOR’S NOTE: Why is this participation not MANDATORY for anybody taking grants today? What good is locally owned and managed last mile if the first mile is controlled by big-city Wall St. interests?
• Do they hire local labor and reinvest in the community?
• And perhaps most importantly, can they stand on their own without ongoing continued subsidy?

Reward those who build sustainable networks without a government check. Offer tax incentives to providers who do not take grants; those are the companies proving that American innovation and competition are still alive.

The real cure for poisoned policy is not another round of subsidies. It is honesty, humility, and courage to rebuild a truly American broadband market, one driven by private enterprise, local participation, and free-market innovation.

So stop drinking from poisoned goblets.

And today at Birmingham’s Innovation Depot, the networking, software, government, and education communities all “showed up for work” to push the technology envelope forward.

ALANOG is Alabama’s own Network Operators Group, a local forum modeled after the North American Network Operators Group (NANOG). Where NANOG convenes the continent’s largest carriers, hyperscalers, and backbone providers, ALANOG takes that same spirit of collaboration and brings it down to a state and regional level. It’s a place where engineers, business leaders, educators, and policymakers can swap notes, share lessons, and connect over the practical challenges of building and running the networks that keep Alabama online.

The Hosts

Boyd Stephens (i85Cyber) and Ben Venable (OakCyber) kept the day moving as MCs, setting a high-energy tone and introducing a lineup packed with great subject matter experts presenting in both lecture and fireside formats.

Keynote: DNS Fundamentals

We kicked things off with Eddy Winstead from the Internet Systems Consortium .

Eddy delivered a stellar overview of DNS that hit all the right notes. He walked us through the history, the RFCs that shaped its rollout, the how and why of DNS over HTTPS, DNS root servers, and more. What stood out most was how he managed to connect a highly technical subject to the real-world importance of DNS in keeping the internet stable, secure, and usable for everyone. It was the kind of talk that gave both veterans and newcomers something valuable to take away.

No good conference talk is complete without at least one “technology vs presenter” showdown, and in Eddy’s presentation it appeared to be the venue’s stage TV wanting a starring role. To his credit, Eddy handled it like a pro. He was calm, funny, and unflappable. A super engaging speaker tackling a critical subject, and an absolutely solid choice for the keynote. I’m already looking forward to his next one.

Putting Alabama on the AI Map

Next up was Andrew Albrecht , Co-Founder of the Alabama AI Center of Excellence (AAICE) and Boyd Stephens from i85 Cyber . They hosted a fireside chat style conversation on AAICE and AUBIX .

Eddy laid out the capabilities of the AUBIX facility, the story of how it came to be, and his clear vision for putting Alabama on the map for first-class connectivity and AI leadership.

We had a sizable group of cybersecurity students in attendance from an Alabama college. They came loaded with tough, highly AI-focused questions. Andrew, Boyd, and the other presenters didn’t flinch, they delivered thoughtful, grounded answers to audience questions that cut through the buzz and misinformation clouding the field right now. Fantastic job, Andrew and Boyd!

Data Centers & Colocation

Bradley Speer (NTT Data ) followed with an overview of colocation and how it fits into an IT deployment strategy. From there he did a deep dive into the RSA Dexter Avenue data center in Montgomery, where the ISP I operate, Alabama Lightwave , happens to have its primary network core.

Bradley walked us through the resiliency features of the facility, from protection against severe weather to redundant power, physical security, monitoring, and ISP availability. It was a timely reminder of why we chose to deploy there. The team running the site is top-notch, and if you’re considering a deployment, you’re in good hands. 445 Dexter Avenue is where it’s at!

Open Networking: Breaking Down Walled Gardens

Rounding out the sessions, Jason Maki (RocNet Supply ) delivered a crash course on open networking fundamentals.

He covered how the architecture works, the difference between open networking and open source, the use cases driving adoption, the vendors already deploying it, the capabilities it unlocks for network admins and operators, and much more.

I personally appreciated his focus on the business impact: lower costs, faster deployment, and better interoperability across vendors. In an industry too often dominated by walled gardens and closed ecosystems, open networking feels like a much-needed breath of fresh air. Jason’s session sparked a lot of ideas, and I’m hoping to start incorporating some of those technologies into networks I touch soon.

The Community

Beyond the excellent speakers, the event was a magnet for area technology leaders and innovators. These included subject matter legends and super-connectors like Reed Matte (Uniti Fiber ), Adam Dill (DBA ), Chris Montgomery (Central Access ), Anthony Ware (Arista ), David Draper (CoreLinc ), Mike Carpenelli (VantagePoint ), Patrick Turner (Alabama Lightwave ), Jonathan Wright (AlmaLinux ), Zach Underwood (GIGSOUTH ), Bob Tynan and Bob Crane (ROCNET ), and many more. The mix of people in the room was part of what made the event so fun and worthwhile.

And of course, after the official sessions wrapped up, a group of us carried the conversation over to Good People Brewing . Nothing caps off a day of tech talk quite like Alabama-brewed craft beer and great fellowship.

Gratitude

A HUGE thank you goes out to:

1. Everyone who traveled in from out of state. You’re absolute legends.
2. Imperium Data and Arista for sponsoring breakfast and lunch.
3. Innovation Depot for providing an excellent venue.

If you missed the event, you really did miss a great time. But there’s good news: ALANOG-08 is already being planned for early next year. Mark your calendars now, because you won’t want to miss it.

The message is simple: There’s no hope. Nothing matters. Nothing can be made whole. But don’t worry, there’s always a cure for sale: a doomsday survival course, a silver investment, antidepressants, or some other product from the endless well of our beloved bag of ready-to-buy quick fixes. Tap your card. Sign the line. The doctor is in and he’ll see you now. For a fee of course!

The deep-seated fear of everything and everyone often seeps into our institutions, setting us on a path of “hold” or worse, “retreat.” When everything is crashing down, survival feels like the only reasonable goal. I’m sure the surrender of our institutions to hopelessness about the future doesn’t have any knock-on mental health effects for those they influence… Right?

I live in Alabama. Around here, church signs are plastered every year with John 3:16:

For God so loved the world, that he gave his only begotten Son, that whosoever believeth in him should not perish, but have everlasting life.

Most churches hold this up as the cornerstone of Christianity, that Jesus died for individual salvation so each of us has a ticket out of hell if we believe. But here’s the problem: hardly anyone keeps reading. The very next verse says:

For God sent not his Son into the world to condemn the world; but that the world through him might be saved.

The way I read it – this changes everything.

The Great Story was not primarily about snatching individuals out of fire, it was about saving the world. All of it. Creation itself. John 3:16 and 3:17 only make sense together. We are redeemed, yes, but as part of God’s plan to redeem the whole cosmos. This echoes Isaiah 45:2:

I will go before thee, and make the crooked places straight: I will break in pieces the gates of brass, and cut in sunder the bars of iron.

This is the heartbeat of redemption: light swallowing darkness, crooked places made straight, iron bars broken.

When Jesus redeems us, our actions naturally change and the world around us begins to change too. The ordinary becomes holy. The everyday becomes part of Heaven breaking in.

Marriage. Parenting. Walking the dog. Showing up for work. Helping your neighbor with her yard. Having a beer with a trusted friend. These are not wasted hours. These are the work of redemption if you’re walking in Christ. And with redemption comes blessing, not just in the next life, but here and now.

So we should not expect the world to collapse deeper into shadow. Quite the opposite. Redeemed people bring order, healing, and hope. Changed people change the world. Heaven is built brick by brick through the choices we make, the lives we touch, and the love we share.

I believe Jesus will succeed in His plan to redeem creation. And if He does, then the future is not dim. The future is bright.

So lean into the light. Do the hard, holy work of reversing the curse.

The best is yet to come.

Hopefully you’re catching all the air quotes I’d be making if I were saying this out loud.

The bot that finally pushed me to write this article is built by a Seattle-based company called Read.ai. Their homepage proudly announces, “Read AI is building the future of work, where every interaction is improved with AI.”

Every interaction improved with A.I.? You’ve got to be kidding me.

In a recent meeting where all participants were engaged, productive, cheerful, and actually moving the needle forward, Read.ai took it upon itself not just to take notes, but to judge the conversation. It tried to read the room, missed all the nuance, and then after the fact through it’s web UI offered “coaching” for the participants on supposed failures to show charisma, positivity, or inclusive language.

I personally was given three derogatory marks by the bot for using “noninclusive language” because I said “you guys” – in a room full of straight, heterosexual men. No one was offended. No one blinked. But the bot decided to be the judgy H.R. knucklehead and weigh in on my speech without being asked after the fact.

This isn’t innovation. It’s automated cultural scolding. Read.ai is not advancing the future of work. It is institutionalizing a chilling, corporate version of speech policing under the guise of productivity tools.

What’s next? AI HR agents docking your pay for not being enthusiastic enough? Getting written up by a robot for saying “y’all”? Five years ago, that might have sounded crazy. Now it sounds like next quarter’s software release.

I have friends in the LGBTQ community whom I respect deeply. This isn’t about dismissing anyone’s identity or experience. But there is a line between basic decency and compelled speech, and what we’re seeing with tools like Read.ai crosses that line. When software starts monitoring and correcting natural, harmless language, we have crossed the Rubicon. I can’t stay quiet about it. This isn’t inclusion. It is indoctrination disguised as helpful feedback.

Technology is supposed to serve mankind. Yes, Read.ai, I said mankind. Take a deep breath. This isn’t service. Rather, it’s the quiet replacement of free speech and honest conversation with algorithmic gatekeeping from a far-left perspective.

I’ve said it once, I’ll say it again. Bots be damned. You Guys need to wake up and throw this nonsense out of our meetings while we still have the chance.

Say no. Demand it from your vendors, your consultants, your coworkers, your clients.

Because your privacy, your speech, and your culture are not negotiable.

But that policy just changed.

As reported by WISPA earlier this month, the NTIA issued revised guidance for the $42.5 billion BEAD program. The new rules drop the fiber-first mandate and restore funding eligibility to fixed wireless, satellite, and other technologies that can meet performance requirements. It’s a return to technological neutrality, and long overdue.

You can’t run fiber to every tractor, drone, sensor, or robot. You can’t trench to every warehouse or pole. But with midband spectrum like CBRS, local businesses, utilities, and municipalities can deploy private LTE and 5G networks on their own terms using tools like Rapid5GS. The hardware is affordable. The software is open. The performance is real.

And now, with BEAD dollars finally available to support these kind of connectivity deployments, the wireless “edge mile” can scale.

This shift matters. It means states can revisit flawed proposals that locked out wireless. It means funds can go to providers who can actually solve the far more important edge mile connectivity challenge – a critical national security priority in light of A.I applications making these kind of connections more important than ever before . It means faster deployment, better coverage, and more local control.

The edge economy is here. Agriculture, logistics, defense, energy, and manufacturing all depend on distributed, intelligent systems in places fiber will never reach. For those building that future, this policy change is the green light we’ve been waiting for.

Fiber still has a role. But the era of fiber-to-every-door as national policy is over. Today, it’s about connecting the edge – and doing so quickly, securely, and affordably. Wireless is how we build the future of American connectivity.

The backhoe bonanza is over. The AI-powered edge starts now! Wireless isn’t the fallback anymore. It’s the foundation, and WISPs will lead the way in this next chapter of America’s connectivity story.

Native by Design

The reason is simple: Titanium was built differently from the start. Unlike many cross-platform systems that attempt to rebuild native controls inside their own rendering engines, Titanium takes a different approach. JavaScript code written in Titanium maps directly to the underlying native APIs provided by iOS and Android. A Titanium Button is not a simulated button, it’s a real UIButton on iOS, drawn by the operating system itself.

This design pays huge dividends when Apple releases major system updates like iOS 26. Because Titanium apps are calling the same native APIs that Apple updates internally, most apps built in Titanium just work. They automatically inherit a significant amount of the look, feel, and behaviors introduced by Apple. (And the same can be said for Titanium apps targeting Android as well!)

Glass Views? Already in Progress

One of iOS 26’s standout features is the new “Liquid Glass” design system, introducing new blurred, semi-translucent interface elements across Control Center, the lock screen, widgets, and system apps. For many cross-platform frameworks, exposing these new native effects will require significant engineering effort, assuming they support them at all.

For Titanium developers, support for these new glass views is already underway. According to Hans Knöchel , TiDev’s Lead iOS Engineer, the team is actively working to expose the new iOS 26 API calls directly into Titanium’s JavaScript layer. This allows developers to access cutting-edge system features almost as soon as Apple makes them available, without waiting for massive rewrites of rendering engines or bridging layers.

TiDev: Open Source, Non-Corporate, and Sustainable

Unlike many developer tools ruled by Silicon Valley venture capital, TiDev operates as a 501(c)(3) non-profit based in Alabama , supported by a worldwide community of contributors. The Titanium framework, originally built by Appcelerator (itself founded in Atlanta), continues today as a fully open-source project maintained by developers who actually use it to build real-world apps.

This community-first approach keeps Titanium nimble, developer-focused, and free from the shifting priorities of big tech investors. Updates like iOS 26 support aren’t beholden to product roadmaps or quarterly earnings, they’re driven by developers who want the framework to remain reliable, modern, and fully native.

Real Apps, Real Results

I’ve seen this firsthand – having developed a number of mobile applications for myself and clients across the United States. The Lightwave LINK , the official mobile application for Alabama Lightwave, an Alabama ISP , was built entirely in Titanium. Thanks to the TiDev Titanium framework upon which this app was built, my app won’t require substantial compatibility to run well on iOS 26. And with Hans and the iOS team actively working to expose even the newest APIs, I can start building on iOS 26’s latest features right away.

Of course, I’m not alone. Hans Knöchel, TiDev’s lead iOS engineer, is also the founder and CEO of Lambus , a collaborative travel planning platform leveraging the Titanium framework. Lambus helps travelers organize itineraries, documents, bookings, expenses, and notes all in one app. It’s available on iOS and Android, and has attracted users around the world. And yes, it’s fully live and in production today, powered by Titanium.

The Titanium Advantage

For developers tired of waiting months for cross-platform tools to catch up every time Apple drops a major update, Titanium offers a fundamentally better model:

• Day 0 OS support: no waiting on framework vendors to catch up.
• True native UI: not simulated or emulated widgets.
• Native performance: because it is native elements under the hood. No Chromium components or other nonsense rendering the UI.
• Fully open-source: Governed by developers, for developers, under guidance of a non-profit 501c3. No big-tech interests here!

Get Started

If you want to start building real mobile apps with native performance, there has never been a better time to explore Titanium:

• Learn more at TitaniumSDK.com
• Join the developer community on the TiDev Slack

Need Help Building An App?

With over a decade of hands-on experience, deep expertise in Titanium, and a strong command of the broader mobile development ecosystem, I can guide your project from initial concept all the way to a fully deployed, production-ready mobile app. Whether you’re starting from scratch or need expert support along the way, I’m here to help. Reach out and let’s start the conversation.

The only question left is: does America know it? Apparently, AT&T doesn’t.

Right now, one of the most powerful tools America has to compete in this global technology struggle is CBRS, America’s “Innovation Band.” The Citizens Broadband Radio Service was deliberately created to democratize wireless spectrum and unleash a new wave of private wireless innovation. It allows startups, universities, manufacturers, hospitals, first responders, and yes, national defense innovators, to deploy private LTE and 5G networks without needing permission from billion-dollar telecom giants.

AT&T’s recent posture on CBRS seems designed to kill it. Or at the very least, to wrench it out of reach from innovators and small businesses. In a breathtaking act of corporate overreach masquerading as “spectrum policy,” AT&T’s proposal would auction off the current CBRS spectrum, handing control to the same corporate giants who already dominate America’s telecom infrastructure. Existing CBRS users would be pushed aside, innovators blocked, and wireless power consolidated into the hands of a few privileged players. Let’s call this what it is: a direct threat to America’s national security.

The AI Battlefield Is the Edge

Artificial intelligence is no longer confined to server farms and data centers. The real battlefield for AI is the edge, where decisions must happen instantly: at our borders, in the skies, on the roads, and inside our factories. Examples include:

• AI-powered drones securing the southern border.
• Autonomous perimeter defenses at airports and ports.
• AI-driven surveillance identifying hostile actors at major events.
• AI airspace monitoring for unauthorized drones and aircraft.
• Critical infrastructure monitoring to protect power grids, pipelines, and water supplies.
• Private defense-industrial 5G networks enabling smart manufacturing for military supply chains.

All these applications can leverage LTE/5G networks that CBRS uniquely empowers, networks built by American innovators, operated on American terms, for American interests. Without CBRS, these innovators would be forced onto massive public carrier systems, controlled by companies like AT&T, where deployment moves at corporate speed, flexibility disappears under layers of bureaucracy, and innovation is dictated by profit margins instead of national security. In a world where China races forward, we simply cannot afford that.

The Technology Cold War Began While We Slept

When OpenAI launched ChatGPT during the pandemic, it marked a modern Sputnik moment. But while America was entangled in regulations and political paralysis, China and other adversaries raced ahead, embedding AI into their military, surveillance, and cyber capabilities. The window to catch up is closing fast.

And now, AT&T wants to slam it shut.

By displacing CBRS from its current, affordable mid-band spectrum position, AT&T’s proposal threatens to cut off thousands of small, nimble American innovators, the very companies most likely to deliver the edge-based AI breakthroughs we urgently need to counter China’s AI surge. For many, the cost and disruption of relocating could prove fatal, forcing them off the field entirely, or worse, into partnerships abroad that risk handing American intellectual property to foreign competitors.

This Isn’t About Spectrum, It’s About Control

The great irony: AT&T and its peers already control a substantial amount of non-governmental licensed spectrum in this country. But they want more. They want CBRS fenced off, reserved only for those with the deepest pockets. In doing so, they will smother the competition America depends on to win the AI race.

And make no mistake: I’m sure Beijing is cheering them on.

Because if America cannot dominate AI at the edge, if we cannot build battlefield-ready AI, border-ready AI, or homeland-ready AI, then our adversaries will.

A Message to Washington: Wake Up

Congress. The FCC. The Pentagon. This is your wake-up call. This is bigger than AT&T’s quarterly earnings. This is a fight for America’s technological future, and for our national security. If we hand CBRS over to the highest bidder, we are not just selling spectrum. We are selling our sovereignty.

CBRS is not a commodity. It is a national security asset. If AT&T succeeds, the losers will be American innovators, and America itself.

For most WISPs, licensed spectrum simply isn’t financially practical. That’s why CBRS has become the innovation core of the WISP industry and often serves as the anchor spectrum for solving these last-mile challenges.

There are powerful platforms on the market, like the Tarana G1 , that take full advantage of CBRS. Tarana G1 is absolutely excellent and able to deliver fiber performance to locations that would be impossible through traditional fixed wireless 5GHZ, 60GHZ, and 2.4GHZ solutions.

Photo Credit: https://www.taranawireless.com/g1-platform/

Unfortunately, Tarana’s price point remains out of reach for many operators without substantial grant funding, a large and profitable existing subscriber base, or outside investment. While an outstanding product, the economic reality is that Tarana is often beyond what self-funded WISPs can sustainably deploy, leaving many still searching for more accessible alternatives.

This is where LTE/5G steps in. On paper, it can offer a potentially cheaper solution to these same connectivity challenges. But as always, nothing comes for free.

LTE is hard. Very hard.

The LTE/5G ecosystem is fragmented, complex, and full of obstacles that prevent small-to-midsize operators from successfully deploying it. Many non-ISP network operators avoid it as well, even though LTE/5G is often one of the best options for connecting edge devices and remote sites that will power tomorrow’s AI-driven applications .

The Pitfalls That Stop Most LTE Deployments

This isn’t easy tech to work with. Even for seasoned network operators, LTE/5G brings a long list of landmines that you don’t normally deal with in a typical ISP or other general network environment. Some of the biggest challenges include:

LTE/5G network architecture: LTE doesn’t drop neatly into a standard ISP model. You have to learn entirely new concepts like the separation of control and user plane traffic, S1 interfaces, bearer management, and how the EPC actually moves packets.

Packet core selection and deployment: Commercial cores are expensive and often built for large carriers, not WISPs. Open-source cores exist, but getting one stable and predictable enough for production takes real work and troubleshooting.

RAN hardware quality: Choosing radios is risky. Some have well-documented manufacturing defects that aren’t obvious on paper. In my own deployments, I’ve seen vendors knowingly ship hardware with known issues across different brands and models. You’ll hear sales people and consultants say things like:

• “Yeah, the radio heads on that unit are garbage from the factory”
• “Oh yeah, once you start loading customers on these, they fall on their face.”
• “The GPS devices on these have a tendency to just fail.”
• “The only way to get firmware for this model is an expensive support agreement.”
• “Yep, those radios have a tendency to lose the 3rd and 4th radio heads at unpredictable times requiring a reboot”
• “So this radio is bricked, only way to fix it is three-level deep Inception level SSH and some undocumented commands. And actually that might not work either TBH. You may just be screwed”.
• “Yeah, this RRH/RRU model is so bad, we use them as chairs around the office.”

Talk about a dumpster fire! The devices being referred to above are still for sale in many places from vendors that know of these issues. I’m not sure how that’s even possible but here we are. The only way to know about these traps apparently is just pure hustle and experimentation. Maybe if you’re lucky, you’ll learn of these issues from friends in the industry over a Moscow Mule .

If this doesn’t sound like a nightmare to you, I don’t know what a nightmare even is. No wonder LTE isn’t more broadly deployed!

And this doesn’t even touch on other trip-mines like back-haul stability, spectrum coordination, S1 traffic management, SAS, and more.

I recently presented at ALANOG-06, our local NANOG-affiliated group, where I gave a fast-paced overview of LTE/5G deployment. I covered RAN hardware configurations, packet core options, and real-world deployment examples. I also presented on Rapid5GS, a deployment script I built that allows operators to spin up a fully functional LTE packet core on a $65 computer in under 5 minutes after Linux is installed.

If you’re a WISP, small business, or operator looking at LTE/5G, this talk will give you a solid foundation of how to set these networks up on a micro scale and what you need for a successful deployment. It slashes through the noise and gets to what’s relevant – if this talk had existed earlier, I’d be easily 12 months ahead of where I am today on several LTE deployment projects. The full presentation is available on YouTube below:

You can download the full PowerPoint of this presentation by clicking here in the PDF format.

Need help designing and deploying LTE/5G for your organization?

I’ve built and operated real-world LTE networks, made some mistakes, and know some traps. I can help you skip months of wasted time, bad hardware, and consultants who don’t fully understand the realities of smaller operators.

DM me if you want help. I’m available for hire and can get started immediately.

CLICK HERE TO WATCH OUR FIRESIDE PRESENTATION

MGMix (Montgomery Internet Exchange) was originally launched in 2016 enabling network operators with a presence at the RSA Dexter Data Center on 445 Dexter Avenue to peer with major networks such as Meta, Google, and Hurricane Electric. When an operator connects to the exchange, they get more efficient paths to major content providers and other network destinations reducing latency and providing a speed boost to their customers.

Unfortunately like many good ideas and initiatives, it hit a wall, and stagnated.

By 2022, MGMix was struggling – held back by things like aging hardware and little community engagement. The promise of a thriving exchange nestled in the heart of Alabama was beginning to fade.

That changed in 2023 when Tony Porterfield took the reigns as CTO for the City of Montgomery. What followed was a bold and ambitious revitalization effort to modernize MGMix and put it back on the map.

The Fireside Chat: What We Covered

This session wasn’t just a look back, it was a look under the hood and into the future. We walked through:

1. The Founding Vision

The idea behind MGMix was simple but powerful: bring major content and cloud providers closer to Alabama’s networks. Reduce latency. Cut bandwidth costs. Keep local traffic local.

2. Why It Went Stagnant

Despite a strong start with significant government backing and large content providers at the table – interest began to wain and the MGMix began a steady slide to irrelevance. By 2022, the peering fabric was dated, and the IXP was on the rocks.

3. The Infrastructure Overhaul

Under Tony’s leadership, the City of Montgomery invested in a full tech refresh and also cleaned up operational issues. This means:

• New high-capacity switches.
• Switch fabric extended to AUBix on redundant 100gb fiber circuits.
• A streamlined onboarding process for new peers.
• IX participation in AAICE (Alabama Artificial Intelligence Center of Excellence) AND MORE.

These partners brought new peers, new traffic, and new energy to the exchange.

4. MGMix, A Marketing Differentiator

In my part of the presentation, I covered how my ISP Alabama Lightwave utilizes our MGMix participation to differentiate ourselves in a crowded ISP space – we tell customers that through the MGMix, we keep “local traffic local”.

4. What’s Next, And How to Get Involved

With solid infrastructure and strong regional buy-in, the next chapter of MGMix is about growth and sustainability:

• Growing participation from rural ISPs and education networks
• Engaging with middle-mile and last-mile providers
• Creating a truly statewide exchange fabric

If you’re an Alabama-based network operator, content provider, or municipality with a connectivity problem to solve, MGMix might just be the answer.

Watch the Full Talk

This fireside chat was filmed live at ALANOG-6 in Montgomery, Alabama.
Catch the full session and learn more at: https://mgmix.net

Contact Us

Got questions or want to get involved? Reach out:

• Tony Porterfield – CTO, City of Montgomery
  • tporterfield@montgomeryal.gov
• Josh Lambert – CEO, Alabama Lightwave Inc.
  • josh.lambert@alabamalightwave.com

Continued Reading

I have covered the MGMix before in my article “Decentralizing the Internet: The Case for Stronger IXPs in Alabama ” – be sure to check it out! The Montgomery Advertiser has also covered this IX closely – hat-tip to them for making this happen. You can find links to those articles below:

• https://www.montgomeryadvertiser.com/story/news/2015/12/16/city-planning-high-speed-network/77353670
• https://www.montgomeryadvertiser.com/picture-gallery/news/local/2016/01/20/montgomery-cyber-connection-the-first-internet-exchange-in-the-state/79067428/
• https://www.montgomeryadvertiser.com/videos/news/local/2016/01/20/79072146/
• https://www.montgomeryadvertiser.com/story/news/2017/02/27/global-internet-giant-lands-montgomery/98483952/
• https://www.montgomeryadvertiser.com/story/news/2017/12/22/new-advisory-board-help-shape-montgomery-internet-exchange-future/971684001/
• https://www.montgomeryadvertiser.com/story/news/2017/06/07/montgomery-internet-hub-ramps-up-100-gb/374010001/
• https://www.montgomeryadvertiser.com/story/opinion/editorials/2017/06/09/our-view-montgomery-internet-exchange-gives-us-great-hope/380692001/
• https://www.montgomeryadvertiser.com/picture-gallery/news/2017/06/07/aum-joins-montgomery-internet-exchange/102606388/
• https://www.montgomeryadvertiser.com/story/news/2018/05/24/asu-and-facebook-join-montgomery-internet-exchange/642638002/

The team at DBA has been gracious to allow a speaker to present at each event I’ve attended so far – said speaker brings a business concept or tech topic to the floor for examination and discussion. Yesterday’s speaker and topic did not disappoint!

Meet Laird Foret , Founder and CEO of Birmingham’s own VisionCore AI .

Laird showcased a product he’s been developing called WardenEyeOne, featured on the VisionCore website as “AI-Powered Surveillance engineered specifically for Correctional Facilities.”

WardenEyeOne is an “always-watching” AI surveillance system designed to ingest and monitor a large number of camera feeds across a facility. It proactively identifies life and safety threats in real-time and alerts security personnel as incidents unfold.

During yesterday’s demo, the system processed several high-risk scenarios, such as a prison altercation, a weapon being brandished, and an active shooter in a school setting. In each case, the AI rapidly interpreted the situation, generated a detailed, real-time text summary of the threat, and relayed it instantly to emergency response staff to support immediate action.

This product sets itself apart from others in a few unique ways – one that stood out to me is that it can run “on premises” and provides this AI locally to a facility without the need for a cloud connection to operate. Laird had one of these A.I. appliances on the stage during his demo – they don’t take up a lot of space and have significant capability without being super power or space hungry. The WardenEyeOne AI runs on consumer gaming GPUs making it accessible without significant hardware investment.

WardenEyeOne’s “Full Visual Comprehension” offers a glimpse into how AI will continue to reshape our world. Traditionally, object detection systems have relied on rigid, rules-based engines that require constant manual updates. In contrast, WardenEyeOne points toward a more adaptive, self-learning approach, capable of recognizing and responding to emerging threats in ways that legacy systems simply can’t.

Evaluated solely on its technical merits, the implications of systems like WardenEyeOne are profound. Laird presented ideas such as a traffic camera becoming “smart,” able to detect a collision and immediately alert EMS and law enforcement. That kind of real-time awareness will undoubtedly save lives. The same potential exists for school surveillance systems that can identify drug activity, or correctional facility cameras that detect abuse as it happens.

Of course, I do have concerns. As with any emerging technology, there’s the risk of misuse by bad actors. I’m sure we’re all familiar with 1984 and Brave New World – and the implications thereof. But I remain hopeful that solutions to the age-old question, “Who watches the watchers? ”, are also on the horizon. If developed and deployed responsibly, systems like WardenEyeOne could lead to real gains in public safety, reduced crime, and meaningful improvements in quality of life. These are incredibly promising developments, if we get the balance right.

The “Breakfast Club” event was well-attended and the networking opportunities abundant. I’ll definitely be back for the next one! Huge appreciation to Daring Bit Assembly (DBA) for making this event happen and providing a delicious breakfast spread and coffee. Special thanks also to Matthew Jaeh , Managing Director of the Techstars Alabama EnergyTech Accelerator at Innovation Depot for furnishing the meeting space.

There’s a lot of buzz, hyperbole, and misinformation in this space – so it was nice seeing a reputable company like Zapier jumping in here and facilitating a conversation featuring a real case study. I probably represent one of many who are looking for new examples of how this emerging AI/Agent technology can serve a business in today’s market conditions.

The Main Event

The example used early in the webinar was presented by Evan Nison , president of a PR and SEO agency called NisonCo based in New Jersey. Evan showed off a sample agent built on the platform that would do automatic lead generation.

The agent he built lives within the Zapier platform. Said agent scans a PR news website to look for press releases featuring companies that are in the industry he sells into. Once the agent determines that the company found in its search matches the criteria for a potential customer, it then does additional research to identify the decision maker that could purchase the product he’s selling.

There’s some really neat “AI” magic happening at the decision maker identification step. The LLM prompt he uses first looks for individuals online with a Head of Marketing job title, and if it can’t find that, falls back on individuals with a title like CEO. This is nice flexibility in the programming allowing his agent to be useful in finding these people across organizations of different sizes and configurations.

But the magic continues. He added additional LLM prompting telling the agent to only add lead information to his sheet if it had a high confidence of it actually being accurate/useful. This step helps filter out AI hallucination – something that critics have leveled at AI tools to date as something that causes their usefulness to be limited in areas requiring high accuracy.

Additional agent capabilities leveraged by Nison’s team included tools to prepare notes for sales calls, build first drafts of sales proposals, and more based on the information gathered from his funnels and internet research agent tooling within Zapier.

Best Practices

Also present on the webinar was Zapier’s Head of Agents, Anna Marie Clifton . Anna Marie, along the other presenters, also shared some best-practices to keep the AI agents between the lines if you will, where the output they’re generating is actually useful to a business.

One such example was to treat the AI like a high school intern working on projects for you. The idea being to keep your directions to the agent clear and direct, linear, and contextualized as much as possible. The AI agent, like a high school intern, won’t know a lot of the intricacies that make your business tick that come from years of experience – so you’ll need to get very clear and specific, providing that context in your LLM prompts, when leveraging AI to perform automation tasks in your company.

It was also advised to define the output you expect, again, very clearly and specific in terms of the output structure and validation it should do when generating results for you.

Anna Marie also mentioned that these agents can integrate with the connections that Zapier has developed over the years, long before the AI boom, to input and output data from their agent platform. This is great news, because Zapier already supports functions such as posting messages to Slack, sending emails via MailGun, filing tickets on Asana, etc.

Where Do We Go From Here

One of the hats I’ve worn over the years is building API/EDI connections for businesses to automate processes for them. Traditionally, this has required a substantial amount of manual work to get systems talking to each other in a way that’s accurate and useful in a business critical setting. There really hasn’t been significant disruption in this industry for a while – until the last year or two – with the emergence of AI.

These prompt/agent tools are still early and the usefulness of them isn’t fully realized yet. But companies like Zapier and their Agent offering are making automation technology accessible to more and more companies – which means a lot more of this automation technology will be part of our economy in the future. This webinar shows that now even verticals like digital marketing and SEO companies can get in on the action and utilize automation to make their companies more efficient and deliver more value.

If you have an interest in bringing automation technology into your business, you should definitely click here to check out Zapier’s webinar and request a copy of the recording.

Thanks to Zapier for getting smart people in the room to show how this works. I’ll be experimenting with these tools to see how they can help my existing clients and may share how that’s panned out in a future article. In the mean time, if you’re a company needing help navigating the automation/integration space – I’m available for hire as a consultant to help you navigate the process. Drop me an email and let’s chat!

Speaking of wizards, meet Richard Stallman, founder of the GNU Project and a key figure in shaping today’s technology ecosystem. With his flowing beard and occasionally iconic attire, I could see how one might expect him to pull out a staff and cast a spell at any moment.

The Cloud, or what in my age we called the internet, has a heart that beats with the pulse of protocols like BGP – languages that routers speak to communicate with each other. With BGP, routers exchange info with each other to coordinate what internet destinations they’re able to reach. This magic allows your internet traffic to jump on the internet in Centreville, AL and get all the way to a server in San Francisco, CA efficiently and redundantly. All of this happens quickly and silently in the background when you’re scrolling TikTok or watching excellent videos about dishwashers on YouTube.

Part of what makes this system work are common locations where routers – those owned from ISPs and content providers alike – connect with each other, and trade internet traffic. It looks a bit like this:

Customer <-> ISP (AT&T, CSpire, etc.) <-> Internet Exchange <-> Netflix

In this example, the customer internet traffic exits their home, passes across their ISP’s network to an internet exchange. Netflix, connected to this hypothetical internet exchange, will then pass the video stream the customer requested back to the customer’s ISP at said exchange, which will journey back across the origin network and in to their streaming device of choice.

The more internet exchanges exist, and the closer they are to the users that utilize the services connected to them, the better and faster the overall internet feels for end users. If I live in Birmingham, Alabama and my local ISP is connected to a local internet exchange in my state where content providers are connected also in a central location like Montgomery – that content loads faster and snappier for me. Why? Because my traffic didn’t have to travel to a major internet hub like Dallas or Ashburn to reach me. Just like driving or flying, the more direct the route, the faster the trip.

Enter The MGMix

Alabama is blessed to have an internet exchange in this state. The City of Montgomery operates one called the MGMix out of the RSA Dexter Avenue Datacenter across the street from the State Capital Building in Montgomery. The MGMix boasts members that are well-connected such as Meta (Facebook) and Hurricane Electric .

I’ve been working with the City of Montgomery and the MGMix to get my ISP, Alabama Lightwave , connected to this internet exchange and have been quite successful so far bringing these direct connections to my customers. So far, we’ve been able to establish peering with:

• Meta (Facebook)
• Hurricane Electric
• JMF Solutions
• Whitesky Communications
• Pine Belt Communications
• Packet Clearing House
• Internet Systems Consortium
• City of Montgomery

In addition to the speed advantages this brings to my internet users at Alabama Lightwave, the overall resiliency of the internet also improves when networks can connect to each other in more locations. Let’s suppose that a data center in Nashville sustained a significant connectivity disruption . Assuming a failure there, Alabama is impacted badly. However, if networks in Alabama are able to communicate in Montgomery without first having to connect with one another out-of-state or worse out-of-region, the overall economy and government becomes most robust as a result, and less prone to failure when regional hubs go offline as has happened before. Ensuring minimal disruption is crucial, especially during regional disasters.

Another key benefit of ix presence is “data sovereignty”. In a world where throttling and censorship becomes ever-more-concerning, if network operators can talk directly with BGP and exchange traffic at ix locations without going through Wall St. telecommunications companies, they can help ensure free-flowing data regardless of the political orientations of middle-man network operators or interference from nefarious actors.

It’s crucial for Alabama network operators to invest in strengthening the MGMix, AUBix, and other regional IXs. The more we build neutral, local interconnection points, the more we move toward a decentralized, resilient internet. And a faster internet too!

The innovations we live amongst today are made possible through human ingenuity, hard work, and providence. Not to be forgotten however are the breakthroughs made possible by simply getting the right people in the room working on the right problems. In a time fresh off the heels of a pandemic that forced so many into the corners and away from community – it’s a welcome breath of fresh air to see people coming together to work hard and dream again.

This morning, DBA , an Alabama-based software development company, hosted a gathering of technology and business professionals around breakfast and coffee to dream and mingle. Minds developed in the trenches of respected and successful institutions such as Regions Bank, Shipt, Innovation Depot, and more populated the John Hand Club exchanging thoughts and ideas around everything from AI Agents and venture capital to government policy, client relations, and more. Contacts were shared, ideas were shared, tactics were shared. Magic happened. Progress was made.

To Adam Dill , Josh Adams , and the entire team at DBA – THANK YOU for making this happen. For those that attended – THANK YOU for coming. This is how you make the world a better place. I was delighted to share the room with so many people driven to leave things better then they found it, and will definitely be back soon. If you’re an Alabama technology or business professional, you should definitely reach out to the team at DBA and make arrangements to be at one of these events. I promise you won’t find a lack of value or connections to be made.

Photos courtesy of Josh Adams at DBA.

Larry Sanger , one of the original founders of Wikipedia, caught my attention in December 2024 after he publicly critiqued the X social network and moved his personal content feed back to a self-hosted website at https://sangerfeed.org/

He once again has exclusive control of how his content is published – just like I do on this website – freedom from censorship and corporate interference. He’s not the only one to have made moves like this. Others such as Luke Smith have been pushing similar ideas for years.

I’m thankful to Mr. Sanger – he gave me the push I needed to spend less time on X/Facebook and focus on building my own site more.

My hope is that others will revolt against the current social media paradigm and bring their content back to independent ownership on self-hosted websites and networks. A future where the only posts we see originate from A.I. influencers, bots, politicians, and corporate oligarchs doesn’t seem like one good for any us.

Setting up a self-hosted website is surprisingly simple in today’s world and in reach for most tech-familiar people. A good place to start is https://landchad.net/ which has tutorials for everything from setting up a self-hosted website to setting up a self-hosted YouTube clone.

If you’re trying to go this route and need a little help with setup, drop me an email and I’ll see if I can help. The more of us that setup independent internet outposts, the better the internet will be.

Over on the right side of the photo is the customer’s old fiber drop connecting them to the competition’s newly constructed fiber network in this city. The fiber drop has now been cut, and the ethernet cable occupies the path it used to follow into the customer premises. Why would this household drop fiber capable of delivering gigabit internet in favor of a wireless internet option?

Because contrary to what lobbyists and Wall St. fiber operators will tell you – fiber isn’t the be-all-end-all to a customer’s internet experience.

Far more important than the delivery medium are issues such as:

• Is the service consistently online or prone to frequent outages?
• What’s the latency? (Time in milliseconds between the end user and the services they’re interacting with like Netflix or Facebook.)
• Does the provider have redundant connections out of the service area in case of a network backbone disruption?
• Is the internet bill consistent and predictable?
• Is the ISP spying and selling data to advertisers?
• Is the ISP throttling services if a customer utilizes torrents, VPNs, or other counter-censorship technologies?
• Does the ISP limit data usage? (Data caps!)
• Does the ISP fund and support causes that are inconsistent with the customer’s values?

I’ve seen a number of new Alabama Lightwave customers cite service reliability, billing issues, customer support, and local ownership for why they jumped ship and changed providers to Lightwave.

So what’s the story in this photo? Fiber was a broken promise for this customer. Was it fast? Sometimes! Did it go out alot? Yep. Was the customer service good when it did fail? Nope.

At the end of the day most customers don’t want to think about their internet. They want it to just work. And when it doesn’t, they’ll swap to something else, regardless of what the delivery medium is.

Humans of course are notoriously bad at perception of circumstance. We’re even more notoriously bad at perception of our own self. Perhaps this manifests as an over-inflated sense of self-worth, but can also swing the other way and manifest as an under-developed appreciation for what we’re actually capable of. There be danger in the ditches on both sides of this perilous path.

I’ve been reading though the late Reverend John Claypool’s book “The First to Follow”. The author brought this point home to me when looking at Jesus and his relationship with his disciples. Simon Peter started his relationship with Jesus on quite a rocky footing. He lacked experience, was often highly emotional in his decision making, and even would go as far as publicly denying Jesus three times to his face at the pivotal moment when it mattered most.

Claypool observes that Jesus sticks with Peter in spite of his rocky moments and ultimately helps Peter to be the best he can be. Jesus also checks Peter when he arrogantly inflates his own character resiliency. Outside external investment in Peter’s life, made from a position of humility and love, made a huge difference for his life trajectory and impact. Effects which likely wouldn’t have happened had Jesus never entered the scene for him.

“Sometimes we need light from a borrowed lamp, and are sustained by someone else’s faith in us.”

The First to Follow by The Rev. Dr. John Claypool

This line of thinking was a cause for pause and self-reflection I did not anticipate. Much of my life’s story to date was the direct result of someone else believing in me and giving me a chance to succeed. For all that have done this, please know you’re highly appreciated even if I’ve never told you that before. My goal going forward is to try and be more aware of these people and thank them when they make those investments in me.

Lastly, there’s a moment of reflection here of our responsibility to BE that light-sharing vessel for others. We traverse the darkness of our lives with a lamp blazing of fire on loan. As it was done to us, let us do to others – share that light, lend that faith, extend that hand.

Probably not smart for this software engineer to tap dance with the possibility of engaging in heresy at every turn. But here we are.

The Holy Eucharist, The Lord’s Supper, or Communion, all phrases that essentially mean the same thing in practice, is a sacrament of liturgical significance in most Christian denominations. It proceeds like this – church members will eat some bread and drink some wine (or grape juice, but that’s another conversation) together in accordance with the commands of Jesus to His disciples in the Gospel of Luke:

“And when the hour was come, he sat down, and the twelve apostles with him. And he said unto them, With desire I have desired to eat this passover with you before I suffer: for I say unto you, I will not any more eat thereof, until it be fulfilled in the kingdom of God. And he took the cup, and gave thanks, and said, Take this, and divide it among yourselves: for I say unto you, I will not drink of the fruit of the vine, until the kingdom of God shall come. And he took bread, and gave thanks, and brake it, and gave unto them, saying, This is my body which is given for you: this do in remembrance of me. Likewise also the cup after supper, saying, This cup is the new testament in my blood, which is shed for you.”

Luke 22:14-20 (AKJV)

The general consensus of the universal church is that this passage is to be interpreted as a command that we follow, all inclusive church-wide, as believers of Jesus. It’s understood that we are to re-create this moment amongst ourselves in remembrance of Christ’s sacrifice for us. It’s also generally understood and agreed upon that the feast isn’t limited just to the disciples that were present in this scripture passage, but instead applies to all of us who claim Christ living on this side of the New Testament. I will be operating under this assumption in this article.

Once you move past those points of agreement however, unity quickly falls apart and endless arguments and debates begin. Here’s but a small sampling of the things people will generally argue over when it comes to this sacrament/practice:

• Who is allowed to take the Lord’s Supper.
• Who is allowed to administer the Lord’s Supper.
• What kind of bread you are to use for the Lord’s Supper.
• What kind of “wine” you are to use for the Lord’s Supper. (alcoholic, low-alcohol, or no-alcohol.)
• How often to take the Lord’s Supper.
• How you should approach the table in terms of sin you may or may not have remembered to repent of.
• If you could drink from individual cups or a common cup, or not drink at all and instead dip (also known as intinction.)
• If a “profession of faith” is needed before you come to the table.
• If a “baptism” as a baby is needed before you come to the table.
• If the bread and wine are symbolic, or actually the body and blood of Christ.
• AND ON AND ON AND ON.

As noted above, this is a small sampling of the issues that theologians and church people alike have engaged with for hundreds of years. Today, a search on Sermon Audio for the word “communion” returns 12,760 sermons at the time of this article. A lot of folks have a lot to say apparently about what Jesus was doing in this passage and what it means for us today.

Side note – but curiously, a search for “Widow ” returns only 1,924 sermons. A search for “Poor ” returns 3,936 sermons. Both of these together do not pass 50% of the sermon numbers available when searching “communion”.

The concept of communion and how to look at it has been on my mind as of late for reasons I won’t explore for now. However, in researching this area of theology, I’ve arrived at a few ideas for consideration that might help us move past the endless tug-of-war around this sacrament and instead put our focus on the weightier matters of the Gospel .

Context of the Supper

The Jewish Passover, a meal, is the context of communion in Luke 22. Not a church service. Not a liturgical ceremony. It does not appear to me to be a soul-searching alter call to try and remember every sin you’ve committed and repent of it. It also does not appear to be a high-church ceremony with candles and incense. Instead, the picture I see is an intimate meeting of the disciples around a table to taste and see the gospel in practical form directly from Jesus Himself.

This contextual understanding of this event is re-enforced by the Apostle Paul in 1 Corinthians 11:17-34. It would seem that he shouldn’t need to get on to the church for letting some go hungry and for those participating drinking to drunkenness if they were simply eating a cracker or sipping wine from a chalice. Drunkenness and gluttony are things happening in the context of a feast, not a ceremony.

As an Episcopalian, I find great meaning and spiritual nourishment receiving the Holy Eucharist each week. For me, it has been a life-giving experience, and I eagerly look forward to it every week. If you want to argue that the elements, in their mystery, are the body and blood of Christ, I can see why you’d want to show reverence and order in how you go about observing this sacrament out of reverence to God.

All of that said however, when I examine the Gospel of Luke, the text does not explicitly demand a specific liturgical ceremony for communion – the emphasis Jesus has is on the act itself and meaning thereof, not the environment. If a meal table was good enough for Jesus, it’s probably good enough for us too. My take is that as long as the true essence of the sacrament is upheld, the environment surrounding it can be tailored to suit the needs and beliefs of each congregation – nobody should rush to a church court or confrontation over this.

On Fencing The Table

At no point in the above passage does Jesus kick anybody out, ask them if they’ve fully repented of all their sins, or anything of the sort. In fact, just one verse later in Luke 22:21, He states that His betrayer is present at the table with them. Everybody was at the table. Even Judas.

If Judas could eat the supper, anybody should be able to eat the supper.

The issue of “who do we allow to come to the table” is a hot button because once you decide it’s the job of a priest, preacher, or elder to administrate communion, it doesn’t take a significant leap in logic to put the responsibility on them to avoid allowing their parishioners to “drinketh damnation to himself” (1 Corinthians 11:29-31). While I follow the logic, it doesn’t seem that Jesus was too concerned about this when He was setting this sacrament up. So why are we?

A bit like the Episcopalians look at the elements of communion as a holy mystery, I personally take this same approach when dealing with a complex passage like the one in 1 Corinthians. Jesus always taught simple truths grounded in love. Rather than over-complicating who eats and who doesn’t, I think we’re safer to simply imitate Jesus and leave the issue of damnation (whatever that means!) to the individual conscience of those that wish to eat and drink.

On Administration Of the Supper

Another hot button around this topic is the issue of WHO has the authority or blessing to give communion to the church. This being another point of contention that arises when you interpret and practice the sacrament as a liturgical ceremony.

I find it curious that almost IMMEDIATELY FOLLOWING the initiation of the Lord’s Supper, Jesus has to deal with an argument that starts up about who is the greatest in the Kingdom of Heaven. Jesus points out that a mark of the Gentiles was lording of authority over others – and that his disciples were not to be like that. Instead Jesus says something shocking – the least is the greatest.

With that in mind, it seems to me that the church grounds keeper, or janitor, or nursery volunteer would be the most qualified to serve this sacrament if you take Jesus at face-value. But instead, we argue about if it should be a man or woman, a priest or deacon, an elder or bishop, etc etc. Arguments for millennia – but don’t let me understate the point!

Jesus didn’t seem to be too concerned about who would administer this sacrament. In the AKJV, we get the wording “divide it among yourselves” – not “pass this to the most spiritual and let them figure it out”. Again, if Jesus can keep it simple, so can we.

Conclusion

The main force of this passage in Luke for me is verse 18:

“for I say unto you, I will not drink of the fruit of the vine, until the kingdom of God shall come.”

Rather than pondering the specifics of how we celebrate this, who does what, how often, what kind of drink, etc – I believe it would be more helpful to ponder the meaning of this feast in view of the symbology it caries for the future.

When I eat the broken bread and drink from the cup, my mind is on the inaugurated kingdom of God. I consume in anticipation of a healed world where we don’t quarrel amongst ourselves over the insignificant, but rather live in love for each other, perhaps best represented as a feast with Jesus himself.

If we lived in a perfect world where every widow is accounted for and their needs are met, we’ve got time and space to debate more about communion specifics. The same can be said about orphans, strangers, refugees, etc. At the point we have their needs met, let’s take this on and get communion as perfect as we can make it. But in the meantime, I’d like to see a shift in emphasis to uniting Heaven and Earth through our actions – by being the hands and feet of Jesus to those who need His love and mercy. Take the feast as a reminder of God’s grace to ourselves, and with this renewed understanding, live to serve those whom He commands us to serve.

Now that’s a communion I can get behind.

Threads is, in essence, a Twitter clone. It’s a text-heavy social network designed to encourage users to share thoughts and conversations in a threaded tweet-like manner.

Meta, the Silicon Valley giant behind Facebook, Instagram, and WhatsApp is the software publisher behind Threads. For the past several years they’ve been focused on building the “Metaverse” but have since altered course focusing heavily on A.I.

My suspicious is that Threads sits squarely at the center of this A.I. pivot for Meta.

The current iteration of chatbot A.I. software, ChatGPT for example, is a highly sophisticated text prediction engine trained on top of large sets of data. The better the data processing algorithm and quality of the underlying data set it was trained on, the better the final A.I. tool will ultimately be. Firms sitting on large amounts of data such as Microsoft and Google were able to quickly leverage their data to launch competing chat bot tools in rapid succession. Those were Sydney and Bard respectively.

An arms race is in progress between these tech titans as they battle for market dominance. The key ammunition in this fight for market capture is data to train these A.I. models on that do not carry the risk of lawsuits or content blocks. Access to large amounts of user conversations, comments, and posts will make a huge difference in the quality of an AI tool as they’re built today.

I guess building and owning social media platforms is sexy again. Forget crypto, forget the metaverse, it’s 2008 all over again.

The algorithms serving posts on these platforms will now have an additional perverse incentive to provoke arguments and drama beyond pushing views to advertisers. The more you fight in those comments, the larger the data set will be for the A.I. tools launched by these companies.

If you sign up for Threads (and for that matter, stay on Twitter) – you should do so with both eyes open realizing you’re the product not the customer here. Your data will feed tomorrow’s A.I. You’re on the menu, and from the A.I.s point of view, you’re delicious.

Over the past year, I came to a realization how dependent my life has become on all of these various online service offerings. Services ran by people that may not necessarily have my best interests or those of my neighbors at the front of mind.

This was indeed a concerning realization.

All it takes is one corporation to change their terms of service or end a product offering, and in a seeming instant, years of platform investment you’ve made is gone. This could look like apps that no longer work, or perhaps a service that used to be free suddenly representing a not-so-small budget line item you’re now on the hook to pay every month.

Just from Google alone – I’ve been personally affected by a number of product eliminations where useful services were killed seemingly without cause. The list they’ve shutdown is extensive and they’re not alone .

Of course, personal privacy represents another risk area one is exposed to while having so much data on 3rd party cloud services. Algorithms and services that never sleep constantly reading our emails, monitoring our listening and streaming habits, and never forgetting our internet searches is something we’ve come to accept as a reality of modern living.

Enough is enough. Privacy and independence are worth some sacrifice.

In 2022, I decided make a concerted effort to pull back a bit from dependency on all of these services and reduce some exposure of my private life to the infamous algorithms.

I shutdown my Instagram and TikTok accounts.

These two services with their short-form video swipe algorithms had learned me to a T. As a result, hours of my life were being sucked away every week by systems that were building advertiser profiles around me and selling it to the highest bidder. Actually putting words to that and realizing what was going on still makes me uncomfortable to this day, and I’ve had these accounts deleted for months now. It definitely feels better knowing those services no longer have a role in my life.

I canceled my online Apple Music subscription in favor of a self-hosted AirSonic instance.

I was paying Apple and the recording industry every month to listen to music. In the process, giving them full insight of what my current music tastes were and allowing them to hold that data as long as they see fit. I determined this personal data and the DRM around it was no longer something I was willing to tolerate. Instead of Apple Music, I now purchase MP3 albums and actual physical CDs, rip them, and upload the music I want to hear to a private AirSonic instance. Using the substreamer app, I can still have all the conveniences of on-the-go streaming without surrendering privacy here or having to pay monthly fees.

I setup a private server to host my email instead of Gmail.

This transition was a major win for personal privacy and digital independence. While email is inherently insecure – I determined that allowing Google to host it and read everything going in and out of my inbox was insult to injury and far more private data exposure risk then I was willing to tolerate. Getting away from Gmail was actually surprisingly simple. All you need to do is spin up a VPS somewhere and follow the script here.

I setup a blog to update friends/family on life instead of relying on Facebook.

This very post represents an on-going effort to transition away from Facebook. I’m not planning to share anymore life updates, writings, videos, etc on Facebook or Meta platforms. Too many data privacy concerns for me to feel comfortable there at this point . Plans for the future include finding a way to manage my business pages without a Facebook account and deleting it all together at some point. This is a work in progress but that’s the general trajectory.

I switched to Signal as the primary instant messenger of choice instead of iMessage and Viber.

iMessage and Viber both are closed-source applications where I can’t review how they may or may not be utilizing my private data to build advertiser profiles or other questionable data practices. While switching to the open-source Signal messenger doesn’t fully resolve these concerns (iOS, the current mobile platform I’m on is closed source) it’s a partial step towards the eventual plan of either ditching smartphones entirely, or more likely, switching to one with a clean verifiable ecosystem of no corporate spyware loaded by default.

We’ve got a long way to go, and a short time to get there.

Lasting change is often the result of small focused steps towards the desired outcome. The actions taken so far may seem small, but together represent a meaningful stride towards reclaiming some digital independence from our corporate overlords. It’s a long journey to reduce dependence on these services and the road is definitely a daunting one. However, I believe the end result is worth some struggle, change, and sacrifice. Consider a reflection on your own digital dependence and privacy – perhaps you might join the trail with me! I’d love the company.

For the uninitiated, ChatGPT is an A.I. powered chatbot built on top of large language models (sometimes called LLMs) that enables a user to prompt and question it through a human-centric conversation approach.

For example, you can ask it questions like “What does this PHP code do?” or “Write me an essay on five things to look out for when driving at night.” and it’ll return highly useful, though not always accurate, answers.

Since inception, I’ve used it nearly daily to help with laborious code tasks or data processing. For example handing it some XML and asking it to convert it to CSV – it can do this quite well. Using it to rapidly build code needed to interact with different web service APIs has also proven to be of significant value.

Beyond coding, it’s helped me research legal issues, distill long text into shorter text, build a schedule, it’s even produced an Age of Empires II build order for what buildings to build and units to generate, in a supposedly strategic fashion, for the popular RTS game. (Note to reader: the build order it provided wasn’t particularly useful, but it proves how flexible this tool can be.)

It’s been a long time since anything in the tech space has truly seemed innovative to me. I understand some utility exists with Bitcoin and the related blockchain technology, but I’d hardly call it disruptive. The same could be said for the Metaverse, wearables, 5G, etc. You’ll find plenty of hype for these technologies. I’m glad they exist – but they haven’t really shifted my workflows in any meaningful way. To date, they’ve carved out some efficiency gains, but not really shifted how I work.

ChatGPT is a completely different story. And I’m here for it. I pay for their premium service and use this tool throughout the day.

That being said, there’s a few things I would keep in mind as you utilize this in your personal life or business:

• There’s no expectation of privacy on ChatGPT. Anything you enter is subject to review to assist in training the AI and improving the underlying model. Definitely do not provide the bot anything sensitive such as proprietary code, trade secrets, HIPPA/PCI data, etc.
• It’s a proprietary closed source program. We don’t know what it’s doing under the hood with your questions. For all we know, it’s using these to build the most accurate advertising profiles to date and selling them to the highest bidder. When the code source is closed, anything goes.
• It hallucinates (improvises/lies) about facts and information constantly. Don’t assume that just because it said something that it’s true. Don’t assume the code it produced is going to work out of the box. In many cases, it doesn’t, especially if your prompt wasn’t tuned well for an optimal response.

Alas, even with these downsides, it’s still an extremely useful tool in the belt for my line of work. Be aware of the limitations, but I also wouldn’t delay creating an account and becoming familiar with how this new technology works. It’ll only get better from here.

Get started here: https://chat.openai.com/

Learn more here: https://openai.com/blog/chatgpt