Slashdot Mirror
Dayton, Ohio: Free City-Wide WiFi
_Bunny writes "The City of Dayton, Ohio announced a plan to make all of downtown a WiFi hotspot - and as of last week, the network is live. This makes Dayton the first Ohio city to offer free WiFi access. Approximately one square mile of downtown is now live, including Fifth Third Field, the Oregon District, Webster Station and RiverScape. The WiFi project is a public/private partnership not funded by taxpayers, and comes at no charge to the end user." (According to the linked story at WHIO-TV, the city is actually paying about $5,000 per year, with advertisers picking up the rest of the tab.)
I don't know what you mean by city-wide, but Dayton is a big place and I doubt "within a 1-mile radius of downtown" really covers it all. Still, this is cool.
...this will become a model for other cities. I know how valuable my WiFi connection on campus and in my neighborhood has become. I would love to be able to sit downtown and know that I have internet access available.
Those who know, do not speak. Those who speak, do not know. ~Lao Tzu
It's cool that they're doing this, but the problem is, there's not really much reason to go downtown in Dayton. They just built the new ballpark, but other than that, it's really a pretty crappy place.
How do advertisers push their ads to the WiFi users?
most likely they get to advertise through other means, like stuffing fliers into mailings or hanging their company name on official web pages related to the project. Of course you have lots of little antenna around and the support crews can be branded as well.
Plus being government there are probably some under the table considerations like zoning issues, fees, and similar. Remember a government providing an incentive or discount is not spending any taxpayer money. That is similar to what Washington does by labeling as a program spending cut the simple fact of not increasing the allocation of funds to it.
* Winners compare their achievements to their goals, losers compare theirs to that of others.
Is the city liable when drug dealers do business in a park?
...letting the government provide your electronic information access is like letting the tax authorities be your bank and accountant. What was that phrase I was looking for..? Oh yes, It's the fox guarding the henhouse.
AFAIC, it's for nothing unless you use secure tunnels and proxies to keep them from snooping on you. No, this isn't tinfoil hate time. This is plain old reality. I love my country, but I fear my government as I should. I can't see the same dingbats who can't get water fountains in the parks fixed within five years as being trustworthy with a cordless phone never mind my Internet access. No thanks.
If my grammar and spelling are off, I am [distracted/tired/careless] (take your pick)
But if the job market keeps retracting like it has I won't be here much longer, can't afford to stay. And Cleveland is such a mess now and there seems to be no hope of it turning around yet a third time. Last one out of town shut out the lights...
The city is providing a service, something that doesn't exist freely.
In your analogy to the park, if the town didn't provide the park, then they would go into the street, or if the street wasn't there then they would go into the woods. So them providing "space" is not something they can avoid.
Now if the city was providing a large dome, under which there was no surveillance, no police, and nobody checking who goes in and out, and crimes are committed there, then yes, I would say they are liable for being negligent.
even though in most categories, louisiana is behind, baton rouge has had wireless downtown and at LSU for at least a couple years. these 2 wireless networks combined cover 2 or 3 square miles...and yes, access is free to both. many municipalities are covering areas with large amounts of wifi.
what we need to watch out for is bills in many states that are aimed at barring municipalities from becoming isp's.
"... The WiFi project is a public/private partnership not funded by taxpayers, and comes at no charge to the end user."
How can something be publicly funded without tax payers money? And than the cost of the decision making process of the council, admin, p.r. etc.
"(According to the linked story at WHIO-TV, the city is actually paying about $5,000 per year, with advertisers picking up the rest of the tab.)"
How do advertisers make money? Do users have to accept ads to enjoy a 'free' service? How free is it? Can I use VOIP? Can I do anything I like?
In the statement of the city of Dayton it reads: "We also believe offering this type of exciting, pioneering service will go a long way toward helping Dayton attract that 'creative class' of people who will help fuel our community's future success."
Not sure if WiFi can provide sufficient bandwidth for such ambitions...
-- Neminem laede, immo omnes, quantum potes, iuva.
You haven't been downtown lately it would seem. Afte r the completion of Fifth Third Field,the new Performing Arts Center, and Riverside downtown Dayton has definetly been on an upswing the last couple of years. Back in 1999 when I first started going to school there it was trashy and sketchy, but by the time I graduated it was a pleasure to go down there. It's easy to take a shot at an old midwestern city of industry, but your lack of recent experience and stereotyping is disgusting.
If people vote to force themselves to give money to corporations, rather than become more efficient and save money for the community, then they are more stupid than can be believed.
What about Cedar Point? It's by far the coolest roller coaster park in North America (or even the world).
But... I guess you don't have to LIVE in Ohio to visit the park, so nevermind!
No offense, but I really get annoyed with people who expunge this sort of reductionist view of the democratic process.
It would be one thing to make the statement you made if there was a referendum on the issue; but in reality the decision is being made be the legislature. A legislature who is being heavily lobbied by the telecommunications (mostly Verizon) companies to block public WiFi. "People" don't really have a say except perhaps to not reelect their representative, something I seriously doubt their representative is sweating over considering not a large enough segment of the population even knows what WiFi is.
Lets say you are on the state legislature of Pennsylvania. On one hand there is a non-profit group trying to WiFi Phily. On the other is Verizon with enough money and power to do whatever they want with your career for good or ill, and they don't like the idea. You are serving on the state legislature, not a position that affords you much power, job security, or prestige.
Having public WiFi in Phily might be good for you, the project might get enough attention that everyone involved comes out looking so good that Verizon isn't a problem. But thats a big "might". Are you going to take that risk?
Phily is not a wealthy city. Most of it is sprawling ghetto. Many of the residents do not own computers and have never even heard of WiFi. The ones that have heard of it can mostly afford to pay for it. You aren't going to get too many votes for supporting the Non-profit from the city itself.
The only way this is going to turn into a substantial amount of votes for you is if the project becomes a media circus. For that to happen it has to be sold as a bill that will make Philadelphia a "city of the future" or it has to be sold as you going toe to toe with big bad Verizon. The city of the future thing is good but the Verizon thing is better, but carries significant risk to you.
It comes down to whether "you" in the Pennsylvania legislature think its a good idea to take on Verizon. You might, but even if you do its going to take some balls.
Last I heard the PA legislature does have a set, kinda. From what I read the Phily WiFi project is going to be allowed to move forward, though similar efforts elsewhere in the state are going to be banned. Its not exactly a great precedent for public WiFi, and similar debates are being held all over the country. Ultimately most of the decisions are going to be made by the politicians involved and the will of the people will not be their primary concern.
Cool art gallery, if you're into that sort of thing.