In selecting a city, our goal was to find a location where we could build efficiently, make an impact on the community and develop relationships with local government and community organizations. We’ve found this in Kansas City.

Google says that nearly 1,100 cities applied to host the high-speed broadband network. Many used public and government support to show Google how desperately they wanted to win the project — Topeka, Kansas, even changed its name to Google, Kansas for the entire month of March 2010.

Google announced its plans about 13 months ago, saying its high-speed network will “deliver Internet speeds more than 100 times faster than what most Americans have access to today with 1 gigabit per second, fiber-to-the-home connections.”

The goal is to build web-based tools any user can use that enables them to detect Internet throttling, government censorship, and other transparency problems. It will let users verify that their ISPs are delivering the upload and download speeds they were promised. It will let users learn if their governments are blocking or modifying the Internet without their knowledge. It will basically help users know if they are being cheated from the raw internet.

Google may increase the $1 million grant by an additional $500,000 extension if the team needs another year of development time and if Google likes the path the team is going.

Georgia Tech told Ars Technica the tool will provide “a suite of Web-based, Internet-scale measurement tools that any user around the world could access for free. With the help of these tools, users could determine whether their ISPs are providing the kind of service customers are paying for, and whether the data they send and receive over their network connections is being tampered with by governments and/or ISPs.”

Wenke Lee, a computer science professor at the school gave an example of how the tool will help. He said, “say something happens again like what happened in Egypt recently, when the Internet was essentially shut down. If we have a community of Internet user-participants in that country, we will know instantly when a government or ISP starts to block traffic, tamper with search results, even alter Web-based information in order to spread propaganda.”

As several others have already remarked, GIPS has a customer list that includes “Nortel, Oracle, Samsung, WebEx, Yahoo. AOL and other key players in the VoIP market.” Some of the VoIP and videoconferencing functions at the core of WebEx, Yahoo Messenger and AOL AIM are provided by GIPS. In the near term the company says it will continue to service those accounts but everybody will probably be on the phone this morning seeking alternative vendors — just in case.

The last time Google bought a company that worked with competitors was Teracent, a company behind some of Yahoo’s online and mobile dynamic advertising. Indeed, with its huge mountain of cash, Google’s rivals do need to worry that the company will buy “the infrastructure” out from under them. This is immediately true of GIPS.

So how will Google use GIPS?

On the eve of Google’s now annual developer event this acquisition seems very timely. Google will likely build out its VoIP offering (Google Voice) to become a full-blown competitor to Skype and conventional telcos/carriers. However it already has the capability given its previous Gizmo5 acquisition. GIPS will add video and more muscle to the mix, giving Google some new enterprise tools for Apps and maybe Wave (or whatever Wave evolves into).

We’ll certainly see video chat/conferencing come to Android and mobile at some point in the future as well. There are potentially some interesting call (and maybe video) ad-related opportunities that Google can further develop here. It’s already doing Click-to-Call (Pay-per-Call lite) in mobile and experimenting with phone number insertion in AdWords online. And it has call-tracking capabilities through Google Voice.

I’m also eager to see the ultimate consumer and enterprise offerings that arise from the Gizmo5 and now GIPS acquisitions. While they don’t solve the ultimate problem of fast and affordable internet or mobile broadband access they potentially will provide new competition and choice to consumers and enterprises around voice and videoconferencing services.

As a personal side note, anything that gives the current crop of dismal online conferencing services (i.e., GoToMeeting, WebEx) a serious run for their money has got my vote.

According to the Topeka Capital-Journal (err … the Google Capital-Journal?), mayor Bill Bunten issued a proclamation today that renames the city to “Google, Kansas — the capital city of fiber optics” for the entire month of March. When presented with the idea, none of the city’s seven councilmembers objected. (After all, who among us would refuse the chance to be a councilmember of Google?)

This is apparently nothing new for Topeka; the newspaper says the city changed its name temporarily in 1998 to honor … get this … Pokemon. Topeka was briefly called “ToPikachu.”

Topeka is one of several cities that is pushing hard to sell Google on building a super-fast, experimental broadband network inside its borders. Google announced its plans last month, saying the networks will “deliver Internet speeds more than 100 times faster than what most Americans have access to today.”

A few years ago Google was reportedly aggregating “dark fiber” and seeking a person to “negotiat[e] dark fiber contracts both in metropolitan areas and over long distances as part of development of a global backbone network . . .”

Today Google is announcing that the company is going to “build and test ultra high-speed broadband networks in a small number of trial locations across the United States.” The company asserts that these networks will “deliver Internet speeds more than 100 times faster than what most Americans have access to today with 1 gigabit per second, fiber-to-the-home connections.”

The stated intention is to “offer service at a competitive price to at least 50,000 and potentially up to 500,000 people.” Like Google’s aspirations for the White Spaces spectrum this appears to be geared toward rural or underserved markets in the US. This won’t be free WiFi but “competitively priced” WiFi.

Google says that its goal is to experiment “with new ways to help make Internet access better and faster for everyone” and provides some specific use cases in its blog post:

• Next generation apps: We want to see what developers and users can do with ultra high-speeds, whether it’s creating new bandwidth-intensive “killer apps” and services, or other uses we can’t yet imagine.

• New deployment techniques: We’ll test new ways to build fiber networks, and to help inform and support deployments elsewhere, we’ll share key lessons learned with the world.

• Openness and choice: We’ll operate an “open access” network, giving users the choice of multiple service providers. And consistent with our past advocacy, we’ll manage our network in an open, non-discriminatory and transparent way.

This last bullet is interesting; Google appears to be positioning itself as a wholesaler rather than a direct-to-consumer ISP in this instance. Indeed, the company said it will allow others to utilize/tap the network.

Google has long battled with telcos (i.e., AT&T) over net neutrality and access to the network. (The case was made to me that the recent complaint about “search neutrality” by the Minority Media and Telecommunications Council is ultimately being fueled by AT&T behind the scenes.) Beyond simply expanding broadband coverage to under-served communities, the company seems to be seeking a variety of ways to control or ensure unfettered access to the pipes that provide connectivity to its services.

Consider the myriad Google strategies underway:

• White Spaces
• WiMax
• Fiber networks

Some will surely see this as the latest installment in the ongoing story of Google’s push toward “world domination” or, at the very least, to become a full-service carrier/ISP/telco — or alternative. Google Voice will very soon be a Skype-like alternative to conventional telco networks (and mobile carriers).

The Nexus One is being sold directly by Google. In the future Google will also sell Chrome OS netbooks and maybe tablets and perhaps other devices directly to consumers. Eventually connectivity could (and will) be offered via a range of providers including Google directly or its affiliates. (Google also has visions of a competitive marketplace for broadband in the future.)

Google believes that better, faster and more ubiquitous connectivity benefits the company through increased usage. The Android example supports that thesis in mobile to a great degree.

There will be the inevitable anti-trust discussion of Google’s apparent effort to “own the pipes.” The third bullet above — “openness and choice” — may be Google’s strategy to avoid this issue by providing third parties with access to the network. Clearly consumers want faster broadband speeds at competitive prices and the Obama administration is using stimulus money to try and promote broadband growth and development across the US. It’s unclear whether Google has applied for any of this money as part of the program above.

As with Android and Chrome, but potentially in an even bigger way, this is a significant step for Google and shows that it will continue to make efforts to try and control its fate in arenas that the company sees as strategic.

Click here to view the embedded video.

Postscript: Google offered a range information and commentary in reaction to the announcement:

“Big broadband creates big opportunities. This significant trial will provide an American testbed for the next generation of innovative, high-speed Internet apps, devices, and services. The FCC’s National Broadband Plan will build upon such private-sector initiatives and will include recommendations for facilitating and accelerating greater investment in broadband, creating jobs and increasing America’s global competitiveness.”

• Google does not intend to build a nationwide ISP
• Major markets are not going to get this in all probability — the population range is pretty firm (up to 500K population: Lancaster, PA or Spokane, WA for example)
• Google is trying to see what this kind of speed will make possible in terms of service and application delivery, as well as “modeling” a new form of broadband “best practices” for the broader market
• Third parties may utilize Google’s network for delivery of services, which could go beyond Internet and could include phone and TV
• There’s no WiFi aspect to this fiber network. I was told you can’t get this kind of speed w/o a physical chord or cable

Google says in many cases, DNS can be slow and we all know how much Google is obsessed with speed these days. Google hopes that their DNS service will be super fast, faster than the other out there.

For more information on how to use Google’s Public DNS, see the Google Code Blog.

Google added:

As people begin to use Google Public DNS, we plan to share what we learn with the broader web community and other DNS providers, to improve the browsing experience for Internet users globally. The goal of Google Public DNS is to benefit users worldwide while also helping the tens of thousands of DNS resolvers improve their services, ultimately making the web faster for everyone.

Postscript: I spoke with a Google representative about this. In short, Google is really not storing specific IP information for over 48 hours, I recommend you look at this page for what Google is storing exactly. I am told the Electronic Frontier Foundation is very supportive of this privacy policy, which is good.

Google also said they have no current plans to give people a way to block certain sites or hijack the DNS queries like other DNS providers currently offer. They made it clear to me that this is completely about speeding up the Internet and not about data collection or hijacking results. Exactly how much faster is Google’s DNS service on average? Google wouldn’t say but they want us to give it a try and make our own decision.

Postscript #2: The OpenDNS Blog responded to this Google News. I’d like to highlight one piece of the long blog post:

Third, Google claims that this service is better because it has no ads or redirection. But you have to remember they are also the largest advertising and redirection company on the Internet. To think that Google’s DNS service is for the benefit of the Internet would be naive.

There’s no product or specific consumer offering here. Rather Google is trying to advocate multiple initiatives in parallel that the company believes are important to usher in a better, faster internet (including for mobile devices). This Google Code Blog post lays out the arguments and suggestions as does the video below:

Click here to view the embedded video.

Google very much needs third party participation and cooperation and so has established this site to teach best practices and offer tools to speed up websites. In addition, Google says it will seek to advocate broadband friendly practices in Washington D.C. and abroad.

One can pretty easily understand Google’s motives. A faster internet means more usage and a better online infrastructure means that the web and the browser become better development platforms.

Theoretically no technology company should object; all would presumably benefit from a faster and more user-friendly internet. The fourth bullet of the Google post, about the so-called White Spaces initiative, is where some controversy might creep in to the broader effort:

While there are now more than 400 million broadband subscribers worldwide, broadband penetration is still relatively low in many areas of the world. Steps have been taken to bring the benefits of broadband to more people, such as the FCC’s decision to open up the white spaces spectrum, for which the Internet community, including Google, was a strong champion. Bringing the benefits of cheap reliable broadband access around the world should be one of the primary goals of our industry

Not everyone, chiefly incumbent ISPs and maybe wireless carriers, would be so happy with cheaper, more accessible broadband. Depending on ultimate retail cost it could be somewhat disruptive to current ISP and WiFi business models. But all that remains to be seen.

Google is clearly pursuing self-interest here but in this case self interest would appear to be broadly aligned with the interests of other web companies and the public more generally.

Google’s Small Business Network was created to give small business owners the information and tools to promote business-friendly policies in Washington, D.C. and state capitols. The Internet provides an unparalleled opportunity for small businesses to start up, grow, and reach a worldwide customer base. But realizing its potential requires your participation.

Google wants to know about the issues that are important to you so that we can better invest in your goals and objectives and ultimately, your success. New laws, regulations and other public policy initiatives at the federal and state levels should be designed with your best interests in mind.

There’s also a little bit of what one might call “reciprocal lobbying” going on:

We want to help you stay on top of many issues, the first two of which are increasing high-speed Internet or broadband access and preserving an open Internet. An open, accessible Internet is a critical element in helping you reach beyond yesterday’s customers. The Internet has given you the power to compete in new markets and stay in touch with partners across the U.S. or overseas. Infrastructure that enables high-speed Internet and standards that keep it open have the potential to help create jobs in your hometown and around the world. Learn more and sign our open letter to Congress.

Assuming that Google can get enough attention from SMBs, this effort could be quite valuable in several ways: in product development, PR/communications, customer acquisition and loyalty and so on. Google might also develop an effective tool for grassroots lobbying on its issues (i.e., net neutrality).

The opponents and detractors unsuccessfully argued that new uses of the white spaces “radio spectrum,” existing “between” frequencies used by broadcasters and others, might disrupt broadcasts or live performances. Initial testing of devices on this spectrum did indicate there was some cause for concern. But upon retesting and some lobbying publicly and privately, the FCC directors voted to approve the plan to allow access to this spectrum.

Here’s what Google envisions:

Google and other companies (including Dell, EarthLink, Hewlett-Packard, Intel, Microsoft, and Philips) have formed the “White Spaces Coalition,” to persuade the FCC to establish appropriate interference standards that would allow entrepreneurs to develop fixed and mobile devices that utilize these airwaves. Earlier this year, the coalition submitted two prototype devices (from Microsoft and Philips) to the FCC’s engineers to demonstrate the feasibility of this approach.

The idea is to create wireless broadband using this spectrum that will effectively ensure continuous and near-universal coverage for internet-connected devices (fixed and mobile). Unlike conventional radio/wireless spectrum, the “unlicensed” part of this means that no one has to pay anything to the FCC to use it. That stands in contrast to the nearly $20 billion paid as part of the recent 700MHz spectrum auction earlier this year (dominated by AT&T and Verizon).

What happens now? Google co-founder Larry Page makes a prediction:

We will soon have “Wi-Fi on steroids,” since these spectrum signals have much longer range than today’s Wi-Fi technology and broadband access can be spread using fewer base stations resulting in better coverage at lower cost.

In a semi-related vein, Google previously filed a patent application that describes an open, competitive marketplace for wireless telecommunications and broadband services. It would theoretically permit users to move with their mobile devices (computers, phones, etc.) between networks and, essentially, always be assured of a connection at the best price. I was quite skeptical this could ever come into being as a practical matter. But whether or not this specific idea is ever translated into reality, the approval of the white spaces plan may amount to the same thing.

Google is also an investor in Clearwire, the Sprint majority owned WiMax venture now in operation in several US markets.

Stepping back, as the white spaces spectrum are utilized, we will likely see more options for consumers for internet access. Precisely when and how much this will cost is unclear. We may also see (in time) a range of new devices that tap into this spectrum (like Amazon’s Kindle does with Sprint’s network) to offer connectivity on the go — perhaps without any sort of access subsription or consumer account.

Many of those new devices may look very different than today’s netbooks or smartphones, but could also be powered by a Windows OS or Android or Linux. In time the internet may get integrated into many more types of devices (e.g., home refrigerators, in-store kiosks, new digital newspapers, etc.) via this spectrum as well.

It opens up a range of intriguing possibilities for consumers, tech and media companies and device makers. And it points to a not-too-distant future of near-ubiquitous internet connectivity.

There’s more discussion at Techmeme.

Google is working with John Malone, the cable television magnate, and HSBC to set up O3b Networks to purchase the satellites and split the $750 million bill. The deal should reduce the cost of internet by 95% in those areas.

Larry Alder, product manager in Google’s alternative access group, told the Financial Times, “this really fits into Google’s mission [to extend internet use] around the developing world.”