Free Wi-fi Prompts BellSouth to Withdraw Donation

turbosaab writes "Shortly after learning of the New Orleans plan for free city-wide wireless internet, Bellsouth Corp. withdrew an offer to donate a damaged building to be used for police headquarters. According to the Washington Post, 'Bill Oliver, angrily rescinded the offer of the building in a conversation with New Orleans homeland security director Terry Ebbert.'"

Comments

Wow.

[ScaryFroMan]

I mean WOW. That's possibly the coldest, worst thing that I've ever heard a company to do. I mean Sony sucks because of the rootkit, and M$ is the spawn of satan, but never would they do something like that.

They may as well just strangle puppies in front of orphans. I'll never use thier services.

Re:Wow.

[spune]

One word: Monopoly.

I don't know how it is down South now with telcoms, but when I lived in Tennessee, BellSouth was the only option we had in terms of phone service.

Re:Wow.

[Trillan]

Well, the reality is that Sony never would have made the offer to begin with. But making and then withdrawing it certainly appears more evil. :)

Re:Wow.

[ZachPruckowski]

Unfortunately, there are probably plenty of people who have BellSouth who can't switch away from it because they have no local alternatives. I don't have a landline (well, I do...but I don't know the number to it), but most non-college students need one. And VoIP isn't an option if you don't have highspeed access, even if you can call "normal" phones with it. And you do have highspeed, and its from Bell South, you can't really switch away from them unless you also have cable. A lot of you guys seem to be lucky enough to have broadband internet and multiple phone providers in your area. In some parts of the country, particularly "backwater" parts of the South, you don't have those kind of options.

(I lived 10 of my almost 19 years in such a place, so "backwater" isn't an insult).

Re:Wow.

[SillySnake]

This would be a prime time for Sony or M$ to step in and help their image.. Though, for the most part, both have positive images.. Maybe it would be better for the cable internet provider there, Cox/Comcast/Whoever..
They could just step in, buy the building, and give it to the city, with much praise coming from families and businesses who, as they move back, are going to be resubscribing to internet providers.
Of course, the whole thing would need some press coverage..

Re:Wow.

[Honig the Apothecary]

I wish I could get rid of the $70 a month I pay them for home telecommunications extortion service (it barely qualifies as such). There are no other phone companies where I live in Alabama for home service.

That said, at work when we switched from Bellsouth to another CLEC here, Bellsouth sent us a bill for $30,000 for "Unfulfilled Contract". That was all it showed, a line item for "Unfulfilled Contract" Cost $30,000. They could not produce a copy of the contract that we supposedly had not fulfilled. Needless to say, it did not get paid.

Reneging on their offer to house the NOPD just screams of a whiney corporation not getting their way. Jackasses!

Re:Wow.

[Anonymous Luddite]

>> M$ is the spawn of satan, but never would they do something like that.

If nothing else, Microsoft understands public relations. In the same postion, they might want to do it, but would show better judgement I expect.

Re:Wow.

[shrewd]

amazingly transparant: "you wont scratch our back, so we will withdraw our offer of help" i hope they get a lot of bad publicity for this.

Re:Wow.

[Loconut1389]

They're already starting to.

Re:Wow.

[frank_adrian314159]

That was all it showed, a line item for "Unfulfilled Contract" Cost $30,000. They could not produce a copy of the contract that we supposedly had not fulfilled. Needless to say, it did not get paid.

And so they get to write off $30,000 in unrecoverable recepits on their taxes. Schweet!

Re:Wow.

[nwbvt]

"That's possibly the coldest, worst thing that I've ever heard a company to do. "

I'm sure there are many companies that never donated that amount of their company property in the first place. Does that make them any less cold than BellSouth?

BTW, if you RTFA (I know, its /., almost no one gets past the sensationalist headlines), they did not say they would not donate the building, merely that they would have to "continue to work through issues regarding the building" after the city decided to create a monopoly (that gets its income from forced taxation) to compete with BellSouth's services. Thats a bit different from strangling puppies in front of orphans.

Re:Wow.

[B3ryllium]

On some phone networks, you can pick up a landline and dial "211" to have a voice system read back your phone number to you. I don't know if that still works, but it's worth a shot.

Re:Wow.

[nwbvt]

Well that sort of assumes BellSouth would sell the building, which would be a strange move considering they are in the process of donating it to charity (don't rely on just the headline and RTFA, the offer is still on the table).

Re:Wow.

[Skreems]

well... the whole point of BellSouth rescinding the offer in the first place is that with free wifi, many people will NOT be resubscribing for internet service...

Re:Wow.

[jZnat]

That must've sucked. Up here in Chicago, there has to be at least 4 or 5 major telcos, and dozens of mobile phone telcos.

Re:Wow.

[Honig the Apothecary]

I wonder how much they have done that since the CLECs have moved in. 1. Customer Switches to competitor 2. Threaten Customer with Exorbitant Bill for BS contract that never existed 3. ??? 4. Add to profit by writing off fake charges!

Re:Wow.

[DarkTempes]

No WAY a college student needs a landline.

Most college students I know only have cell phones or no phone at all (the latter being quite rare).

I know very few college students with a landline phone.

Now I do agree with the south not having alot of other options. Bellsouth is the defacto standard phone company if you want a landline down here. I mean sure, there are some other options, but who in the south is willing to pay a good bit more just to get away from one company? Not many.

Re:Wow.

[smilindog2000]

I hear that BellSouth asked Uncle Sam for $6B to rewire New Orleans! With Wimax/WiFi, the cost was so cheap (a few million dollars), companies were able to donate the needed equipment. I think I understand why BellSouth is pissed.

If you recall, a Republican from Texas is trying to make it illegal for cities to bypass the phone companies and offer free Wi-Fi. BellSouth has the GOP in it's pocket.

Re:Wow.

[Malor]

In the South, it's often cheaper to just switch to 100% cellphone. Bellsouth's 'cheap' plans are on the order of $40/mo with all the taxes and surcharges and crap you have no choice but to take. (Coming from California, I was absolutely astonished at the cost of a phone here.. it was more like $12/mo for the cheapest options there.)

You can often get a cellphone plan for $30/mo, and $50/mo will give you a pile of minutes and free long distance.... and the phone works practically anywhere.

Essentially, they're pricing themselves right out of business, as far as I can see.

Re:Wow.

[DarkTempes]

My cell phone is way cheaper than landline.

I rarely need to use a phone at all, and when I do, it's almost always on nights or weekends. For me a phone is only for emergencies (car break down on the side of the road in the middle of nowhere?), buisness (server down at 4am? someone calls my cell to wake me up), and occasionally pleasure calls (calling people who don't know how to use a computer).

Thus two options have worked fine for me a) pre-paid in the past b) now I just had myself added to one of my relatives plans as an 'extra' family line. which is only like $5-10/month.

Then add how time is money. A cell phone means you get your calls when you need to get them, as the phone can always be with you. A landline is stuck in one place. If my server goes down and I had a landline and someone just left a message I might not get that message for another 8 hours! That's alot of money and unacceptable downtime.

Re:Wow.

[SilverspurG]

No WAY a college student needs a landline.

Odd. Ten years ago the land line was standard and people were debating whether or not they really needed a cell phone.

Re:Wow.

[jonbrewer]

That's possibly the coldest, worst thing that I've ever heard a company to do.

In 2004 Pfizer withdrew funding from a New Zealand based cancer research centre over a dispute with Pharmac, the government (well, crown) entity that purchases pharmaceuticals for hospitals and health programmes. http://www.auckland.ac.nz/uoa/about/news/articles/ 2004/05/0005.cfm

The people who run America's large corporations are by and large not nice people. (Yeah, that means you Mr. Niblack, and your fucking lawyers.)

Re:Wow.

[rbarreira]

And it is more evil... Not doing an offer is just inaction, what they did is really a bad action, which is (normally) quite worse, in my opinion.

Re:Wow.

[krymsin01]

Myself, I realized about 5 years ago that I had no use for a landline after I ditched dial up. Plus cellphones are a lot more portable, and cheaper in my case.

Re:Wow.

[geminidomino]

occasionally pleasure calls (calling people who don't know how to use a computer).

You know, there are far more pleasurable calls you can make, and if it's someone you know personally, you might even be able to do it without spending $3.99/min

Re:Wow.

[jacksonj04]

Soon it will be deciding whether you keep your cellphone, or get a WiFi VoIP phone with GSM backup.

Re:Wow.

[raoul666]

Breaking a promise is a hell of a lot more evil then not making one, in my book.

Re:Wow.

[raoul666]

Or call someone with caller id.

Re:Wow.

[Malor]

My mother has your problem... no cable at all, and the phone lines are horrible, even worse than BellSouth. (she's got some other weird local phone provider, Alltel perhaps, and it's like $65/mo for a BASIC PHONE LINE.) She was on Starband, but that company is an absolute trainwreck.... DO NOT buy their service, it's HORRIBLE. They are the single worst company I have ever tried to deal with.

Fortunately, she's able to get net access via Cingular (which is just Bellsouth in disguise, go figure), and so she has a couple of Cingular phones and a PCMCIA modem. It'd be useless for gaming, but for web browsing and file downloading, it's way better than dialup. You might want to double-check that you have no wireless coverage... it's improving fast, and she's in a fairly remote area.

I stand behind my statement that Bellsouth is killing themselves through overpricing.... think of just how motivated you are to find another solution. As soon as something shows up -- and it will, eventually -- I bet you'll switch instantly.

Re:Wow.

[rabel]

Think about how much you really need those extra services. I recently cancelled all caller id and related services and long distance service for both of my land lines. Yeah, I just couldn't bear to drop "touch tone service" (>:[) but my $80 / month phone bill went down to $20. I have a cell phone which I use for LD and I don't really miss the caller ID service. Consider dropping all those hugely profitable extra services.

I've also been doing some serious research into VoIP and am getting ready to make that plunge since I have cable broadband (but I have satellite TV, ha).

Re:Wow.

[Ex-MislTech]

My uncle worked for SBC for 35 years, and may I say that the management and
ownership border on biblical evil and would sell their mothers soul for the bottom line .

The president here in Oklahoma just walked out under protest because he could no
longer stomach what they intended to do to their own workers .

They do not care about progress, they care about fat wallets and stock prices .

They will use predatory business practices to get their way, and they are the true
core of the AT&T break up, and are in line to buy back AT&T thus nullifying the
huge anti-trust break up .

These ppl are unethical, and basically evil at the top of SBC .

Them buying yahoo made me sad .

Ex-MislTech

Re:Wow.

[rapidweather]

I would not be suprised if sometime later on today BellSouth changes it's mind. Anyone who has seen the TV news lately can see how N.O. is hurting. The Wi-fi idea was just a small way to try and get some residents to return. Mostly aid workers and city officials would benefit, if they had a computer that could use Wi-fi. Probably only a few, really. Free Wi-fi is a shot in the dark for an area that has so many problems that prevent people from wanting to live there.

Re:Wow.

[cowscows]

Well, a company's PR department will say a lot of things to cover up for something stupid that an exec or marketing decided to do/say. I'm willing to believe that someone did suddenly change his mind about the building in a fit of anger, but the PR about it is going to cause them to quickly backtrack on that.

And yes, offering something and then taking it away is worse than never offering anything in the first place. It goes beyond just getting their hopes up and then disappointing them. The NOPD could have been led to believe that this whole building thing was a done deal, so they would've pretty much stopped looking for another place to set up shop. And the NOPD does not really have the time and the resources to go deal with that right now.

Not to mention the fact that Bell South has pretty much built their business on a monopoly, one offered to them by the government in the past. The phone companies were pretty much given profit for decades, but now times are changing, and many of them are too lazy to change with it. The city is getting a pretty sweet deal, basically a truckload of free Wifi equipment, should they really just ignore that opportunity, just so Bellsouth can continue to have an environment pretty much free of competition?

Re:Wow.

[nwbvt]

"Well, a company's PR department will say a lot of things to cover up for something stupid that an exec or marketing decided to do/say. I'm willing to believe that someone did suddenly change his mind about the building in a fit of anger, but the PR about it is going to cause them to quickly backtrack on that."

Considering recent events, I'm not exactly in the mood to believe anything the NOPD has to say.

If I started a rumor that {insert name of any company here} just {insert heinous act here}, would you be willing to believe it? If so I have a bridge to sell you for cheap. Show me the actual letter the guy wrote first, then maybe I'll believe that their interpretation of events is the accurate one.

"The city is getting a pretty sweet deal, basically a truckload of free Wifi equipment, should they really just ignore that opportunity, just so Bellsouth can continue to have an environment pretty much free of competition?"

No, thats not what is happening. The government is planning on using taxpayer revenue that it forces citizens to give them to create a competitor to the phone company. Thats not exactly free market economics.

Re:Wow.

[Corbets]

I'm going to have to disagree - I don't think this is all that unreasonable. New Orleans announced they were going to break state law, a law that exhists to (arguably) help keep telecom companies profitable. Now, whether you agree with that law or not, the fact of the matter is that by breaking it, New Orleans is likely going to cost Bell South a lot of money.

I work for a large pharma company who got told by a foreign company that unless we dropped our prices significantly this year (prices that are already discounted heavily for this and other 3rd-world countries), they were going to break our patent and make generic copies of our drug. We gave in, unfortunately, but I can promise that our humanitarian aid to this country will decrease significantly next year.

I see this as much the same thing. Remember that first and foremost a corporation exists to make money. Social responsibility is only a recent theme in corporate politics, and certainly a secondary one. If a government attacks a company's bottom line, then there are going to be consequences.

My opinion, anyway. I'll give ten to one odds that it doesn't jive with most of the Slashdot crew. :)

Re:Wow.

[FooAtWFU]

College students generally have a phone line installed in the dorm. Typically, it's been installed a while, and the universities used to make enormous amounts of money off them. I've heard our own director of Information Systems tell about how they used to buy long distance in bulk at 13 cents a minute, resell it to students at 25 cents a minute, and they made millions every year. Now they buy for about 3, sell for 5, and make thousands. Still- for a college student living on campus, a landline where they don't pay for anything except long distance may be cheaper than a cell phone- and if you're poor and working your way through university on a scholoarship (or faculty dependant tuition concession) then a cell phone may simply be unaffordable when they run $20-$60 a month. That's books for a semester. And do you somehow think that these cell phone companies are measurably less-evil than Bellsouth?

I did not have a cell phone until this semester, and that's only because I'm with the university's special technology pilot program (they eventually want to give them to all students so they can get a cut of that, as well) and they gave me the rather nice cell phone/PDA combo to use, and they're even paying for my service... =D

Re:Wow.

[sstidman]

I took it that he has a cell phone, so can't he just call himself to get the number for the land line? "Hello, me? It's me. What's my number?" Easy.

Re:Wow.

[NardofDoom]

It's not just the South my friend. I live in 'flyover' PA (between Pittsburgh and Philly) and I have two options for Internet, one for cable, and one for phone service. I hear a lot of /.ers talking about "just switching" service and I think 'better the devil you know than the devil you don't.'

Re:Wow.

[Zigg]

I have a hard time seeing a problem here.

By engaging in this plan, New Orleans is creating a taxpayer-supported competitor -- a monopoly with mandatory participation -- that will compete directly with BellSouth's services.

And you all expect them to still harbor goodwill after such a move?

You can rave all day about telco practices and such, and I'd probably agree with you, but I'm sorry, I just can't get behind the outrage. At least, not the Slashdot outrage from the "Wi-Fi is a constitutional right" crowd.

Re:Wow.

[Chop]

I live in Knoxville, TN and yes, Bellsouth is still the only main telco. There is one smaller telco that I know of, but They cannot compete with Bellsouth on price/options, and they are only available on the west side of the city. For example, at my last job, my boss though three-way calling was cool, it was not a feature at the time. Looks like I will be moving to Packet8 a little sooner than I thought.

Chop

Re:Wow.

[danaris]

"Creating a competitor to the phone company" is a trifle disingenuous. A better way to put it might be, oh, "Providing a service which many, if not most, Americans now consider essential."

That sounds to me like the definition of what government is supposed to do: provide essential services with a focus on maximising service, not profit.

Dan Aris

Re:Wow.

[schon]

I'm sure there are many companies that never donated that amount of their company property in the first place. Does that make them any less cold than BellSouth?

Yes, it does.

Consider your employer refusing to pay you one day. If they just claimed "well, none of the other companies in town are paying you either, so we're not any less cold than anyone else."

They promised they would do something, then reneged. It *is* worse than not promising at all.

Re:Wow.

[roystgnr]

And so they get to write off $30,000 in unrecoverable recepits on their taxes. Schweet!

Only if they've already written that $30,000 onto their books as revenues or if they've got a crooked accountant. And if they've got a crooked accountant cheating on their taxes, why would they want to send a paper trail to an ex-customer?

Re:Wow.

[Peter La Casse]

I remember Cingular as Ameritech in disguise, and then Ameritech was bought by SBC. So SBC and Cingular are associated in my mind with all of the incompetence of Ameritech.

I've noticed that wherever somebody is from in the US, they tend to think that their local Baby Bell is the worst of the bunch.

Re:Wow.

[somoose]

Cingular is a joint venture between SBC (soon to be called ATT) and BellSouth with SBC owning 60% of it. SBC does not currently own BellSouth, although BellSouth has been flirting with one merger or another for a few years now.

Re:Wow.

[cowscows]

New Orleans didn't have the money to totally bankroll a project like this before the storm, and they certainly don't have it now. This whole project is being made possible because of donations. Will it be completely free of cost for the city? Probably not, but that doesn't mean it isn't worthwhile. Governments often spend money in order to spur development or otherwise bring economic activity to their areas. How much does the city of New Orleans spend on various things for Mardi Gras? I don't know any exact numbers, but I'm willing to bet it's a pretty sizeable amount. Now that's something that I'd consider less valuable in a lot of ways than a city-wide WiFi connection, but overall, mardi gras brings in a ton of revenue for many businesses and people in the city. So it's all good.

And don't try with the free market economics crap. The phone companies, and most of the other privately owned utilities have basically functioned as government sponsored monopolies for decades. They've got no right to complain about the free market now. Think of this as the government correcting its earlier mistakes. They've tried deregulation, the entrenched companies have lots of little tricks to keep competitors from gaining any traction. This is an easier way for the city to "inspire" Bell South to maybe be a little more innovative, or at least efficient, and the citizens of New Orleans should benefit from this in a number of ways.

Re:Wow.

[superflippy]

Bellsouth's 'cheap' plans are on the order of $40/mo with all the taxes and surcharges and crap you have no choice but to take.
For us, their cheapest landline plan comes to $25 and change, including all the taxes and crap. When we bought cellphones a couple years ago, we wanted to keep our landline and that's BellSouth's minimum monthly charge for having a local number without long distance or any features.

Still doesn't change the fact that what they did in New Orleans is pretty awful.

Re:Wow.

[RESPAWN]

You are entirely correct in your assertion that there may not be any other options in New Orleans. If we don't want to go with BellSouth, our only other choice in the city for a "landline" is VOIP. That means having to spend the money on a cable modem subscription from Cox cable, and I hate to say it, but my service wasn't that great when I was last down there to move my furniture away. Personally, I already didn't like BS due to the horrible service we received from them on our Telecom equipment at work.

Re:Wow.

[Mr_Perl]

In Spencer IA where I moved a few years ago we have a municipal communications system.

< $60/month now buys:

Basic cable
2 regular phone lines
5 Mbit Broadband w/static IP (and choice from 4 bw providers)

I am of the opinion that other small towns should do the same, we had a big bond sale, laid the fiber, and forced the ruling (Mediacom) price gouger's rates down to something reasonable so they didn't get pushed out entirely.

So we aren't lining the pockets of Mediacom execs any longer, now we're treating ourselves.

I don't know how well this would work in a more corrupt (larger) governmental organization, but with proper oversight it's likely to be better than what you guys currently suffer under.

Re:Wow.

[Malor]

Well, I have direct experience with Pacific Bell and Bellsouth... and let me tell you, Pacific Bell is head and shoulders better than, er, BS. :) Bellsouth doesn't seem THAT terrible, actually, except that they charge way too damn much for lines. I've heard nothing but nightmare stories about SBC... from what I've heard, they're probably the worst of the Baby Bells.

Apparently Cingular is a joint venture between SBC and BS. I know Cingular and BS are joined at the hip; you can get both bills together if you like, and they offer you a discount on cell phone service if you have a BS landline.

(as an corollary to your observation about perceptions of phone companies, I have lived in several places in the US, and in each and every one of them, it was asserted to me most solemnly that this place was THE WORST for allergies in the whole country.)

Re:Wow.

[sammaytg1]

Did you actually read his comment? He was saying that college student don't need a landline.

Re:Wow.

[Darby]

Looks like I will be moving to Packet8 a little sooner than I thought.

I've been with them for over a year in Chicago with no complaints.
My mom signed up with them on my recommendation in Seattle and cancelled soon after due to poor service so YMMV.

Re:Wow.

[timeOday]

You have to admit, sharing a phone bill with roomates was a pain in the butt.

Re:Wow.

[Golias]

a cell phone may simply be unaffordable when they run $20-$60 a month. That's books for a semester.

Are you high!?

Perhaps I'm being too hard on you. Maybe you haven't taken a full-load semester of University courses for a while.

Even taking you absurd $60/month figure (a student would be an idiot to sign up for a plan that expensive these days), in three months that's $180.

At a lot of colleges, that could be ONE textbook!

Heck, even back when I was college (as I recall, that would be back in the opening years of the Bronze Age), we were shelling out about $60 per used book, if we were lucky enough to find them.

Re:Wow.

[timeOday]

The government is planning on using taxpayer revenue that it forces citizens to give them to create a competitor to the phone company. Thats not exactly free market economics.

If the citizens don't want the service, they can elect different people who will comply to their will. Which is more than you can say for a telephone monopoly - outside of government control (which you oppose), monopolies are completely unaccountable.

Re:Wow.

[Chop]

I will keep that in mind, Vonage is not an option here as they do not offer numbers in the 865 area code and according to their website will not transfer my number.

Chop

Re:Wow.

[pHatidic]

You only think it's really bad because you are thinking of it as them canceling a donation. In reality it was a bribe to get the contract to begin with, so really it should be thought of more as a mutual bribe cancelation. That's right, the city of NoLo is just as much at fault here people.

Re:Wow.

[SnarfQuest]

Or look at the phone bill.

Re:Wow.

[joeyspqr]

That sounds to me like the definition of what government is supposed to do: provide essential services with a focus on maximising service, not profit.

not in this country (USoA) - in this country the function of gov't is to provide the opportunity for private monoplies to reap obscene profits while saddling future generations with a poisoned environment and bankrupt economy

and yes, i am a pinko bleeding heart liberal

Re:Wow.

[danaris]

So am I, and I was giving what the government is really supposed to do, not what the corporations (and, by extension, the current administration) believe government is supposed to do.

On the latter, though, you're absolutely right.

Dan Aris

Re:Wow.

[phylus]

I have BellSouth and my local exchange uses "200" to read back the ANI number.

Re:Wow.

[dsanfte]

Most students don't live in dorms. Dormitory life may be fine when you're 18; it's not so great when you're 25, married, and have a kid.

Re:Wow.

[FooAtWFU]

Well, $60 a month for a semester of four months, say? September October November December? That's $240, and I got my books for about $240 this semester- I had an English course with one anthology and assorted random volumes, two computer computer science courses (with fairly expensive books), an art course, and some stupid waste-of-time 'health' course with a paperback textbook. I got many of the books used (bookstore-used, not off-a-random-student used, but still not New).

Of course, having more expensive books hardly leaves you more money to spend on cell phones...

Re:Wow.

[siriuskase]

Now that is petty. Who's running Bellsouth, teenage girls?

Re:Wow.

[ImaLamer]

That sounds to me like the definition of what government is supposed to do: provide essential services with a focus on maximising service, not profit.

Actually, that is what "corporations" are supposed to do. At one time they were given a charter by the state (on a state-to-state basis) to provide a service for minimal (if any) profit. As time progressed this changed, it was ruled that corporations have the rights of the individual and that focusing on anything *but* profit is illegal.

Gone are the days that a corporation lived and died by its ability to provide a service to the public. Microsoft can't live and die after they've done their service, these charters have no shelf life.

If I was the U.S. Government (which I kinda am), I'd revoke the Bell South corporate charter.

Re:Wow.

[Bob Uhl]

Oh, get a grip--why on earth would they fund someone who's competing with them? That makes no sense whatsoever.

Re:Wow.

[Morgalyn]

When I was a student in Gainesville, FL, I needed to get a landline for a little while. By ordering from BellSouth via phone (which is funny to me, to order a phone line by phone, I had to use a payphone!), and regularly insisting I didn't even want long distance access, just 911 and local dialing, not regional, not state, not national, just local, I ended up getting a rate of.. $11/month! There was about another 2-3$ in taxes and fees, though.

Since then (like 4 years ago?) I've switched to cellphone only, although I think the price reaming is worse in cellphones than with other utilities. Mostly I switched over for the portability aspect, and the lack of sales calls.

Re:Wow.

[Trillan]

Well, it is certainly more "assholish" for lack of a better term. But I don't think either is more evil than the other -- the reality is that there's a need, and in both cases it isn't being met.

Re:Wow.

[siriuskase]

You have to price out the whole package, you can't have VOIP without broadband, BellSouth doesn't allow DSL (from anyone) unless you also have their landline. So in BellSouth land, you gotta have a landline anyway, unless you go to the cable company for everything and they are even more expensive.

Now, if the dorm has wifi or wired ethernet in the room for free, that makes the decision a lot simpler. If you need to use the phone away from the room, get cell, otherwise landline is fine, unless cell has free long distance that you need. Cell wins out most of the time unless your internet depends on landline.

Re:Wow.

[siriuskase]

Ugh, my folks used to have them for landline with DSL until they moved closer to town. Their DSL was slower than my dialup. Now they have BellSouth DSL and thinks it's great. But, I think that says more about Alltel than Bell.

Re:Wow.

[dswan69]

It is rather pathetic. Did he run crying to his mommy about the bad children in New Orleans?

Re:Wow.

[gatzke]

"That sounds to me like the definition of what government is supposed to do: provide essential services with a focus on maximising service, not profit."

If you are US citizen, you need to go review your trusty copy of the constitution.

Government run monopoly is not what the US is about.

Defend us from all threats, foreign and domestic is the number one job.

Re:Wow.

[nwbvt]

Not even close. You are under a legal contract with your employer. There was no such contract here.

Re:Wow.

[nwbvt]

"If the citizens don't want the service, they can elect different people who will comply to their will."

Not unless the voting population of your state consists solely of yourself.

"Which is more than you can say for a telephone monopoly - outside of government control (which you oppose), monopolies are completely unaccountable."

Except for of course cell phones, digital phones, cable, etc.

Re:Wow.

[nwbvt]

"New Orleans didn't have the money to totally bankroll a project like this before the storm, and they certainly don't have it now. This whole project is being made possible because of donations."

Do you have a source for this? Aside from the fact that the charitable donations were made to rebuild the city's basic infrastructure as opposed to new luxury services, I believe New Orleans was thinking about this move before the storm. If they wanted to fund it using charity money all along, that would have to mean they knew about the storm.

"The phone companies, and most of the other privately owned utilities have basically functioned as government sponsored monopolies for decades."

Not anymore. You now have plenty of alternatives available.

Re:Wow.

[atrizzah]

I go to Iowa State, and I was wondering if you all from Spencer are aware of how badly Mediacom slandered your municipal telecom system throughout the rest of the state. Everyone who has Mediacom cable had the pleasure of watching commercials EVERY single commercial break about what a disaster Spencer's telecom initiative was. Interesting to hear that you're enjoying it...

Re:Wow.

[dgatwood]

Even with this latest cheap shot, they're still a good deal better than SBC....

:-)

Re:Wow.

[sjames]

merely that they would have to "continue to work through issues regarding the building" after the city decided to create a monopoly (that gets its income from forced taxation) to compete with BellSouth's services. Thats a bit different from strangling puppies in front of orphans.

Indeed, it is different. However, it's not terribly ethical. Frankly it sounds like a payoff to me and could be interpreted as illegal except that their careful wording limits the ability to prove it. It IS fairly clear that they want to trade a damaged building to the city in exchange for the city not doing what's best for the residents (who vote and pay taxes).

Perhaps the city council should inform BellSouth that the damaged building needs a 'safety inspection' and if they own it when condemmned, they will have to pay for demolition.

Re:Wow.

[nwbvt]

"Frankly it sounds like a payoff to me and could be interpreted as illegal except that their careful wording limits the ability to prove it."

Are you implying that it is illegal for someone to disagree with a policy that the government implements? Or for someone to be less that fully cooperative in the giving of donations to someone they are angry at? Besides, cities enact policies all the time in attempts to please businesses, in fact that was the justification for the free Wi-fi in the first place.

"It IS fairly clear that they want to trade a damaged building to the city in exchange for the city not doing what's best for the residents (who vote and pay taxes)."

What's best for the residents of New Orleans? Are you kidding me? I think most residents would greatly prefer that money and those resources to be spent in other areas, such as the construction of a decent set of levies, rebuilding basic infrastructure, and the hiring of a police force that won't go AWOL the moment disaster hits. Not drowning, having a place to live, and protection against criminals is going to be much higher priorities than the ability to surf the net outside while drinking a mocha latte. Please don't kid yourself, this is not a policy designed to help the poor homeless residents of New Orleans. It is a policy whose stated purpose (this is no unfounded conspiracy theory) is to attract new businesses to the city.

"Perhaps the city council should inform BellSouth that the damaged building needs a 'safety inspection' and if they own it when condemmned, they will have to pay for demolition."

You are not the first I've seen to suggest this. Please think about what it is you are suggestion. Do you really want the government to threaten fines against companies and/or individuals unless they "donate" their private resources to the government?

Re:Wow.

[rsadelle]

2-1-1 is becoming a human services referral number.

Re:Wow.

[sjames]

Are you implying that it is illegal for someone to disagree with a policy that the government implements? Or for someone to be less that fully cooperative in the giving of donations to someone they are angry at? Besides, cities enact policies all the time in attempts to please businesses, in fact that was the justification for the free Wi-fi in the first place.

I'm implying nothing of the sort. What I'm stating outright is that a 'gift' to a government body with clear strings attached is actually what we call a payoff, not a gift.

What's best for the residents of New Orleans?

Yes, exactly. I am well aware of the intent to attract businesses to the city by providing wireless. Given that part of the problem they have was a very high unemployment rate, and that post Katrina some percentage of businesses will relocate or just fold, I can at least see how the city can reason this to be in the residents best interest. Frankly, the cost of a wireless rollout isn't that high. It can potentially help to close the 'digital divide' as well. There is some controversy over the importance of the digital divide, and even more over the question of the poor getting the hardware needed to use the wireless access, but overall they're probably better off with rather than without.

You are not the first I've seen to suggest this. Please think about what it is you are suggestion. Do you really want the government to threaten fines against companies and/or individuals unless they "donate" their private resources to the government?

I did not mean for that suggestion to be taken seriously. For one, it would be illegal. It is analogous to the proposition BellSouth is offering the city once you strip away all of the "now, I'm not saying nothing but...". In fact, if the city DID do that, I would consider it to be about as outrageous as I find BellSouth's actions.

Re:Wow.

[walstib]

Living in Atlanta myself, I have to agree with you 110% Thank god for Vonage! As for cell companies here, Verizon is the worst of the worst for service and coverage.

Re:Wow.

[Mr_Perl]

Thanks for the reply.

Spencer has put a heavy dose of fear into Mediacom and the commercial cable industry which has become used to monopolies. We didn't force them out, we just made them compete and competition is good for you know who.

It's no surprise that they have been trying to convince lawmakers to outlaw municipal utilities getting into communications.

Be sure to let your state/fed reps know how you feel about their anticompetitive actions!

Re:Wow.

[jc42]

OK, guys; enough bashing Sony. It's time to bash M$.

My suggestion: Microsoft would donate the building regardless. But when the police tried to move in, they'd be hit with a huge bill, because MS had only donated the physical building. The police didn't have a license to use the building. That would cost them an extra $1 million per year.

Upgrades to the building or its services would be an extra charge.

OK; it's your turn ...

Re:Wow.

[LWATCDR]

Wow Bellsouth you are not going to like this...
Makes me wonder if Google+Vontage might offer New Orleans a new Phone system based on VOIP as a giant test system. Could cost Bell South one heck of a lot more than the free WiFI did.
I really don't understand why Bell South is getting so bent over free wifi. Even if there was free wifi where I live I would want a DSL of Fiber connection.

Re:Wow.

[petermgreen]

if you have one offer you are less likely to go looking for another one and so if the first offer gets rescinded are likely to have to do without for longer.

Re:Wow.

[petermgreen]

are your (presumablly american) lecturers and libraries really shitty or is it something to do with the nature of computing degrees?

i'm an electronic systems engineering student at a major university in the uk and i haven't bought a single textbook since i started. The lecture slides (which are both handed out and availible on the intranet) provide plenty sufficiant information to cover the course content and if i really need a book for some reason (such as a different perspective) the library is perfectly adequate.

do you americans really have profs that require you to buy a specific book just to get through the course?!

Re:Wow.

[Trillan]

That is true. Good point.

So what am I missing?

[Pichu0102]

Are they being jackasses and withdrawing their offer because they're not being used for the wifi or because they think if they city can afford wifi they can afford to buy the building from them? Either way, this is a seriously stupid PR move.

Re:So what am I missing?

[man_of_mr_e]

My guess is that they're upset because it means nobody will have any reason to purchase their DSL services, ISDN, and a LOT of lost revenue from phone service where people go to vonage.

Re:So what am I missing?

[srleffler]

No, they are being jackasses because they are deadly afraid of municipalities implementing their own city-wide wireless internet. Other municipalities have tried to do this, and it scares the phone and cable companies silly, because if this is implemented nobody will need to pay them for internet access. Worse, with VOIP nobody may need to pay for phone service either. Municipal wireless internet equals an entire municipal market lost to the telecomm companies. They do not want this effort in New Orleans to succeed.

Re:So what am I missing?

[fireboy1919]

Another thought is that as soon as it really takes hold in a major US city and it works, city planners the nation over will take note.

And it'll happen again. And again, and again, and again until we don't need cellphone companies, cable companies, or telephone companies. So far it hasn't worked on a massive scale - mostly because it was too much cost for too few to benefit. Its the biggest threat to these companies that there is.

Still, such a violent self-preserving always disturbs me. It's why I work at a small company myself. Too many people all working together mean that there's going to be power at the top. And if power doesn't corrupt, it certainly attacts the corrupted like a moth to flame.

Re:So what am I missing?

[the_bahua]

I don't know, I think I'd prefer to get my internet access from a company that has a vested interest in providing a service for money, as opposed to a governmental body whose only motivation for uptime and happy users is ... what? I don't know.

Government control of internet access? the terrible possibilities resound in my head: censorship, digital rights, privacy, and reprisal. If government controls the internet access, what happens to people who are delinquent on their property taxes? Have outstanding parking tickets? Have a late library book? Whatever mistakes I may make, I don't think my line into the world should be on the chopping block, as a means of coercion. I'd prefer to confine my internet access to an organization whose job it is to provide it, not one whose job it might become to withold it, or use it against me.

Re:So what am I missing?

[Silver Gryphon]

Guatemala did the same thing back in '95. I looked into starting the country's first ISP. The government-owned phone company had an uplink to the internet, and refused to even give me 56k. Not a price issue, just refused -- the phone company would lose revenue from the $2/min voice calls because of email, and I'd be cutting into their email-only service that charged by the KB. I think AT&T/Sprint/etc went through the same pains in the early 90s, but they seem to be doing just fine now.

For years the government fought all the demands by businesses to set up ISPs, and eventually caved a few years ago. Now somebody went in and set up cable, DSL, wireless, the works. Now VoIP to/from there is free, so they dropped the international voice rate to near-USA rates.

P.S. You haven't lived until you've dialed your internet uplink internationally by modem on a pulse-dial origin system with a calling card only supporting touch-tone. After 2 full minutes of pulse dialing, you welcome that pittance of a 4800 baud connection and kill the first person to pick up a handset.

If it were tone you could just do something like
ATDT 0018002255288,,,,,1234567890,,8011234567,,,,,
But since it's pulse, you had to pick up a handset in the middle and dial the calling card # and destination by hand or use advanced Hayes AT-command scripting.

Re:So what am I missing?

[SilverspurG]

Did you have another phone with pulse capability other than the modem?

Re:So what am I missing?

[horza]

Another thought is that as soon as it really takes hold in a major US city and it works, city planners the nation over will take note.

By which time Verizon et al will have legislation against such municipal services in place on the books everywhere, much like Philadelphia.

Phillip.

Re:So what am I missing?

[bhtooefr]

Four letters: ATDP.

That would have taken a LITTLE longer, but no picking up phones, as your modem would have been in pulse mode the whole time.

Re:So what am I missing?

[Anonymous Coward]

> I don't know, I think I'd prefer to get my internet access from a company that has a vested interest in providing a service for money, as opposed to a governmental body whose only motivation for uptime and happy users is ... what? I don't know.

1. My local power utility is owned by the municipality and costs 21% less per kWh, has a better infrastructure, and is more reliable than the privitized utilities surrounding it.
2. There are very few people who are happy with the service that the Bells provide despite the fact that they have a vested interest in providing a service for money.

> Government control of internet access? the terrible possibilities resound in my head: censorship, digital rights, privacy, and reprisal.

Who do you think invented the Internet?

> If government controls the internet access, what happens to people who are delinquent on their property taxes?

The same thing that happens to customers of any other municipal utility who are delinquent- nothing. Ideally, ISP service would be run as an independent governing board, much like a utility.

> Have outstanding parking tickets? Have a late library book?

Or you could pay your parking tickets and return your library books. Did you know that if you stop paying, BellSouth will stop providing internet access?

Regardless, if it's run as a utility, it's independent of the library and parking enforcement.

> Whatever mistakes I may make, I don't think my line into the world should be on the chopping block, as a means of coercion.

Is this a problem? Muni utilities don't cut power, water, phone service, etc. Did you know that the government can garnish your wages? That's greater coercion than Internet access.

> I'd prefer to confine my internet access to an organization whose job it is to provide it, not one whose job it might become to withold it, or use it against me.

Let me know when you find this organization. I'm a free-market kind of guy, but I recognize that there are times when unregulated enterprise does not provide optimal solutions.

Re:So what am I missing?

[Sockatume]

Ah, so that's who Neo's talking to at the end of The Matrix.

Re:So what am I missing?

[flyinwhitey]

It's funny how "offer" always turns into "control" in the minds of nuts like you.

The governemnt doesn't take your library card if you fail to pay your property taxes, so what exactly makes you think they'll take your internet access?

More importantly, if they do, businesses will be there to pick it up.

Stop making up stupid objections with no basis in reality.

Re:So what am I missing?

[NoData]

Government control of internet access? the terrible possibilities resound in my head: censorship, digital rights, privacy, and reprisal.

Uhmmm...you do realize that until 1991 internet access WAS exclusively governmentally controlled and limited? It was called NSFNET at the time, and a lot of people actually think it was a lot freer place back then (and in the few years of web emergence that followed).

It all depends on which government body is controlling the internet, and, more importantly, who's controlling the government at the time.

Re:So what am I missing?

[Duhavid]

Like, maybe, BellSouth? :-)

Re:So what am I missing?

[Cally]

And it'll happen again. And again, and again, and again until we don't need cellphone companies, cable companies, or telephone companies.

Oh yeah, and who's going to backhaul all those bits up to the nearest IX - the packet pixies?

Now we know just how much Bellsouth cares

[Omnifarious]

Which is basically, nada. It was all about what they could get out of it (good PR in this case). And as soon as it looked like New Orleans was going to do something that would make it harder for them to profit, poof goes the offer.

Re:Now we know just how much Bellsouth cares

[eobanb]

Jerks. I hope they get bought by AT&T.

Wait, no! No!

Surprised?

[P2PDaemon]

Should we be surprised? It sure seems like a lot of big companies are having irrational knee-jerk reactions to a lot of things lately... I can see why they wouldn't be happy, but to "angrily" rescind a charitable offer to a pretty beaten up city that needs anything it can get? Sounds like a bad PR event for BellSouth.

Re:Surprised?

[catwh0re]

This is the sort of thing governments remember. So when it comes to a random trial in the future, don't expect bell-south to be coming up aces.

Re:Surprised?

[Urusai]

Well, you'd think that the first 4 years of Dubya would have been bad PR for his second term...personally, I blame NASCAR.

Re:Surprised?

[releppes]

Or to have the recipiant of a charitable offer turn around and spit in the face of their doners....not that I support BellSouth in any way....just pointing out that people are stupid on both sides of the fence.

Re:Surprised?

[catwh0re]

While I agree to the point you make here. A free wifi network does compete with BellSouths business model. However two points need to be made.

1.) First the wifi network is another charity gift to the people of Louisiana, so they can get back on their feet, and wouldn't be doing too much damage to BellSouths bottom line anyway.
2.) Secondly once the network was established they were looking for a company to take over control of it, now because of BellSouths donation they were pretty much guaranteed that they were going to get this network to add to their own. (Probably even be allowed to introduce charges, or as a minimum offer pay-for premium services over this network.)

Instead BellSouth chucked a tanty, because they aren't happy that they may lose out on a few bucks between now and the point that they do the hand over.

In response to Katrina

[ookabooka]

The article states that the Internet service is in response to hurricane Katrina, in an attempt to help speed recovery efforts. I can understand why BellSouth would be upset about this, being a taxpayer funded competition, but taking back your offer of a building to help rebuild the local law enforcement of a destroyed city. . . thats just a dick thing to do, shame on you BellSouth.

Re:In response to Katrina

[releppes]

It's ironic really. BellSouth donates to the crooked law enforcement that pillages their own city. Then the city pisses on BellSouth by cutting into their profits. So BellSouth takes a logical course of action and the nation gets in an uproar. Give me a break.

Re:In response to Katrina

[enjo13]

"I can understand why BellSouth would be upset about this, being a taxpayer funded competition"

This statement just screams of irony.. after all Bellsouth owes its very existence to taxpayer funding and many years of legalized monopoly. They just bit the very hand that made them in the first place. First deregulation (in many areas anyways) and now this. Poor Bellsouth.

Re:That was a mistake...

[connorbd]

Spite for the sake of profit -- what do you expect from a business culture that rewards borderline sociopaths?

Why is this surprising?

[Stickerboy]

It's not like Louisiana has a sterling reputation for honesty and integrity in political dealings. I bet BellSouth was offering the building for "free" in the first place for some sort of inside deal in service or reconstruction.

Then the city government starts talking about taking away the local broadband market, and you betcha that building suddenly has "issues needing to be worked through". Wink wink.

Re:That was a mistake...

[Omnifarious]

There are plenty of reasons for them to be upset, but to express it that way is completely wrong.

I have mixed feelings about city-wide wifi projects. But, I definitely think wifi should be available everywhere for free. Mostly because I can't see any other way it's workable.

Right now, in order to get wifi in the various places I go, I'd have to have about 4 or 5 $30/mo accounts with various providers. That's completely ridiciulous and wrong. I can't use two providers at once. I shouldn't have to pay both of them.

But I can't see of a better way to work things unless you just hand it out for free.

/me kicks Bell-South square in the junk

[redthefed]

They pulled a donation because New Orleans is trying to rebuild it's shattered infrastructure? Asinine.

Re:/me kicks Bell-South square in the junk

[akhomerun]

bellsouth doesn't have the luxury of having any junk.

they donated theirs to their customers.

That's Crappy

[MHZmaster]

Wait, correct me if I'm wrong, but it sounds like not only was Bellsouth planning to donate a damaged building to the city, but now they're rescinding their offer.

That's just crappy. Really.

Why do other countries have 25 mbit connections with cable for $20 a month and in the US we can't give a 512 kbit line for free while the city is a complete mess. And they can't provide more than 128 kbit after the city gets back to normal.
Not that anyone could use the wifi very much without power anyway, but thats another story.

Re:That's Crappy

[paulproteus]

Why do other countries have 25 mbit connections with cable for $20 a month and in the US we can't give a 512 kbit line for free while the city is a complete mess.

Other countries have faster connections for cheaper because they have competitive marketplaces, and their companies don't get away with insulting the citizens of a damaged city.

In other words, they have governments that look out for the interests of citizens rather than the interests of corporations.

Re:That's Crappy

[tajgenie]

The United States is probably the country farthest from communism in this day and age, and internet in other countries is highly subsidized by thier governments. Now yeah, theres no competition in the telecommunications market in america, and yeah thats a communist ideal, and yeah thats a big reason why our cable/internet/phone service sucks. But also consider that competition is replaced in other countries by big government paychecks, which the companies won't get if they don't do what the goverment tells them to (which is to give high high speed internet). Keep that in mind.

Re:That's Crappy

[WindBourne]

While the gov. in other countries do subsidize some of it, how is this better than creating gov. backed monopolies?

I have no issue with short-term monopolies to help a company get started, but once in place, the monoploy should be dropped. Consider that in my area, Qwest has the monopoly on twisted pair for telephony. In addition, Comcast has the cable market with TV. Comcast is now competing with the old Phone service as well as the new VOIP stuff. But nobody else is allowed into this market place. That is, we have 2 companies who are offering "incentives" in various ways to officials(some legal, some illegal, most on the border). Finally, they are allowed to charge as high as they want ($45/month for .5M DSL ??? Only in a monopoly).

The current admin is now allowing the providers to limit their compitition on the lines. That is, they get a monopoly not only on the line, but shortly on the services that can be offered.

So all in all, we are not better off and are being screwed because the FCC and local officials seems to want to keep the monopolies going, in spite of saying that they want competition.

Re:That's Crappy

[deimtee]

Not many things in life are free, true.
But the price of things can be much more than those things are worth.
You never get more than you pay for, but it is quite easy to get less.
What does it actually cost to run a wi-fi network? How much of what BS would charge is pure profit? If a community decides to run their own wi-fi as a non-profit (ie. at cost) why is that wrong if they can do it for less than BS charges?

Re:That's Crappy

[loraksus]

Wait, correct me if I'm wrong,
You're not, it is crappy.

but it sounds like not only was Bellsouth planning to donate a damaged building to the city,
Correct, they have a damaged building that they have no desire to fix and most likely "exchanged" it for a tax write off or similar future consideration.
The value of that consideration will, of course, far exceed the cost of building a new building. Perhaps the city would agree to re-pave all the streets that BS will rip up when laying new lines, etc, etc.

but now they're rescinding their offer.
Well, sort of. They are still going to "give" the building to the city, get their tax break or whatnot, not going have to pay to fix the building, but have still received insurance money and are now hoping to kill a potential competitor by "giving the building" away.
Again.
-ish.

I'm guessing they just wanted to move out of the area since office space won't be worth a damn in NOLA for the next few months (the whole power and comm wires soaked and "a lot of our employees are elsewhere" thing)
Then, once the rest of the building is done (in a year or two - and assuming that they actually want a building there, it will probably be much cheaper for them to move the jobs to a small city elsewhere (where they will get a tax break for "bringing jobs into the community" or something similar)), they will be able to hire construction workers for cheap because of the surplus of workers. If they do decide to build a building in nola, they will probably get another 10 year-ish tax break for "bringing jobs back" to the area.
Oh, and in the old building, guess who provides the datacomm and phone services? Of course, the rates will have to go up (and not come down) as a result of Katrina.

If you think the execs behind this aren't walking around giggling madly about how badly they are milking the city, be more cynical.

Re:That's Crappy

[JesseMcDonald]

The main objection that the telcos seem to have about municipal Wi-Fi projects is that the city pays for them out of the city's taxes, part of which come from the telcos themselves. In other words, the city government has the potential to force their own competition to help put themselves out of business by financing the development of the Wi-Fi infrastructure. It's not an intractable problem, but it is a fairly serious one. If the Wi-Fi network was developed by a private organization (for-profit or non-profit) without any assistance from city taxes the telcos would have no grounds on which to complain about unfair competition.

Of course, the telcos received huge tax-driven subsidies themselves when they started out, so perhaps the system isn't as unfair as they would like everyone to believe...

Re:That's Crappy

[jandrese]

I'm not sure about that. It seems like half of the time those super high speed services are run by the government monopoly and can afford to do that because they're subsidized. In small countries it seems like privitized telcos with competition are the exception rather than the norm.

Re:That's Crappy

[Tharian]

But even then, you're not being allowed to make full use of the capitalist society when big businesses use their clout to prevent other companies from being able to offer (similar) goods at (better or lower) prices.

Instead, it's the government that is already selling out by being bought off by those same big businesses to enact legislation that helps prevent any sort of improvement that might (big emphasis on might) cause them (big business) harm because they choose to not innovate.

Re:That's Crappy

[Darby]

The United States is probably the country farthest from communism in this day and age,

Sure, but you are aware that what you just said makes a pretty damn good definition of Fascism aren't you?
Seriously, Fascism was invented for the express purpose of being as far away from communism as possible.

We fought a big war a while ago against that very thing, now we have people bragging about how we're exactly that.
Truly frightening.

Re:That's Crappy

[tajgenie]

I don't want to start a gigantic politics war (yeah like it doesn't already exist) but facism is no different than communism. Whoever came up with this dual definition was an idiot. Both forms are formed from the same roots - trends towards government control. They aren't opposite extremes. Conservatism is called conservatism for a reason - because it wants the least government control possible, as opposed to liberalism, which is trying to control every aspect of people's lives.

Re:That's Crappy

[Darby]

I don't want to start a gigantic politics war

Then maybe you should actually learn something about the subject before spouting off on it?

but facism is no different than communism.

It most certainly is different. There are many similarities, and many of the negative effects are similar, but they are fundamentally different.

Whoever came up with this dual definition was an idiot. Both forms are formed from the same roots - trends towards government control.

Conservatism is called conservatism for a reason - because it wants the least government control possible, as opposed to liberalism, which is trying to control every aspect of people's lives.

No, they were not an idiot. There are fundamental differences between the Left and the Right. The fact that you can spout this shows that you know nothing at all about the subject, yet you still feel the need to spout it.

You are right that both the Left and the Right want big government control.
Your statement that conservatism is called that for a reason is one of the most backwardsass Orwellian things I have ever heard.

Conservatism is right wing, Socialism and Communism are Left wing. Do you even know what they are right or left of?!?

That's right. Liberalism.

Liberalism is the philosophy that all people are created equal and the individual is the important element of a society. Individual liberty is the hallmark of Liberalism.

The Left is defined by agreeing with Liberalism in that all people are created equal but believing further that the power of the state should be used to enforce that. Is that clear, "Comrade"?

The Right is defined by disagreeing with the fundamental tenent of Liberalism that all people are created equal further, they believe that the power of the state should be used to *prevent* equality. That is why the party on the Right is *always* the party of the wealthy elite.

So conservatives, who believe in using the power of the government to ban people from getting married becasue they don't like who those people are. They believe in using the power of the state to promote the wealthy elite at the expense of the general populace. They believe in using the power of the state to prevent people from being allowed to see or hear anything "dirty". Seriously dude, you're spouting utter crap which doesn't stand up to a single second of thought.

Now, the term "Liberal" has been under attack by both the Left and the Right in America for a long time since they are both in favor of big oppressive government.
Of course, there really is no Left in this country.
What we have are a moderately right wing party which has a number of Left-Fascists in it as well (the Democrats) and an extremist right wing party (the Republicans).

Seriously dude, if you don't even understand the basics of political systems don't spout nonsense. Certainly don't say you don't want to start a politics war when you're spouting nonsense that 5 minutes of research would have clued you in on.

Jumping to conclusions?

[mdobossy]

I'm not one to side with a "greedy" corperation, but this seems like a knee-jerk typical "stir the pot" title to me.

Half way down the article, an actual source (Jeff Battcher) from Bell South is quoted as saying that they are suprised that the city officials would claim this, as they are still working out the terms of the building, and that the offer is still on the table.

On the other hand, the article claims that "city officials", no specific source, claims that Bell South is withdrawing the offer. Seems kind of fishy to me. As usual, the truth is probably somewhere in the middle.

Re:Jumping to conclusions?

[ksheff]

he committed a Slashdot sin: reading the article before posting about it.

Re:Jumping to conclusions?

[Flashbck]

I'm from New Orleans and Bill Oliver used to be my neighbor. I knew this man for a few years and I do not believe that he would do such a thing. This is probably a case where the "city officials" are bending the truth a bit. Hell, I remember when I was in high school, I accudentally hit Mr. Oliver's car when I was in a rush to get to school. I knocked on his door to tell him about it and he just laughed it off and made some joke about how he had a dent there that he wanted to fix anyway. This supposed angry rescission of the offer is probably a case of Mr. Oliver telling the "city officials" that the building is not ready to be occupied yet and is being spun into something completely different to help int he acceptance of city-wide free WiFi.

I for one hope that the WiFi stays. I'll still pay for my Cox Communications cable modem for the faster speeds at home, but it would be nice to bring my laptop to the park and be able to get an internet connection there.

Re:Jumping to conclusions?

[WhyCause]

I live in New Orleans (yes, right now!), so let me tell about how "the offer is still on the table," and hwo it'll all play out.

1. NOLA announces the free WiFi.
2. BellSouth exec gets pissed, and calls up the homeland security guy in NOLA and says, "if you do that, you can't have the building."
3. NOLA officials 'leak' the story to the national press, and the story goes out.
4. Low level exec gets called by a reporter and says, "well, I don't know why they're saying that."
5. Fracas goes on for a few days/weeks with sniping back and forth.
6. BellSouth says to NOLA "don't fight the law and you can have the building*"
7. BellSouth and NOLA 'reach an agreement'
8. Everybody's smilin' again

* New Orleans had been planning to set up a WiFi network before the storm, with funding issues slowing down the rollout. They also had planned on fighting the state law that limited municipal broadband to 128kb/s (that law was bought after Lafayette, LA started installing fiber to the curb). With the donation of all the wireless equipment, and the continued state of emergency freeing the city from a lot of regulatory hurdles, out comes the intarwebs.

Re:Jumping to conclusions?

[Moofie]

"The offer is still on the table" means that if NO cancels their plan, they can still use the building. (I'm sure that the building is just about worthless to BellSouth, and they're trying to get PR mileage out of this. Nothing wrong with that per se, but it's not like they're passing out hookers n' blow here.) Just because BellSouth wishes to appear sympathetic doesn't mean you should let them snow you.

Re:Jumping to conclusions?

[PartyArtie]

Maybe Bill Oliver is still upset that Biff Loman stole his pen?

quid pro quo

[Petrox]

Maybe the NOLA Police should also withdraw their civil protection of Bell South HQ in the city.

Re:quid pro quo

[EmagGeek]

Well, this would clearly be illegal, but what would NOT be illegal would be stringent enforcement of building codes and city laws on BellSouth. After all, I am sure that a damaged building violates any number of zoning, building safety, environmental, and other protections, maybe even to the tune of $1M per day...

that's nothing..

[Anonymous Coward]

I saw Duane Ackerman (CEO of BellSouth) kicking a kitten last week.

Re:that's nothing..

[blueadept1]

Then, the kitten flew through the air at a couple hundred miles per hour, smoked an orphan in the head, who dropped his flaming moe, shattered on the ground and lit the dry grass alight. The fire spread rapidly to the local homeless shelter which burned to the ground in minutes. An electrical fire in the building sent a surge to the high voltage lines outside which carried to the local hospital, whose outside transformers exploded, catching the hospital on fire.

Oh yeah, that.

Re:that's nothing..

[nathanh]

That's nothing. Last week I saw Duane Ackerman (CEO of BellSouth) punch a baby in the face.

To be fair, the baby was being a dick.

And the problem is?

[HexaByte]

Let me get this straight: A company donates a damaged building that may cost millions to repair to be the headquarters of the most corrupt police department in the US, and then renigs when told that the city has plans to gut their DSL monopoly with free Wi-Fi?

Is that the story?

Seem to me that everyone wins.

The city isn't stuck pay to rehab a wrecked building, the cops, lacking a HQ, wouldn't be as efficient at coluding to be corrupt, a monopoly gets shafted, then outs themselves as greedy bastards, and the citizens get free WiFi!

What's the downside here?

Re:And the problem is?

[osobear]

The city isn't stuck pay to rehab a wrecked building, the cops, lacking a HQ, wouldn't be as efficient at coluding to be corrupt, a monopoly gets shafted, then outs themselves as greedy bastards, and the citizens get free WiFi!

What's the downside here?

Shit, that's cynical!

Re:Typical Republicans.

[mdobossy]

Why, because anyone who does anything remotely bad, is a republican..

Re:Money

[buysse]

Most of the cost of deploying something like city-wide wifi is infrastructure -- you need to lay physical wires (glass, usually) to a large number of locations and build a box to put the hardware in, along with supplying power to that box and making it weatherproof (and tamperproof, to a reasonable degree). A Cisco AP is pocket change by comparison to those costs.

The thing about New Orleans is that they're basically starting from scratch in large parts of the city. They have to lay out new power and communications lines through large areas, and the incremental cost of an additional few strands of glass is nothing. They have to rebuild all of the traffic lights, street lights, etc. The real incremental cost of adding the infrastructure for the city-wide wifi is insignificant, and the other work needs to be done.

It has the benefit of getting people (and businesses) to come back. People that live there pay taxes. People that don't live there don't, at least not to the city. The city needs the tax base. I'm betting that someone pulled some numbers out of their arse, threw it in a spreadsheet, and showed a net fiscal gain for the city to install free wireless. Hell, they might even be right.

The key here is that it's nowhere near as expensive to install something like this for New Orleans as it would be for an undamaged city, perversely enough... just because of how much rebuilding will need to be done anyway. Best to rebuild it right.

Can't they afford a new building for police hq?

[Anonymous Coward]

they can afford a city-wide wi-fi but they can't afford a new building for police hq?

Re:That was a mistake...

[mctk]

Nothing more, nothing less. "Even the shooting of your father was business, not personal, Sonny!"

Re:MOD THE TROLL DOWN!!!

[ZachPruckowski]

Wow, did I just see the guy saying "Mod the troll down" get nailed faster than the actual troll? That's always worth a laugh.

"Yes, I know the "MOD THE TROLL DOWN!" thing is a crapflood, but still.

Haven't they learned from their corporate brethren

[numLocked]

This has 'backfire' written all over it.

BellSouth has been known to suck.

[Max Threshold]

You don't have much choice if you live in the Dirty South. Sure, the law requires they lease their lines to competitors... but if you try to get service from a competitor, BellSouth does everything they can to delay and interfere with it. A buddy of mine worked for a DSL provider in Atlanta, and they were run out of business because it literally took months to get BellSouth to do whatever they had to do to get a customer set up.

BellSouth also loves to heap questionable charges on your bill. They charge $80 to transfer your number if you move, even though it takes all of five minutes and is done without the operator getting out of her chair.

When I moved from Atlanta, I canceled my BellSouth service. Three years later I got calls from debt collectors demanding payment for several months of service after I canceled it. I basically told them to fuck off, and never heard from them again. If they try to garnish my wages, I swear to God, I'll fly a jet into the BellSouth tower...

Re:BellSouth has been known to suck.

[JourneyExpertApe]

Yeah, totally. I heard they use baby seal fat in their printers. So, like, everytime you get a bill from them, it took, like three baby seals to print it. And this one time, they cancelled this one guy's service because he tried to download Linux. I shit you not.

Re:BellSouth has been known to suck.

[jsse]

If they try to garnish my wages, I swear to God, I'll fly a jet into the BellSouth tower...

No wonder BellSouth has that many damnaged buildings ready to donate.

Re:BellSouth has been known to suck.

[eh2o]

I swear to God, I'll fly a jet into the BellSouth tower...

Ahem. Might want to post AC next time... ;)

Re:BellSouth has been known to suck.

[deep44]

... but if you try to get service from a competitor, BellSouth does everything they can to delay and interfere with it.

I don't agree with what BellSouth is doing; in fact, I dislike BellSouth a great deal. However, your statements are completely out of line- unless of course, you have some sort of proof. You've stated that BellSouth purposely delays and interferes with CLECs - now, aside from your friend's perception of his dealings with BellSouth, do you have any hard facts to back your claim?

I don't doubt that your friend experienced delays, but I don't believe those delays were at all malicious. I'm not sure if you've ever worked at a company as large as BellSouth, but orchestrated neglegence like that can't just happen without around 10,000 employees knowing about it. Then, as soon as somebody gets pissed off and quits, or better yet - is fired - guess who they go talk to? The media.

BellSouth is a poor excuse for a corporation, but trust me.. they couldn't pull that off (and keep it a secret) even if they wanted to.

Re:BellSouth has been known to suck.

[woolio]

When I was a BellSouth customer, I did not have any need of long-distance services...

Because I did not select a carrier, they actually charged me a FEE for NOT using a carrier!!!!

Charged if you do, charged if you don't...

Even the basic tax rules of the IRS are a bit more sensible...

Re:BellSouth has been known to suck.

[Yartrebo]

Baby Bells have been doing this ever since they were 'forced' to open their local lines to competitors. For a baby bell to transfer you over speedily and efficiently is the exception rather than the rule.

We all know that the mainstream press is extremely selective in what it covers, and it's not even like this is breaking news. Common sense says that they will act like this.

And it doesn't require the active knowledge and participation of the staff. Upper management can implement it themselves by assigning far too few staff to the "transfer business to our competitors" division.

Given the clear motive and the track record and considering that slashdot is not a criminal court, I put the burden of proof on Bell South to prove that they're innocent.

Re:BellSouth has been known to suck.

[TheQuantumShift]

Seems to be the norm. Qwest does the same thing. I actually broke into hysterical laughter when I called them to ask if they were serious.
They claimed it was a fee to "block" LD on the line.
I said, "Ok, I don't want a block."
Response?
"So which LD package would you like to sign up for?"
"None"
"So, that'll be a block then"
"..."
Just another reason I have a cell and cable internet...

Re:BellSouth has been known to suck.

[Belial6]

I've never used BellSouth, but I call BS on the going to the media. There comes a point where corruption becomes so blatent that everybody already knows about it. At that point the media doesn't care. E.G. RIAA, MS, MPAA, SBC, Sprint.

The media doesn't do investigations. They report at best. That means that when a megacorp specifically sets up their system to "accidently" cause problems, the media will not report it.

Re:BellSouth has been known to suck.

[aussie_a]

Baby Bells have been doing this ever since they were 'forced' to open their local lines to competitors.

So there should be plenty of evidence to support the claim then.

We all know that the mainstream press is extremely selective in what it covers, and it's not even like this is breaking news.

Of course. When you post up complaints against companies like this, unless you offer proof your post is meaningless. I can make a post claiming to be an ex-employee of BellSouth and say how completely wrong, or completely right the poster was. But it's completely pointless to do so. And completely false.

While unsupported allegations against a company might be fun to read, they don't really add anything meaningful to the conversation.

Re:BellSouth has been known to suck.

[Honig the Apothecary]

It is not a secret at all. Ask any lineman you see sitting at box by the road with a laptop; they do not respond as quickly to request that are on circuits serviced by competitors. I have seen it time and time again in dealing with Bellsouth in the last 10 years. I've had a service request for an Frame that required a "reset" of a card in a street-side box. The 1st time it was a Bellsouth circuit; took them literally 2 hours to get out, reset it, and have it back up. The 2nd time the parent company had switched the provider to a CLEC and for the EXACT SAME PROBLEM/RESOLUTION took 3 days. The lineman confirmed that it was the same problem it was 2 months earlier. Same lineman, same location, different service provider.

Their system can and most likely does prioritize Bellsouth circuits higher than ITC/Deltacom, Sprint, MCI, or whatever other telecom you can think of. The how is easy. The why is obvious.

Re:BellSouth has been known to suck.

[deep44]

Uhh, they're not proven guilty.. which makes them innocent. That's how it works, remember?

Oh, and you obviously don't realize how many layers of management fall between the "staff" and "upper management". Not to mention the fact that the "staff" in this case would be union workers, and if they feel that work is being held back, they file a grievance against BellSouth.

Trust me, it's not as easy as you think it is. Unless you've worked with a baby-bell first-hand, you couldn't possibly understand how grossly inefficient they are (which is actually funny - they're so good at it, you mistake it for malice).

Re:BellSouth has been known to suck.

[Silver Gryphon]

BellSouth does have some bad practices. Whether by choice or by negligence, they lost my business for as long as I have a choice. I made two calls to Guatemala in March, and found they had charged $3.00 per minute for those calls, totalling $108. I disputed the charge in April, because they never informed me that the rate had gone up from 35 cents. They did offer the $4/month "international plan" which had that 35 cent rate.

The next six bills came with the amount listed as in dispute, interest still accruing. Then I got a disconnect call (no paper notice) saying I was past due and they would cut off service unless I "made arrangements" right then. I repeated the dispute and they said they'd get back to me. I decided to give Vonage a try because they refused to delay the disconnect. In the next 3 months, BellSouth never got back to me, still charged interest on the $108 plus the $65/month for their "value plan" with the same features I'm getting with Vonage for $15. Vonage proved to be flawless, so I cancelled BellSouth. I have since gotten about 15 calls from BellSouth offering to switch me back. I get such joy out of telling the telemarketer why I switched and that even a $100 check won't get me to give up the $15/mo rate I get. They recognize the name and say, "yes, they're one of our biggest competitors."

It took them almost 3 months to release the number to Vonage. They wasted time when it was to my advantage, but when they want money, they're right on it. I spent an additional $400 on "we'll get back to you."

I can't claim malicious intent, but I know from 17 years of business experience -- corporate management sets priorities, and they don't usually set customers as number one. When a company gets to be a virtual monopoly, they stop trying hard to keep their customers. I've seen it first hand -- coworkers will say, "The customer won't want to go through the trouble of switching, so let them wait." Sometimes the 3 months to switch is better than a year of being blown off.

What the industry can do is make it easy enough to switch and then BellSouth will once again be motivated to keep its customers in a gentler grip. I think that's happening more now with VoIP competition.

Re:BellSouth has been known to suck.

[DigiShaman]

Ah ha!!! So THAT'S why Osama Bin Laden ordered two jets to ram the WTC. He wanted to take out the communication spires at the top of them. Someone must have screwed him on the international telco bill to piss him off that badly. :P

Re:BellSouth has been known to suck.

[SilverspurG]

but orchestrated neglegence like that can't just happen without around 10,000 employees knowing about it.

They may know about it but they don't know what it is. Take any task and divide it into its components. Then separate the authority for each of those components into a different department. Then surround each different department with paperwork which they use to charge for their hours or verify a work order. Then make the intersystem storage and communication of this paperwork a real PITA. 10000 workers see it as business as usual. On any given day you'll probably hear an employee of BellSouth (or any other company) swear something similar to,"This is the absolutely stupidest way to get this done. Why do they make us do this?"

So yes. Orchestrated negligence is used as a business tactic all the time. Anyone on the inside who manages to figure it out is sternly instructed to get back to work, maybe even cited for insubordination.

Re:BellSouth has been known to suck.

[burner]

No wonder BellSouth has that many damnaged buildings ready to donate.

Interesting typo.

Re:BellSouth has been known to suck.

[Max Threshold]

Nah, the FBI already has a file on me three feet thick. They've been reading my email for no particular reason since 2000 or earlier, and they know that if I were going to do something, I wouldn't talk about it, before or after. I just like to throw them a bone now and then... Are you reading this, Agent Summerville? I still have your business card. No, I still don't have anything to tell you.

Re:BellSouth has been known to suck.

[RawGutts]

Amen to living in the Dirty South Home of the BellShit heads. I know this is off topic a bit, but I gotta tell everyone about this. Let me give you the setup of my house before all this started. I am what is called ITP here in Atlanta. That means your inside the perimeter and can basicly toss a rock in any direction to hit a bellshit building. I have 1 line DSL for my personal use and 1 line for business. So I was running two DSL lines to the house. Now I decided to drop the personal DSL to get Dedicated DSL Line that does not need Dial Tone to run from Covad in my house because they offered a really nice deal, alot cheaper than the BellShits. I was like why the hell not; I know that I am close to not just one but two CO's and can get DSL. So I order the line and covad is sending me updates on the progress and told me the line tested at 10,600 feet. Covad set up a tech to come out to the house to run the lines in the house because Bellshits don't go in the house and what not. So the Covad tech gets there and tests the loop, all of a sudden the line is testing at 22,900 feet. I just start screaming at this point. I'm like how the FUCK did almost 2 miles get added on to this damn Loop? He was baffled and I knew what the hell was going on the Bellshits were playing god damn games. Well the Covad guy said that I could reorder the line again and see what happens. Well a little light went off and I thought lets just see when I order BellShits DSL on this new line they claimed was 22,900 feet. Sure enough the BellShits said they could have me on DSL on that line in the same damn day and the loop was around 10000 feet!!! I was like really? it's 10k huh on the line you told covad that was 22,900 feet? They didn't answer me. So I called Covad back and called for a setup again, the same thing happend over again! I did this two more times just to see what the Bellshits would do and just like clockwork they magiclly made the distance grow! So that is cold hard facts, covad has it documented and I do as well. What good will it do? Not a god damn thing because we live in the Dirty South! Hopefully one day some company will have the balls to go WiMax or something in Atlanta and 6+ million people in Atlanta can all at once tell the BellShits where shove it...

Re:BellSouth has been known to suck.

[DeltaHat]

Any sufficiently advanced incompetence is indistinguishable from malice.

Re:BellSouth has been known to suck.

[dattaway]

the following is a rant:

How about 6 hours worth of cell phone bills to BellSouth just to acknowledge THEY have a problem on their end of the line. Is my bill enough documentation they are screwing me? I found a better way of getting relief...

I didn't mind BellSouth's tactics after that. I talked to a few people who had to deal with BellSouth for years and found out how to really cost them for wasting my time. We learned how to escalate the problem to the highest levels and complain to the right people. Enough of the runaround. Their customer service people are scripted into a land of chronic dysfunction. They spent a week running new underground cable just after I cancelled my service. They will likely never recover those costs, but that's the price they pay for organizing their monster of a company to be so unfriendly.

Re:BellSouth has been known to suck.

[friedmud]

So this isn't "Hard" evidence (is there ever such a thing on slashdot?)... but my Mother worked for a competing local telco (McLeodUSA) that was trying to take business away from SBC. She worked in the department responsible for physically making the switch from a customers old service over to McLeod whenever they signed up....

From talking to her it would take anywhere from 3 to 4 weeks on the smaller end of the spectrum to several months to get people switched. And then, after the switch the customer's service would "magically" switch back to SBC... in fact McLeod had a whole set of people dedicated to watching out for SBC switching people back without notice.... that sounds pretty shady to me.

With SBC atleast, they have a computer system with a published API that independent phone companies are supposed to be able to talk to in order expedite the process (I think it was required by law in our area). The thing is, SBC kept changing the API. McLeod had whole teams of people who's job it was to keep on top of the changing SBC API... and frequently that wasn't enough (ie the computer system still wouldn't work a lot of the time... and then guess what... my mom would be on the phone on hold with SBC trying to get them to switch someone's phone service).

Sure this is just anecdotal evidence... but my mom did work there for something like 3 years and she is full of horror stories about dealing with local telcos. Also note that McLeod is going out of business... as with the DSL provider when people have to wait _months_ to get their service switched it looks bad for the company offering the service.... which benefits SBC... hmmm

Friedmud

Re:BellSouth has been known to suck.

[elrous0]

Nah, the FBI already has a file on me three feet thick. They've been reading my email for no particular reason since 2000 or earlier

A well-constructed tin-foil hat will stop this, you know. Just don't use some cheap store brand Spring for the Reynold's heavy duty stuff. No more FBI, no more CIA, and a significant reduction in the voices.

-Eric

Re:BellSouth has been known to suck.

[whitehatlurker]

significant reduction in the voices.

That's bogus - not only are the voices still there, they have a tendancy to echo, so it sounds like more of them. ;-)

Re:BellSouth has been known to suck.

[TheDauthi]

I've got one worse for you. Happened right before I started working for this company.

I work for a Fortune 500 company that has its major operations center in the south. At one point, we were using BellSouth to carry most of our calls. After a major acquisition, we announced that we were switching to MCI trunks (directly, instead of through BellSouth).

First, they tried to wheedle us on price, but we didn't budge, it was not the price, but the level of service we recieved from them that was why we were switching.

One morning a few weeks later, our ops center stopped recieving calls, and couldn't make outgoing ones. After a brief investigation (looking out the fricking window), there is a backhoe across the street digging.

It was Bellsouth, and they were running some telephone lines, and had "accidentally" broke our connection. One of our telephony guys called our rep at BellSouth and asked how long it would be untli it was back up. He was told that "repairing a broken line was not part of the transition services, and BellSouth would not be repairing the line."

Re:BellSouth has been known to suck.

[sgarringer]

I also worked for McLeod and we all knew the same thing. The thing we had to deal with is customers who would get installed the the LEC but they'd "forget" to punch down the customers line in the SDU box, they wouldn't bring the wires over from the phone company to the subscriber side.

The LEC technically didn't do cross connect / punch down services, so the subscriber would then be on their own to find a local company to do the work. But guess what, if they switched back to the LEC, the punchdown service was part of a standard install. This was Qwest, also one of the horrible bell breakup stories.

We finally wrote instructions that explained how to do the punchdown service that we'd step people through over the phone. It was a total PITA but it got the job done...

-Shawn

Re:BellSouth has been known to suck.

[bjdevil66]

If this is true and documentable (you're obviously a witness to these anticompetitive acts), why haven't the other companies done anything about it? BellSouth should pay through the nose to get their attention (does big business listen to anything else besides expensive litigation?)...

Re:BellSouth has been known to suck.

[BarryJacobsen]

Does it say something about our society if I am genuinely wondering if you're just joking or are serious?

Re:BellSouth has been known to suck.

[greed]

Properly-crinkled tinfoil will dampen the echos instead of reinforcing them.

But, for Best Results(tm), get some christmas tree flocking and spray the inside of your tinfoil hat with that. Then you'll have an anechoic tinfoil hat, and have the best of both worlds: no echos from the voices AND govenment mind-control protection.

Re:BellSouth has been known to suck.

[sik0fewl]

No, I think it says something about you :). Remember, this is slashdot.

Re:BellSouth has been known to suck.

[pclminion]

I'm not sure if you've ever worked at a company as large as BellSouth, but orchestrated neglegence like that can't just happen without around 10,000 employees knowing about it.

"Orchestrated negligence" is an oxymoron. It can't be negligence if you know you're doing it.

Besides, who gives a fuck? What sort of news story would it make -- "Company A helps itself before helping its competitors." No fucking duh. Do you think anybody is going to get worked up about that?

Re:BellSouth has been known to suck.

[BarryJacobsen]

Being slashdot, I think there's an equal chance the FBI is keeping tabs on him for something (whether or not he's done something that warrants such is another concern) or that he's being sarcastic. Another likely possibility is both. Another is the possibility that he was making a joke, but in fact is being watched by the FBI. Again, the fact that I even consider that he's not joking, does that say something about our society? (Assuming that I'm a reasonable person, which may or may not be a reasonable assumption)

Re:BellSouth has been known to suck.

[poopdeville]

No, just you.

Re:BellSouth has been known to suck.

[AgentSummerville]

I just like to throw them a bone now and then... Are you reading this, Agent Summerville?

Go ahead, Max -- laugh it up. But someday .. someday, I'll get you, dammit!@

Re:BellSouth has been known to suck.

[Max Threshold]

Yeah, I'm serious. I called Janet Reno "the domestic enemy I swore an oath to defend the Constitution against" in an email to my father, and two agents showed up at my door a couple days later. Their printout of my email only showed the text I had written, not what I'd quoted, and they asked if they could get copies of the rest of the conversation, whether I'd ever been to D.C., and whether I owned any firearms. Very strange.

Prominently displayed on my bookshelf were Bruce Schneier's crypto book, Che Guevara's Guerrilla Warfare, and a book by a retired Army Colonel called On Killing. Haha.

This was about two months before they lied to Congress about Carnivore only being used to monitor the email of convicts and suspects. I've never been involved in anything illegal... never even smoked pot. But I guess now I am an enemy of the state.

Let me be the first to say...

[the_macman]

WTF. Ok there are a few things on my mind. Perhaps I'm not fully understanding things but let me explain anyways. What the fuck is wrong with companies in America? I here stories of Verizon disabling bluetooth, ISPs fighting city-wide wireless, etc. I don't understand what companies are afraid of by progress. You guys are gonna be left in the dust by other nations that aren't so narrowly focused on money, but rather take progress as a goal. Apparently not in the USA. So BellSouth goes and pulls a stunt like this making them look like total jerks. Way to go. Can someone please explain what their motive would be for pulling a stunt like this?

Re:Let me be the first to say...

[Anonymous Coward]

Can someone please explain what their motive would be for pulling a stunt like this?

"You'll get a big building and we'll get a nice monopoly without free competition, ok?" I think it's called a bribe / corruption. That's how things work in US.

Re:Let me be the first to say...

[eh2o]

Because progress does not buy mansions and private jets. The rotten apples are on the top of the barrel.

Re:Let me be the first to say...

[TinoMNYY24]

America isn't the pro-society utopia that certain people would like you to believe it is. All entities in America follow the Adam Smith version of economics, in which every entity fights for their own economic dominance without care for the well being of others. In theory, this results in the strongest surviving to provide the best products and services to the most people. The motivation is personal wealth. This idea is so ingrained in American consciousness that it's very difficult for Americans to care about the general well being of the society as a whole. For an example, look at the state of charitable donations in America. Most donations are given to the Red Cross or WHO or other organizations who mainly focus their efforts on the Third World. America has a large amount of homeless, unemployed, orphans, etc. However they have obviously failed in their task of making themselves wealthy by being the best, so they are left out in the cold.

Now, to answer your question, no matter what, American companies care about themselves first and only. The only reason you see an American company "doing good" is in response to bleeding heart shareholders or politicians. In this scenario, the company is only doing their good deeds in order to get people off their back so they can return to squeezing their employees and customers out of every cent. In the specific case of the NO WiFi, the phone companies are not going to cooperate with any effort that removes such a large chunk of potential customers.

The communications companies are terrified of the new developments in free municipal internet. All they see is red lines on a chart, they don't see how good this could be for NO. Free internet, coupled with cheap computers and a new school district centered around internet learning would (hopefully) transform NO from a near-slum into a center for high tech learning. Even if it didn't perform to that degree, it would still help the previously underprivileged gain a foothold which they can use to make a better life for themselves, because no one here will help them.

Bad PR, but ...

[IntelliTubbie]

Of course, everyone is all for rebuilding New Orleans. How could anyone, aside from a cold-blooded sociopath, be against it? But if you discovered that the government's idea of "rebuilding" is to turn a major part of your business into a government-owned monopoly -- and not only that, but they expected you to help them with this plan -- well, I think you'd be a bit miffed, too. I know that New Orleans' stated motive for "free" (TANSTAAFL) municipal WiFi is to stimulate business, but showing a penchant for nationalizing industries isn't exactly a great way to say, "Hey, Mr. CEO, bring your business to New Orleans!"

Cheers,
IT

Re:Bad PR, but ...

[teknomage1]

What in the heck does TANSTAAFL stand for?

Re:Bad PR, but ...

[LordLucless]

I'm guessing the government wouldn't administer the WiFi themselves - there's probably a very happy telco out there somewhere looking to get a very fat contract. So while Bell South might be miffed, there's someone else who will be very happy. Of course, having a state-sponsored telco is a mite bad to free marketeers, but then, when was the last time telecommunications operated as a free market?

Re:Bad PR, but ...

[CptNerd]

There
Ain't
No
Such
Thing
As
A
Free
Lunch.

Re:Bad PR, but ...

[Turn-X Alphonse]

I'm technically against new Orleans..

Move it else where and rebuild it. Where it is now is clearly not a safe place to be (with natural disasters getting worse it seems), so lets move it to where it is safe. Start a fresh and go from there. If you really wanted you could be a corrupt dick out for money and keep the old one there, turn it into a huge tourist trap (come see the ruins of new Orleans! Who knows what still dweels in these deserted streets!?) and get rich as hell for it.

I really see no need to rebuild it exactly where it is, if it's not safe then it's just silly to do so infact.

Re:Bad PR, but ...

[flyinwhitey]

"How could anyone, aside from a cold-blooded sociopath, be against it?"

I'm against it. Perhaps I'm a cold blooded sociopath, but at least I'm not an stupid enough to advocate RE-building a city in an area which is GUARANTEED to flood catastrophically again.

So, since I'm a sociopath, what is someone who idiotically ignores good sense, in an misguided effort to rebuild a lost city in one of the worst possible locations imaginable?

That would be YOU.

Re:Bad PR, but ...

[Peyna]

Everyone knows it's TINSTAAFL not TANSTAAFL. Or is it "Ain't" if you're from New Orleans?

Re:Bad PR, but ...

[CptNerd]

Actually, it's "Ain't" if you're on the Moon (a Harsh Mistress, as we all know), or if you're a computer geek:

TANSTAAFL:
http://catb.org/~esr/jargon/html/T/TANSTAAFL.html
http://jargon.net/jargonfile/t/TANSTAAFL.html
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Tanstaafl

Re:Bad PR, but ...

[Money for Nothin']

  Of course, everyone is all for rebuilding New Orleans. How could anyone, aside from a cold-blooded sociopath, be against it?

Because, uh, the city is 7 feet below sea-level? Or because it's hugely-expensive? Or because demand to live in New Orleans is now lower than it was pre-Katrina?

There are plenty of reasons not to rebuild New Orleans (at least, not to its pre-Katrina levels).

Sums it up

[teasea]

After all, what's the point of a charitable act without a solid profit motive?

Bell$outh

[rodgster]

I've been a customer of Bell$outh, $BC and a few others.

It is my opinion that Bell$outh is actually worse than $BC, which is hard to believe.

I try my darnest to Not do business with either one of them (home & work). I actually prefer to pay more from a different provider just to incite competition and avoid those clowns.

There is No innovation from these Bozos. Missed the boat on VOIP. I mean look at Verizon they're working on fiber to the curb. Any how long are we going to have to pay a surchare for touch tone service? What a joke and rip-off.

I hate their support (1st level outsource). Here's a little secret when calling either one of these guys, if you select that it is a new install for DSLs (even though it is not) you always get US based personnel. T's, Frames, etc are not outsourced in my experience. But last time I had a Frame problem, it took hours to find anyone who even knew what Frame Relay was at $BC (actually I never did find anyone at $BC, pathetic).

Hate to say it, but I long for the day when both of these companies are out of business.

Re:Bell$outh

[ehrichweiss]

"Any how long are we going to have to pay a surchare for touch tone service? What a joke and rip-off."

Don't. Use pulse instead, it will actually cost them more for you to use it. Seriously. They'll reform that quickly enough.

Re:Bell$outh

[linuxhansl]

I have a related story. I was using SBC DSL for a while. For some reason in my neighborhood (right in the center of the city) they could only deliver 120kbit (out of the minimum 384kbit advertised), when I ask to reduce by bill accordingly they said "Take it or leave it".
What could I do? I needed the service so I paid the full price. There were other issues where they tried to force me to do an assisted install of the DSL modem so that they can collect the installation fee, and they would refuse to give me basic information to setup my own DSL modem (that I got from SBC in my previous appartment).

The same week my cable provider finally enabled internet service I cancelled my SBC DSL and told them to shuff it up their a**es (man that felt good). Not that cable is necessarily better (in my neighborhood it happens to be), but I take anything over SBC DSL.

Re:Bell$outh

[osobear]

Why are you u$ing a dollar $ign for the letter "s" in company name$? I$ it more $la$hdot-like? I$ it more bad-a$$, a$ it in$ult$ the companie$ them$elve$?

Re:Bell$outh

[rodgster]

It is to indicate the these companies are only interested in $$$$$$$.

I always filled out my checks to Bell$outh & $BC. And I was amused my this "personal joke" that the banks did't have a problem cashing them. Sorry if you didn't/don't get it. Currently I don't give any of these asshats even $0.01, but many of the companies I work for still do, despite my suggestions to get services elsewhere.

Hope that helps.

Re:Bell$outh

[BushCheney08]

Hate to say it, but I long for the day when both of these companies are out of business.

Don't worry. There are rumors that both will be devoured by an up-and-comer called AT&T. Once that happens, everything will be much better...

Re:Bell$outh

[div_2n]

Any [idea] how long are we going to have to pay a surchare for touch tone service? What a joke and rip-off.

Up to and until one or more of the following happens:

1) The US Government takes control of all infrastructure and leases access to private companies.

2) US Regulations force Bellsouth and other ILECs to play nice with competitors. Despite what anyone here thinks, they don't have to and they take advantage of that fact. Bellsouth charges more per DSL port for a competitor just to get access to (under new contracts) than they charge for home service. Kind of hard to compete like that.

3) Someone shells out buckets of cash to reinvent their infrastructure to every town along the way, runs copper to each home and sells service at a competitive rate. That should read never.

Re:Bell$outh

[elasticwings]

Bellsouth is just awful. I moved from one location to another and put in a change of address. They moved my service but sent my bill to the old address. I don't know why, but for some reason, I thought that when I told them I was moving that they would be smart enough to send the bill to the address that they were providing the service to. I finally got around to putting in a forward at the post office for something else I needed. Then I got the two months late bill with a bunch of extra charges. Of course, I called and said that I was ready to pay my bill off and drop my service. So they send me a 100$ check to keep me from dropping. A couple of weeks later, my service stops working. I call and complain figuring they probably shut off the service even though I paid the bill off and everything. They tell me everything is fine in the system and try to send a truck out to my house. I pretty much cancelled right then. I switched to cable and have been doing fine since. I do have my qualms with Comcast, but they are a hell of a lot better than my other option for highspeed internet.

Re:Bell$outh

[Hektor_Troy]

W££, why don't w u$ currncy $ymbo£$ for vrything thn?

Re:Bell$outh

[TyfStar]

Since when does a monopoly become a better thing?!?! if they are devoured by AT&T, you just simply won't have a choice to switch to another providor when they are pissing you off...

Re:Bell$outh

[legojenn]

Because the Euro symbol does not show up.

Re:Bell$outh

[denelson83]

What, no Euro $¥mbo£$?

Re:Bell$outh

[BushCheney08]

Please tell me you're just being a troll. If not, I suggest you go read up a little on the histories of the companies mentioned in the prior post. Maybe, just maybe, you'll understand why my post was modded 'funny'.

Re:Bell$outh

[thesandtiger]

It is to indicate the these companies are only interested in $$$$$$$.

My god, man, you've blown the case wide open! Extra! Extra! Read all about it: FOR-PROFIT CORPORATION ONLY INTERESTED IN PROFIT! Your keen insight and penetrating analysis of this situation will doubtless earn you a special place in history.

I always filled out my checks to Bell$outh & $BC. And I was amused my this "personal joke" that the banks did't have a problem cashing them. Sorry if you didn't/don't get it.

Not only are you an ace journalistic style type of investigator, but you're a brilliant satirist as well! I don't even know why you wasted your time apologizing to some guy who *clearly* is too stupid to get the vastly amusing joke, but I sure am glad you took the time to explain it!

Well, I'm sure you have much more important things to do than dilly-dally around on /., but before you go, what would happen if you replaced the "C" in "SBC" as well? That'd show those money grubbing bastards! DOLLARS *and* CENTS! Get it? It might take awhile, because the humor is so deep, but it'll come to you, I am sure.

STICK IT TO THE MAN! WOO! WOO!

Re:Bell$outh

[glassjaw rocks]

Guess what, Companies ARE ONLY INTERESTED IN YOUR MONEY. Business people don't have meetings to try and decide what will make their customers happier at the end of the day, they have meetings to find out how to get more of the customers money. If any company says they don't do this, they're lying. Google is the only exception (for now).

Re:Bell$outh

[cokane2]

you are correct--according to my calculations it is 37% more insulting to use the "$" for s. I mean a company that seeks profits? What the fuck is wrong with them?

Re:Bell$outh

[sjames]

Tell me about it! A few YEARS ago, they dug up every lawn in the neighborhood to put new lines in. They did not take that opportunity to upgrade anything, just a one for one replacement. The new sounds no better than the old did. However, in the process, they replaced the buried line from the street to the back of my house. In spite of many requests (polite and not so), they have yet to bury the new line including the extra 20 feet or so they coiled up and left in the grass. If I didn't need the line for work, I'd run it over with the lawnmower every week, but...

You wouldn't think it would be so hard to get phone service right given the century of collective experiance.

Re:Bell$outh

[InsaneGeek]

Why do you think this doesn't currently apply to google? Google is no exception, they are allways looking for ways to get more money. Just because they have some misguided "geek love" of google being able to basically walk on water, it doesn't change anything.

Re:Bell$outh

[glassjaw rocks]

I have my own conspiracy theories about google, I just think they think of the customer's money just as much as the customer.

*goes back to playing chess*

Bribe

[gremlins]

I guess Terry Ebbert doesn't know how to take a bribe!?!?!

Re:Haven't they learned from their corporate breth

[Punboy]

Really? Wow, so does my jeep o.O

tis the season..

[headlessspider]

and that, ladies and gents, is the spirit of giving... [comment written sarcastically, of course]

Fascinating

[galdosdi]

All I can say is this is really amazing. It's the rare incident like this that for just a single moment really throws all the PR BS down and bares open the very core of the soul of a corporation for all to see, what they're really about, and what really motivates them into doing and not doing the things they do and don't do.

Re:That was a mistake... And perhaps ineffective

[David Hume]

It was not only a mistake from the viewpoint of PR. Bellsouth's withdrawal of its donation may not be legally ineffective. It may still be on the hook to donate the building if the City of New Orleans reasonably and detrimentally relied on Bellsouth's promise. The key concept is promissory estoppel. Promissory estoppel can be used to enforce a charitable gift when the charity (or in this case, the city) relied upon it. One classic example is:

An example of promissory estoppel is where a foreign student declares that she is unable to return to college because she is unable to raise enough money to cover all the costs especially with textbooks costing so much and I agree to provide her with the necessary textbooks if she returns. When she returns, I cannot back off on my gift since she has relied upon it to return. In this case promissory estoppel substitutes for consideration and we have a binding contract.

It would be interesting if BellSouth reaped all of the bad publicity caused by withdrawing its offer, only to have to donate the building anyway.

Re: Scared for nothing.

[Anonymous Coward]

This is ridiculous. What do they feel threatened by? Sure, citywide wi-fi might cause the loss of some customers, but it could have gained them many more. Does BellSouth have any idea what happened when coffee shops with free wi-fi started popping up in my neighborhood? I ordered DSL! After I had a taste of broadband, I realized I wasn't going to sit in a coffee shop all day long but and I no longer wanted to be limited by dialup in my own home any more so I decided to pay for it. Because it is unlikely a free wi-fi network's quality of service will match the quality of service of my own line running into my home. BellSouth could have used the citywide free wi-fi as a "gateway drug" to selling their own broadband service, but it looks like they just blew the opportunity. Boneheads.

They are probably really afraid

[CupBeEmpty]

That the government can offer a better service for free... with the kind of service I have gotten out of US telco's I can see why they can't sell their product. No one complains that we don't have private roads. Maybe internet service needs to be free. It is certainly becoming necessary to normal cultural development. So what happens is the government provides basic access and if you want faster then you pay. That will certainly put pressure on the market to fix the current state of insanity that is US internet services.

Re:They are probably really afraid

[16K Ram Pack]

The problem with government supplying is like what you get with UK healthcare, though. You pay regardless, and so if you then opt for private healthcare, you have to pay again. It doesn't give the people running the service much incentive to improve.

Where businesses have a massive investment, and to create a competitor would take too long, regulation is a better option. OFTEL did a lot of good things, like forcing cellphone operators to do number transfers, and the DSL market is extremely competitive right now.

Re:They are probably really afraid

[jqstm]

Maybe internet service needs to be free

There is persistent confusion that government services are free. Of course somebody has to pay for them in the form of taxes.

They are probably really afraid That the government can offer a better service for free

I think they would be more concerned that it is free(i.e. funded through coercion) than that it is better.

Re:That was a mistake...

[rpdillon]

Good points.

I'd say that we should jump off the same way we did with cell phones: basically only have one provider, and have roaming charges. What ends up happening is that you get the provider that supplies your city/area, and when you travel, you pay a little extra.

Later, after the infrastructure is in place, the companies will get competitive (as happened with cell phones) and start to drop the roaming charges and you end up basically having the equilvalent of a single, nationwide provider (sort of like we have now will cell - does anyone pay "roaming" anymore?)

I don't know if this would work, but I'd love to see ubiquitous wi-fi, even if it cost me a little extra.

bell south sucks

[kaufmanmoore]

I'm in bellsouth territory and its the worst run of toe "baby" bells. Its DSL is twice the price of verizon and sbc. They aren't planning on any sort of fiber to the home or to the curb program. They aren't really moving very fast on Wimax either. I'm jelous of those places that have phone companies with fiber and are getting faster speeds and better offerings due to competition.

Re:bell south sucks

[erikharrison]

BellSouth does have a fiber to the home program. It's mostly secret, but they're moving everyone over to a BBG backend which they think will help them support the number of customers that their fiber plan is going to generate. (It won't, their BroadBand Gateway system is so awful it's redonkulous, and if you know a major BLS technician, he'll admit to you it's so, and likely to be so for years).

Lots of customers are already on fiber to the curb, especially in Florida. It's speed capped at the NOC in software for competition reasons, and it costs the same as DSL currently, but they want everyone on fiber to the home in a few years.

Most of this is stuff you only know if you put 2 and 2 together, but it's obviously their plan.

Evil?

[Z34107]

Consider events from the viewpoint of the corporation you just maligned. Fairly or not, BellSouth offered a damaged building and in return, the government launched a taxpayer-funded program directly competing with BellSouth. In simpler terms, BellSouth was stabbed in the back. Given the action of the government, BellSouth's reaction is, although not exactly nice, is at least understandable on some level.

Withdrawing the property was indeed petty. And as for "coldest, worst thing" a company has ever done, surely that's hyperbole. Japanese corporations used American POWs as slave labor during World War II. Whether they were justified in any way, shape, or form or not is irrelevant - slave labor is worse than calling "backsies." on a ruined piece of real estate that could be taken with eminent domain anyways.

As for "M$ is the spawn of evil" - do you truly believe that when you have a hotmail address? Besides, whether Microsoft is "evil" or not is irrelevant - they had nothing to do with BellSouth recinding their offer. Come to think of it, neither did Sony, nor their rootkit. Unless you are implying that all corporations are evil - which is something else entirely.

Re:Evil?

[1u3hr]

Consider events from the viewpoint of the corporation you just maligned. Fairly or not, BellSouth offered a damaged building and in return, the government launched a taxpayer-funded program directly competing with BellSouth

It wasn't "in return", there was no linkage. If the only reason BS was offering their building (which was apparently damaged and useless to them anyway) was in expectation of preferential treatment, well screw them. It was a disaster, you don't offer aid and withdraw it if you don't get the kickback you expected. Well, you can but don't expect to get away without looking like a jerk.

Payback's a bitch

[Buran]

So how long before the city declares the building blighted and takes it anyway via eminent domain?

Hey...

[threedognit3]

Nothing personal, it's just business.

Re:Money

[rewinn]

You're "right on the money." When you have to put in basic infrastructure, either because it was destroyed or because it never existed, why limit yourself to the old ways of doing things?

We can compare rebuilding New Orleans to building infrastructure in the "developing world"; e.g. free wireless is an incredible force multiplier. How much would a small business give not to have to worry about web connectivity? My guess is: a lot!

Re:BellSouth

[Coming soon!]

Despite the longings of some, this isn't a socialist nation and the (hopefully) vast majority of us don't wish to see it become one. Federal and State governments shoud not compete with/undermine private industry. Internet access is not a right nor is it a utility or a necessity. The State has no interest in provisioning the service. and should be dissuaded from doing so.

Don't Burn Bridges

[serutan]

Whether this story is 100% accurate or not, it raises an important point for anybody in business. Do Not Burn Bridges. The guy you just called an asshole on the phone might be in a position to do you an important favor six months from now. Or not. Everybody has feelings, and some people have long memories and will delight in punishing or rewarding you for some little thing from the past.

If the New Orleans city planners are thinking of setting up free WiFi, they certainly aren't going to change their minds and go begging Bell South to please let them use that building. If anything it will just make the city officials less inclined to listen to the offers [cough-bribes-cough] Bell South is probably right now trying to think up to convince them to rethink the thing.

Come again on that one?

[MichaelSmith]

Any how long are we going to have to pay a surchare for touch tone service?

You have to pay for DTMF?

And I thought Telstra was bad. They do some crappy things but not this.

Re:Come again on that one?

[digitalchinky]

If you only knew the half of what Telstra actually does. One tiny irritating example of the many thousands: CCITT 7 and SMS - usually this signal takes up a 64kbps timeslot on the same trunk as your call, has to exist for GSM to function, yet still they hit you up for 25 cents per SMS for a feature that would exist and function regardless. Meh, it's all GREED.

Country Australia where dial up is still common, instead of giving everyone their 4kHz of analogue, they digitise it, give it some ADPCM, then mux it all up before it even gets to the end of the street. Some people are lucky if they get 14.4kbps.

When you complain, they give the standard line that the only government mandate is to support up to v.29 (Fax G3) - so consider yourself lucky you even get that, and have a nice day.

Greedy bums. I live in Asia now. Don't have this problem any longer.

Re:Come again on that one?

[uncle2]

Brendan, Please make contact nicknoff@iinet.net.au David

Reasonable

[dysk]

I'll engage in telco hating as much as the next person, but this act is completely within Bellsouth's rights. The city has declared themselves to be in direct competition with Bellsouth's business model, and naturally they're not going to do things which'll support it.

The city is making a good decision by offering wifi service, but they also need to recognize that it'll make them some enemies.

Are you feeling lucky?

[Straker Skunk]

The downside is that their "free" WiFi will be paid for by us lucky US taxpayers.

Yeah, just like their "free" roads and "free" levees. Yay for private ownership of all public infrastructure!

Re:Are you feeling lucky?

[elpapacito]

Nope, that's bullshit.

Competition in public infrastructure ? In my country the freeway was built with public money and they still charged for its use which was OK for the majority of population who didn't drive but during season holidays.

Now the freeway exploitation and maintenance have been privatized to some very big private group and the net result so far is

1* the charges have been increased significantly expecially for frequent travelers it's becoming unbearable
2* the maintenance went downhill because no competition can be introduced ! What do you compete with, airplanes , railroads ? Nope no sir roads market isn't entered by anybody because it would require trillions of investment and nobody wants to do that when a competitior is already present
3* rich richies are becoming richer and more people then before are getting the shaft

Privatization is like God, if you just blindly believe it's better then public ownership then fuck off already, believe whatever you want but DON'T bring me down in the misery one stupidly can choose just because he heard it's good !

Re:Are you feeling lucky?

[JesseMcDonald]

An important point in your example is that the road was initially built with public funds, and only later turned over to a private group. In other words, the group that ended up administering the road probably didn't have the same level of investment in the road that a fully private venture would require. They also did not have the same need to build up trust amongst their customer base. Any private group intending to develop a transportation network would have to raise capital for the venture, capital that would be hard to raise unless they could demonstrate a workable business plan beforehand.

Mixed public/private ventures often combine the worst parts of both.

PLEASE....!

[Dr_Ish]

I live in Louisiana, though I am not originally from here. The comments about the corruption in this State are not fair. The Feds want to deny us reasonable help, on the basis of such slander. Slashdot should be able to do better. Bellsouth are not exactly the most ethical company, especially when their monopolies are challenged. I refuse to do business with them, since before the Hurricanes. They seem to be acting badly again, so boycott them. However, please do not slander Louisiana. Remember, most of the 'hurricane relief' around here has been done by regular people helping others. The Feds have been useless. In a town a bit North of where I live a shelter had 3000 people in it at one point, with no government aid whatsoever. It was entirely supported by donations by locals. In the town of Lafayette, where I live, Bellsouth is fighting the local, city owned, utility system, because it wants to lay fiber to every home. The utility will do a better and cheaper job than Bellsouth, so Bellsouth are upset. So, feel free to be mean about Bellsouth, but do not slader Louisiana, unless you know what you are talking about. We are down, but do not deserve to be kicked. Kick Bellsouth and the moron in the Whitehouse and his useless cronies instead.

Re:PLEASE....!

[Technician]

The utility will do a better and cheaper job than Bellsouth, so Bellsouth are upset.

I've noticed that many utilities will not invest in this if the incumbent has already wired the area. The utility did this because the need was there. There is no competition in an unserviced area. They may have had monopoly plans for future expansion, but unserviced areas don't wait forever.

Re:PLEASE....!

[flyinwhitey]

"The comments about the corruption in this State are not fair."

I notice you don't quesiton the accuracy though.

You're right, it's not fair that we single Louisiana out for being corrupt.

Other states are bad too, and some may even be near Louisiana in corruption.

Re:PLEASE....!

[Scudsucker]

I wonder if you'd have the same opinion if the same disaster with the same results had happened when Clinton was president.

Sore Losers

[fishyfool]

Bah, Piss on bellsouth.

Re:Touch Tone surcharge

[Technician]

Any how long are we going to have to pay a surchare for touch tone service?

I fixed that problem myself. I put a rotary dial phone in and used it. When they updated the equipment, they asked when I would upgrade to touchtone. I knew legacy support cost them. I told them when it doesn't cost more. They dropped the charge and I switched over to DTMF. (this was quite a few years ago. Call them and ask why DTMF support costs extra. Don't take the it cost's more excuse. Point out the fact rotary support after their upgrade now costs more. They would save if you dropped rotary for DTMF. Ask them how much legacy dial support costs them.

Re:Oh boy...

[Jackass Thompson]

Stop Harassing Me!

Re:That was a mistake...

[ArsenneLupin]

There are pleanty of reasons they should be upset about the city-wide free wifi.

Indeed, many people are upset about the city-wide free wifi being offered/prepared right now. They (rightfully) think that the city should have more important priorities. Like making sure that more basic services (electricity, water, ...) are available all throughout the city. Or helping its poorest citizens to rebuild. The city should not squander what little money it has left on such non-necessities as wifi.

So, canceling your donation on these news may be the reasonable thing to do ... if you do not happen to be a competitor of said wifi service!!!!

conflict with nothing

[ChipMonk]

BellSouth's push is for DSL, not WiFi. One gives you a reasonably reliable, dedicated line, while the other gives you mobility at the cost of reliability and speed. If BellSouth were actually building WiFi towers, you might have a case.

Absent a contract, BellSouth has zero right to order particular behavior from another entity. Abusing their market position like that is one of the criteria of an illegal monopoly. Micro$haft got busted for doing that to some of their OEM's.

Re:conflict with nothing

[16K Ram Pack]

The two things are in competition, in the same way that buses and cars are. Granted, the reliability may not be so good. But if it is free/very cheap, lots of people will accept it.

Re:That was a mistake... And perhaps ineffective

[woolio]

IANAL.. But I do know that Louisiana is under the "Napoleonic Code", which is slightly different than the (constitutions?) that most states follow. C'est la vie...

Not sure if this stops the "estoppel" idea or not.

Re:That was a mistake...

[buysse]

It's damned near free to build wifi once you actually rebuild the infrastructure you're talking about. More to the point, the city needs to get a tax base working again. Something like this will get people and businesses to move back to the city while having a very small marginal cost (when you lay new glass for phone service, and fix the electrical grid, the cost of adding a couple of strands of glass and a power drop to a new box on the light pole is extremely small, and it's all the infrastructure cost that's needed for wifi). IIRC, the networking hardware (routers, APs, etc.) are being donated, so the overall marginal cost of adding wifi to the city now, while rebuilding is very small. Adding it after rebuilding would be much more expensive.

Re:doesnt new orleans have bigger issues?

[Technician]

Doesnt the city of New Orleans have bigger issues right now. Seems to me that they should be worrying about rebuiding their city, instead of offering free wi-fi in the first place.

A lot of copper is corroded. All the telephone building demark points were under water. Communications is essential to rebuilding. This is very true where the building is uninhabitable. Wireless is the way to go. This is part of dealing with the rebuilding. How long do you think it would take to replace every copper junction box, flooded trunk cable to the junction boxes in the city and all the demark points on the buildings. This is a quick way to get VOIP phones and Internet to the construction trailers.

Better Be Careful Slashdot!

[kramthegram]

Or good old SB will take away the internets!

Re:BellSouth: "We now want the Wal-mart treatment"

[randyest]

Oh my, aren't you full of yourself! But please do tell us about the spanking that Walmart got?

Way to go

[mortong]

Stay classy BellSouth

wouldn't this give the city the ability to watch?

[fishyfool]

the ability to watch everything and not have a warrent?
what about when the inevitable happens and it's hacked?
free public wireless internet (fpwi) might be ok for the masses, but no business should depend on it.

Re:That was a mistake...

[Technician]

I can't use two providers at once. I shouldn't have to pay both of them.

It reminds me of the days past of the private pay phones. Everyone was going to get rich putting in their own pay phones. The reality is most cost more and provided less service. They cost even to call your calling card. They cost more than a cell phone. In short, nobody used them. They lost money because the bell's charged a monthly charge the phone owner did not regain from use. I remember trying to use one with a calling card and going no way to paying twice both localy and a calling card. I always asked for the location of a real phone.

obligatory overused joke

[Plaid Phantom]

9. ???????
10. PROFIT!!! (No, really!)

I've done some work for BellSouth...

[MrPerfekt]

the individual people on the inside are decent enough but the higher-ups and board _really_ sucks. I guess we really shouldn't be very suprised since they are after all a telephone company. I feel obligated to tell everyone that telephone companies are second to only the recording industry in their desperation to hold on to a dying business model and spite their customers at every turn because of it.

Honestly, if I were a phone company, I'd seek emotional therapy.

EVIL

[Leroy_Brown242]

Well, this really doesn't change my opinion of them much.

Re:BellSouth

[Plaid Phantom]

Federal and State governments shoud not compete with/undermine private industry.

Ah, but what about effective monopolies providing substandard services at ridiculous prices?

Foolish on Bell South's part

[WindBourne]

They are being incredibly stupid. First, these will need a backbone to support them. They could easily have won the contract. In addition, as part of that, they could then insist on 11B, rather than 11G. That means that each site gets at most 5.5 megs (just let one or two leechs on that) . Then limit how much bandwidth leaves the city for the free hook ups. With the city covered by "free wifi", it would have taken out any real compitition from WIFI providers.

At first, this network would be used for intercity comm. As time went on, more ppl would head out to the net. In addition, as ppl came back and brought their own radios, there would be interference. So if end users want any real speed, they would have to pay for it. At first, it may be a higher speed access to the Internet (priority/total bandwidth), but it may also mean a DSL line. Finally, they could have instisted that Ray do a few ads for them saying that BS helped NO get back on their feet. Now, Ray will be talking, but it will be about somebody else and negative towards BS.

Man, these monopolies know how to shoot themselves in the foot.

Re:Foolish on Bell South's part

[drcagn]

First of all, Cox, the cable provider here in New Orleans would have won the contract regardless as Nagin was a VP for Cox Communications before he was the Mayor of New Orleans. Also, whether they use 802.11b or 802.11g doesn't matter, as the access is going to be 512kbits down while the city is in a state of emergency, and when it returns to a normal state the access is going to drop to 128kbits for legal reasons. The hardware was donated to the city and is most likely 11g anyway, so why not use it?

This sort of network is crucial to the rebuilding effort because it blankets the entire city with access via a mesh network. The access points are going to be mounted on street lights, so besides providing the actual internet access to a few major crucial nodes, all the access points really need is electricity.

I don't think BellSouth has to worry too much because all they are going to lose is the dialup and low end market. 128kbits is only going to let you browse the web and check your email. Businesses can't rely on such connections for their offices, and aren't intended to. This is mainly so people working in the field can pull up things from the internet quickly with a laptop, or so workers can submit data collected in the field to their main office without having to go there physically. BellSouth will still have the business market.

Also this wifi system is only for Orleans parish, and BellSouth will still have the business of surrounding St. Bernard, Plaquemines, and especially Jefferson parishes; they will have the Northshore, too. Jefferson is larger than Orleans and at this point is more important to businesses such as BellSouth because Jefferson didn't have the major flooding that Orleans did.

Re:Foolish on Bell South's part

[Scudsucker]

and when it returns to a normal state the access is going to drop to 128kbits for legal reasons.

What legal reasons would those be?

Look at your bill closer

[Mr. Arbusto]

This isn't true. You can set yourself to be No Pic (10x1) for Long Distance. 10x1 means your calls are routed by which ever carriers equipment pics it up first, and isn't preset so they don't even guarantee you can make an LD call. The ILEC/CLEC can charge a one time Fee to change your pic, but they cannot charge you for having it set to 10x1 nor can they charge any surcharges like the National Access Fee.

What they are probably charging you for is a Toll Restriction, which is usually extremely high, that costs about 2 - 10 dollars per month. It is an optional service and you can have it removed from your bill, unless you are receiving a handful of government benefits that require a toll restriction, in which-case, you be reimbursed for it anyway.

Re:Look at your bill closer

[Carnivore]

Do you have a link that says that I don't have to pay the national access fee if I pick the "no pic" carrier? I'm paying bellsouth something like $6.50 on top of my $9/mo phone bill for access. I have no long distance carrier.

If this works out, you've saved me a a fair bit of money.

Re:Look at your bill closer

[siriuskase]

back when I was with BS, they charged me a fee for having no LD carrier. I couldn't get them to do away with the fee until I signed up with a LD carrier who didn't have a monthly minimum. But every other month BS figured out someone to overcharge me. They were always happy to remove the charge if I call customer service, but it happened too often, and the wait for person was much too long, so I switched to MCI, not exactly a saintly company either, but the bill is the same every month. MCI no longer sells in Georgia, but they didn't kick off the existing customers and they didn't raise the rates.

Re:Look at your bill closer

[Mr. Arbusto]

There is a surcharge that is capped at 6.50 called the Subscriber line charge that is assessed by pretty much every carrier. Most carriers will only reiburse the charge when compelled by goverment programs. It is assest on a per line basis and you will probably never get it off your bill, since it can be hidden behind a goverment sounding name, but isn't required collection.

A basic breakdown of typical charges and taxes can be found at the FCC.

As for the National Access Fee, that is simple. It can ONLY be assessed by your long distance carrier, if you have no carrier, there is no one that can charge it. Again, you may have some sort of toll restriction in place. Upon thinking about it further, it is possible that the Tariff for your area may allow/require (I really hate the PSC/PSU scapegoat telephone companies use) a restriction of some sort. The FCC has an okay website for explaining the charges and the layout of your bill.

Next:

[Council]

Next: Bill Oliver has been removed from his job as head of Bell South's Public Relations department.

Re:That was a mistake...

[archeopterix]

Spite for the sake of profit -- what do you expect from a business culture that rewards borderline sociopaths?

Borderline?

Re:BellSouth

[Coming soon!]

I'm no defender of monopolies and telecom companies are the bottom of the barrel in my opinion, but lets be real here. Bell South doesn't compell you to take there service and won't/can't put you in jail for refusing it. The State can and will do both. And "free" municipal wireless isn't really "free" is it? It's paid for with tax payers dollers and if a given taxpayer doesn't see the value and wants to opt out what recourse do they have? I can think many more legitimate uses for the tax reciepts of New Oreleans than compelling citizens to pay for WiFi.

Why is free wi-fi acceptable?

[RedBear]

Maybe I'm just completely "out of the loop" so to speak, but I really can't understand how all these cities can A) justify and B) afford to offer all this free wireless internet access. Being devil's advocate here, and ignoring the fact that BellSouth may be a corporation that everyone loves to hate, how is it allowable for a city government to basically destroy the market for local Internet access? I mean, aren't the people who say it's illegal government competition basically correct? It does take away any motive to pay for Internet access, right?

And how can they afford the infrastructure necessary to provide wi-fi in the first place? Honest questions here, this particular aspect of Internet history has been bewildering me for many months now. I guess I just haven't read enough about it. Anyone with a better handle on this phenomenon care to comment?

I guess the last question would be, why are they doing it? Why aren't these places just relying on the open market to provide Internet access? (Let's ignore New Orleans for the moment.) Is it just to attract businesses and people to the area? What is the main purpose of a city going through all the trouble and expense of offering free wi-fi? What is the benefit to the city as a whole? I just don't get it.

Any insights would be appreciated.

Re:Why is free wi-fi acceptable?

[WindBourne]

Actually, if BellSouth (and the other RBOCs) were smart, they would all set up free wifi. One of the bigger costs with RBOCs is the hardware. It is getting cheaper, but it is still expensive. In addition, their marketing budgets are not small potatoes. So, how would a free wifi help? First, it would let them know who uses what where. That is very expensive to determine in the real world. That means, that the RBOC could figure out where to expend the money on hardware. But it would also let them target various markets.

In 1999/2000, I tried to get USWest/Qwest to buy off on the idea of running several WiFi PTPs from a single serviced building to other line-of-sight buildings who did not have regular service. If they used that to carry internet, they could then find out which building had a market. Once that was determined, then, they could boost the equipment and market to the building customers i.e. all of this would cheaply prove the market for them.

Likewise, if Bell south simply installed the free wifi themselves they could find out where to focus their efforts on the bottlenecks, while getting all the new customers. But I doubt that they will be bright enough to do so.

Re:Why is free wi-fi acceptable?

[caudron]

how is it allowable for a city government to basically destroy the market for local Internet access?

There exists no law or convention that forbids a government from entering a previously private market. Indeed, there exists a long history of the government taking control of markets that are deemed to be signifigant infrastructure points. That's why roads and schools are government owned and operated. That's why telecoms and power companies are so stringently leashed. Frankly, I'm surprised it's taken this long for the government to start waking up to the fact that we rely HEAVILY on the Internet as an infrastructure. You can expect increasingly strong government involvement in the control and deployment of the Internet going forward. Really, I can't argue the logic. If the Internet goes black, we are all screwed at this point, just as if the power or telephone system goes black. Business relies on the Internet far too much to ignore it.

It does take away any motive to pay for Internet access, right?

It does, yes. But there will be a market for premium internet service. I mean, if the local municipal maintains a 512k up/down pipe to each home or a WiMax blanket over the city, there will still be people who are willing to pay for more bandwidth. In fact, most businesses would still HAVE to pay for higher bandwidth. A company with even a moderately consistent bandwidth usage would want and need a thicker pipe. Some home users would want it as well. For the rest, yes, they could get by just fine on the 512k they are handed for free. That will shrink the market, or more specifically, it will tier the market. I don't see that as a bad thing. There are many people now who can't afford their own food, and therefore obviously have no Internet access, yet those same families suffer generationally because without the advantage of the Internet, they are finding it increasingly difficult to academically compete with those who are online...which makes the next generation more likely to be in the same economically disadvantaged position. This helps alleviate that inequity.

how can they afford the infrastructure necessary to provide wi-fi in the first place?

Taxes. Yeah, poorer municipalities won't be able to do it for a while, but richer ones will enter quicker becuase they have a stronger tax base. Those early adopters, just as with any market, will drive the price down by economies of scale. This will allow the poorer localities to enter the market sooner. And yes, the answer no politician will give you is that it's your taxes that will pay for it. Deal. Our taxes pay for all sorts of stuff, and as the economy rises overall (this is what it does in the U.S.) we will be able to do more with less. At first, the burden will be noticable, but over time it will not. The costs will decline, the infrastructure will be in place, the system will be simplified. This is the way of progress. No big deal. Municipal Internet will seem like a pain to us the first few years as kinks are worked out and costs slowly lower, but inside a decade it will be considered blunderingly obvious that we should have done it sooner. Think of what can be done with a TRULY ubiquitous network that everyone in the U.S. can access at will from anywhere. The uses are mindblowingly numerous. This is one of those things that can be a sea change if we let it.

What is the main purpose of a city going through all the trouble and expense of offering free wi-fi? What is the benefit to the city as a whole?

There is no one reason. There are so many that the real question is why would the citizenry fight it? For a tourist town, the early adopters can tout it as a way to boost touring revenue. "Come lounge on our sandy shores and SMS your friends back home from the comfort of your beach chair" More tourists means more tax revenue means less tax bruden on the locals means WiMax pays for itself and then some early on. For a business town it means touting a way t

Re:Why is free wi-fi acceptable?

[Corbets]

While the other responders to your comment mention that there are no laws preventing a city from entering a private marketplace yada yada blah blah blah, I'd point out that there is indeed an LA state law that prohibits municipalities from setting up their own public broadband networks. As originally posted on Slashdot, anyway, New Orleans is planning on breaking that law and challenging later.

So the short version is it's not allowable.

Re:Why is free wi-fi acceptable?

[jandrese]

You know, I'd be more inclined to side with the companies if there were real companies actually deploying city wide Wi-Fi anywhere. Sure there's always someone willing to install hotspots in the airport and in coffee shops, but then there's the other 95% of the city that they never bother with. Cities are doing this because nobody else shows any interest at all until they're suing the city for interfering with the plans they didn't have.

Re:Why is free wi-fi acceptable?

[Todd Knarr]

Well, three points:

1. The city can use wi-fi access for their own purposes, eg. law-enforcement and public-safety datalinks. It's not as if wide areas of wi-fi coverage are useless to the government.
2. The public itself is looking for Internet access. It's not as if there's not a public demand for the service.
3. Companies like BellSouth are not providing the service. In most of the areas where public wi-fi's being considered or actually deployed, the telcos that oppose it have also steadfastly declined to provide Internet service themselves because it's not profitable for them to do so.

To me #3 is the clincher. Saying the government shouldn't compete with private business is one thing, but when said private business won't provide a service what justification is there for preventing the government from stepping in given both public demand and government usefulness?

Re:Why is free wi-fi acceptable?

[The Cisco Kid]

Im not sure of the case in NO, but 'all these cities' wanting to do this, are NOT subsidizing it. They are accepting bids from private companies to finance and provide the service. All the winning bidder would get is some help avoiding red tape for right-of-way, tower access, permits, etc, as well as a designation of being the 'official' provider.

Re:BellSouth

[Coming soon!]

their

Ray Nagin worked for cox communications

[chocolatetrumpet]

Ray Nagin worked for cox communications

And... just guess who got that wifi contract?

This is how the world works, folks. It may not be right...

makes perfect sense.

[eshefer]

these guys have to keep their spending to a minimum since thier revenue sources will dry up in less then five years.

hoorah!

Re:That was a mistake...

[grozzie2]

Right now, in order to get wifi in the various places I go, I'd have to have about 4 or 5 $30/mo accounts with various providers.

You are just using the wrong provider. I use the same provider all over the place, it's quite rare to not find one of thier access points, and virtually all of them are trouble free, and convenient. I suggest you stop pissing around with the wannabe attempts at global hotspot coverage (t-mobil and such), and just go with the one that's already everywhere (and free). linksys.

Re:That was a mistake... And perhaps ineffective

[Durindana]

I love this shit, I really do. IANAL either... but I am a law student in Louisiana. I think it's fun that even somewhat-informed folks think of this state as a bit of another country.

For the record: Parts of Louisiana law are indeed derived from the various French civil codes, mostly the "private" law: sales, successions, family/divorce, etc. In those areas, Louisiana is (somewhat) a "civil law" state. Other parts, notably the criminal law, are virtually identical to the systems of other, "common law" states. Yes, Louisiana does have a constitution (in English), and no, it does not mention alligators.

Now, as for the grandparent: the more modern, and more general, name for reliance-based estoppel is "detrimental reliance," which explains what's going on a little more clearly. Yes, the doctrine (probably!) would be applied in Louisiana as in other states: as the Wikipedia article points out, estoppel is a creation of courts sitting in equity, not of the common law per se.

However, in this or in any other state, a relying party generally should only recover its loss incurred by reliance, not the entire thing promised.

If the city of New Orleans spent, say, $10,000 in preparation for taking over the offered building, should the city get its $10,000 back... or should it get the entire building (presumably worth much more)? I don't know any of the details about this building deal, but simple equity tells me BellSouth shouldn't be liable for more than the city lost, if anything, in reliance on their promise.

Obligatory disclaimer: I am not a lawyer and the above is not legal advice to anyone.

Re: Scared for nothing.

[vhogemann]

They don't want you to have Free-WiFi because once you have it, you won't want to pay for it.

These companies see WiFi as another service they can charge you for, and all of those free hotspots spoils them a future revenue source.

They're scared of the future, because the communication services are getting cheaper and cheaper. You don't have to spend that much bandwidth just to do voice communication, with all those bandwidth potential being laid over the planet it will be so cheap to do voice that some company might decide they can afford to give it away, for free, just for the sake of publicity. And once one company had done it, every other will have to do the same.

Imagine a "free" cellphone network, where you just have to pay for the phone device. If whe switch over to VoIP this can be a reality... And of course if you're using a 100% digital network you just could offer free internet as well, only with a limited bandwidth.

And I picture this for countries that have a private telecommunications network, on countries where the teles are owned by the governament this can happen even sooner.

Re:That was a mistake...

[16K Ram Pack]

The other way would be for someone to create a multi-platform account. I don't have a link, but there's someone doing it in the UK.

Re:That was a mistake... And perhaps ineffective

[mobby_6kl]

Don't think this would apply. If NO demolished everything else, hoping to use this building, then maybe. But otherwise they are free to rethink their offer.

Government budget != political abuse

[karzan]

There are many, many cases of services that are answerable to and funded by a state and that are not subject to this kind of selective provision. Examples in the UK include the BBC and the NHS.

The way it works is that these services are managed not directly by politicians themselves, but by civil servants who are ultimately accountable to politicians, who are then ultimately accountable to the electorate. Because there is a public commitment that these services will be universally provided, and that no one can be excluded from them, there would be a public outcry if that were to happen, and that is why it doesn't happen. Governments work very well when the people do their job of holding governments accountable. It is mainly when people in government realise they will not be held accountable (for example, by an electorate which sees it as their 'patriotic duty' to support government policy whatever it may be) that government fails.

I imagine with wifi it would be quite easy to make a commitment not to exclude anyone. All you really have to do is allow anyone to access the network anonymously. If you're worried about government backtracking on this, well then it can be written into law which makes it harder for politicians to change, the same way the BBC charter is written into law.

What's the big deal?

[EmagGeek]

The moment the city goes live, they'll be shut down by the Federal Gov't because it is ILLEGAL for the government (federal or local) to compete with private enterprise.

Re:What's the big deal?

[Packet Pusher]

Explain why my trash, water and sewer are handled by the government then. It would be possible for a private enterprise to handle all of these.

If Bell South were actually doing anything but killing the forward progress of the Internet I'd be all for suppporting them. No reason that Bell South can't roll out faster Internet access to compete with it. Why do we still not have 100Mb or even 10Mb to the home for a reasonable price?

Re:What's the big deal?

[EmagGeek]

I couldn't tell you. My water, sewer, and trash are all run by private companies. You probably live in an area where there are no companies that are willing to take on the task of providing these services.

Just as an example, Aqua is one of the largest private water suppliers in the country, and you can bet that your trash company is not your government, but rather a private firm that has a contract with your government.

Re:What's the big deal?

[Darby]

you can bet that your trash company is not your government, but rather a private firm that has a contract with your government.

So you're saying that they socialized the costs and privatized the profits?
So the government takes our money and gives it to a for profit company guaranteeing that it will always cost us more than it costs to do it?

Yep, that's fascism.

Re:What's the big deal?

[Widowwolf]

Please show proof of this..No where does it state that

Get a grip!

[Bozovision]

Wow they offered a building; that's fantastic!

Did everyone and his dog do this? Nope, I don't think so. They may have changed their mind (but that's not even clear). Anyway, it's not something to give them a kicking about. If you attack people who are doing good things then you discourage people from helping.

Actually, attacking them is even worse because if you read the article you'll see that it's not clear-cut that they reneged on the offer. They certainly dispute the headline.

Thank you BellSouth for trying to help people who need help. We apologise for the behaviour of a minority on this site.

Yes we noticed this too

[CiXeL]

We came from los angeles and moved to miami. Their rates are pretty expensive and you're right they're pricing themselves out of business. With all the transplants moving into florida now alot of companies are going to have to deal with rising expectations as people move in from states where things are more competant. One nitpick: he called it "the dirty south", I want to see him come to miami beach and tell me its "the dirty south".

Re:Yes we noticed this too

[Doc Ruby]

Miami isn't really "the South", unless you mean "South New York". Though it's "dirty" is most of the ways the rest of Dixie is dirty, plus lots of the ways NYC is dirty, without the grime. Your sleazy BellSouth experience is an example.

Re:Yes we noticed this too

[F_Scentura]

Uh, coming from a native Miamian the "dirty south" reference is for the music and dancing, not grime :)

Re:Yes we noticed this too

[poopdeville]

Go into any club in South Beach and then tell us it isn't dirty.

Wrong, Sony has donated...

[Anonymous Coward]

... at least $500,000 for Katrina relief, and is matching employee contributions up to $1 million. I have not great love for the company, but all this demonizing gets old after awhile.

http://www.us.playstation.com/PressReleases.aspx?i d=290&print

Re:Wrong, Sony has donated...

[Trillan]

Without even seeing it, I can guarantee that building was worth more than $1.5 million. Sony hasn't backed out, but it is a lower contribution. That's not demonizing, that's reality.

Only problem with that...

[nwbvt]

Quid pro quo requires the other guy to have actually done something to you. That has not happened yet. BellSouth (despite the headline, but I'm sure you know to not trust everything you read on /., right?) has not yet withdrawn their offer to donate the building.

So what you are basically suggesting is to hold out police resources in an attempt to force a company to "voluntarily" give their private property to the state. Thats a tad bit scary of a concept. Think where it would lead. "Whats that Mr. Jones? You don't feel like giving $20 to the policeman's ball? Well thats ok. Oh, you know what? I just remembered I can't help you report that guy who just mugged you, I have to help someone else who would donate his $20. Good luck if he comes back again, maybe you can fight him off with a stick."

Still not getting it...

[RedBear]

Yeah, so hardware and infrastructure costs money. That's kind of part of my point. I'm still not understanding how it helps the communications company to give away their services for free after they paid millions for the hardware. How does "finding out who uses what and where" help them make money when your service is free? That is what companies do, after all, right? Sell a product or service to make money? Free stuff doesn't usually bring a lot of money in.

1. Give away service for free
2. ???
3. Profit! (or some other benefit, if we're talking about a city government)

Hope someone can bridge that gap for me. I'm not a total idiot, I swear, but the answer to when free turns into money isn't really popping out for me. That's why this whole concept of "free wifi" for an entire city is still baffling me a bit.

Re:Still not getting it...

[cowscows]

They'd just have to be a little more careful about how they did it than a local government would be. They'd have to make sure that the really dense areas only got a taste of it, not enough to not need to subscribe. Keep some of the people happy, so that the the ones that are complaining and motivated can't get a big enough group together to affect change. If a city feels entirely neglected in some way, it's much easier for them to take action than if just some of the people are "suffering".

There's also the whole, the first hit is free mentality. After I got some broadband use at a friend's house, you can be damn sure I would not shut up to my parents about how much we needed a faster connection. There are plenty of people who don't understand that having broadband doesn't just make your email go faster, it can really change how you're able to use the internet in more fundamental ways.

Abstracting things another way, Google gives away a hell of a lot of services for free, yet they're finding ways to make money. Their share price is still vastly overvalued, but they are making money, they're just being a little bit more imaginative with their business plans.

In New Orleans's case, the city can afford this whole thing because a lot of the equipment has been donated. Legally, I think they're justifying it easily because the city is still under a state of emergency or something. Ethically, I see no real problem with New Orleans or any other municipality doing this, because I believe that there can be a real benefit from it, both economically, and in a quality-of-life sense. Similar to roads and fire hydrants and stuff.

Re:Still not getting it...

[msdschris]

1. Give away a basic, lo-kbps, non-guaranteed QOS for everyone. Make all those who think that net access is some right happy enough.

2. Offer better packages to those who need / want better service.

3. Profit

Re:Still not getting it...

[WindBourne]

The city will almost certainly pay for the Internet connection. It does not have to be fast. In fact, you really want to keep it slow, or at least limited bandwidth (but the BL will have work-arounds in Linux and BSD). Then allow the city to use anything that they want network wise for the local area.

Plain and simple, Bell South has to determine which connections are broken, which work, and where is the most immediate needs. In addition, they really need to get a network going through the entire area as fast as possible. Determining where to repair is difficult. But if you have a wifi network, then you can monitor it and determine where all the bandwidth is being used. Now, you have an idea of where to focus your repair efforts (that is, the part of the network that is under the most strain).

Now, as to making money with this, it is simple. The more that ppl come back, the heavier the load on the wifi. In addition, it is certain that it will slow way down as ppl bring their own wifi radios for local connections. Instead of 5.5 meg total, it will quickly slow to an aggregate of 1 meg (due to the local interference) and a further slow down by others coming on-line. So what will ppl do? They will pay for the local DSL connection. Or you can sell them a private connection to the network with fast connection (i.e., higher priority with more packets allowed, rather than being aggregated with others). This is no different than give away the razor to sell the blades, but with one HUGE difference. As more citizens come back, they will load down the network and more ppl will decide to switch up.

Oh for god's sake...

[Money for Nothin']

Since when are businesses in the business of charity?

The business of business is business, not giving money away.

Re:Oh for god's sake...

[teasea]

Was that an SST? or just a regular jet?

True stupidity requires a college education.

Re:Oh for god's sake...

[Money for Nothin']

"A witty saying proves nothing." -- Voltaire

op ed piece?

[Anonymous Coward]

Another typical slashdot article. Not many facts, someone is crying at some big corporation. More flamebait.

Why don't you wait until BellSouth says this is true, instead of "We've been working for over two months on this building . . . we are a little surprised by these comments."

All it takes is a SLANT given by the POSTER on slashdot, and the mindless flaming begins.

I could have posted this article as "City worried about WiFi as many residents are still without power."

Then you could have flamed New Orleans politcal leaders.

Doesn't the slashdot community tired of flaming random corporations?

Re:op ed piece?

[The Cisco Kid]

Too bad those power engineers have no way to access their HQ's infrastructure maps from out in the field while they are trying to restore power, even from their battery (or vehicle) powered laptop. If only someone could set up some wireless Internet access...

Re:op ed piece?

[amrust]

Would it make it faster to have WiFi? Probably. But let's be honest... power crews don't absolutely need access to HQ-database maps, to set poles from a staking sheet and work order. It's done every day of the week where I live. Just issue a replace/repair work order, some RUS standards, and tell them to have at it. Many utilities have contract crews that do their primary buildouts. I'm sure New Orleans is big enough the city utility is not doing their own rebuilds, anyway.

But this "free" wireless has some strings attached, I'm sure. Who would pay the distributor of the equipment for their wireless Access Points and Subscriber Units? Who does the labor for the installs themselves? Who provides the backbone-pipe? Just because Nagin says the businesses won't have to pay for WiFi, doesn't mean everything involved is totally FREE.

Someone is paying, that's fur sure.

Re:op ed piece?

[The Cisco Kid]

My contention was that the anon OP was blasting the city for providing wireless net just because not everyone has power yet, as if they can only do one thing at a time. I'm sure that lots of rebuilding is being done simultaneously in many different areas. It just happens to take longer to deploy several square miles of new power transmission equipment than it does to stick an AP somewhere and cover the same area with wireless net. Why should those that either have power, or alternate means (battery/laptop) have to wait until everyone has power before they can have Internet?

They also seem to miss the point that wireless net may well greatly assist the rebuild of the other infrastructure (even if my original example isnt relevant).

There exists a "state of emergency"?

[way2trivial]

fricken use it anyway.. it's an ongoing emergency..

hell get FEMA to giftwrap it..

Re:There exists a "state of emergency"?

[way2trivial]

http://en.wiktionary.org/wiki/commandeer
fema does not have to reimburse....

Re:There exists a "state of emergency"?

[WhiteWolf666]

Don't forget the early supreme court decision (this year) on emminent domain.

If New Orleans decides that building can be used more efficiently for the city, they have every right to buy it at market rates.

I cannot imagine that the New Orleans real estate market is particularly hot right now.

Sounds like an "Everybody loves Raymond" episode

[iChild]

I think Bell south is in the right here. Think about this. As in the Everybody loves Raymond episode, you give money to your brother because he has hit hard times. He then promptly books a vacation to Vegas. I'd be pissed. That money was for bills to help him along until he could stand on his own.

Same situation here. Bell south gives a building because New Orleans needs help. New Orleans then announces a free wifi network for the whole city. This is not a need, will take a lot of money, and will be taking directly from Bell south's business.

Sucky.

What a childish action

[Secrity]

This sort of thing sounds like what a child would do.

Re:What a childish action

[Maelstrum]

I totally agree. I just hope this is publicized so people can see what jerks they are.

Some Reasons

[brunes69]

Maybe I'm just completely "out of the loop" so to speak, but I really can't understand how all these cities can A) justify and B) afford to offer all this free wireless internet access.

In my city at least (we have had free 802.11g WiFi over large swaths of the city for two years now, and they are constantly expanding it), it is easy to justify.

• The city installed lots of fibre in the late 90's to future infrastructure, and much of it was just lying there, dark. Why not light it up? This cost is minimal
• The cost of installing all the WAP's is offset by how much the city itself uses it. For example, the whole downtown is blanketed, so parking meter attendants can easily upload their tickets into the main system. Lots of other city employees use it for other uses as well.
• It attracts business and travellers to the area. Being able to sit at any coffee bar downtown and use free WiFi is a huge draw.

As well, the city leases out the high speed fibre ring to companies, since they can do it cheaper than the local ISPs in many situations. Last I heard, the city was very well into the black on the whole project, it is far from a money-losing thing.

Being devil's advocate here ... how is it allowable for a city government to basically destroy the market for local Internet access? I mean, aren't the people who say it's illegal government competition basically correct? It does take away any motive to pay for Internet access, right?

Wrong. No company is going to depend on public WiFi for it's internet backbone. For one, performance is suceptible to the weather, and also the number of people on the local node. As well, it is inherently not as secure as a landline (since the access is free and public, there is no WEP involved). Also, anyone who is security conscious would not use it even for their day-to-day use.

But it is great for surfing the web, or doing company business over a VPN. Personally, I love it. And since it actually *makes* the city money, thus lowering my tax burden, I love it even more.

Rebuild the wetlands, not a doomed city

[Secrity]

It is assinine to rebuild New Orleans in it's current location. It's stupid to rebild a coastal city that is already mostly below sea level, is still sinking, and has a haywired dike system. Restore the areas that did not flood and use them as tourist areas. Build parks and wetlands in the parts of the city that are under sealevel or are prone to flooding and restore the wetlands around New Orleans.

Re:That was a mistake...

[Omnifarious]

*laugh* That's what I do whenever I can. :-) I actually have a full suite of network analysis tools loaded onto my laptop for just that reason.

BellSouth BitTorrent users in a bind

[Valdrax]

In the South, it's often cheaper to just switch to 100% cellphone.

You don't have that option if you're a BitTorrent user where I live. Here are the sum and total of my alternatives to BellSouth DSL:

Cox or ComCast cable -- Welcome to the world of bandwidth caps and termination for 24/7 usage!
Earthlink DSL -- You still have to pay for phone service (at those same wonderful "competitive" rate, only now your DSL is $10-15 more expensive because BellSouth users get a discount.
Satellite -- This is NOT an option for people who actually share their torrents.
Dial-up -- This is NOT an option for people who do anything with torrents.

I'm looking right now into the costs of a UMTS cellular modem but it's looking to be too much. If Cingular doesn't do bandwidth capping, it might be the only broadband alternative for BitTorrent users (though a bit more expensive for unlimited access). Of course, I'm just waiting for Cingular to turn evil since it's the joint venture of BellSouth and SBC, the two biggest jackasses among the Baby Bells right now.

It's one thing when it's never offered...

[Svartalf]

...and a completely different animal when it's offered and then recinded for most reasons imagineable or possible.

"Well then, I guess I'll take my ball and go home now..."

Instead of figuring a way to work their business position out in the context of a legitimate offering by the government, they opt to act like spoiled brats.

My first question was...

[OneSmartFellow]

Why is New Orleans wasting money on building a WiFi infrastructure when what they really need to do is completely rebuild the sea wall to withstand a Cat 5 Hurricane.

Then I realised, why of course, this is New Orleans, they expect the Federal Govt to pay for all their important infrastructure, and they can waste their own money however they like.

Re:My first question was...

[The Cisco Kid]

You completely underestimate the immediate need for telecommunications (which can be setup fairly quickly, and cost effectively if wireless is used rather than underground copper) in order for there to be anything in New Orleans to be worth the multi-year, multi-biliion dollar effort that building better hurricane protection that they will also need (but not immediately, since afaik hurricane season is mostly over)

Zero sum game?

[jav1231]

It would seem that the solution is right before everyone's eyes on public WiFi. Why couldn't there be limited speeds on the WiFi, tempting customers to move to land-based Internet for more speed? Frankly, this is probably already the case. How fast with N.O. WiFi be anyway? Just a thought.

Re: Scared for nothing -- Indeed...

[Svartalf]

And New Orleans was also talking to turning over the service once things are largely done over to a commercial entity instead of maintaining it themselves- BellSouth just did themselves out of a possible nice broadband services offering (because I sure as hell wouldn't list them as one of the businesses slated for the taking over phase of things...).

Idiots, they're so damn greedy that they're willing to cut their nose off to spite their face.

Re:That was a mistake... And perhaps ineffective

[dozer]

"simple equity tells me BellSouth shouldn't be liable for more than the city lost, if anything, in reliance on their promise."

But what about opportunity cost? Good luck putting a price on that.

Let's consider a typical promisory estoppel case (patron promises to pay a student's tuition, then refuses when it's due)... The student hasn't actually lost any money when the patron renegs on his promise. But she lost the opportunity to apply to a cheaper college that year, one that she would have gone to had the patron not promised anything. Thanks to the patron's promise, she will now spend a year idle before she can apply again. He basically cost her a year of her life. How do you put a price on that? That's why the patron is usually forced to fulfill his promise.

Same with New Orleans. They may have stopped searching for other buildings when BellSouth made their promise (depends on how binding BellSouth's promise was). They have lost the opportunity to move the police in a timely fashion. What is the direct cost to the government? Huge. And the indirect cost to the citizens? Even larger.

No Surprise

[Jaysyn]

I'll say it again, this is no surprise to anyone who has worked for or with them. This is the perfect example of management mindset at Bellsouth. I know I'm painting them with a broad brush, but 90% of Bell management I've met are *just like this*.

Jaysyn

Re: Scared for nothing -- Indeed...

[Manitcor]

Whats sad is, the way our country is, more than likely, they will get to bid and will win it. Then they keep thier 250,000 sq ft building and overcharge the city for the access points so they can "get back" the revenue they "lost" while the city was running things.

Bellsouth isn't the only reneging company

[patternjuggler]

This is just like when Burger King and Safeway canceled their aid after learning that food was being distributed for free to New Orleans residents in the wake of the disaster.

Seriously though, the city probably has the right to just take the building from BellSouth anyway- if you can kick people off their land to build a mall or a stadium no one is going to raise an eyebrow if you eminent domain a building to help maintain law and order in the city. It is just better PR if everyone is happy about it.

This is pretty bad, although the reputation of the New Orleans police was tarnished a bit in the disaster. Can you imagine the shitstorm if the building was going to go to firefighters and BellSouth reneged on that?

Looks like a bribe

[virtigex]

If Bell South offered this building in the expectation of favorable treatment, this looks like a bribe. Last time I looked, it's illegal to bribe a public official (especially a police force). If I were the DA for New Orleans, I'd go straight ahead and prosecute.
What a dumb move by Bell South!

Comment removed

[account_deleted]

Comment removed based on user account deletion

sources? sources?

[MegaFur]

I've been looking around, good ol' Google, and digg.com and all that. So far, the only source I find for this story is that one Washington Post article. I think the Post is a valid news source, but it would be nice to have more sources to back this story up because I think it's important.

Anyone out there got more sources?

Re:That was a mistake... And perhaps ineffective

[jasonditz]

LA's Napoleanic Code-based legal system is completely insane anyhow. The city could just as easily seize the building in question, claim right to use without right to ownership, and not have to pay a dime for it. That's actually how NO plans to quarter a lot of their police (in individual homes).

Bellsouth made two mistakes: making such an offer in the first place and then picking a bad time to go back on it .

The correct time to angrily rescind the offer was the day when that video broke of the New Orleans police beating that old man and threatening bystanders.

Free wifi but no money for a cop shop

[markdowling]

Seems like BellSouth told NO that if they had money for wifi they obviously had enough money to have a police station - taking their building and their market is kinda double dipping.

Have to say that on a priorities basis and given the dubious state of the NOPD right now, I think (though it may not be the /. convention) they might have a point. Bread first, circuses later.

Time to fall on my sword

[drhamad]

Alright, after reading through a lot of the comments on here, the vast majority of which are angry at BellSouth, I'm going to fall on my sword here and come out in favor of them.

Don't get me wrong, I don't mean to say that what they did is the nice thing to do, and I have absolutely no experience with their services - I live in Boston. But when you're donating something to somebody (or in this case, some city), you don't expect them to turn around and stab you in the back. And that's exactly what New Orleans has done. Internet access is a huge revenue stream for telecommunications companies, obviously, and New Orleans has just circumvented that, for many people.

Does New Orleans need all the help it can get, right now? Yes, of course
Is this a nasty thing for BellSouth to do? Yes
But is it undestandable? To me, absolutely.

Re:Time to fall on my sword

[The Cisco Kid]

Absolutely its understandable. After all, BellSouth realizes that its business is completely unviable unless it has absolute monopoly control over telecomunnications infrastruscture. It can allow no meaningful competition or alternate means of telecoms if it is to survive.

That said, I hope that, in the end, if SBC/BS tries to tie its donation to N.O. modifying or scaling back its wireless plans, that N.O. tells them to take their building and shove it where the sun don't shine. I am sure there will be plenty of abandonded buildings in N.O. and a company that owns one that is less dependent on monopoly status will be happy to step forward.

Re:Time to fall on my sword

[Widowwolf]

Please do not put SBC(Now at&t(yes the companies name is now supposed to be in all lowercase-New branding thing)) in the same usage as Bellsouth..The only thing we somewhat share is a cellphone network(Cingular)

Re:Time to fall on my sword

[The Cisco Kid]

Ok, my mistake. One company is a greedy foot-dragging monopoly that can't stand allowing any chance for true competition to ever become reality, and the other is a greedy foot-dragging mono... Oh wait.. Which was which again?

And yes its quite ironic that SBC has become AT&T now. The evil beast rears its head again. We can only hope that it gets broken up again, and this time it gets done right (each wire center gets split into two competing dialtone providers, each with full rights to offer service to the same set customers, who can freely choose, and with no barriers for additional providers).

The copper in the ground should belong to each locality, or to the property owners, and the telcos (and yes I used plural there) should have equal access to it. The current situation where the ILEC's fight tooth and nail against sharing it just isnt viable. (google for 'structural seperation' - its really the only long term solution for a healthy competitive telecom market, unless some major advancement occurs in wireless tech)

Re:Mod parent redundant

[Loconut1389]

Never cut and pasted anything, and what other story are you talking about where I would have posted a link to this article?

This isn't REALLY a bad thing

[Anonymous Coward]

If you look at where the building is in relation to where the hardest hit area is, you will see it's right in the middle of it (New Orleans East). I had hear BS was donating this building to the city to use as a com center and EVERYONE complained about it's location and safety. There is no power out there yet, much less phone service, and they wanted to put the 911 call center there. It's not such a bad thing they took it back, 911 has been in the Hyatt since the storm and the dispatchers have been complaining about mold etc in there, so this forces them to move the call center to a more central location (City Park ave), a newer building.
If you ask me, they should look at moving the call center to the only place that didn't flood; the west bank. Algiers has been back up and running for almost 2 months now, AND there is a building that is not being used by the defunct school board still in perfect shape, close to a CO. I think the politions in NO need to learn to say "thanks but no thanks" to offers that look great on the surface but smell like mold and flood water when you get down to it.

On another note, I tried to connect to the city WiFi network the otherday, couldn't get an IP to save my life, and the network on the cruise ships? forget WiFi in the cabins, I have to go upstairs and pretty much sit right next to the AP. I'm glad I can catch EV-DO in our cabin.

Heh

[angrytuna]

"Listen closely. I'd like to help you but I can't. I'd like to say take a copy of your policy to Norma Wilcox on... Norma Wilcox, W-I-L-C-O-X... on the third floor, but I can't.
I also do not advise you to fill out and file a WS2475 form with our legal department on the second floor. I would not expect someone to get back to you to resolve the matter quickly. I'd like to help, but there's nothing I can do.
Thank you ma'm, I know you are upset!
[very softly] Pretend to be upset!

It's not just cold, but perhaps illegal?

[phorm]

It seems to me that when a corporation offers a "donation," and then withdraws it when somebody in government doesn't do them a "favor," then that donation was in fact a "bribe." I know there are lots of loopholes, but I thought that out and out blatant bribery was still illegal. Perhaps I'm wrong?

Fredericton, NB is already doing it.

[BaconFatJello]

http://www.fred-ezone.ca/ Works quite well from what I am told from a few workmates who are out there.

It's amazing how fast times change

[Andy Dodd]

Back when I first got a cell phone during my sophomore year as an undergrad (late 1999-early 2000ish), some of the upperclassmen and alumni I knew were commenting, "No college student needs a cell phone". The fact that I had a cell phone was a joke with a number of people I knew.

Two years later, over half of the incoming freshman had cell phones already. Now, three years later, it's unheard of for college students to have landlines because most have cell phones.

Re:Touch Tone surcharge

[mellon]

My experience back in the 1980s when New England Telephone was charging for DTMF was to get rotary. Turned out that DTMF worked anyway - you couldn't turn it off at the switch. So I got DTMF without paying the surcharge. Chances are that your switch also doesn't support turning off DTMF support, so even if you don't have a rotary phone, if you opt out of DTMF, it'll still work. If it were me, I'd *get* a rotary phone.

Re:That was a mistake...

[connorbd]

Well, if you're too psycho someone will figure it out. You want someone to be just psycho enough to get results with no ethical considerations, but not so psycho that they run the company into the ground with their own megalomania.

Of course, you could build a company like Costco... they're a great example of how to run things sanely. But Wall Street doesn't reward responsibility for its own sake.

You should know this.

[jskline]

Kind of speaks volumes as to the fact that MONEY, and nothing else, is the real root of this, and how much all parties involved stand to make from it. Pretty bad when the level of destruction and how much you expect to make going in is what your more interested in rather than getting people back up and going.

Motives, motives, motives...

Cheers

Re: Scared for nothing.

[redlegno]

As a preface, I'm from the New Orleans area and I have seen a lot of news on this subject. The free WiFi is ~150 kb/s. It is barely over dial up speeds and is only available in limited areas for now. It is meant as a tease to prompt users to get better and faster services. It is also meant to give those returning without telephone or cable service (because BS and Cox are busy cutting each other's lines) access to the Internet until service is restored.

It is a great idea and the company that is donating the equipment should be lauded.

The politically incorrect term is

[corngrower]

Indian Givers!

Unbelievable

[ACS Data Recovery]

I don't think I've ever heard of a company doing something like this. Just an incredible display of pompous arrogance.

Part of the solution or part of the problem

[eagl]

In a disaster area, you're either part of the solution or part of the problem. There are no bystanders. Bellsouth basically decided that they are not going to be part of the solution. There are plenty of other companies in the US that ARE willing to be part of not only the short-term solution but also the very long term solution, so good riddance. Lets hope they get out and stay out, and that the govt remembers what they did when it comes time to review contract bids in the future.

Re:BellSouth

[Plaid Phantom]

You have a point. (What? a /.er conceding a point!?!? ;)

Damned if you do, damned if you don't, in a way.

Re:What a bunch of cockbags...

[lewp]

Who the fuck am I trolling? All the giant, faceless corporation sympathizers out there?

Totally worth it.

Re:What happened to capitolism?

[Darby]

If you look at England as a model of the way this is heading, they used to own a ton of companies in the 70s and 80s and was more of a socialist environment. What happened? Rampant waste, deadlines missed, sky high taxes and an overall stagnate economy. In the 90's they began privatizing these corporations and they became profitable and well run. No more taxes being dumped into these wasteful programs.

Well, you're either a troll or have no clue how the privatization in England actually went. I hate to break it to you, but I don't think many people in England actually agree with you.
Now all of the problems you mentioned are *worse*.
The service is worse, and the separate train lines are incompatible.

Some things will never work privatized, and some things go straight to shit because of the way they are privatized. The British train system is the latter.

But what it absolutely isn't is what you said.

Seriously dude, you might make some attempt to actually figure out the facts before you spout nonsense propaganda.

Corporate "charity" is a myth

[macraig]

Corporate "charity" is a myth. It's always been conditional on a promise of free advertising or an otherwise enlarged profit margin.

It's a meteor shower tonight!

[teasea]

It's difficult to debate when the participants are talking about two different things.

You're still missing the joke.

Re:It's a meteor shower tonight!

[Money for Nothin']

You forgot the 24 comets just blew by in a freak incident unforeseen by astronomers anywhere on Earth...

I'm denser than lead. What's the joke? That I'm stupid? If you believe that, then you might try debating the issue; otherwise, I'll write you off as incapable of wielding any better a rhetorical sword than the logical fallacy of ad-hominem attack...

I took your original post as sarcasm. The irony is that a profit motive was *absolutely* behind BellSouth's thinking all along; the sarcasm matched the truth.

Where I disagree with apparently the rest of Slashdot (unsurprisingly) is on whether that's a good thing -- whether a business should do charitable things purely out of the supposed goodness of its legal-fiction's heart, or whether it should seek solutions that are at least superficially-charitable *and* profit-bearing...

Tough Job

[SoopahMan]

It isn't easy wiring the nation - it costs millions and millions, then you need to comply with a million tricky laws which you must navigate very carefully or face fines, lawsuits, It's no wonder broadband isn't available in most rural areas - providers have absolutely no guarantee of ever making back the cost.

But it is amazing how competition will make a bully become your best friend. Here in Boston, RCN pushed us around, charging fees for more and more absurd things, to the point that you could pay $50 for calling Support about an outage they caused! Then Comcast showed up in town, and prices spiraled through the floor. Only Comcast ever got reasonable customer service put together, but RCN might figure out why they lose business some day.

Community free wireless isn't the end of the world for these companies - it's just competition. Maybe it'll break their banks, but in most areas it will just provide another option. If municipal wireless is only on half the time, broadband can sell on having more up-time - implicitly requiring that they actually provide great up-time, which SBC and BellSouth do not have now. They can sell on having responsive customer service, but of course they'll need to get their act in gear if they expect to sell on it. Municipal wireless will force broadband providers the premium service we as consumers have expected all along.

In some cases it really might wipe them out though - never able to recoup their costs of building the network. If that appens, who's right? Can we attack SBC for having no broadband in Podunk, TX, but also attack BellSouth for having the community replace them with a tax-paid free option, after responding (if poorly) to broadband demands? Maybe we are being a little unfair.

What About the Police Reaction?

[Lord Flipper]

I'm curious to hear what a cop in New Orleans thinks of reneging on an offer to help the City and the Police because of the presence of wireless Internet access.

children.... a telecom ran by children.....simple

[scotchard]

I work for a CLEC and have to deal with Bellsouth every day. I have gotten into arguments with their reps who have admitted they screwed something up, they were wrong and what I stated was correct but there was nothing they were going to do about it--and this was managment. I have always known that a large portion of their employees have pacifiers tethered to their collar (called their Union); however, until I read this article, I never realized just how infantile their corporation is. On the whole, I blame the whole organization. There are plenty enough employees that could band together and demand change. They do it for their own raises all the time. They are just too lazy, apathetic or ignorant to care.