Slashdot Mirror
Details on San Francisco's Free Wifi
FrenchSilk writes to mention that the San Francisco Chronicle has more details on the previously discussed Earthlink/Google municipal wifi project. The paper confirms that free access will be free to everyone, with higher bandwidth and more reliable tiers also available. The article touches on a number of related subjects, such as security, reliability, and privacy. From the article: "Recognizing the concerns expressed by electronic privacy advocates and community members, the City has negotiated an Agreement that addresses the privacy needs of our residents, negotiating terms stronger than any other City and incorporating protections that go far beyond what federal, state or local law requires. EarthLink and the provider of the free service will be required to fully disclose their privacy policy. This ensures that all users are aware of the privacy policies."
But does it run on Linux? All joking aside, the service seems pretty decent for a free service (300 Kbps), although $21.95 for a 1 Mbps service is a bit under the norm, but possibly a better deal than whatever internet providers exist in SF now- especially considering the mobility of it. The $12.95 discount for low-income residents makes me go "WTF" though- if your family is "low-income" by the conventional measure (poverty line) you probably shouldn't be spending money on wi-fi. I detect political hijinks. I wonder how the service is going to know whether each person is "free" or "paid", and how long it'll be before that gets hacked.
I do like the following things, though: Network neutrality. The City has required that EarthLink adhere to the Federal Communications Commission's (FCC) principles of internet freedom to address any potential for abuse of consumers or retail service providers. Non exclusivity: The agreement provides access to the City's right of way and facilities on a competitively neutral and non discriminatory basis. Nothing will prevent additional Wi-Fi providers from deploying similar networks should they desire to do so. Open Access: The agreement ensures that all internet service providers, including our local businesses, nonprofits and other organizations, will be able to provide commercial services without fear of a local monopoly. The City is not granting an exclusive franchise; rather, the City has negotiated an Agreement that provides the foundation for competition.
Care about privacy? Read this!
When you say "free", do you mean:
1. Free as in beer.
2. Free as in speech.
or
3. Free as in taxpayer-subsidized?
"Ask not what your country can do for you." --John F. Kennedy
Read carefully folks!
Earthlink guarantees your privacy by tossing 95% of your emails. Nobody will be able to reconstruct your conversations.
And your security is insured by having 30% of your packets dropped. This has been scientifically proven to reduce probing attacks by 30%.
FATMOUSE + YOU = FATMOUSE
If I remember correctly, Google will manage the free 300-kilobits-per-second Wi-Fi service, EarthLink will offer the faster premium service (1mbps and above), and Motorola and Tropos will provide the hardware / software for the mesh with the wireless service running at 2.4GHz and the mesh backbone at 5.8GHz
At the same time, salaries are proportionately raised. Job offers at Google's HQ in CA pays a good $30-$40k more than their new Pittsburgh, PA office. It may not be the best sample points, but I have friends whose parents each make solid 6 figures in CA and live at about the same level that I do with one parent making minimal six-figures in PA. I do still agree though, if people really are living with relatively low incomes, whatever that may be, they shouldn't be spending it on increasing their internet experience, nor should they be incited to by the lower cost.
Heh, Why bother "happening" to be in the city at all? Point your Pringle yagi antenna - powered wireless connection west across the bay and be a proud San Franciscan from the comfort of your own home. If I needed to, I know I would. But seriously, I'm wondering 2 things:
How tamper proof are they actually going to make this thing? If the policy is libral/versatile/friendly enough, they probably won't face *too* much circumvention attempts. But there will inevitably be a few bad apples intent upon being a pain in the ass for the service providers and ruin it to varying degrees for the rest of us.
What does this mean for the community run free wireless groups already operating in SF? With the uniqueness and value of their efforts decreased, will they fold and cease to exist? Would that loss of diversity and choice be harmful? Have the leaders/organizers of the project(s) come out with public statements regarding the deployment?
Stay sentient. Don't drink bad milk.
Did you RTFA? "A 300 Kbps free tier of service for use by all residents, businesses and visitors. This 300 Kbps tier is adequate for most basic Internet tasks such as web, email and even VoIP."
So, when do the telecom companies start bribing city officials to kill this project?
Free citywide Wifi would seem to me to be a deathblow for anyone currently selling
dialtone. Won't everyone just start using VOIP?
And just wait until VOIP enabled mobile handsets become commonplace...
------ The best brain training is now totally free : )
Sorry your ADSL is expensive.
I pay $1100 a month to share a basic 2 BR flat in SF, and going out to eat somewhere basic typically costs $20/person unless drinks are involved. If my motorcycle gets ticketed for being parked on the sidewalk, it's $100. People commonly pay $200 a month for a garage, or being careful, you can park on the street and pay the inevitable $250 in tickets every quarter.
WiFi won't be free in SF until the City approves the plan and it actually gets built. While the plan drags along, I pay $50/ month for 1.5 Mbit ADSL.
When I go on vacation, my biggest expense is paying my rent while I'm away, but it's almost worth it to be able to come home from vacation and know I'm still somewhere people travel to visit. Oh, by the way, it's fairly expensive to be a tourist here, too.
http://www.roughlydrafted.com/
if people really are living with relatively low incomes, whatever that may be, they shouldn't be spending it on increasing their internet experience, nor should they be incited to by the lower cost.
That's right, they should be spending it on Slim Jims, beer and lottery tickets, like the good old days.
We'll have none of this tapping into a world of information, education, free software, looking for work, looking for a better place to live, access to cheap delivered goods instead of being stuck getting everything from the low income neighborhood ripoff joint, effective communication with each other across town or across the globe without having to support a landline/cell contract, etc. Think of the children, man!
Especially at a lower cost than what they're paying now for inferior service. Jeeeezus Christ, where's the economic sense in that? Do you know what will happen to the nation's economy if the mass of low income people start being incited to buy things because they cost less?
It'll collapse, that's what it'll do. We depend on them to buy Kellog's Frosted Flakes instead of Corn Meal and sugar, Microsoft Windows instead of downloading Ubuntu, emergency room visits for flu instead of a reasonably priced GP down the block, blockbuster movies instead of community theater.
Just who do they think they are determining their own priorities anyway? The whole point of having low income people around is so that higher income people can tell them how they should be living, innit? Next thing ya know they'll start thinking they might like an afternoon at the art museum or something. We'd have to rub shoulders with them or something if we allowed that sort of thing; when they should be putting in that sixteenth hour at work, dammit. They obviously need the three bucks.
No, the purpose of low income people is to pick oranges/cotton to provide tax dollars to provide museums and ubiquitous WiFi for high income people.
Fucking peasants are revolting.
Next week if you're not careful.
KFG
Fear not, all of these 15M/2M FTTP guys on /. are in the cherry picked areas of the country. Most of the US is still on dialup. I define most as "more than 50% of landmass," and I'd bet a dollar that it's closer to 70-80% of landmass, but I'm not going to try and look it up.
Until just two years ago, I was ten miles from a major university with several GB/s of bandwidth (may be tens of GB, for all I know) and when I called the local telco and cableco inquiring about "high speed internet" they were excited to tell me that they had high speed internet - they'd just upgraded more than half of their modem pool to 56kb! By the time I left there, they had a 768/128kb ADSL that I badgered them into extending to my house (about 20,000 ft from the CO), where I got 680/65kb. And a bargain at $45/mo. Note that this is not some university in the middle of nowhere, as we're less than 250 miles from Washington, D.C. Now I'm "in town" and can get better DSL, or cable if I don't mind being down for 10-15% of the time (fuck you Adephia). Ten years ago they were all going to have 10bT to the houses thanks to the University, but I can only guess that Adelphia and Bell Atlantic (now Verizon) squashed that pretty quickly.
Is it just my observation, or are there way too many stupid people in the world?
Is it really? It works out at £4.697 at today's exchange rate, while the minimum wage here is £5.35/hour, or $10.41/hour. Cost of living here (Wales) is a lot lower than California too...
I am TheRaven on Soylent News
Now could the economists here (armchair or otherwise) explain to me how this condition doesn't collapse, especially when it's driven in part by the technology industry, which has far fewer reasons to physically locate anywhere in particular? Considering that the rest of the world-- the rest of the country, even-- is paying far less wage for the same amount of living, how does the inflated wage/price leapfrog continue, yet still manage to survive within the greater saner, more reasonably-priced world?
Information wants to be free.
Entertainment wants to be paid.
You just want to be cheap.
Funny this should come up today. I have been without my ADSL here in SF for nearly a week now, and in fact have not even had dial tone for two days. So the $50/month has felt even more expensive than usual. In fact, I just got down from the roof, where I was hanging out with the ATT/PacBell/Yahoo/YouNameIt tech. He told me it was my lucky day--- he was going to replace the dry-rotted wiring with wire that would conduct a signal, thus re-establishing my dial-tone and my DSL. I asked him why it was lucky that he was replacing the wire, when it seemed to be his job to do just that sort of thing. He said that I am responsible for the wire because it's inside wiring. I mentioned that the wire on the roof was coming in from the street and was quite outside, where it either baked in the sun or sat in a puddle when it rained. He assured me that this was considered inside wire, and not the telco's problem. But what a fun week I've had with tech support.
Tech Support: Hi, what's the problem, sir?
Me: There seems to be a line issue. I can ping my ADSL router but can't ping outside that. The sync light also indicates a line issue.
TS: Yes, sir. I can help you with that. Are you using a Mac or Windows?
Me: Um. Mac.
TS: Sir, all our Mac representatives are busy. Try calling back tomorrow.
Me: WAIT! No! You see, I think the problem is independent of the computer I am using.
TS: I am happy to help you, sir. What browser are you using?
Me: Um. Firefox.
TS: Well sir, as I mentioned, all our Mac representatives are busy. Try calling back tomorrow.
Me: Wait...ah...I might actually be using a Windows machine. Computers are hard. Now what?
TS: Oh, in that case we need to determine which version of Windows you are running....
Me: Wait, stop. Can you see my router from where you are?
TS: {pause} No sir, there is no signal at all on the line.
Me: Ok, so can you imagine a situation where my browser or my computer would have any effect on the actual phone line?
TS: Sir, I would be happy to help you, but you see, all our Mac representatives are busy.
and so on...
Google, please hurry!