The future of wireless internet

[B~E]

http://www.nytimes.com/auth/login?URI=http://www.nytimes.com/2005/02/17/technology/17wired.html&OP=3dd5f8c9/Q2Bqd!Q2BcoQ5Bb)oo4EQ2BEQ26Q26hQ2BQ26EQ2BJ3Q2B4dQ5 BQ3FloQ20oe1Q2BJ3qS)dcQ3BQ3F4Q3DQ20

PHILADELPHIA, Feb. 11 - If Mayor John F. Street has his way, by next year this 135-square-mile metropolis will become one gigantic wireless hot spot, offering every neighborhood high-speed access to the Web at below-market prices in what would be the largest experiment in municipal Internet service in the country.

City officials envision a seamless mesh of broadband signals that will enable the police to download mug shots as they race to crime scenes in their patrol cars, allow truck drivers to maintain Internet access to inventories as they roam the city, and perhaps most important, let students and low-income residents get on the net.

Experts say the Philadelphia model, if successful, could provide the tipping point for a nationwide movement to make broadband affordable and accessible in every municipality. From tiny St. Francis, Kan., to tech-savvy San Francisco, more than 50 local governments have already installed or are on the verge of creating municipal broadband systems for the public.

But Philadelphia's plan has prompted a debate over who should provide the service, and whether government should compete with private industry, particularly in hard-to-reach rural areas or low-income urban communities. Telecommunications and cable companies say that municipal Internet networks will not only inhibit private enterprise, but also result in poor service and wasted tax dollars. They have mounted major lobbying campaigns in several states to restrict or prohibit municipalities from establishing their own networks.

"This is a growing trend, but an ominous and disturbing one," said Adam Thierer, director of telecommunications studies at the libertarian Cato Institute and the author of a soon-to-be-released study criticizing the Philadelphia plan. "The last thing I'd want to see is broadband turned into a lazy public utility."

Philadelphia officials say that will not happen here. Mr. Street has said he will try to raise corporate and foundation financing so the strapped city does not have to pay the network's $10 million startup costs. He also says the city will recruit private companies to help operate the system, asserting it will earn enough revenue to be self-sustaining.

Though details of Mr. Street's plan are still being developed, the city expects to install 4,000 wireless antennas along lampposts across the city in the next 18 months, creating a network of broadband signals.

City officials also hope to extend service into homes and businesses in poor neighborhoods, using nonprofit organizations to provide low-cost equipment, training and service.

"Just as highways were a critical infrastructure component of the last century, wireless Internet access must be a part of our infrastructure for the 21st century," Mr. Street said last month in a speech before the United States Conference of Mayors.

Most municipally run Internet systems are in small rural towns, many of which provide service at below-market rates. Philadelphia is proposing to charge $15 to $25 a month for its service, half of what private servers now charge, and even less for low-income users.

Industry officials say that if the program takes off, it will inevitably take customers from providers like the Comcast Corporation or Verizon Communications.

"Is it fair that the industry pay tax dollars to the city that are then used to launch a network that would compete with our own?" asked David L. Cohen, executive vice president of Comcast, which is based in Philadelphia. "I don't think so."

Officials in Philadelphia and other municipalities contend they never intended to compete with private companies. Many say they want to provide Internet service only because students, small businesses and low-income residents cannot afford or obtain high-speed Internet access.

Philadelphia officials say a recent survey found that nearly 40 percent of residents did not have Internet service. But industry officials say that virtually every neighborhood in the city is wired for broadband and that many people are choosing not to buy it.

Industry officials and advocates of limited government also say providing Internet access is far more risky, complicated and expensive than government officials realize. Equipment will quickly become obsolete, and slow-moving governments will not keep pace, they say.

"Government doesn't do service well," said Eric Rabe, vice president for public relations for Verizon.


------------


thats ****ing pimp. i know they were talking about this in Chicago, and they already have made most of downtown WiFi... that would just be awesome to make the whole city ****ing wireless. 15 bucks is pretty damn good, and it would definatly do wonders to bridge the digital divide. im all for cool shit like this. the federal gov't should fund this for the entire country. but no. we like going to iraq and making bonfires out of piles of money in the sand.

[AxL]

It is pretty cool, however it shouldn't be the governments job to bridge the digital divide. You have to consider how many people actually want this vs. the people that don't. Also I think the last part of your post, was pretty idiotic.

[icastbigspells]

What if someone just hacked that thing like a mo

[₪Zeratul₪]

Originally Posted by AxL

It is pretty cool, however it shouldn't be the governments job to bridge the digital divide. You have to consider how many people actually want this vs. the people that don't. Also I think the last part of your post, was pretty idiotic.

I'm pretty sick of the government running everything for Us.
Don't even get me started on the postal system, or how they broke up AT&T for "the benfit of Americans"

[RuneyPoo]

AT&T sucks anyways, on on topic... There is already wireless internet, it's called Satelite Internet. This will just be an improved version of Satelite Internet at a cheaper price, so you wont have to worry about all the cords, money, and hassle.

Good deal, luckily if they do this, prices on Adelphia High-Speed will drop majorly. ^_^

[₪Zeratul₪]

Yea, AT&T sucks now. They were broken to pieces, I LOVED my AT&T service before the government decided to step in.

[B~E]

Originally Posted by ₪Zeratul₪

I'm pretty sick of the government running everything for Us.
Don't even get me started on the postal system, or how they broke up AT&T for "the benfit of Americans"

Originally Posted by Black~Enthusiasm

Philadelphia officials say that will not happen here. Mr. Street has said he will try to raise corporate and foundation financing so the strapped city does not have to pay the network's $10 million startup costs. He also says the city will recruit private companies to help operate the system, asserting it will earn enough revenue to be self-sustaining.

Nice reading here.

[Bag]

I'm sure Comcast will get involved if it does happen here in Philly. I sure as hell wouldn't mind paying less for my internet.