Community Wifi Feeds Community Cable in NYC

akb writes "Manhattan Neighborhood Network has embarked on a project to combine two community networking communities in NYC, the nascent community wifi network on that isle with public access cable TV. The project has successfully conducted a test which involved cablecasting an mpeg4 video stream being transported by the nycwireless.net wireless node in Bryant Park."

Comments

independence ?

[colonel.sys]

i wonder if all this community activity will turn into a movement that actually makes all those little subnetworks (wifi and cable connected) into kind of a sub-net culture that will be independend of the big, commercial internet.

will they be controlled by the world's governments soon? will corporations try to switch them off?

anyway this is exciting. i think with dmca-legislations hanging over heads of the people in different countries all over the world, this is kind of a light in the darkness.

am i too naive?

I wish more things like this were availible

[adzoox]

I wish more cable systems and PBS stations would open up their studios to local access TV and rebroadcast to the internet. (By the way, to the post below, this is public access TV, not Network being transmitted)

I think ALL cable systems should be REQUIRED to have a local access channel. It could be a source of revenue for the cable stations, you actually have to buy air time. (Like Wayne's World) - New York and California shouldn't get all the fun. I bet that cooking shows, computer shows, and craft shows would flourish in local markets and help with our cable bills at the same time.

I, for one, would love to an Apple Computer / Linux Help show.

ambitious at best

[myrashka]

Perhaps someday soon this will be practical - but for now, WiFi has too many disdvantages:

1) Bandwidth - even on the newer 54Mbps feed will quickly become saturated
2) QoS is still a pipe dream
3) Microwave ovens - still a predominant feature of many people's homes.

And with HDTV coming out - will we really want to be stuck with 320x200 doubled at 15fps for our TV? Might be a novelty or convenient when you want to watch something important when you're away from home - but seems to me that until WiFi becomes more hardwire-ish, this is a project best left for the novelty that it is. Continue to wokr on giving free ubiquitous wifi on a grand scale (i.e. bigger than just NYC)....

Re:ambitious at best

[myrashka]

Okay - wait...we're talking WiFi here....not Ku Band or anything else. I limited my discussion to the scope of the article - IN WIFI. Thus, by your example, 1080i would be too much for your typical 802.11b wifi setup. And at best, you'd get a few hdtv channels on 802.11a (course, you'd be limited to a few city blocks).

With the newer technologies (we're talking general wifi here - 802.11(put your favorite variant here)), you'd still be lucky to get a dozen streams or so - even with multicast.

2. Since when does multicast have priority on a network? Fact of the matter is only one person can transmit at a time...this includes interference. So if the band is clogged, multicast won't improve anything here. QoS is required even for the mulitcasters to get the right priority. Course, this matters not for point 3 (interference).

3. Typical wifi today is 802.11b...802.11a still has to pan out and 802.11g seems like a better alternative for most. While I agree neither gets knocked out by your average Microwave - both get reduced bandwidth due to the wideband interference. And you point out other points of interference to bandwidth - which really is the whole point here.

So buddy- if you had a modicum of reading comprehension, you'd note that my point is the bandwidth/reliability isn't there for something more than a channel.

And I simply pointed out the area I'd rather people invest first....I'd gladly (and have in the past) contribute to such fine efforts simliar to NYC wireless.

Btw - talking is what we do here at slashdot (well writing and reading). And don't go calling the kettle black if you don't have the courage to post with a registered account.

Re:feed people

[FunWithHeadlines]

"There are enough hungry people we don't need bourgeois pseudo intellectuals in SoHo sipping a 5 dollar latte and reading neoconservative websites while a homeless family digs pizza crusts out of a trashbin."

Indeed, if you paint such a black-and-white picture your point is clear. The reality is often in many shades of grey. Why do you assume that only "bourgeois pseudo intellectuals" would benefit from this? Isn't it possible that this movement will grow to the point that it will one day make it possible for someone poor enough to own a hand-me-down computer but cannot affort monthly access charges to be able to get online and get some of the same advantages in knowledge as those SoHo poseurs?

"Feed people, not networks," you say. Certainly. But why can't you do both?
------