Slashdot Mirror


Free Wi-Fi Threatened?

jasonmicron writes "The Houston Chronicle is reporting that if certain state officials have their way, cities in the state of Texas will no longer be able to offer free WiFi to their citizens. This could set a dangerous precedent if passed, as broadband providers could start lobbying officials in the other 49 states to ban free WiFi as well. According to the article, Pennsylvania has already fallen victim to such a law but it excluded Philedelphia due to the city's 'existing efforts.'"

9 of 586 comments (clear)

  1. Maybe not so bad? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 5, Insightful

    The way I see it is, this is protection from government controlled internet. Not only would I fear things like the Patriot Act finding its way on to the backbone of the internet, but state controlled free internet would kill any competition. (Why pay when its free?) Granted there's little competition now days, but Govt control would just make it worse. We need to look toward ways of promoting Wi-Fi/Internet competition in the private sector. As long as this doesn't preclude small communities from offering Wi-Fi, I have no problems...

  2. This seems silly by DumbWhiteGuy777 · · Score: 5, Insightful

    Banning of free Wi-Fi? What kind of country do we live in that would BAN free stuff?

    I think if this passes, the terrorists have really won.

  3. Re:I can see 20 access points... by ackthpt · · Score: 5, Insightful
    Tell me again why the government needs to be able to get into the free-WiFi business.

    Maybe when it's all locked up in private hands you'll see rates more akin to those of satellite or cable TV.

    Why should taxpayers fund Public Libraries when there's perfectly good bookstores around to sell them books and magazines, eh?

    --

    A feeling of having made the same mistake before: Deja Foobar
  4. Re:"Free" as in Routers are Purchased by Magic Elv by sploo22 · · Score: 5, Insightful

    If it's the latter, have the taxpayers forking over the dough had any opportunity to vote how they wanted their money used, vis-a-vis large metro-area technology installations?

    That's the whole point of this. If this law is passed, people will NOT get to vote - it will be banned no matter what. Do you think it should be illegal for public libraries to provide public hotspots?

    --
    Karma: Segmentation fault (tried to dereference a null post)
  5. There are major benefits... by Statecraftsman · · Score: 5, Insightful
    for many small cities and towns to go out on a limb and offer free wifi. Even if it does cost something in taxes, it offers huge benefits in terms of quality of life and attracting smart people and businesses.

    I look forward to a time when you can go to small towns across the country and see them revitalized by being well connected. This could be the solution to the last mile problem that the major telecom players are unwilling to solve.

    Their cost/benefit analysis just doesn't have the community's interest at heart to the same degree that a mayor or city council will. This sort of legislation must be seen for the defensive maneuver it is.

  6. Re:Government by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 5, Insightful

    Since when is public transit necessary? People can drive, ride bikes, or walk. Or they can take a taxi. Transit takes money away from cab drivers, you know. In addition, the advertising on the sides of buses competes against newspapers, radio, television, and billboards.

    Since when is city water necessary? It competes against providers of bottled water. Is that fair?

    Public schools and colleges compete against private and parochial ones. Again, is this fair?

    Libraries compete against bookstores.

    City garbage collection competes against private trash haulers.

    Police compete against private security companies. Perhaps police should only patrol public areas. Anyone owning private property should hire a security company.

    Public housing projects compete against private landlords.

    Public parking lots and street parking competes against private parking garages.

    The USPS competes against UPS, FedEx, Airborne Express, and others.

    PBS and NPR compete against commercial television and radio.

    My point is simple. We have many services provided by governments that compete against private companies, yet we see no problem with them. Some you may think are essential, and some you may think should be turned over entirely to the private sector. However, it's naive to go around saying that wi-fi isn't an essential service and therefore shouldn't be provided by a city when there are many other things that cities do that could also be classified as non-essential, depending on how you define what is and isn't essential. It's simply not a black and white issue. What a government should and shouldn't provide ought to be an issue decided by those who are governed, not by legislators bankrolled by big telecom companies.

  7. Buggy Whip Lobby by madstork2000 · · Score: 5, Insightful

    Dear duly elected state stenator,

    I represent the buggy whip industry, and we would like to join the efforts against municipalities who are offering useful public services.

    While we no longer pack the lobbying punch we did 100 years ago, we feel its important to make a stand here and now. It is not the cities place to provide mass public transportation on its roads. God created the horse to transport man. He gave us whips to get those horses moving.

    Buses are bad, so are cars. Horses eat grass, and could be feed on our lawn clippings further protecting the environment. Even horse's shit can be useful in fertilizing and for electrical generation, Clearly Municipal governments missed the boat 100 years ago in funding such follies as public roads, and mass transit systems.

    As a God fearing nation of people we implore our leaders to stop trying to mess with Gods plan, and threaten wholesome established industries. Much like our own buggy whip industry once was; simply because technology has made it economically feasible to provide such services.

    Why should tax payers pay for things they might actually use more than say a library or more often than a park? To hell with the people who would benifit from those services, you need thriving industry lobbying dollars. Unfortunately at the time our industry did not react quickly enough, and we are but a footnote in history. Don't let that happen to what's left of the Bells.

    Communications and access to information is a priviledge and should only be readily accessible to those who can afford it, and those willing to pay for it. Information and the internet most certainly are different than other services traditionally provided by local governments, like libraries.

    We the buggy whip industry clearly messed up a 100 years ago. It is going to take a lot of effort to reverse the clear damage done to our industry by the municipalities senseless actions.

    But here ans now we can help prevent a another senseless travesty by feverently supporting the telecommunications industry's oppisition to the communistic cesspools of municiple wifi Internet access.

    Infact, I hear you can even get pornography, and other naughty things, for free on the Internet. I heard that terrorists might even use tit to communicate.

    Surely a God fearing, senator representing good wholesome people in the worlds greatest democracy, will not allow these back water heathanistic towns to undermine the very fabric of our country.

    Municipal wifi will taking jobs away for hard working telecommunications workers who often risk their lives high atop poles stringing cable for one of the great and lasting american icons. Municipal wifi will encourage people to get online and have access to dangerous information, and maybe even porn.
    Municipal wifi is communism, it might even be an even more communistic than the GPL, and free software. (Those Linux zealots will undoubtably further undermine the economicy if allowed to leverage their radical beliefs to the masses with free Internet.)

    For Gods ske this is AMERICA, we cannot block the internet liek CHINA and get a way with it. We need to limit the free flow of information more covertly. We have already made broadband Internet dangerously low priced. Higher government cannot afford to let everyone have access to the knowledge and power of the Internet. If that happens then things like Internet voting could become a realistic. Vote turnout would sore, and fine Senetors might become obsolete like buggy whips.

    We the buggy whip industry implore you to NOT let our fate happen NEEDLESSLY AGAIN.

  8. Re:I can see 20 access points... by Qzukk · · Score: 5, Insightful

    Ok, don't want to pay taxes, that's peachy.

    The problem is that a majority of the services bought by tax money goes out to benefit everyone. Local fire department? Even if your house never catches on fire, good coverage will make your insurance premiums lower. Schools? Even if you're an old fogey with no kids, educated children are less likely to become ruffians who you have to chase off your yard with a cane. Medical care? Even if you're never sick, preventative health care would reduce the number of days of work lost to sick days, plus contain outbreaks of infectious disease before it becomes widespread (too bad America doesn't buy into this). Water? Electricity? Sewage? At one time the only effective way to get pipes and wires to every person in the city was for the government to do it itself, and in doing so it modernized life for everyone.

    Wireless is a bit harder to justify as a good-for-everyone deal. But what if a city decided to set up wireless points and ask the users to pay for it rather than doing it with their taxes? This law (from the first time this dupe was posted) would still make it illegal, because the purpose of the law isn't to say what cities should or should not do with tax money, its to make sure that people don't get wireless service until one of the Big Telecom companies deigns to provide the service in a suitably overcharged and crippled format.

    --
    If I have been able to see further than others, it is because I bought a pair of binoculars.
  9. Re:I can see 20 access points... by shutdown+-p+now · · Score: 5, Insightful

    If a local community, through their elected representatives, decided that free WiFi is a "common good" service (and isn't it?), I don't see any reason why it shouldn't be implemented, nor why should there be any laws prohibiting it. If someone isn't willing to waste their tax money on that, they can move to a different place.