Slashdot Mirror


New Orleans to Deploy Free Wi-Fi City Wide

Lawrence_Bird writes "The Washington Post is reporting that New Orleans will deploy a city wide wi-fi network with free public access. Much of the equipment has been donated, but New Orleans will own and operate the network. Interestingly, they are only able to do this while a state of emergency remains in place as technically their planned 512Kbps service violates state law prohibiting municipalities from offering access at speeds in excess of 144Kbps, a restriction the city plans on fighting even though they will eventually outsource the whole operation."

6 of 363 comments (clear)

  1. They meant "free" WiFi by dada21 · · Score: 5, Interesting



    Note that nothing a government offers is truly free, even in the case here where the hardware is mostly donated.

    Government-run programs are generally maintained by unionized public workers. These programs have little competition and often cost more than a private competitive market (note municipal water reclamation costs).

    The city mentions they'll outsource the program to private companies, but do you believe these companies won't be owned by cronies? Even New Orleans has their own version of Haliburton.

    Is providing Internet access ever a city's responsible? In my town we have 3 city-wide free WiFi providers and 20 local "coffee shop" providers. I don't see why New Orleans feels that they're needing a taxpayer funded ISP when what they really need is a tax hiatus to bring businesses and entrepreneurs to LA to create jobs and better lives that jobs help to build.

    The hurricane damage is evidence to me of the decay of government projects and the wasted taxpayer money. That money would produce a safer city with more jobs if it was left to the citizens.

    1. Re:They meant "free" WiFi by flyinwhitey · · Score: 5, Insightful

      As long as I consider the Library a government responsibility, I have to say the same about internet access.

      There is no fundamental difference to me, and universal access to information is the kind of thing I would be proud to pay taxes for.

      --
      How pathetic are you that you follow me from topic to topic and waste all your mod points at once modding me down?
  2. Re:Hmmmm...... by cayenne8 · · Score: 5, Insightful
    "Perhaps their priorities are a bit backward?"

    Well, for the majority of us...it is a circular hell to rebuild. We want to rebuild homes..but, have to wait till FEMA sets new flood plain standards...have to see if you have to raise your house or no insurance. And we're waiting to see if we can get long term commitment to rebuild the levee system...to withstand CAT 5 storms...without that, not much use in rebuilding.

    Funny...the politicos couldn't fall over each other fast enough for 9/11...but, sure don't seem to be too excited to help us down here.

    Frankly, if we could get our fair share of royalties for letting all the oil/gas be mined on and off our coast...get the 40%-50% that other states do when natural resources like oil are harvested (many interior states)...revenue that we've not had, but, should have for years...we could easily take care of ourselves and build a system that would make Holland blush. It is money that is ours, and should be ours...but, we can't seem to get it out of congress.

    Sorry...easy to get carried away on the soapbox...it is so frustrating down here...a total clusterfuck doesn't even come close to describing it...

    --
    Light travels faster than sound. This is why some people appear bright until you hear them speak.........
  3. Quoi? by C10H14N2 · · Score: 5, Insightful

    That money would produce a safer city with more jobs if it was left to the citizens.

    Last I checked, in this country, the government is composed of -- gasp -- citizens, not space aliens from Uranus. At what point did Americans forget the "of, by, and for the people" routine? Why should a state or federal authority be telling the citizens of a town that they can't do whatever they blinking well please as far as public works projects? So the _citizens_ get together and say, golly, we can all chip in ten bucks and we'll have a wonderful benefit for our community that is worth far more than ten bucks to each citizen.

    What's next? Gee, sorry Podunksville, you can't build a public park with a toilet. You need to sell the land off to a private developer so you can have the privilege of paying to sit on the grass or take a leak.

    I don't see how this is any different.

  4. Interesting.. all the neg. and missing the point by maillemaker · · Score: 5, Interesting

    I'm surprised at all the negativity about this.

    I'm also suprised at the lack of debate at the /real/ meat in this article - the fact that the big ISPs have already lobbied in places to hobble the speed of such WiFi networks.

    I think this is going to become a huge issue as WiFi and WiMax take off.

    My subdivision has some 500 houses in it. If half of them get high speed internet in some form, at $50/month they are paying out some $12,500 a month collectively for high speed internet access.

    What if our subdivision decided to set up it's own WiFi network? Yeah, I can see the ISPs getting real nervous about this.

    Also, I can see Cell Phone companies getting VERY nervous about this. If WiFi internet access becomes free and widespread, you won't need the cellular network anymore to make wireless phone calls. Just a portable wireless IP phone.

    No wonder the big Telecom industries are out to squelch this.

    Steve

    --
    A work that expires before its copyright never enters the public domain and thus enjoys eternal copyright protection.
  5. Re:Free wi-fi is important by FatRatBastard · · Score: 5, Insightful

    Yes, because the digital divide is chock-full of people who are able to afford a laptop/desktop with a wi-fi card, but can't afford basic dial-up service. And as you can imagine, that's a large, large group.

    And slightly OT, but I'm going to laugh very hard and very long when the first "Municipal Wi-Fi blocking content" story hits /. Because we all know elected officials never want to block the citizens they represent from information....

    well, with kids yeah. We have to protect the kids. And you know how irresposible some parents can be. So lets put a huge filter on porn coming down the pipe. Tax dollars shouldn't pay for porn anyway.

    Oh, and smoking. Bad. Very bad. Lets ban any site that promotes smoking. Promotion of all things smoking over publicly financed wi-fi? I think not! You might as well just shove smokes in babies mouths.

    What? This site offends the sensiblities of [fill in religious group/cult of choice]? Block them too. We're all fine, upstanding [christians, jews, muslims, hindis, scientologists] and there's no way our community should have to see this.

    What? People are going to RELIGIOUS sites? Hasn't anyone heard of the seperation of church and state? If someone wants to cyber-pray let them pay for their own access.

    Hate speech. Who doesnt' hate hate speech? Of course! Its gone. ("by the way, what is hate speech?" "Ah.. the devil's in the details")

    Wal Mart? Do we really want our citizens helping keep that community killing, baby eating, spawn of satan corperation in business by allowing them to purchase cheap shit over our wi-fi? I think not! If you want to destroy mom and pop shops do it on your own nickel. ...