Slashdot Mirror


Startup Launches Open Wi-Fi, Challenging ISPs

Chuckles08 writes "Forbes has a story about how FreedomPop is trying to disrupt the public Wi-fi business. From the article: 'Getting hosed by your Internet service provider may seem as inevitable as death and taxes, but a new startup aims to change that. Startup FreedomPop, which is backed by Skype co-founder Niklas Zennstrom, DCM and Mangrove Capital, provides cheaper Internet access and the ability for people to share access with others on its network.'"

22 of 65 comments (clear)

  1. Internet as a commodity by gagol · · Score: 3, Insightful

    I hope it can disrupt the connectivity oligopoly that reigns at the moment. North America's connectivity is, on average, twice as bad as Romania in 30 something position. Lets do this!

    --
    Tomorrow is another day...
    1. Re:Internet as a commodity by girlintraining · · Score: 2

      I hope it can disrupt the connectivity oligopoly that reigns at the moment. North America's connectivity is, on average, twice as bad as Romania in 30 something position. Lets do this!

      There's only one resource the government cannot absolutely control and manipulate at the behest of their corporate masters: The air. If you want better internet, a free and open internet, that is resistant to censorship and manipulation of commercial interests, you're going to have to start with making a wireless technology that is capable of sending data at a high rate of speed over considerable distance, be resistant to jamming and fading, and even more resistant to being triangulated and traced back to its source.

      Mesh networking technologies and protocols are not robust yet, owing to the simple problem that once you're part of the network, as a peer you can overwhelm any of your neighbors with a denial of service attack. Anonymity seems incompatible with a trust network, the only effective defense in a truly decentralized communications medium from the widescale propagation of such tactics.

      Encryption and onion-routing can prevent tampering or surveillance, to a point. But with all of these technologies assembled together, it's almost a given that a vulnerability or weakness in the infrastructure will be discovered -- it's simply too complex. And then you have the problem of upgrading to eradicate the problem. As we've seen with IPv6 deployment, even when the hardware and technology is mature and developed, migrating to new protocols is something many are resistant to, despite offering the same services and only enhancing existing infrastructure; There are no real drawbacks.

      Software defined radio may one day provide us with the raw tools to create a global wireless network that can operate securely and independently of the control of even the largest governments on the planet, but the technology and availability of materials isn't there yet -- it's still too cost-prohibitive, not just from an R&D perspective (it would take thousands of people worldwide coordinating the build up of such a device, and many tens of thousands to deploy it), but also from the fact that to organize that many people is impossible to do covertly, and given the consequences if it were to succeed, every major government on the planet would devote large amounts of law enforcement resources to preventing it.

      That said, criminals are already taking the first baby-steps towards this technology -- a massive wireless communications network is running in Mexico that the drug cartels are using (by kidnapping telco and RF engineers!) for exactly this purpose. Although it is still very primitive and the equipment easy enough to locate, it's already proving a real headache and far more feasible than anyone anticipated.

      --
      #fuckbeta #iamslashdot #dicemustdie
  2. Prediction: by SuricouRaven · · Score: 5, Insightful

    At some point, someone is going to get into *serious* legal trouble through this. Most likely via someone using their connection transfering child porn and getting caught. It only has to happen once. The story will be widely publicised, including all the horrifying details of the caught-in-the-middle victim having their life torn apart, losing their job, being vilified by their neighbours, and having every computer, phone, games console, hard drive and USB stick they own confiscated as evidence. As a result of this, other users will be terrified to share their connection and risk becoming the next victim of an investigation.

    The same reason there are so few tor exit nodes.

    1. Re:Prediction: by gagol · · Score: 3, Interesting

      ipv6 could address this problem very easily... no nat allowed on the box, every device have its own ip.

      --
      Tomorrow is another day...
    2. Re:Prediction: by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 2, Interesting

      Won't get that far. Comcast is part of the MPAA now... they'll just wait all 30 seconds until someone downloads an illegal copy of a movie, then sue with everything they have. FreedomPop will burn through all their startup funds paying legal fees, and blink out of existence.

    3. Re:Prediction: by WaffleMonster · · Score: 4, Interesting

      At some point, someone is going to get into *serious* legal trouble through this. Most likely via someone using their connection transfering child porn and getting caught. It only has to happen once.

      Nothing can ever happen if everyone is always content to sit in the corner cowering in fear of what could happen. Such a society would suck ass.

      I would counter your argument by asking a stupid question... How many tens? hundreds? of millions of PCs are compromised botnet zombies?

      Why could not the same argument of CP raid risk be extended to simply owning a PC? We've all heard of encryption ransomware why not CP raid ransom or your compromised system being used to traffic the same? What is the difference?

    4. Re:Prediction: by fph+il+quozientatore · · Score: 3, Interesting

      I know a few people in Germany that run a free public Wi-Fi network and they have tried to get registered as an internet provider (alas, without success). Providers are not held liable for what people do using their connection; why should this be legally different? It seems that the only difference is that you are not paying for it.

      --
      My first program:

      Hell Segmentation fault

    5. Re:Prediction: by wjh31 · · Score: 2, Insightful
    6. Re:Prediction: by alexgieg · · Score: 2

      The same reason there are so few tor exit nodes.

      What we really need is some kind of low cost "FreeBox" appliance running some kind of fully cryptographed, non-open-Internet-connected, private, distributed, point-to-point, wireless network, perhaps running the Freenet project or something similar, that people could attach to their routers and instantly get access to it alongside their commercial Internet connection. That, and people willing to install it all around, so that whenever you go you get anonymous access to the parallel network. And a law or judicial decision protecting such nodes as free speech. I don't see any other way for an open network to remain available on the long run...

      --
      Conservatism: (n.) love of the existing evils. Liberalism: (n.) desire to substitute new evils for the existing ones.
    7. Re:Prediction: by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 2, Interesting

      I know a few people in Germany that run a free public Wi-Fi network and they have tried to get registered as an internet provider (alas, without success). Providers are not held liable for what people do using their connection; why should this be legally different? It seems that the only difference is that you are not paying for it.

      If it takes a charge to be registered as an ISP, then charge for it - charge 0.01 Euro per 10 years, to be paid in 2099.

    8. Re:Prediction: by RaceProUK · · Score: 5, Funny

      It's how long the evil laugh goes for.

      --
      No colour or religion ever stopped the bullet from a gun
    9. Re:Prediction: by jakimfett · · Score: 2

      You mean like my wireless darknet project? Yeah, people are working on it, but you know how it is...we all gotta live, and between playing server admin, school, and trying to find a long term job, it's tough to find time (and money) to dedicate to it.

      --
      Bits of code, random ramblings: jakimfett.com
  3. Yes, a Skype co-founder by guises · · Score: 5, Informative

    I was keen on this until I had a look at the privacy policy. They don't even pay lipservice to privacy, explicitly saying that they will combine whatever information they get from you with information from third parties and also share your information with third parties. I wouldn't use this without a VPN.

  4. Not a world first by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 2, Interesting

    We have it here in Israel and it seems to work pretty well. http://www.globes.co.il/serveen/globes/docview.asp?did=1000768403&fid=1725

  5. Re:Share access? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 2, Insightful

    If more people did it then the feds wouldn't have such an easy time busting down peoples doors. The whole reason the courts are OK with it is because it is seen as highly probable that the owner or someone within the household committed a crime. However if you have shared access then there is a higher chance that a neighbor did it. If you multiply that and half of the busts are of innocent people there it defeats the points of busting people in the first place.

  6. Open Wi-Fi in The Netherlands by sciencewatcher · · Score: 5, Interesting

    In the city of Groningen, The Netherlands, population 180,000, the cable company has converted the wireless routers of most of the subscribers into dual private and open Wi-Fi access points. Almost all subscribers agreed to participate. In return the subscribers can use each others access points using their own username and password. As you walk or cycle down the street the connection stays permanent as you move from one access point to the next. Both the cable company and the wireless phone operators are in fierce competition with asymmetrical infrastructure. This move by the cable company seems to be designed to undercut the need for 3G/4G access for tablets and smartphones. There are plans to roll out this new type of usage throughout the country.

    1. Re:Open Wi-Fi in The Netherlands by TapeCutter · · Score: 2

      Free and open are two different things.

      --
      And did you exchange a walk on part in the war for a lead role in a cage? - Pink Floyd.
    2. Re:Open Wi-Fi in The Netherlands by sciencewatcher · · Score: 3, Insightful

      Absolutely, it is just an attempt by the cable company to keep it's customers from going to the competition for commercial reasons. The cable company does not have a cellular phone network and in this way tries to add functionality to compensate for that. It might become an interesting development.

  7. It's standard practice in France and elsewhere by Kergan · · Score: 3, Informative

    FWIW, all four major carriers offer this in France:

    http://www.ariase.com/fr/guides/hotspots-wifi.html (url is in French)

    Basically, users from your carrier get to use your Wifi, and in return you get to use their own Wifi routers across the country.

    France is not alone, either. For carriers, it's a cheap way to roll-out a nationwide Wifi network, with the added benefit that they can then redirect mobile data traffic to land pipes, resulting in less encumbered wireless networks.

  8. Re:fon by sco08y · · Score: 3, Informative

    FTFA:

    Stokols believes this service will disrupt others such as FON, another free Wi-Fi startup. That’s because FON cuts deals with large telecommunications providers such as BT, while FreedomPop doesn’t need to. FON users do not share the majority of their access, because they are home users where others in residential areas do not need access as much, he says.

  9. Clearwire = No Go by rsmith-mac · · Score: 4, Interesting

    Unfortunately FreedomPop is building their service on top of Clearwire's WiMax service, which doesn't bode well for the performance or the reliability of the resulting service.

    Clearwire ceased their buildout more than a year ago, and assuming they survive the next few years will be trying to roll out an LTE network on their spectrum. In the meantime their WiMax network is already oversubscribed both on a per-tower basis and a backhaul basis; as a result the actual speed of the service isn't much better than CDMA 3G, never mind HSPA+ or LTE. Adding a bunch of users is only going to make this worse, especially since FreedomPop isn't the only service taking advantage of Clearwire's cutthroat rates.

    Clearwire's 2.6GHz spectrum may also be a minor concern here. Based on the results of Clearwire's own efforts, their spectrum works well for mobile use but has a lot of trouble penetrating homes, which is where a service like FreedomPop is most likely to be used.

    Ultimately like any other wireless service this is going to be entirely area-dependent. But for most users they're effectively buying into a cheap 3G-ish service with no quality of service standards. It's cheap, but that's about all FreedomPop has going for it.

    1. Re:Clearwire = No Go by MachineShedFred · · Score: 3, Funny

      When I lived in Portland, I tried ClearWire because the price was awesome, and my DSL sucked the big one. The only place I could get reception was if I held the modem above my head in the back yard, with it plugged into a 30' extension cord. And that was in one of their most built out markets.

      Yeah, I sent it back.

      --
      Slashdot still doesnâ(TM)t support Unicode after it was added to the HTML standard in 1997.