Slashdot Mirror
WiFi Gone Wild
b4k4 writes "According to this news release, the Texas Department of Transportation is proposing to install hotspots at all 84 Safety Rest Stops and 12 Travel Information Centers statewide. This would be in addition to the four test locations already in place along US287." Reader polluted notes that Portland is working on free WiFi. An anonymous reader sent in word of this year's wifi-shootout, a contest to maximize the range for an 802.11b connection. And Roland Piquepaille writes in regarding cows wearing WiFi collars, which I'm afraid reminds me of a crummy sci-fi movie.
The places that have wireless networks should also issue handouts concerning possible security problems to cover their butts. How long until you hear someone getting sued because someone borked their computer over a wireless network?
Won't this cause parking problems as people stay at rest stops as long as their battery lasts, rather than long enough to do their business?
"How would you like your firewall? Rare, medium, or well?"
John
Now, nerds in texas can always get their /. fix when traveling. They just have to stop of at a rest area, get some vending machine food, a soda, stop off at mr. porclyn and /.
Although, hopefully not all at the same time.
Evolution or ID?
I have to admit, I'm becoming annoyed with WiFi. Not because I think there is anything wrong with it, but for the simple reason that if there is ANYTHING involving networks, out comes WiFi.
Why is WiFi so great? And why is everyone working to provide free access to it? Free acces (as in beer) is great. But I just have one question. Why?
Sure it's convenient and everything, but governments, businesses and individuals are all doing this. Providing free WiFi. Why? What payoff does everyone get?
How long before telcos ship integrated devices that include DSL modem and wifi, all interoperable with VoIP networks?
They could still make money on the DSL subscriptions and do and end-run around the grassroots personal telcos.
Some truck stops in Texas already have WiFi access (though not free) via a service for truckers.
From my wardrive along the interstate it can be debated that there are enough hot spots already.
All joking aside I can't wait for there to be legitimate free APs.
Seems that in Texas, truckers are the predominant users of roadside rest stops. Since a govt agency will be providing the Internet, you can bet your life that there will be plenty of surveillance involved, so I wonder if this will also be a fishing expedition for truckers who traffik in child pr0n? If you've ever travelled thru Texas on the interstate highways, you've undoubtedly noticed the many "adult" movie stores near lots of truckstops, and how many 18-wheelers are always filling their parking lots..... not to be making any insinuations about truckers being such big-time consumers of pr0n or nothing like that.
So far, the RIAA's "sue the world" strategy has relied on subpoenas sent to ISPs to identify the filesharer who was using a specific IP address at a specific time. What happens when the ISP has no idea: "Well, it was somebody travelling on I-20."? If the ISP were a private entity, the RIAA _may_ be able to sue the ISP. But, what happens when the ISP is the State of Texas? My one semester of ConLaw says that the 11th Amendment would bar that suit.
This would be GREAT, if they were to set up a damn ROAD CONSTRUCTION WEBSITE.
I'd love to be able to check and say "oh, I-35 is under construction from hither to yonder. Hm, what is my alternate route?" instead of the old "a mile past the last exit you see the ROAD CONSTRUCTION NEXT 50 MILES" sign.
www.eFax.com are spammers
I can understand how wonderful it would be to have these hotspots available for "free."
However, taxpayer dollars are coerced from citizens for any government project. This one is a short-sighted waste of those dollars.
If there is a compelling demand for this kind of service, then Texas should have stopped at a trial of 4 spots (if even that) and let private industry take over.
The "1.5% of fatalities are caused by fatigue" argument is a red herring meant to justify this wasteful expenditure. I am sure the hundreds of thousands (million? two million?) of dollars spent on this "sexy" bureaucratic project could have been far better spent in other forms of more relevant traffic safety measures -- like carving those "wake-up" notches into road sides, or more money into re-inforcing messages not to drive drunk, or more money for training to reduce recidivism in previous DUI convicts.
OR HOW ABOUT THIS? How about putting some stalls on the bathroom doors in the rest stops at El Paso? No joke... they had open stalls last time I was there a year ago. Aren't there are more basic steps along the road of highway culture than going from the outhouse straight to Wi-Fi?
As it stands, this is a luxury expenditure that will let a small number of travelers with laptops get mail while otherwise subsidizing porn-surfing. Come on... if it's late at night and someone is tired, precisely how does an hour spent surfing web sites and expending ones mental resources in that kind of concentration improve one's alertness? It's an unsubstantiated bureaucracy-boosting statement that pushes the taxpayer just a few steps further down the road of permanent government debt, and ultimately, a form of bondage to pay back old expenses that should never have been incurred in the first place.
Next time I drive through Texas, I'll drive friendly, I won't mess with Texas, and I'll surf the web for free. Three nice thoughts. But only two of them are good ideas. It would be nice for the Slashdot crowd of harder-than-average thinkers to look past our love of technology to identify bigger-picture issues before slapping on the seal of approval for this kind of government excess.
In Soviet Russia, our new overlords are belong to all your base.
I can't wait for the first time a hurd of wirelessly controlled cows get hacked. Imagine the fun you could have with a hurd of cows at your command.
I think I'd have them follow the same person around all day. When he stopped walking, the cows would stop. When he went in a building, the cows would wait outside.
Or just send them all to go and flash-mob the local butchers.
You need to go back and read the news release more carefully.
TxDOT is taking bids for private companies to come in and install intenet kiosks in rest areas. These kiosks would charge users per time-unit to use them to access the internet.
These private vendors are also required by TxDOT to provide free wireless coverage. The income from the use of the kiosk is expected to fund the wireless usage.
The only expense to the taxpayer is whatever administrative time is required to run the bid and selection process. After that, it's all in the hands of private companies.
"3. CONCEPT: TxDOT envisions a concept where wireless internet service is available for public use.
3.1. The traveling public would be able to use a personal computing device, such as a laptop computer, equipped to acquire a wireless internet signal, to use the internet and send email during a break from the road.
3.2. A separate kiosk, provided by the vendor, would allow those traveling without a personal computing device to utilize the internet service.
3.3. This service will be provided at a cost to the consumer, not to TxDOT."
TxDOT is expecting the "People not traveling with wireless equipment" to cover the cost of the project when they "connect to the Internet at kiosks for a reasonable fee to be collected by the vendor."
Personally I think this is the fatal flaw in their plan. I doubt there will be enough kiosk users to cover the costs. Still I have to give them credit for trying.
Insert Generic Sig Here: