Slashdot Mirror


Google to Offer Free Wi-Fi?

meaning writes "Business 2.0 reports on the possibility of Google building a national broadband network and giving Wi-Fi access to everyone in America. From the article: 'So once the GoogleNet is built, how would consumers connect for free access? One of the cheapest ways would be for Google to blanket major cities with Wi-Fi, and evidence gathered by Business 2.0 suggests that the company may be trying to do just that. In April it launched a Google-sponsored Wi-Fi hotspot in San Francisco's Union Square shopping district, built by a local startup called Feeva. Feeva is reportedly readying more free hotspots in California, Florida, New York, and Washington, and it's possible that Google may be involved.'"

3 of 419 comments (clear)

  1. Also in New York City (Bryant Park) by GillBates0 · · Score: 5, Informative
    Wifi access in NYC's Bryant Park is sponsored by Google. From the official park webpage:

    Special Thanks To
    The Bryant Park Wireless Network is proudly sponsored by Google.

    --
    An Indian-American Hindu committed to non-violent thought/speech/action alarmed by the global explosion of radical Islam
  2. Why do I RTFA? by Mostly+a+lurker · · Score: 4, Informative
    Google has to pay as much as $60 per megabit in IP transit fees.
    How do we interpret this nonsense? Taken literally, it would mean that every 100KB mail you read on Gmail costs Google $60. Lol. The most likely interpretation, I suppose, is that Google pays $60 per month for every decicated 1Mbit per second between the Internet backbone and their servers. This would be a bit high for an individual and Google, with its immense purchasing power, must do better than that. Otoh, $60 per year for 1Mbit per second dedicated seems too low. Guess I should just follow standard ./ practice and ignore TFA: basing my understanding on the article's headline.
  3. Re:America?? You mean USA! by switcha · · Score: 3, Informative
    By that logic South Africa could be referred to as Africa.

    No, your example sucks. Just like there is no country of South America, there is no country called Africa. Shortening the United States of America to America doesn't lead to confusion with a continent.

    Maybe the original ranter would like it more if when referring to North and South America, people just said the Americas. I'm fine with that. North, Central and South, all in one tidy name.

    --
    You know what? ... A little club soda *did* get that out!