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 According to the Washington Post, 'Bill Oliver, angrily rescinded the offer of the building in a conversation with New Orleans homeland security director Terry Ebbert.'"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.

[Loconut1389]

They're already starting to.

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.

[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.

[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.

[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.

[raoul666]

Or call someone with caller id.

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.

[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.

[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.

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?

[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?

[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.

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.

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: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.

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.

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?

[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.

quid pro quo

[Petrox]

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

that's nothing..

[Anonymous Coward]

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

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: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.

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.

[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.

[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.

[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.

[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.

[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.

[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.

[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."

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 ...

[CptNerd]

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

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

[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

[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

[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:Haven't they learned from their corporate breth

[Punboy]

Really? Wow, so does my jeep o.O

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.

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.

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.

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.

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.

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: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.

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.

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.

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?

[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?

[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?

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...

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.

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.

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: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.

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.

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.

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?

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: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.

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.