Until a couple of months ago, I hadn\u2019t lived in a \u201csmart home\u201d built within the last five years. I was lured in by the availability of symmetrical 1GB fiber internet for the same $100 that got me 500Mbps of asymmetrical cable at my previous apartment. But I encountered more obstacles getting it set up than a track and field hurdler, everything from a missing fiber gateway port to my $1,000 robot vacuum losing connection every time it tried to clean too far away from the router. I was saved by the ethernet ports in every room and my off-the-shelf Asus gaming router, but I couldn\u2019t (and still can\u2019t) do anything about the cable Cthulhu monstrosity lurking behind a metal plate in my closet that drives most of my frustration.<\/p>\n<\/div>\n
It turns out that the \u201csmart homes of the future\u201d cannot run on Wi-Fi alone thanks to the materials we\u2019ve been using to construct our homes cheaply and quickly for decades. Over the last several years, more engineering and architecture firms have started including ethernet wiring in their building plans, but that\u2019s as far as the digital infrastructure of a home usually goes. What\u2019s forgotten is not only where the pre-built internet hub is placed inside the building but also what materials are used for construction.<\/p>\n<\/div>\n
I\u2019m going to use my new home as an example. It was built with an \u201cinternet hub.\u201d Every ethernet cable and coax cable threaded through the walls terminates inside a nook because that nook is where cable and fiber enter the house. The ISP\u2019s provided modem \/ router goes inside the nook and is then covered with a wobbly metal plate that gets screwed into the wall at the corners.<\/p>\n<\/div>\n The Information Technology and Innovation Foundation (ITIF) noted in a recent blog post<\/a> that if the US were to focus a significant chunk of its efforts on creating a better digital infrastructure instead of \u201cfixing\u201d our physical infrastructure, it would result in \u201csuperior longer-term economic growth, competitiveness, national security, and environmental benefits.\u201d This includes outfitting buildings and dwellings with wired Gigabit fiber internet and, more importantly, taking into consideration which materials would obstruct Wi-Fi signals the least.<\/p>\n<\/div>\n A plethora of architects, civil engineers, and project managers across Orange and Los Angeles counties in California all told me the same thing: Wi-Fi-penetrating materials typically aren\u2019t a consideration unless it\u2019s a large structure like an office building or warehouse; telecom technicians are called in then, but mainly to help with wiring. However, those same people told me they\u2019ve been able to reduce construction costs significantly by wiring residences for ethernet as they are building them. <\/p>\n<\/div>\n The cost of common building materials like brick, wood, drywall, plywood, concrete, metal, and acoustic ceiling tiles is usually cheaper than Wi-Fi-penetrating materials, especially if they are sustainable \u2014 although the cost of even common materials has sharply increased by 20.4 percent year over year as of April 2022<\/a>, according to the National Association of Home Builders (NAHB). With many states in the middle of a severe housing crisis driven in part by those rising material costs, it\u2019s likely many companies will continue to build for speed. California, for example, needs 2.5 million new, affordable homes<\/a>, and at least 1 million of those must be for low-income families or those experiencing houselessness.<\/p>\n<\/div>\n