NEWS: Free Wi-Fi still a goer in San Fran'

<http://www.theregister.co.uk/2008/06/12/free_wi_fi_san_francisco/>

While municipal Wi-Fi systems are being switched off from
Philadelphia to Cupertino, San Francisco is planning to have the
whole city connected wirelessly by the end of the year.

Haight-Ashbury and the Mission District are already covered by the
"Free The Net" project, a mesh network run by Meraki and paid for as
a research project by the company, which is backed by Google amongst
others. But yesterday Mayor Gavin Newsom said the project will be
available to all San Francisco residents by the end of the year.

This follows on from the last attempts to wireless-up the city, in a
joint venture with Google and Earthlink. That project foundered on
privacy concerns and funding problems, having someone else to pay for
it might help this time around. Additionally this time Google is one
step removed, which might distract those with privacy concerns.

Certainly municipal Wi-Fi isn't having a lot of success around the
US. Earthlink is pulling out of its Philadelphia deployment after
offering to hand over the infrastructure to anyone who wanted it and
failing to find a buyer. Meanwhile MetroFi is to shut down its
networks in Sunnyvale, Santa Clara, Cupertino and San Jose on June
20th, and is mostly concerned with avoiding the cost of ripping out
the infrastructure they've got installed in lamp-posts around the
area.

Residents of Geneva and St. Charles, Kane County are still waiting
for MeshLinx Wireless to start installing municipal Wi-Fi, which
could find itself stillborn if WiMAX deployments go ahead as
expected.

Around the world the idea of cities providing a low-bandwidth Wi-Fi
service to their residents for free has been considered, promoted,
deployed and bankrupted time and time again, but that's not stopping
San Franciso -- the city that still wants everyone to wear flowers in
its hair, and with a mayor convinced that municipal Wi-Fi should be
his legacy.

--
Best regards, FAQ for Wireless Internet: <http://Wireless.wikia.com>
John Navas FAQ for Wi-Fi: <http://wireless.wikia.com/wiki/Wi-Fi>
Wi-Fi How To: <http://wireless.wikia.com/wiki/Wi-Fi_HowTo>
Fixes to Wi-Fi Problems: <http://wireless.wikia.com/wiki/Wi-Fi_Fixes>

John Navas <(E-Mail Removed)> writes:

> <http://www.theregister.co.uk/2008/06/12/free_wi_fi_san_francisco/>
> <snip>
> Around the world the idea of cities providing a low-bandwidth Wi-Fi
> service to their residents for free has been considered, promoted,
> deployed and bankrupted time and time again, but that's not stopping
> San Franciso -- the city that still wants everyone to wear flowers in
> its hair, and with a mayor convinced that municipal Wi-Fi should be
> his legacy.

Try <http://www.newsguide.us/technology/networking/Meraki-Extends-Free-The-Net-Project-In-San-Francisco-To-Affordable-Housing-Complexes/>

It seems that no city funds are involved and that the company
providing it intends to sell hardware/software to anyone who
wants to create such a network.

The bad feature I found so far is described at
<http://sf.meraki.com/faq#tech>, which claims that the first
time you use it, you get some sort of "splash screen", which
I guess is a web page, and that you can "click through it" to
go to where you first intended. If you don't have a browser
or use a browser, it is not clear what happens.

Bill Z. wrote:
> John Navas <(E-Mail Removed)> writes:
>
>> <http://www.theregister.co.uk/2008/06/12/free_wi_fi_san_francisco/>
>> <snip>
>> Around the world the idea of cities providing a low-bandwidth Wi-Fi
>> service to their residents for free has been considered, promoted,
>> deployed and bankrupted time and time again, but that's not stopping
>> San Franciso -- the city that still wants everyone to wear flowers in
>> its hair, and with a mayor convinced that municipal Wi-Fi should be
>> his legacy.
>
> Try <http://www.newsguide.us/technology/networking/Meraki-Extends-Free-The-Net-Project-In-San-Francisco-To-Affordable-Housing-Complexes/>
>
> It seems that no city funds are involved and that the company
> providing it intends to sell hardware/software to anyone who
> wants to create such a network.
>
> The bad feature I found so far is described at
> <http://sf.meraki.com/faq#tech>, which claims that the first
> time you use it, you get some sort of "splash screen", which
> I guess is a web page, and that you can "click through it" to
> go to where you first intended. If you don't have a browser
> or use a browser, it is not clear what happens.


You have to do a bit of reading to figure out this network. The idea is
for "volunteers" to purchase repeaters for their homes and thus extend
the network.

Here's some more info on what it actually is

http://www.dailywireless.org/2007/03...ks-the-casbah/

In ba.internet Roy <(E-Mail Removed)> wrote:
: You have to do a bit of reading to figure out this network. The idea is
: for "volunteers" to purchase repeaters for their homes and thus extend
: the network.

And in the process, violate the terms of service of their own Internet
connection.

I guess the talk of bandwidth caps will put the kibosh on this in the long
run anyway.

: Here's some more info on what it actually is

: http://www.dailywireless.org/2007/03...ks-the-casbah/

--
Dane Jasper Sonic.net, Inc.
(707)522-1000
private.php?do=newpm&u= http://www.sonic.net/

Key fingerprint = A5 D6 6E 16 D8 81 BA E9 CB BD A9 77 B3 AF 45 53

Dane Jasper <(E-Mail Removed)> wrote:

>In ba.internet Roy <(E-Mail Removed)> wrote:

>: You have to do a bit of reading to figure out this network. The idea is
>: for "volunteers" to purchase repeaters for their homes and thus extend
>: the network.

>And in the process, violate the terms of service of their own Internet
>connection.

I got the impression the city was asking for free rooftop space
and probably power, but not for the resident to supply an
internet connection to the device, which is a repeater.

In any event, this does not seem a real substitute for
the previously-planned deployment which fell through.

Steve

In article <48542aaf$0$17237$(E-Mail Removed)>,
Dane Jasper <(E-Mail Removed)> wrote:

> I guess the talk of bandwidth caps will put the kibosh on this in the long
> run anyway.

Indeed. Bandwidth caps will put the damper on many things the Internet
promised and may take away some things we take for granted now. I
suspect that one day, we'll look fondly back on unlimited dial-up
Internet service.

--
John Higdon
+1 408 ANdrews 6-4400

Dane Jasper <(E-Mail Removed)> writes:

> In ba.internet Roy <(E-Mail Removed)> wrote:
> : You have to do a bit of reading to figure out this network. The idea is
> : for "volunteers" to purchase repeaters for their homes and thus extend
> : the network.
>
> And in the process, violate the terms of service of their own Internet
> connection.

The articles on it claimed that wasn't a problem due to the ISPs the
company making the repeaters uses.

On Sat, 14 Jun 2008 13:55:38 -0700, John Higdon
<(E-Mail Removed)> wrote in
<HisRoyalRadioHigness-(E-Mail Removed)>:

>In article <48542aaf$0$17237$(E-Mail Removed)>,
> Dane Jasper <(E-Mail Removed)> wrote:
>
>> I guess the talk of bandwidth caps will put the kibosh on this in the long
>> run anyway.
>
>Indeed. Bandwidth caps will put the damper on many things the Internet
>promised and may take away some things we take for granted now. I
>suspect that one day, we'll look fondly back on unlimited dial-up
>Internet service.

I seriously doubt that. The "caps" being considered are in the GIGAbyte
range of broadband, not the MEGAbyte range of dialup. Like most people
I'm not even close to that level of transfer.

I'm not sure what you mean by "things the Internet promised" -- do you?
-- but I don't see any real risk to anything other than massive
audio/video downloading, which is NOT what the Internet was built for.

The real issue isn't "caps" -- it's the insanity of flat rate pricing,
where normal users wind up subsidizing bandwidth hogs. It's long since
time for metered usage.

--
Best regards, FAQ for Wireless Internet: <http://Wireless.wikia.com>
John Navas FAQ for Wi-Fi: <http://wireless.wikia.com/wiki/Wi-Fi>
Wi-Fi How To: <http://wireless.wikia.com/wiki/Wi-Fi_HowTo>
Fixes to Wi-Fi Problems: <http://wireless.wikia.com/wiki/Wi-Fi_Fixes>

In article <(E-Mail Removed)>,
John Navas <(E-Mail Removed)> wrote:

> I seriously doubt that. The "caps" being considered are in the GIGAbyte
> range of broadband, not the MEGAbyte range of dialup. Like most people
> I'm not even close to that level of transfer.

And if you don't need it, no one does. I understand.

> I'm not sure what you mean by "things the Internet promised" -- do you?
> -- but I don't see any real risk to anything other than massive
> audio/video downloading, which is NOT what the Internet was built for.

Could you direct me to a reference which outlines "what the Internet was
built for"? I had always mistakenly assumed that it was a dumb network
whose usage was limited only by the imagination of those utilizing it.

> The real issue isn't "caps" -- it's the insanity of flat rate pricing,
> where normal users wind up subsidizing bandwidth hogs. It's long since
> time for metered usage.

I respectfully disagree.

--
John Higdon
+1 408 ANdrews 6-4400

On Wed, 18 Jun 2008 09:46:05 -0700, John Higdon
<(E-Mail Removed)> wrote in
<HisRoyalRadioHigness-(E-Mail Removed)>:

>In article <(E-Mail Removed)>,
> John Navas <(E-Mail Removed)> wrote:
>
>> I seriously doubt that. The "caps" being considered are in the GIGAbyte
>> range of broadband, not the MEGAbyte range of dialup. Like most people
>> I'm not even close to that level of transfer.
>
>And if you don't need it, no one does. I understand.

What part of "most people" was unclear?

>> I'm not sure what you mean by "things the Internet promised" -- do you?
>> -- but I don't see any real risk to anything other than massive
>> audio/video downloading, which is NOT what the Internet was built for.
>
>Could you direct me to a reference which outlines "what the Internet was
>built for"? I had always mistakenly assumed that it was a dumb network
>whose usage was limited only by the imagination of those utilizing it.

There are ample references to the fact that multicasting wasn't a
consideration in the original design of TCP/IP, on which the Internet is
based, as I'm sure you know.

>> The real issue isn't "caps" -- it's the insanity of flat rate pricing,
>> where normal users wind up subsidizing bandwidth hogs. It's long since
>> time for metered usage.
>
>I respectfully disagree.

I take it then that you're one of those profiting from subsidies by the
rest of us.

--
Best regards, FAQ for Wireless Internet: <http://Wireless.wikia.com>
John Navas FAQ for Wi-Fi: <http://wireless.wikia.com/wiki/Wi-Fi>
Wi-Fi How To: <http://wireless.wikia.com/wiki/Wi-Fi_HowTo>
Fixes to Wi-Fi Problems: <http://wireless.wikia.com/wiki/Wi-Fi_Fixes>