Slashdot Mirror
Minneapolis To Go Wireless
an_mo writes " According to a Minneapolis Star Tribune article, Wednesday will see the announcement of a request for bids on a citywide wireless access service The city will unveil a request for a proposal for a privately owned, $15 million to $20 million citywide wireless and fiber-optic network to improve government communications by linking every city building, police car and housing inspector. The network would also would be available to every individual in the city for $18 to $24 a month."
why is this not implimented everywhere?
That area is so flat one high gain antenna on top of a flag pole should be able to service everyone.
As a resident of a suburb just outside of Minneapolis (Eden Prairie), I'm somewhat torn about this:
On the positive side, this influx of competition in the broadband arena is good for me as a consumer, currently tithing about $45/month to Time-Warner Cable (which serves Minneapolis and the SW 'burbs). More competition in the broadband arena is a very good thing--especially when it shakes up entrenched local monopolies (Qwest DSL and Time-Warner Cable). Also, as a Hennepin County (which contains Minneapolis and my suburb) taxpayer, technologies that can streamline government operations (and either provide better services and/or lower taxes) is another good thing.
However, on the negative side, I'm nervous about governments getting into the broadband business--the potential for intrusion and abuse of the citizen's rights to privacy is certainly increased. The fact that this deployment is run by a private company helps a little--but it still concerns me, since the government is providing the funding for it.
Technology itself is neutral and can be used for both good and evil purposes. Perhaps, what I'd like to see would be a citizen's oversight group that can provide the checks on government abuse of the network.
Another smaller suburb to my southwest (Chaska) has their own municipal deployment, which apparently is working out pretty well.
As long as municipal broadband doesn't block other entities from providing broadband service to a community and foster competition, municipal broadband could be a very good thing. But, I'm still concerned about potential abuse of the network by the local governments.
Spending $20 Million to install wireless is great, but it'll reflect poorly if the system isn't completely overhauled every few years.
I'm surprised there's not some government regulation against government competing against business for the betterment of everyone that's stopping this.
I look forward to the time in the not so distant future where wireless internet access is considered an inherent right. Even now, driving around Boston with macstumbler, I can find dozens of open non-WEP protected networks ripe for the taking and so I delude myself these unprotected networks are a purposeful open sharing of bandwidth. Am I the only one who finds the idea of forcing your citizens to pay to join such a network to be a little silly? I guess I think this sort of thing should be a public right rather than an extra cost. Mind you, let's reform healthcare and education first, and give them the kind of money they need, but you know, after taking care of the more essential essentials, free wireless and fiber-optic networks for everyone!
So if every cop car is linked, couldn't you find a way to track the location of each car and then use that to plan a crime? Or see that there are no cars on the road, so you can speed as fast as you want.
Tech orientated schemes like this are often privately funded, which is odd considering the supposedly vast benefits. It suggests to me a skepticism regarding new technology among local councils, but then they have only a limited amount of butter to spread around as it were.
On the other hand, when does a police car radio ever cease working in densely populated areas for example? Officials might just view wireless as a "it isn't broke, we won't fix it, but you can" scheme.
Want to empower your citizens or simply want to sell them to the highest bidder?
Sure this simplifies the question, but some solutions ( http://www.personaltelco.net ) work with all the parts of a community ( citizens, biz owners, etc) to create the power to empower, not simply the muni blessed right to make more montly bill paying consumers.
The real question is , what works for your community. In places where there is not a grass roots DIY mindset then the AOLization method might indeed be the way to go, for communities that can raise the populace to action though....oh thereis so much more to be done.
Come to Portland, see the results in progress.
-tom
Poor little clams! Snap! Snap! Snap! Poor little clams! Snap! Snap! Snap! Poor little clams! Snap! Snap! Snap!
I know Chaska Minnesota does this with wireless gear from Tropos Networks. Are they supplying Minneapolis too?
Great, and when all of the cities have municipal wi-fi, the Fed will step in and give them 20 percent federal grants provided they pipe their data direct to the NSA. After all, we all want city inspectors to be able to access all our files from their laptops when they come over for an inspection. With e-filing, imagine the ability they are going to have to instantly file tickets, etc. Webcams on every corner, with facial recognition and full databasing, and no wires to cut. Muni Wi-Fi? Yeech! Someone throw a wooden shoe into these works.
the stupid one in which a private company runs "San Angeles", where Taco Bell is the only approved restaurant?
Tyranny isn't the worst enemy of a democracy. Cynicism is.
This is the phone & cable companies worst nightmare - they spend billions building their networks and somebody can now undercut their costs with $99 wireless access points and antennae. I think Qwest DSL costs $40-50 in Minneapolis - 2x as much. Still, competition is good - maybe phone & cable companies will step up and we'll see the type of residential speeds that they already have in Korea and Japan here in the US in a few years.
Tristan Yates
With all these cities going wireless, I wouldn't be surprised if we start seeing cases of the black shakes.
Marques Johansson
It's depressing that so many people are going for this. Forget about privacy; the government will own your packets. No wonder they stopped funding Carnivore. Besides, can you say fascism? Who awards the contract to exclusively provide service over a given area? And when the government gets in the "business" of providing Internet access, that's basically your justification for an Internet Tax right there.
At best, "municipal wi-fi" is typical corporatistic corruption, local officials payin' off their Telecom buddies with juicy contracts. At worst, it's a back door for all kinds of government abuses.
Is it really necessary to post a story on the front page everytime a new city thinks about going "wireless"? Must be a slow news day or something.
colorado
New Mexico
Chicago
Texas
Oakland County
philly
Dayton
Top 10 Reasons To Procrastinate
10.
Corpus Christi Texas, my home town, Is already implementing this.
2 8. shtml
As far as I know, we are the first for the entire city to be covered.
Or so I heard at the National Wireless Convention that was held here at Holiday Inn.
"First phase of 147 square mile project for
automated meter reading, public works, police and fire use"
http://www.tropos.com/company/releases/2004_07_
Go, TAMUCC **woohoo Islanders**
I can foresee signal strength problems due to:
* snow
* swarming hordes of rampaging mosquitoes
Ever hear the joke: "Perhaps there's a reason the wind is always blowing north in Iowa... Minnesota sucks!"
BTW: I'm a former Edina MN and St. Anthony MN resident; It's a GREAT place to live! But, you've got to wear a durable environment suit in the summer early evening due to the large mosquitoe population (Land of 10,000 lakes makes for lots of stagnant breeding grounds).
Living there, I quickly learned that most people just don't go outside near sunset in the summer. It's not smart. Breathe too deeply and you'll choke on the swarms. The state needs to start an aggressive Bat breeding program to give the skeeter population a natural check besides insecticide. But, there's all sorts of misconceptions about bats, so that'll probably never happen. Alas...
Or, they could put Bat Houses on the same poles as the Wireless antennae and try to solve 2 problems at once!
Unitarian Church: Freethinkers Congregate!
Didn't Popular Science just claim that Minneapolis is America's most technologically advanced city? Seems like citywide wireless access would be a piece of cake for these guys...
[o]_O
Anyone wardriving this area? I'll post a link to an image if someone uploads their wardriving discoveries.
Zhrodague.net - I do projects and stuff too.
Provide it free and open with our tax dollars or not at all.
My Town was getting ready to offer the same service till Time Warner Cable stepped in bullied the town. Stating if the city launches the service TWC will launch their own service and treat them as a competitor... So what? Isnt that a good thing? TWC not only a media outlet... but their broadband service controls thet street lights in our city... oh crap off topic... kill me later.
-- I Dont Deserve A Sig I Have Bad Karma
Ham!
They'll both be better than no WiFi, but even people who don't need the extra speed will consider the newer/faster one better. I already hear people complain at universities and airports that only have b rather than geven people who don't need the speed or know what an 801.11 is notice in their connection properties that the speed it's connected at is lower than they're used to seeing.
10 PRINT CHR$(205.5+RND(1)); : GOTO 10
I wonder how they're planning on securing this. Methinks it's just a matter of time before someone finds a way to use the network for free. I mean, we've heard that its not too hard to crack WEP, so how are they going to make sure people don't freeload on this service?
We tend to put almost all of our antennae on top of the IDS tower, the tallest skyscraper in Minneapolis.
In fact, over a dozen other towers have gone up in downtown Minnepolis over the last 20 years, all built to be a tiny bit shorter than the IDS, so they wouldn't have to put all the antennae on the newer structure.
We also have a few broadcast towers over by the airport.
TV reception around here is terrific.
Steering back on topic:
It's kind of cool, but there's a local coffee shop chain around here (Dunn Bros. Coffee) which offers free wi-fi already, as do many of the "mom & pop" coffee shops around the city. I was recently playing World of Warcraft in the Dunn Bros. in Richfield (just south of Minneapolis) on my iBook, and found the connection to be solid and fast.
If I lived in Minneaplolis (or if they extended this out to the 'burbs), I would consider using this service, but I'm pretty darn happy with my DSL service from iphouse.com, so I probably would just stick with what I've got anyway.
Information wants to be anthropomorphized.
I bet if they link every police car, we now have a perfect police-car detector. Cheap, fast, reliable. Just rename Netstumbler as Copstumbler ?
I live in Minneapolis and have to say that I believe that they will find a way to royally mess this up.
On one hand, I see the benefits of it - I even think it may have far reaching benefits (like raising property values). On the other hand, we are Murderopolis and the money should go to fighting crime.
In a strange way, wireless may actually help with things like crime rates. No, I am not kidding! The city needs to attract business and people back into the city. Offering this inexpensive, quality service is one way of doing just that. More jobs = less despair = less crime.
I live in the North side of Minneapolis which is where much of the crime exists. It is in parts very bad, the gangs have control. When the gas company goes on service calls into these areas, they frequently hire off-duty police officers for security! There are quite a few empty or underutilized commercial buildings and several large areas where commercial businesses were tore down and are now just empty lots. Still businesses would be crazy to relocate here. They would be robbed, their employees harrassed and their property vandalized.
If wireless comes to Minneapolis, I would hope that it would hit the North side first. It would be an incentive to bring people and business in.
But the city won't work that way. North will be last.
Meanwhile, the cable company will slowly quit providing amazing broadband service since the few remaining subscribers won't justify the cost of upgrading equipment. Here, North Minneapolis will be the first to be cut back.
I'm screwed.
Who really cares? this is as important as the nimrod in the corner house getting an accesspoint.
call me when it's 100% open and free. Oh and not something that us in the community free wireless access have been doing for years now.
are we goingto get starbucks store opening news stories also???
how about important news like SPLACK project has released a beta of their 10.0 distro of slackware for SUN hardware? An old ultrasparc5 makes today's p4 look like a complete joke and can be had for dirt.
Seeing as how everyone in the city is paying for it already, charging $18-$24 a month for service is utterly bogus in my mind. When you figure that the current population of Minneapolis is 382,618 you figure each tax paying citizen has forked over atleast $52.27 of the 20mil cost and what do they get? The ability to pay for wireless service. It's freakin wireless! Why not make it free use they already paid for it?!?!? Do they make the citizens pay to drive down the streets too?
While I was against Verizon and others from trying to make it illegal for municipalities to offer wifi, but in this case, it should be illegal. Minneapolis would be doing nothing here but trying to be a publicly funded teleco service.
This is plain wrong. If municipalities want to put in their own wifi, let them if they make it freely available for all to use. Just because it's technology does not mean it should be treated differently than any other public works project such as roads and parks which are built and maintained on taxpayer dollars and can be enjoyed by all for free.
Anyone have a mirror or can post the text? I got to read the first page and then it went to a "registration required" for page 2 and now just going back to page 1.
This will absolutely destroy the small wireless ISPs in that area. Governments should not be involved in providing NONESENTIAL services when the private sector can provide them.
This is all starting to sound very familiar. What kind of economic policies are we supposed to be creating: capitalist or communist?
-Nick
"A plan fiendishly clever in its intricacies"- Homer Simpson
$15-$20 million AND you have to pay monthly?
Let's suppose you buy 400 top of the line $500 access points from some wf-fi company. That's only $200,0000.
They should hold back on the fiber and use the access points to relay to a few key wired points like sflan does. Cuts down on the cost.
I've lived in Minneapolis all my life, and I'm here to tell you that free wireless is a natural outcome of our longstanding populist/socialist traditions.
Free market, my ass. If you want to live in a better world, instruct your government to tax you and your neighbors -- then spend that tax money on a better world.
-kgj
-kgj
No he is right I'm from Minneapolis but go to college in Fargo, and the Twin Cities aren't that flat, mind you it is not some big mountain range but there are enough changes in elevation in certain parts of the city.
That is all.
...to RTFA, here are some key points.
* The citywide wireless network is necessary to improve government communications by linking every city building, police car and housing inspector to the city's databases, city officials say.
* No tax money would be used for the Minneapolis wireless network, which would be paid for, built, owned and operated by the winning bidder on the city's proposal.
* Minneapolis officials decided not to build their own wireless network because of high construction and administrative costs, Beck said. In addition, city officials were concerned that cities offering high-speed Internet service have been accused by large telephone companies of competing with the private sector, he said.
* the city also needed an improved network that could speed up data traffic in its 47 main buildings and extend high-speed access to 300 other buildings
* The city also wanted to replace expensive cellular radio communications used by police cars with a cheaper and faster wireless data network. There also was a desire to provide broadband to an estimated 10 to 15 percent of the city's population that either isn't served by high-speed Internet access or can't afford it.
So, there's a little bit more going on here than the city slapping an antenna on top of the IDS tower and charging people for internet access, which a lot of these posts seem to think is what is happening.
You're quite right -- I screwed the pooch. Dammit.
-kgj
-kgj
There are a lot of communities working on wide area wireless projects and free municipal hot spots. But the biggest problem with a lot of them is that the PR just isn't that good. You can put up all the WiFi and WiMax sigs you want all over the city, but "joe average" is not going to understand. My proof? Just the other day I was talking to a very intelligent professional and I told him about the free hotspot that is located in the "Reading Garden" of the Cleveland Public Library. He was VERY intrigued. (ie. there are potential users out there who would love to get on this thing) But, he then asked me if his modem in his laptop would work with it. Therein lies the problem. As an industry, IT people are very poor at communicating concepts like this to users.
Choosing the name "Wireless" or "WiFi" for short range wireless networks was poor. The average person isn't going to "get it". We would have been better off if they were called "Cordless Internet Bases". This way they would have some clue that this thing isn't long range and requires some kind of reciever with an antenna on it. Just like a Cordless Phone Base. And WiMax should have been called something more like "Cellular High Speed Internet Access". and Cell Phone Modem connections should be called "Cell Phone Dial-up". I think part of the problem is that the marketers like "whiz bang" terms with cool factor appeal. Marketing something as an 802.11b access point lacks any way of making it stylish. But creating a logo and mainstream name that doesn't relate to anything else that is already similar is a bad move too. We need to find a better way...
-"...bad old ideas look confusingly fresh when they are packaged as technology" - Jaron Lanier (Digital Maoism on Edge.o
just read through the comments, didn't see anything about this...
how are they going to enforce log-in? That is, when I have my 802.11b network setup at home, i simply use WEP and MAC filtering to ensure that no one but me can connect to my router. But if it's open to everyone, how do they make sure that only people who paid can use it?
There's a local free service in my city (Montreal) that has wireless for cafes, and it's pretty cool, but kind of annoying at the same time. When you connect, the first time you try to access a page, it directs you to a log-in page. Then you can browse as much as you want, but every 10 minutes or so it'll direct you back to the log-in page. It's okay, but I wouldn't trust it not to interrupt me during.. i dunno.. online banking or something.
Also, if they do use WEP or something, they can't very well give each user their own key. Besides, it's pretty well known that WEP can be cracked. Couldn't you listen in on conversations around you can grab people's passwords? Forget paying $24 a month, I'll just figure out someone's log-in and use their access...
I remember back when everyone was using dial-up it was always possible to get lists of people's log in names and passwords, which i guess were leaked from local ISPs, and people would use them instead of buying their own accounts. I can see this happening even more easily with wireless.
It's an interesting idea, but knowing the way things work in this city, they'll cheap out and people will be whining about it in less than 2 years. *cough* Metrodome *cough*
You have to come Uptown to get it, but once you are there you will be presented with dozens of unsecured APs. spread the love.
Uh, the proposed Minneapolis service will not be free - you'd need to purchase a login account. Some local 'hotspots' might switch to this service and offer it for free at their specific locations. You'd also be able to purchase access as needed such as on a daily basis (for visitors to the great metro of Minneapolis :-)
...
Given even simply the maintenance costs associated with such a wireless network, I suspect that you will see more municipalities adopting this type of commercial infrastructure
I hope they mean fiber to the buildings and wireless to the police cars.
'Cause if it's the opposite, man, that'd be a mess to implement.
That's right we had ricochet before it shut down. The coverage over the two cities and the suburbs was really good and the equipment is already in place. There's got to be a way to use that existing equipment and not muck up the users that have wifi already setup.
This is the wireless state of Oulu a city of Finland: http://joker.iki.fi/cms/?q=node/view/135&PHPSESSID =80c78af4c4b6589901e695a40bf23ec0
http://www.panoulu.net/ Right now PanOulu is free for university students and personnel.
Can you believe it? FREE as in BEER!
*** Fruits get old fast.
shoot, I need to move...
now I should be able to make progress bugging them... The two cities have a long history of competing with each other...
me, I'm more for running cheap fiber to businesses for a 1 time install fee. the local geek will create an isp for the neighborhood just to get a fast connection. that will create many small competing businesses offering many different types of connections...not just wifi.
it should be almost free for business and be faster. let the businesses compete to offer it to consumers. there are TONS of problems when you give out a monopoly contract every x years to manage stuff.
Security is not a concern if there is an ISP running on top of the city provided connection. the ISP can encrypt info. Besides, incase you forgot after 9-11 all major ISPs let the gov in no questions asked, and they can't tell you when they do either.
Democracy Now! - uncensored, anti-establishment news
What do you guys think will be the method for authenticating users who have payed to use this? The article states that you can enter "one password" to get on the Internet anywhere within the city, however it appears that method is more of a thing for business people or other folks who are visiting for a short time; the password would probably expire in a few days.
Do you guys think that a simple password will be what residents have to provide to be authenticated, or do you think it'll be something more along the lines of if your MAC address is found in their ACL? Otherwise it seems likely that one person would buy an account and just share the password with everyone he/she knew.
I am LOVING it!
eat shiat and bark at the moon
its WHO is in control, the business (facism) or the goverment (socialism.)
simplistically, you'd want to be in the middle.
I think government should provide the foundation internet access and run it. like they do with roads etc.
Let the ISPs use that network, and geeks can be their own ISP... we don't need an ISP, just an IP.
No city roads, police, fire, library, schools??
Its expensive to maintain and run wires for a fibre network. PLEASE let the city do it. all the regulation/permits etc, has made a mess of the streets---getting torn to hell for each company that wants to run some stupid line. the TOTAL COST of multiple companies running lines costs consumers MORE.
ps: gov already spys on you. local gov is too inept anyway. (but I think they could physically manage fibre lines)
Democracy Now! - uncensored, anti-establishment news
I have a bat house in St. Paul.
hardly any bugs flying around my house... but get too far away, and its like those bugs are smarter than we think..
Democracy Now! - uncensored, anti-establishment news
I have lived in Minneapolis for about 25 years. In the city itself, not in the 'burbs.
I like this idea, however, I would prefer that MPLS do this more like how Philidelphia is doing it where the city owns the wires and WAPs, and allows any comer to provide service on that hardware (with certain definitions of "service").
This follows more closely the model of the internet, which is based on the model of the Interstate Highway system. Government owned and maintained, but anyone can use it within certain parameters (called "laws"). This would have the potential of the lowest cost to the end user.
As the article points out, there is some whining from the telecom industry over this, but I say tough shit. I think consumers have been screwed hard enough by the telecom industry for far too long. And, they could still attempt to screw consumers all they want by selling services on the publicly owned wires and WAPs. Then they might have to compete instead of being given artificial monopolies.
I realize this guy has been labeled 'troll', but I think that's an over-reaction.
I'd just like to point out that whether it's government or private, no amount of you flapping your big stupid mouth is going to make any difference. Oh, dear me, I had to go move my own trash cans! Oh, no, those guys have a route they have to do in a limited amount of time and won't clean up garbage when one of my cheapass bags from Sam's Club broke? Oh, what a world, what a world.
People getting hacked to death with machetes and you're bitching about nothing. Move to another city, hell move to another hemisphere you think you got it so bad.
O~ Him that studies revenge keeps his own wounds green. -- Francis Bacon
A new city-controlled service that competes with TV -cable broadband and phone company DSL may be a good thing.
But does the ordinance that creates it specifically allow other private companies to build competing networks in the future? If not, it is a bad deal for the taxpayers and for potential WiFi users.
Last month Popular Science ran an article where the labeled Minneapolis the most technologically advanced city in the US. I guess this just reinforces that. It seems like everybody is getting on the muni WiFi bandwagon. My boss said he was driving from Champaign, IL to St. Louis last week, and some dot-on-the-map town along the way had muni WiFi. It's crazy.
Someone's got a beef...
:P
Dude, have you ever been to residential areas around 5th and Humboldt? I'm not doing a disparaging North vs South thing here, but name a block up there that's as nasty.
I worked as a process server for about two years not long ago while in college in the Minneapolis metro and associate 'burb area - think anything W. of downtown St. Paul along a parabola encompassing St. Paul. I hate St. Paul - the idiot Gov's statement that the streets were designed and laid out by drunken idiots (actually it was an ethnic slur), almost has to be true. Whether or not the ethnicity was correct - I don't care - but I tend to think it was crack and not booze.
There is *one* suburb that I've ever been escorted out of by two cops in vests who called for backup was the one I mentioned above. No idea why, I was fine. I'm slightly thin - and have been called "scrawny" although I hate that descriptor.
Personally, I've never had a problem most places - it's some of the middle class assholes that get on the process server's ass more anyone else - and being about 10x more aggressive about it.
I've had to club a rottweiler who was sic'd on me with a "kill" command with a big "Cop Flashlight" maglite that I always carried, and had a shotgun racked behind a closed front door at me. Both of these happened in jumpy middle class neighborhoods. I've always been able to breeze Edina and the Minnetonka gated areas too... Once you have a bit of cash you tend to take lawsuits and subpeonas with a grain of salt.
Never had a problem anywhere else in the Minneapolis metro or burbs... although I wouldn't let a blonde gal who was a law student and exceptionally cute and naive go into the S Minneapolis areas (where the projects used to be). That'd just be silly; we farmed her out to the corporate courier stuff for her own safety.
Go go SAG and Metro Legal!
no, its not. mpls is quite hilly.