What if there is No Killer Application? An Exploration of a User-Centric Perspective on Broadband
Why this work is in the frame
A frame that forgets how it found something cannot be audited. These are the routes that admitted this work.
Bibliographic record
Abstract
This paper explores user and provider experiences with broadband networks. Drawing on data from an early broadband trial and from recent studies of consumer broadband usage, the validity of the commonly held view that widespread adoption of broadband is dependent upon the development of a killer application is challenged. It is argued that access to broadband can be valuable for users without the provision of a killer application and that the dynamics of broadband development are shifting. As more users become content creators and distributors and as it becomes easier for consumers to establish broadband networks without help from traditional providers, the existing relationships within the broadband industry will change. Broadband researchers and stakeholders in the development of broadband networks are encouraged to explore and understand the implications of these changes, recognizing that there is much to be learned about deploying broadband in ways that will create the broad societal benefits promised by its promoters.
Fetched live from OpenAlex and de-inverted. Abstracts are not stored in this database: the inverted indexes are 8.6 GB of the frame’s 9.3 GB of text, and the host has 13 GB free.
Full frame distilled prediction
Teacher imitationNot calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. Learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and 10,348 direct Gemma labels. Candidate is the union of thresholded teacher heads; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels or direct frontier model labels.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.004 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
Machine scores (provisional)
The two teacher heads of the student model, read on this work. A score orders the frame for review; it never asserts a category, and the validation status ships verbatim with every row.
Baseline scores from an immature model (maturity gate not passed, 7 training rounds). Scores rank; they never assert a category.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from it