Wireless Community

Icon

October 27, 2005 • 8:53 am 0

The Heartland Institute Issues Erroneous Reporting about Bryant Park

“The Heartland Institute”:1, an organization that has published anti-municipal wireless reports in the past, has “posted an article about Google’s sponsorship of Bryant Park”:2. In the article, Steven Titch spouts a number of unfounded and inaccurate claims regarding muniwireless initiatives by the company.

I’d like to correct a few of the errors in Mr. Titch’s article:

* NYCwireless is a non-profit organization that *has no affiliation* with any part of the NYC government. We were not “formed by the city”.
* There has never been any discussion of Google “owning” any hotspot in NYC. Hotspots in NYC are owned by the people that build and operate them, including the “Bryant Park Restoration Corporation”:3 and the “Alliance for Downtown New York”:4 to name a few. The Public Internet Project merely supply support for Bryant Park. Google, and in the past Intel, sponsor the hotspot, providing operational funds to keep the hotspot running.
* Google’s sponsorship *does not* offer *”more evidence that cities cannot operate free Wi-Fi networks”*. It merely provides evidence that companies may be willing to sponsor hotspots, especially popular ones.

And here’s the most important correction: *The New York City government and the NYC Parks Department have had no involvement in the Bryant Park Hotspot.* Bryant Park is a privately managed park under contract with the Parks Department, and NYCwireless and volunteers installed the Bryant Park Hotspot *for free*.

If anything, Google’s sponsorship of Bryant Park shows the popularity and importantance of public Wi-Fi. It is a shining example of how New York City can make use of free public infrastructure, like a park, to provide a worthwhile and meaningful service to residents and visitors. The park’s Wi-Fi network shows why cities *should be* paying attention and addressing issues of public broadband and wireless.

[1]http://wifinetnews.com/archives/004948.html
[2]http://www.heartland.org/Article.cfm?artId=17904
[3]http://www.bryantpark.org/park-management/overview.php
[4]http://www.downtownny.com

Filed under: Community Wireless, Muniwireless, New York City, News, NYCwireless, Policy

October 27, 2005 • 8:01 am 0

WISPA Wireless Crisis Center

Work restoring wireless data services and VOIP in the Gulf states continues. The “Wireless Crisis Center”:1 provides an overview and a running report of how wireless networks are being deployed, with lots of information and pictures.

[1]http://www.radioresponse.org/wordpress/

Filed under: Community Wireless, Emergency Response, Mesh

October 26, 2005 • 9:39 am 2

Free American Broadband!

S. Derek Turner, a research fellow at “Free Press”:1 has “published in Salon a stunningly complete overview of the current state of broadband and wireless in the US”:2.

Mr. Turner highlights how a number of cities and countries around the world provide broadband service that is both many times faster and cheaper than anything available in the US.

bq. “Most Japanese consumers can get an Internet connection that’s 16 times faster than the typical American DSL line for a mere $22 per month. Across the globe, it’s the same story. In France, DSL service that is 10 times faster than the typical United States connection; 100 TV channels and unlimited telephone service cost only $38 per month. In South Korea, super-fast connections are common for less than $30 per month.”

*In effect, the USA has become a 2nd World Country when it comes to Internet access.* We are playing catch-up to the rest of the advanced world, and are falling further and further behind in an area where we once led.

Much of the problem lies in telecom competition, or lack thereof.

bq. “Today, major cable companies and DSL providers control almost 98 percent of the residential and small-business broadband market. This trend is the direct result of FCC policies that fail to encourage real competition among broadband providers, giving free rein over the market to the cable and DSL giants. The corporate giants are also vigorously fighting to stop cities and towns from building “Community Internet” systems — affordable, high-speed broadband services funded in part by community groups and municipalities — even in places where the cable and DSL companies themselves don’t offer service. Yet, like rural electrification projects in the early 20th century, today’s Community Internet projects offer the best hope of achieving universal broadband service.”

bq. “In the 1996 Telecommunications Act, Congress directed the FCC to oversee the timely deployment of Internet services that “enable users to originate and receive high quality voice, data, graphics, and video telecommunications.” Currently, this requirement translates into an Internet connection with typical download and upload speeds between 10 Mbps and 20 Mbps (megabits, or million bits, per second).

bq. “But the FCC defines a “high-speed” connection as one capable of transmitting data at a rate of 200 kbps (kilobits, or a thousand bits, per second) in one direction — about four times the speed of dial-up. At this slow speed, it is barely possible to receive low-quality streaming video, and is completely impractical to originate high-quality video.”

*If free trade and competition are supposed to maximize value for consumers and provide fair prices for goods, why are American’s getting the short end of the stick? Where the FCC and Bush’s White House are declaring success through free markets, why are Americans paying more and more per megabyte then in Europe, Asia, and Canada?*

There’s a further problem as well: availability of broadband doesn’t equal adoption and uptake. Here in NYC, much of the city has both DSL and cable-modem service. Yet most residents don’t make use of broadband due to the unreasonably high prices and poor service that the telco/cable duopoly maintains.

Overall, we are developing a greater digital divide. This bigger divide isn’t between the rich and poor in this country, but rather *a digital divide between the US and the rest of the advanced world*.

Mr. Turner’s “article”:2 is as complete a statement as can be made about how our government and our “markets” are letting us down. Read it and pass it along.

[1]http://www.freepress.net
[2]http://muniwireless.com/community/guests/872/

Filed under: Community Wireless, Muniwireless, Policy

October 26, 2005 • 8:30 am 4

Anaheim to Consider Citywide Wi-Fi Franchise with Earthlink

The Anaheim City Council is “getting ready to consider granting Earthlink a 20-year franchise to operate a public Wi-Fi network”:1 throughout all 50 square miles of the city.

As proposed, this franchise is both good and bad. On the good side, Anaheim is recognizing that public wireless is a good feature to add to their city, and they’ve already completed an RFP for their network. And its also good that the City is providing access to streetlight poles and existing fiber deployments.

On the bad side, the franchise is exclusive, and it specifically enables Earthlink to be both network maintainer as well as the sole service provider. This aspect of the franchise clearly shows a lack of vision on the City’s part. Earthlink will be allowed to set prices, and the City has given them a complete monopoly for public wireless service for 20 years. What Anaheim should have done is provide a 5 year exclusive franchise for the operations of the network, but require the network be open to any ISP that wants to use it at wholesale rates. This would enable price and service competition that will ensure that *affordable* wireless broadband is deployed.

In addition, the 20 year franchise is far too long for Wi-Fi deployments, and its not clear that such a franchise will be useful for Anaheim once Wi-Fi has evolved over the next 5 years. The City is granting a very long term exclusive contract for a service that is brand new, and technology that is also in its infancy. Whether Earthlink will succeed *and* provide good service remains to be seen.

As cities increasingly move towards trying to deploy municipal networks, they need to recognize that they shouldn’t be giving away the farm. Too many cities and towns were burned badly by franchises handed out to telco and cable operators, but they haven’t learned their lessons. In cases like Anaheim’s, Earthlink would have been happy to get the network operations contract for a handful of years, without any franchise or exclusivity. The City could have bargained much harder and given away far less, thereby ensuring that they get full value for their physical resources.

And of equal if not greater importance, Anaheim should have required that competition be part of the marketplace. Having a single company that controls the creation, operation, maintenance, and service over a network is a terrible idea. Its exactly the type of behavior shown by telco and cable giants like SBC and Verizon, who provide expensive, poor service.

[1]http://www.govtech.net/magazine/channel_story.php/97030

Filed under: Muniwireless, News, Policy, Urban Wireless

October 25, 2005 • 9:20 pm 0

One Economy Interview on Muni-Wireless

I was recently interviewed for a research paper being written by James Sison of the “One Economy Corporation”:1. James is researching how cities and other municipalities can prepare themselves for implementing wireless and broadband services. I spoke to James about how broadband development in this country, and especially in New York City, is both slower and more expensive than in Europe and Asia.

I also commented to him about “a previous post”:2 where I wrote about the full cost of broadband in NYC versus the cost of a computer. In the US, we pay a premium for our connectivity, and this makes no sense when you consider how much commerce takes place online:

bq. New York City (Community Nonprofit Model)

bq. Dana Spiegel of NYCwireless (“http://www.nycwireless.net”:3) runs a non-profit group that “enables the growth of free, public wireless Internet access in New York City.” The all-volunteer network manages more than 100 wi-fi hotspots located in public spaces and underserved neighborhoods. “The growth of the global economy depends on how many people you can get online,” says executive director Spiegel. “Over a three year period, people will spend an average of $1800 in New York ($50/mo x 36 mo) just to get online. You’d think that tech companies would give computers and Internet access away, just so they can get consumers to spend more money online.”

[1]http://www.one-economy.com/
[2]http://www.wirelesscommunity.info/2005/05/05/testimony-to-the-new-york-city-council’s-technology-in-government-committee/
[3]http://www.nycwireless.net

Filed under: Interview, Muniwireless, News, NYCwireless

October 21, 2005 • 10:04 am 0

MIT Media Lab's 20th Anniversary

I’m currently at the “MIT Media Lab’s”:1 20th anniversary event, where the “Walter Bender”:2 has invited all of us alumni back to the Lab to see what work is going on. One of the most interesting thing being talked about is the “$100 laptop project”:3, which integrates low cost Wi-Fi mesh networking. One of the best quotes about the project came from “Mike Bove”:4 (this was relayed via a third party, so the exact wording is certainly not correct):

> “When you have tens or hundreds of kids communicating with each other without the need for centralized access points, then the existing telecommunications system will really undergo a revolutionary change.”

He’s right. More mesh = less centralized (structure, control, dependency, cost). This is a great meme that needs to be promoted publicly. This is truly the power of *community* networking.

[1]http://www.media.mit.edu
[2]http://web.media.mit.edu/~walter
[3]http://laptop.media.mit.edu
[4]http://web.media.mit.edu/~vmb

Filed under: Community Wireless, Event, Mesh

October 14, 2005 • 8:03 am 0

The End User Cost of Muni-networks

I’m a big fan of what’s going on in Philadelphia, but “this article in The Philadelphia Inquirer”:1 has me thinking that maybe all of this talk about the end user cost of muni-networks is, in part, wrong.

One way that most Community Wireless networks are different from other broadband networks is that they view their wireless service as supplemental. In other words, NYCwireless wouldn’t ever expect to be the *only* Internet service that a person uses. This is true for most CWNs, especially those in urban places.

As such, our pricing models expect that usage of the networks is an add on to a user’s already expensive broadband connection. This is one way that commercial Wi-Fi is different, and why so many people are unhappy about the high prices. Is the $30 per month (or thereabout) price of a T-Mobile Wi-Fi a supplemental service fee, or is it a primary broadband connection fee?

I already pay over $100 per month for my DSL at home. I’m not going to pay another $20 or $30 per month just to get Wi-Fi periodically. And neither are most other people (discount the road-warrior types who’s businesses pay for their supplemental internet fees).

We need a more sophisticated pricing model. And this is what bothers me about the Philadelphia prices. The Philly network imagines that it is the primary broadband connection for people living in the city. But what about all of the people who already have $40-$60 home DSL and cablemodems? Wireless Philadelphia should make sense for them as well, except they won’t really use it at home, just when they are away from home.

I think this is critical for the project’s success. What is the right price for supplemental Internet? I personally would pay about $5 *total* for all other broadband I would use outside of my home. I suspect that this pricing is about what other people would be willing to pay as well. This type of pricing model respects existing broadband service, and offers the opportunity for Philadelphia to capture more of the market. It also acknowledges that one company/organization can’t solve the universal broadband issue by itself.

Who says that I should only have 1 broadband connection? Telcos, cable companies, WISPs, and any other broadband provider *must* embrace this view of the market, because its the way things will be in the future.

[1]http://www.philly.com/mld/philly/12888807.htm

Filed under: Community Wireless, Muniwireless, NYCwireless, Policy, Urban Wireless

October 12, 2005 • 8:18 am 0

Wireless Toroto Launches First Big Hotspot

Those of you who have been attending NYCwireless meetings in the last year may have met Gabe Sawhney who recently started “Wireless Toronto”:1. Gabe came down to NYC this past spring to talk about community wireless, and then went back to Toronto and started up his own wireless group there.

Like “Ile Sans Fil”:2 in Montreal, “Wireless Toronto”:1 is going after “local businesses, especially cafes, pubs, and restaurants”:3. They’ve just launched one of their biggest hotspots at the “St. Lawrence Market”:4, a large open-air farmers’ market. You can read about it in “this article”:5.

[1]http://wirelesstoronto.ca
[2]http://www.ilesansfil.org
[3]http://wirelesstoronto.ca/wt_hotspot_locations.php
[4]http://www.stlawrencemarket.com/
[5]http://www.theglobeandmail.com/servlet/story/RTGAM.20051007.gtmarket1007/BNStory/Technology

Filed under: Community Wireless, NYCwireless

October 7, 2005 • 1:01 pm 0

WSFII Presentation On October 1, 2005

I’ve posted the presentation I gave at the “World Summit on Free Information Infrastructures”:1 (WSFII). I “wrote about this conference previously”:2, and it was wonderful to participate! I learned quite a lot about what’s going on overseas — Europe and India — and made some good friends too.

You can download it here: “WSFII Presentation – NYCwireless Oct. 1, 2005″:3

You can also see photos from the event here: “Flickr photos from WSFII”:4

[1]http://www.wsfii.org
[2]http://www.wirelesscommunity.info/2005/09/15/world-summit-on-free-information-infrastructure/
[3]http://www.wirelesscommunity.info/wp-content/20051001WorldSummitonFreeInformationInfrastructuresNYCwireless.pdf
[4]http://www.flickr.com/photos/tags/wsfii

Filed under: Community Wireless, Event, NYCwireless, WSFII

October 7, 2005 • 1:00 am 0

Free Press Map of Community Internet Projects

“Free Press”:1 has put up a terrific interactive map of “Community Internet Across America”:2 that gives a nationwide view of all of the community internet projects, including NYCwireless, underway.

This map is a great way for you to see what’s happening across the country, and maybe in your backyard. If you don’t see a dot in your area, then either let Free Press know about an existing community internet project, or start your own. Its easy, and is a great way to help your community grow!

[1]http://www.freepress.net
[2]http://www.freepress.net/communityinternet/networks.php

Filed under: Community Wireless, Muniwireless, News, NYCwireless, Policy

Twitter

Error: Twitter did not respond. Please wait a few minutes and refresh this page.

Blog Stats

  • 1,117 hits
Follow

Get every new post delivered to your Inbox.

%d bloggers like this: