Slashdot Mirror
US Considers Some Free Wireless Broadband Service
gollum123 writes "US regulators may dedicate spectrum to free wireless Internet service for some Americans to increase affordable broadband service nationwide, the Federal Communications Commission said on Tuesday. The FCC provided few details about how it would carry out such a plan and who would qualify, but will make a recommendation under the National Broadband Plan set for release next week. The agency will determine details later. One way of making broadband more affordable is to 'consider use of spectrum for a free or a very low-cost wireless broadband service,' the FCC said in a statement." Nobody has more than a couple of paragraphs on this story. None of the press coverage mentions the obvious likelihood that any such free network would be heavily filtered, censored, and monitored.
First comes government cheese. Then comes government health care. Now comes government internet connections. Next comes government monitoring and censorship of said inter- *NO CARRIER*
Living With a Nerd
I'm not worried about it, i'm worried that there are too many stupid people willing to change their behavior when they should be changing their government.
I don't remember the name of the company but suffice it to say, there is a company who has been riding the back of the FCC for years, trying to get them to approve some kind of free wireless broadband plan just like is being described here.
The old plan was to have the government collect some revenue from the company in exchange for offering exclusive use of the spectrum. The company was planning to filter the connection, specifically to block porn, because they had some significant ties to the moral morons in the "family" groups.
I don't recall how they were planning to pay for the whole thing, but i seem to remember they had for-pay plans that might have subsidized the free (censored) plans.
Comment removed based on user account deletion
I have heard it would cost $1,500 per home to run fiber to every home in the nation. That's $225 billion. If you want better and more affordable communications install fiber co-ops throughout the nation that do nothing but the physical installation from the home to a neighborhood hub. From the hub, any ISP that chooses can compete for your business.
unless nobody gets paid for providing that, and nobody gets charged to make up for the free stuff, the word you're looking for is not "free", it's subsidized. Not that I'm against it, I really have no opinion right now, but I'm tired of people thinking stuff is free because others pay for it.
The Cloud - because you don't care if your apps and data are up in the air.
Setup our own MESH type networks? I was thinking about this. I know there are ports of OpenWRT that let you mod a Linksys WRT54G to do bridging. That would do the trick.
I'm a big fan of free broadband WiFi provided by neighborhood associations, local business alliances, charities, etc, etc, etc - but not by an overgrown mafia organization with a monopoly on violent force!
The geek out-of-doors is truly a babe in the woods.
The neighborhood association can be far tougher and more relentless in its demands for conformity than any governmental agency you are ever likely to encounter.
The real Mafias of this world begin with control of the street.
They see themselves - and want to be seen by others - as an extended family or clan. More Russian than Russia. That gives them legitimacy and power a gun cannot buy.
The actual remarks by Commissioner Clyburn are a lot less technical than the SL summary implies. What she wants doesn't have so much to do with the physical deployment of broadband (the "last mile"), as it does with actually adopting the broadband that's available (what she called the last "half-mile".)
Apparently, 93 million Americans don't use broadband, even though they could. Why? The Commish says its because 1) broadband costs too much, 2) non-users lack "digital literacy", and 3) non-users just don't see the benefit. Her proposed fixes have a lot more in common with the Peace Corps than with the White Spaces Coalition: provide free broadband to the poor, and form a National Digital Literacy Corps to deliver a National Digital Literacy Program while going home-to-home to help set up broadband. Her model is the recent national switch-over to digital TV, where hundreds of thousands of volunteers went around and hooked people's TVs up.
"We receive as friendly that which agrees with, we resist with dislike that which opposes us" - Faraday
Isn't it more likely, whatever are the specifics, that this kind of announcement, coming from the Feds, is an attempt at creating competitive pressure on the current ISPs to expand their network and/or keep prices stable or lower?
Allow people to complain that they don't have broadband online(they can use dialup or someone else's service). Then the biggest clusters of people complaining get targetted first.
God spoke to me.
Allow people to complain that they don't have broadband online(they can use dialup or someone else's service). Then the biggest clusters of people complaining get targetted first.
Targeted how exactly, and for what? "Take off and nuke the site from orbit, it's the only way to be sure" type targeting, or something slightly more benign? Could you mean targeted as in for putting every man, woman, and child, as well as their children and grandchildren into virtual economic servitude to pay for their own enslavement at the hands of a government grown out of control?
Although I suppose the answer to those questions depends on which "government official" you ask on a given day, and how far up or down his numbers are with his constituents if an elected official and/or as in the case of the government hallway-rat, whatever will both secure his position and advance it and his overall wealth & power. And, of course, how honest said official feels he/she can be without worry of ending up at the end of a rope.
Strat
Progressivism (aka US 'Liberalism'): Ideas so good they need a police/surveillance-state to enforce.
We've already paid 320 billion to get fiber to the home that never got installed. If the FCC and state utilities would simply hold the telcos to the existing contracts it'd be a done deal. But we'd have to have politicians not beholden to the industry. My local House rep Fred Upton was previously chair of the Subcommittee on Communications, Technology, and the Internet. Not surprising to see SBC, Verizon, and other telcos giving upwards of 100K a year (according to opensecrets.org). Corporatism at its finest.
I really don't see a lacking of broadband penetration any more, this isn't 1999. Maybe about the working poor not affording/knowing how to use computersm but if they actullly get a computer, they get brondband if they need it. Why not give away free telephone service too? It's alot more importantand VOIP makes it dirt cheap, or free water, etc. The market place is working just fine for broadband, no need to make it a government utility. Same for cell phones
Where does this lie keep on coming from? Nothing was paid to the telecoms. Nothing at all.
That whole "320 billion" figure basically counts profits made by the telecoms since some date against them, as if any profit made somehow counts as "paying the telecom for fiber to the home" which is ridiculous.
When it comes to actual fund received from the government, the telecoms got squat.
Seems to me the target for this stuff would be the un-served rural population. There are millions of us out here who will be dead and gone long before we get even DSL service. You are looking at huge areas with insufficient population to support any "for profit" service except possibly wireless.
That brings us to the infrastructure needed. You have to have towers, power, radios, antennas, and back haul. Just because you make the spectrum "free" and declare service free does not put the necessary equipment in place.
Maybe they will pay for it with the surplus funds they make from 0bama health care.
The US is first and foremost a Capitalist nation. As such, giving citizens anything they could be made to pay for is completely alien.
(Just consider the "Healthcare Reform" Bill.)
Unless of course a major Corporation was to pay Congress to do this - but why would that ever happen?
Standing tall in the land of the rich and the poor
Have any of you tuned in to over-the-air television recently? Imagine that, but with the internet.
The FCC would be doing it's job properly to open a range in the spectrum to public internet, license it to qualified providers, and then play watch dog over it.
If you're worried about internet wardrobe malfunctions being banned, and you should be, then you should stop with the grumbling and get behind this movement while promoting freedom of speech and expression on the internet as it always has been.
Just because Cable TV has more channels, that doesn't mean it's the only way to tune in. Trust me, I know. I grew up in an area that you couldn't actually get cable. Which also means I couldn't get broadband.
Eventually we will all have to get used to the idea that the internet is a utility in the sense that it drives commerce and carries public concern. It's our modern electricity. It has to be made available to everyone for us to continue as an equal society. The government will become involved. It's up to us to determine whether that's in a fashion like our current electric and telecom monopolies or in a more acceptable manner.
The devout village elders with buckles on their hats and scarlett letters at the ready will prevent the free distribution of anything relating to (shudder) sexuality.
The media people receive in sparsely populated areas is already "heavily filtered, censored, and monitored." Just drive across Wyoming some time and see what the radio offers.
When it comes to actual fund received from the government, the telecoms got squat.
[citation needed]
$182 million
The first broadband stimulus grants and loans – about $182 million worth – finally have been awarded
There, 10 seconds on google.
Your turn.
The US hasn't been a capitalist nation in over 100 years. We are a social market economy.
It`ll never happen...if it does,they`ll find some way to charge for it.
You are an idiot.
You have far more control over what happens with government provided access then you do with private organizations.
Here is a clue, moron: the government DOES control the internet. It created it, and it controls right away for the pipes. Contrary to what myopic morons like yourself seem to believe, against all evidence, you DO have a voice in the government. you do NOT have a voice with a private company, unless you own a significant portion of said corporation.
The Kruger Dunning explains most post on
Interesting. I had to look that one up and I don't remember the term from college economics.
From what I read a social market economy is merely regulated capitalism in which regulation works to achieve various desirable goals. And we do have a lot a regulation in places. Some of this is designed to achieve goals too. However, it does not seem we are making the coordinated effort we required by the definition and we are arguably failing to regulate entire segments of the economy properly. I think that definition is a partial fit at best.
As for capitalism, this too requires regulation due to the tendency for various industries to produce harmful results. But in that case the regulation shows up when there is a clear need - not before. I believe this characterizes a lot of what occurs in the US.
There is already a US Gov't supported program(aka Obamaphone) for "low income" population. What is going on with America!!!!
you DO have a voice in the government
More like a 1/100 millionth of a voice.
you do NOT have a voice with a private company
Yes, I can say "no, I won't buy your product" to them. I can't say "no" to the government.
You have far more control over what happens with government provided access then you do with private organizations
Honestly, have YOU ever controlled something that government has done? Just you.
I have regularly told cable companies and DSL providers, on my own, that I don't want their service. And I now have AT&T Uverse and 5Mbps down, and I am basically happy :)
So I can pay taxes for others to have censored internet... How about instead, the Federal government works to remove monopolies? I only have one DSL provider in my area and the speeds are terrible.
'Political power grows out of the barrel of a gun.' - Mao Tse-tung
While some of you are making fun of a government ran isp, you are missing the point.
The Government should be taking care of: The internet, the phone, the cable, the power, healthcare, etc...
The Government should be keeping the infostructure running. We are in charge of our government.
Instead, we let the government run us, and they reinforce the notion by letting us think the gov makes shoddy products.
Do I have a socialist view? maybe, but here's the kicker:
communist and socialism haven't worked because the peeps in the government don't want to give up power. solution is simple. Everyone works for the government for 1/2 of their work week. No more lifetime senators or any positions. You do your term, then you move on to something else in the gov.
If your going to go socialist, you go the whole way.
Be seeing you...
The parent ether has no clue, or works for
IPS or a cell phone carrier. Reading on
other posters also simple don't understand how the Internet works, and that a grid of
roof top routers can and will ( when its legal ) replace low bandwidth comumications
like cell phone carriers. Well perhaps not
as a foot ball game. Of in a harbor tunnel.
But most any place you can see a roof top
you should get coverage. We are talking ranges of 5 to 10 miles.
NOw that that is said when will the FCC
put out the standards of fair play so the hardware can be built for my "Roof Top Router"
So I to can get free local cell phone calling and connect to 100s of viable local ISP's for the long hall.
Sure at first I will only have 5 or 10 miles
range, but as others figure it our the grid will grow and fill in.
As for monitoring why would any one care, if I call my Mom or a friend and ask if I can stop over. Or that I had a flat tire...
Oh and if it was true that I was planing a crime, please monitor me.
4) considers the current providers immoral....
and refuses to pay for that which the FCC has denied us all this time.
We are talking, Free as in freedom of speech
Not as in your free to read for me in the city square.
It is currently Illegal for me to put a
Cell Phone Router on my roof.
It is legal for me to go out and buy a gun.
It is not legal for me to shoot you with it.
There have to be Rules to make a Wireless
Network Grid Work. And until the FCC gives up
the spectrum and makes the rules, hardware can not
be built and I can not join in to the free open cell phone network.
Yes you could text and get e-mail too so how much do you pay
for e-mail, and phone?
Sure the network is not completely free.
And there will be people that will use it
without putting up a router. But then if your
out or your routers range, you will want to use
other peoples routers as well.
It a matter of being civicly-responsible.