Slashdot Mirror

and by December some poor schmuck (Alan Gross) is rotting in a Cuban jail for bringing computer equipment in for Jewish groups.

While I sympathize with the "poor schmuck", your characterization is extremely disingenous. He was a contractor for the CIA (via USAID). He worked under a "democracy-promotion program", for an employer that openly states that Cuba is not "democratic". Those two alone make him a paid agent of a hostile governemnt stirring dissent against the Cuban government. And that was precisely what he was convicted of.

He was "helping people access the internet" in the narrowest sense possible: he was helping only those selected by his employer. In this game, both parties are actively trying to control what the Cubans see (see also "piramideo"), neither can claim the higher ground. If the US were honest with wanting to "help people access the internet", there are far more effective solutions with no risks to Americans. Just allowing these guys (and other providers) to sell their services to Cubans would have been cheaper and far more effective, and would have put the blame squarely on the Cuban government[1]. That they use expensive covert operations to connect a selected few rather than allow the public at large to take the risk themselves (which would cost them literally nothing) is telling. Gross was not, sadly, an agent to help people access the internet, rather, he was pawn in this game of who gets to control the Cuban public.

I do have a lot of sympathy for Gross, though. Everything I've heard about the "poor schmuck" makes me think that he truly believed that he was a force of good, trying to help people, rather than a pawn of an organization whose goals are the opposite. I'm saddened that someone who is probably a good person, doing what he thought was a good thing, is rotting in jail. But he was a paid covert agent of an enemy nation, actively (though maybe unknowingly) working to undermine the Cuban government. He did what he was accused of doing, and your attitude, "they jailed him for helpling people access the internet" doesn't help. Releasing him would send a very clear message: send more covert agents, if caught, we will release them. I wonder how a Cuban agent caught in the US would be treated. Oh, wait, I know.

Your argument about him preventing Cuba from accessing that $20 billion a year export market is unfounded. To my knowledge, that has never been on the negotiation table. In fact, to my knowledge, the US has consistently refused to negotiate, claiming, as you do, that he is innocent (??!!). He isn't, and until the US accepts that fact (e.g., by also dropping other covert programs), an unilateral gesture will only signal "send more". For now, the next Gross will have to consider whether a few million dollars are worth the risk.

I.

[1] Currently, satellite internet users not only have to smuggle their equipment into the island, they also have to smuggle them out of the US, and then go to great length to prevent the equipment from reporting back its location. A few years back I heard of a black-market service in Havana to disable the GPS sensor of DirectTV modems. I have no idea if that is still possible with newer models.

There are ALWAYS options... Problem is that many times such options are too expensive. http://www.hughesnet.com/ Wi-Max doesn't work? Hmmm, you must live in a valley. To bad my friend.

using the concepts of a free exchange of ideas to overthrow another regime

If it only were the concepts of a "free exchange of ideas". Instead, they want to control what Cubans see (just like the Cuban counterpart). They could aim to let the Cubans access the internet as a whole, twitter included, and I would see that as a worthy goal. But alas, they make it as hard as possible. They could easily let some companies do business with Cubans who can pay (or they families abroad). But no, currently, one would need not only to smuggle the equipment into Cuba (which would be expected of an oppresive regime), but also to smuggle it out from the US (which is not consistent with a freedom-seeking regime), and then prevent the GPS from reporting back the true location of the modem. Instead, USAID spends lots of money (I don't have the numbers at hand) making sure that those selected by them have access to, and only to, what they want.

That's what irks me the most about the Alan Gross situation. Instead of making a public stance, removing the embargo for telecomunication/satellite equipment and services, and making a greater statement in the process, they opted to keep the prohibition for all but those hand-picked by USAID (and left Gross paying for the consequences when he was found).

(Disclosure: I no longer live in Cuba, but it stills irks me to see this.)

Not always. I often get "The content owner has not made this video available on mobile" on my Nexus 7.

You know what you never see on your Nexus 7? Flash. Well....unless you don't upgrade to Kitkat, track down the apk and install it manually. That's not going to be a very popular option.

Nor do they offer the slightest bit of interactivity. What's the multi-platform successor to Flash games?

In spirit? Phones and mobile, produced using multi-platform game engines. I see people passing around goofy phone apps the way that they used to pass around goofy Flash games. As the closest-related technology? HTML5.

Except for PC users on satellite Internet.

Again, like I said, it depends on your audience. Honestly, I've never met anyone with satellite internet. Still, HughesNet seems to offer some plans with some decent caps at decent prices (given what the service is).

Even if one plans to export the animations to YouTube, in which non-Adobe program should one create them in the first place?

Why would it have to be a non-Adobe program to create the animation? My problem's more with Flash/SWF than Adobe products. Edge produces HTML5 content, and is the Adobe product that's meant to succeed Flash. If you'd rather ditch Adobe products completely, from what I understand, there are alternatives.

Aircraft will be using something like HughesNet. They might have to throttle the onboard WiFi speeds to keep everyone from streaming video simultaneously. But for web surfing, e-mail, some gaming (latency might be an issue), etc. it will be just fine. And for reasonable* prices.

* Nothing like millions of dollars per plane per year.

The USPS is incredibly cheap compared to the commercial alternatives. The USPS goes to EVERY mailbox each day (6 days a week).

What alternative to the USPS is allowed to deliver first class mail?

That's right. None. Since the USPS has a legal monopoly, you can't compare them to the commercial alternatives, because none can exist. If they could, they might do a better job than the USPS.

What are you going to do for the farmers and ranchers who live 50 miles away from the nearest FedEx drop box? Remeber they don't get internet out there either.

Sure they do.

Now to get around data caps we need to have someone hack up a system that will use IP over voice

The lossy compression that both GSM and CDMA2000 use for voice signals would interfere with using any decently fast modulation.

so you can surf unlimited for free on nights & weekends.

HughesNet satellite already offers unmetered wee hours (called "Download Zone"). Why doesn't cellular?

Not the greatest speed, but there are options:
HughesNet
WildBlue

Current Hughes plans

A limit of 200 MB every 24 hours on the $60/mo plan can be a pain if you need to download a big operating system update and you shut off your PC at night.

"Satellite broadband" tends to use dialup as the upstream.

Satellites haven't had to use dialup for the upstream connection for many years now. Until DSL finally became available at my parent's rural location they used Hughes and the satellite connection was used for both.

Current Hughes plans.

http://www.hughesnet.com/

http://www.wildblue.com/

http://www.wisegeek.com/what-is-satellite-broadband.htm

Maybe if you gave her some real options for it, she would have it.

Oh wait, $99.00 a month is too expensive?

you are not complaining about accessibility, you're complaining about the price of available service.

Ummm - that is the whole business plan of this company.

Radio waves are amazing things...you should try them sometime.

I would also add a satellite data link for those times when you are out in the wilderness with no wifi signals...

There's always satellite internet. It isn't the greatest (long latencies), but it exists. Try HughesNet (http://www.hughesnet.com/) and WildBlue (http://www.wildblue.com/); I think there's another one out there, but I don't remember their name.

You have several options:

1. Your post suggests that you have limited cellphone connectivity. You can get a cellphone repeater ($200-$1000) to boost the cellphone signal. Depending on the carrier, you could be able to use EDGE/3G to get some connectivity.

2. You could use satellite . It is decently fast, but has high latency.

3. If you are in a neighborhood where broadband is widely available, but the specific location of your property is the limiting factor, you could work with your neighbor to share their broadband by way of a wifi connection. If you do some research, you will find a lot of ways to do it with things like repeaters, boosters and external antennas.

Good luck.

Or you can get satellite. Not bad, but your uplink will be crap and your latency painful.

Totally off topic, but, in that case, there'd be nothing preventing you from buying the Ferrari, hanging out on some tropical island and grabbing some satellite internet access (anyone tried Hughesnet?) a few high end laptops and working on whatever you wish on a south pacific beach somewhere. That way, you mix in that all important geek factor into your fantasy, and get to retain your geek card.