Wireless Community

Icon

Can Wi-Fi make it in Manhattan?

C|Net’s article “Can Wi-Fi make it in Manhattan”:1 lays out very clearly the state of affairs in New York City with regards to municipal and affordable broadband. NYCwireless, along with a number of other supporters like “Andrew Rasiej”:2 and “Micah Sifry”:3, have been battling the apathy here regarding affordable broadband, and it feels like we’re finally starting to make progress.

There are plenty of organizations (profit and non-profit alike) in NYC that been helping different constituencies get access to broadband in NYC at affordable rates. But if we want to address the issue for everyone, then the City Government must be involved. And thankfully, City Councilmember Gale Brewer has been both supportive and vocal in her work to address these issues. And there are lots of others in our City government that are as supportive, if not as vocal. Unfortunately, Mayor Bloomberg is completely disconnected and uninterested in addressing the issue.

[1]http://news.com.com/Can+Wi-Fi+make+it+in+Manhattan/2100-7351_3-5992316.html
[2]http://www.personaldemocracy.com/about/#andrew
[3]http://www.personaldemocracy.com/about/#micah

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

Municipal Wireless is Good for the Broadband Marketplace

There’s a comment that Rick Truocchio left on the MuniWireless article “Scrooge of the Year nomination: BellSouth”:1 — about how BellSouth recinded an offer to the city of New Orleans for use of one one of the buildings for free when the city announced its free wireless network — that really highlights the delusion of broadband providers, both big and small, when it comes to Municipal Wireless.

His comment:

bq. First off that is illegal and unpractical. Second I do not see how you do not get the point of BellSouth. They pay millions in taxes and give free internet to government agencies, who then turn around and use their tax money to compete directly with them by give the service that they make money off of to pay thise taxes, for free. You cannot compete with free.

bq. If the city open a restaurant on Bourbon Street and gave away free food I am sure you would see local restauranteurs up in arms as well, and they dont employee half of what bell does, nor do they pay near the taxes, nor do they assist the local govt in achieveing their connectivity goals.

bq. Sorry to burst the philanthopic business bubble, but there still is no such thing as a free lunch, and bell nor anyother intelligent successful/business operator is not going to give free buildings away to a city that threatens to put them out of business or severly cut into thier market share. Economics 101.

bq. I compete with bell and cable co’s all day, but I can never compete with free wireless from a municipality as a small business. This amounts to taxpayer subsidised competition (if taxpayer money is used) which is really not fair or level competition becuase private enterprise does not have access to the same money or free right of way that the city enjoys.

bq. Regards,

bq. Rick

My response:

bq. Rick, do you compete with free dialup? Sure you do. Every broadband provider is “threatened” by free dialup connections. Why should I pay for your broadband when I can dialup to the internet for free?

bq. The answer is simple! I get more service and support from a company that I buy DSL from then from a free dialup service. Municipal Wireless is the same. You compete not just on cost, but on value.

bq. Essentially, Municipal Wireless is raising the floor for broadband. Instead of the base level of service being dialup, it will now be the wireless service that is provided by the city, or by an organization working with the city.

bq. Does this change your marketplace? Sure it does. But it doesn’t cut you out of the market. Just like you need to change strategy when Verizon starts to offer FiOS in your area.

bq. This is healthy marketplace competition. *That* is Economics 101. According to your view, you’d rather the marketplace be stagnant. And frankly, though I always root for the small ISP in the marketplace, you suggest that customers suffer just so you can live. That’s both unpractical and, more importantly, damaging to our country.

Some people complain loudly about how municipalities shouldn’t compete with private industry. First, this is downright wrong. Of course municipalities should be able to compete with private industry, especially when there aren’t otherwise enough competitors in the marketplace to provide value to consumers. And while they should be competing *fairly*, most people who complain ignore the fact that the Telcos and Cable Companies already have an unfair advantage because of the tax breaks and subsidies they receive from government.

Second, markets evolve. And in the course of that evolution, some companies die, and every company changes. This is both healthy and unavoidable.

Third, municipal wireless doesn’t kill competitors. If anything, it helps small businesses by bringing more consumers into the marketplace. As Joe Plotkin of Bway.net likes to say, he’s actually *gained* customers by supporting NYCwireless.

[1]http://www.muniwireless.com/municipal/936/

Filed under: Muniwireless, News, Policy

$100 Laptop Plus Mesh Networking Equals Salvation for US, Too

$100 Laptop

The “$100 Laptop that the MIT Media Lab:1 has been working on has gotten some press lately, and for good reason. I was at the Lab for a reunion gathering a few weeks ago, and Nicholas Negroponte talked about the “$100 Laptop”:1 as more of a vehicle for social change, as opposed to just another piece of hardware. It is cheap and functional, and it will enable entire countries to equip all of their children with an educational tool.

Most importantly, it will act as a vehicle for an entire country’s youth generation to gain a voice that is independent of the government and independent of the established power structures. Its action as a social tool comes almost entirely from the inclusion of mesh wireless technology into the Laptop, so that each child can communicate with every other child using peer-to-peer wireless connections. Imagine the early American Pony Express, where letters were handed from person to person in order to travel across the country.

Nicholas is appropriately concentrating on third world countries with the “$100 Laptop”:1. But as a vehicle for social change, the Laptop, with mesh wireless, stands to be a powerful force in the US and other first world countries as well, and not just for kids. Right now — and if you’ve read this blog, you know about this already — all communications technologies in the US necessarily get filtered through large Telco/Cable/Media companies. SBC plus AT&T and Verizon plus Sprint control a majority of this country’s communications pipes, and as “I’ve spoken about in the past”:2, are increasingly seeking ways to control the content and conversations that take place over “their” networks.

This is bad for everyone. A reliance on asymmetrical communication services (cable-modems, DSL) chokes off our voices, and our country becomes more and more influenced by fewer and fewer people who care less and less about us, the public.

What can we do? The mesh networking built into Nicholas’ “$100 Laptop”:1 enables communication from person to person, without any need to interact with the Telco companies that want to stifle real conversation. If everyone in the US had a “$100 Laptop”:1 with mesh networking, there would truly be conversation “For the People, By the People”.

This is the real power of a transformative technology, one that can effect change in both First and Third World countries.

[1]http://laptop.media.mit.edu
[2]http://wirelesscommunity.files.wordpress.com/2005/12/tnlaptopcrank1.jpg2005/11/02/sbc-ceo-claims-he-owns-the-internet-and-will-charge-everyone-for-its-use/

Filed under: Community Wireless, Mesh, News, Urban Wireless

Updated: NYC SIG-CHI Panel Presentation on Dec. 7th

_note: this entry was republished today as a reminder_

I will be appearing on December 7th from 6:30pm-8:30pm on a panel at the next “NYC SIG-CHI”:1 meeting discussing wireless networks and building software for wireless broadband use. I’ll be concentrating my talk on NYCwireless and the software that I and others have built to make use of our Wi-Fi networks, and I’ll also talk a bit about social software and how wireless technologies play a role in bringing social software into more natural social situations.

The panel should be fun. Scott Weiss of Usable Products will speak on quantitative research for mobile devices. Josh Rubin, formerly with UPOC and now on his own, and John Devanney of MOMENT will also be speaking. I expect there will be much open discussion about the different aspects of mobile design.

*UPDATE: The panel has been postponed until January 18. Please update your calendars!*

[1]http://groups.yahoo.com/group/nycchi

Filed under: Community Wireless, Event, New York City, NYCwireless, Urban Wireless

No Mesh Networking Standards Yet

An “article in Mobile Pipeline”:1 (as “reported by Glenn”:2 at Wi-Fi Networking News) discusses the six vendors of mesh wireless technologies — BelAir, Cisco, Firetide, Motorola (mesh division), Tropos, and Strix — and indicates that there are no standards between any of them.

We can assume that market forces as well as smart business will eventually cause these vendors and others to come to an agreement on mesh networking protocols and architecture. There’s also work being done by the IEEE 802.11 standards body to a “create 802.11s mesh networking standard”:3. And of course, it would make sense for clients — businesses and expecially municipal governments — to push these vendors to standardize their products to ensure that there’s no vendor lock in. This is particularly important for governments, and should be a criteria for any muni-wireless RFP.

Mobile Pipeline neglects to discuss the open source projects that provide well developed mesh technology. CUWiN, Freifunk, and LocustWorld integrate mesh technologies–”CUWiN”:4 using “Hazy Sighted Link State (HSLS)”:5, “Freifunk”:6 using “Optimized Link State Routing (OLSR)”:7, and “LocustWorld”:8 using “Ad hoc On Demand Distance Vector (AODV)”:9. In both of these cases these mesh networks use published, open standards for meshing.

I know I’m leaving out a number of other open source or open standard mesh networking projects. Please let me know what else should be included here.

[1]http://www.mobilepipeline.com/showArticle.jhtml?articleId=174403205&pgno=1
[2]http://wifinetnews.com/archives/006104.html
[3]http://grouper.ieee.org/groups/802/11/Reports/tgs_update.htm
[4]http://cuwireless.net
[5]http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Hazy_Sighted_Link_State_Routing_Protocol
[6]http://www.freifunk.net
[7]http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/OLSR
[8]http://www.locustworld.com/
[9]http://moment.cs.ucsb.edu/AODV/

Filed under: Mesh, News

Interview in the New Haven Advocate: Take My WiFi, Please

I was interviewed for an article in the New Haven Advocate, titled “Take My WiFi, Please”:1, about New Haven’s Muniwireless initiative. This is a great article that really touches on the reasons why a small town (and really any town) would want to support some form of municipal network:

bq. Sometimes, citizens take matters in their own hands. If the residents of an apartment building buy small routers for their apartments, they often have enough coverage radius that the street in front of them becomes a wireless hotspot. Many businesses offer strong wireless signals, knowing that neighbors can use the signal (in our offices, the Omni Hotel “WiFi” wireless fidelity signal is strong enough that we can use it). In New York City, NYC Wireless, a non-profit organization, has gotten parks to agree to place routers at key spots to turn the parks into free wireless hot spots. So you can sit in Bryant Park or Union Square and check your email on your laptop. Parks and businesses and citizens can team up, too, to make a whole block or neighborhood WiFi-enabled.

bq. Then there is “municipal broadband.” Dana Spiegel, the executive director of NYC Wireless, defines municipal broadband as “merely the local government stepping in to spur the development of universal coverage and affordably priced broadband.”

bq. …

bq. In Lafayette, La., the government built its own fiber cable network and has become a wholesale broadband internet provider. It not only gets revenue from its internet customers, but it also gets savings on its telecommunications costs, because it no longer has to pay a telecom company to carry its phone and internet traffic.

bq. But more commonly, says Spiegel, “municipal broadband could be the government putting out a contract with a company after an appropriate competition, and providing guaranteed rates for the use of local, government-owned facilities in order to build a network that is run by the private company and also, in exchange for this, requiring that there be affordable access provided to all members of the community.

bq. “The most popular model is to contract out the building, operation and maintenance of the network, let a private company do all the development, but they get use of government-owned buildings for the infrastructure “like antennae].

bq. “This is not a new model this is how cable TV was developed,” Spiegel adds. “The city said, ’Okay, we’ll franchise you to do this, we’ll give you access to our rights of way, you can use under our streets, on our buildings. In exchange, you need to pay us, provide community access TV, and all sorts of other things. And these are the benefits that a local government got out of a business using their resources.’”

bq. With wireless web, the benefits would be different, but the franchise model could be the same.

bq. …

bq. Meanwhile, these large companies, fat with profit, have shown very little interest in building a better internet. The telecoms have, according to NYC Wireless’s Dana Spiegel, “been promising for 20 or 30 years, in exchange for getting subsidies and tax credits, to build broadband infrastructure. We taxpayers have given them everything they wanted and we’ve gotten nothing. They promised 15 years ago to build nationwide fiber infrastructure. They laughed all the way to the bank. They have been spending all of their money over the past five to 10 years lobbying for their agenda and not doing a whole lot to provide better, cheaper broadband. And they’ve been found to bypass low-income communities.”

bq. What we have here is a market failure. As much as some economists assure us that the free market will take care of us all and it’s true that the American free market has brought us a wealth of computer and technology innovation in this crucial area we have fallen way behind. The European and Asian countries where government and private industry have worked together, now have faster, cheaper, more accessible broadband internet.

bq. That helps poor people get jobs. It helps small businesses compete. And, yes, it helps lonely people find dates. It spreads the benefits of the internet across the population.

[1]http://newhavenadvocate.com/gbase/News/content?oid=oid:135562

Filed under: Interview, Muniwireless, News, NYCwireless

Columbia Spectator Takes University to Task for Anemic Wi-Fi

The Columbia Spectator has taken Columbia University to task in a “scathing editorial about the lack of ubiquitous Wi-Fi”:1 across the University and its dormitories.

bq. Internet access has become a necessary tool for every facet of a college education, and wireless coverage that benefits administrators more than it does students and faculty is absurd. It is unacceptable that Earl Hall, Avery, and the President’s house are the only campus buildings with full wireless coverage. Not even Butler, the 24-hour library where a significant percentage of the student body can be found at any given time, has the same wireless coverage provided to Bollinger and other administrators. Many classrooms and dorms have yet to be provided with wireless coverage at all.

bq. Lisa Hogarty, executive vice president for administrative and student services at Columbia, recently explained the University’s wireless priorities by saying that “Our strategy … is that all of the learning spaces, most broadly defined, get this technology.” Hogarty’s self-proclaimed strategy, while an admirable start, is not good enough. If the University is truly set on improving wireless coverage on campus, it will immediately begin examining the feasibility of providing full wireless coverage to all academic buildings, libraries and dorms.

Lisa Hogarty (lhogarty@columbia.edu) clearly has a lot to learn about how learning happens. This is a very unfortunate state of affairs for the Vice President for Student Services for a top University.

I remember that while at MIT (a university that “understands ubiquitous wireless”:2) much of my learning happened outside of the classroom: staying up late in common areas of my dorm hall, researching at the libraries, hanging out in indoor and outdoor common areas, reading while eating breakfast, lunch, or dinner, and bumping into other students or professors in the hall, just to name a few. Every single square foot of a college is a “learning space”, 24×7.

I certainly support the students and the Columbia Spectator on this issue. Columbia should set an example and provide real ubiquitous Wi-Fi, not drag its feet and make excuses.

And Columbia, if you need NYCwireless to help you out, just ask.

[1]http://www.columbiaspectator.com/vnews/display.v/ART/2005/12/01/438e6a8719eb9
[2]http://www.wirelesscommunity.info/2005/12/02/tracking-wireless-network-users-in-real-time/

Filed under: New York City, News, Policy

Tracking Wireless Network Users in Real-Time

[MIT has created a great tool for exploring the use of its campus-wide Wi-Fi network":1. The tool displays a real time view of the location of each Wi-Fi user on campus, and provides a way to visualize the patterns of network use over time. Its not a tracking tool per se, but rather a trend analysis tool.

I'd love to see a tool like this available on all public networks (anonymous of course). Some of the tools in WifiDog -- a centralized hotspot management tool that "NYCwireless":2 is working to deploy -- enables a form of this statistical analysis (its a start, anyway). With a little more work it would be possible to easily see the trends of use of public wireless networks like "NYCwireless":2 and "Île Sans Fil":3. With a bit more work, we will be able to tease out trends that bridge both online use and changes in the physical world environment (time of day, sales, events, etc.). This type of analysis will be particularly important especially for large scale networks like those planned for deployment in Philadelphia and San Francisco.

[1]http://seattlepi.nwsource.com/business/1700AP_Wireless_Campus.html
[2]http://www.nycwireless.net
[3]http://www.ilesansfil.org

Filed under: News, Urban Wireless

Twitter

Follow

Get every new post delivered to your Inbox.