What is Digg?134 Comments
- inactive, on 10/12/2007, -3/+72"State law prohibits cities from providing more than a relatively sluggish 128-kbps network, but New Orleans offered its faster network as an emergency relief effort."
This goes to show that the Telco's don't give a flying F%#* about public relations. Kudos to the city's CIO. - xocomil, on 10/12/2007, -1/+53It makes me sick to see this kind of crap. The city's WiFi was put in place by city funds that were paid for by the tax payers. Now, these tax payers are benefiting from a useful network and the major telcos and cable companies don't want anything to do with it. They want it to be illegal for tax funds to be used to make a better network. They've accepted money from us to run fiber to every home by 2006. It's now 2006 how many of us have fiber at our houses? How many of us are paying Comcast $50 for 3Mbit service/$70 for 8Mbit service? How many of us are paying outrageous prices for crappy DSL connections? I want my damn fiber that I PAID FOR in tax concessions to these *****. I don't want to hear them whining about how expensive it is. We gave them BILLIONS to do this. Now they want the tax concessions to continue, but they want the government to concede on the point of FTTP and allow them to run it to the "street" or to the neighborhood meaning you're still on copper going out of your house.
I'm sorry for the rant, but it pisses me off that we paid for them to build these damn networks that they are using to try to extort money out of Internet companies to make sure there stuff goes through at optimal speeds. We paid for all the damn dark fiber they refuse to sell or light up...... - mikoslav, on 10/12/2007, -2/+53And not only public relations, they obviously don't give a ***** about people either!
- tazamore, on 10/12/2007, -0/+40Monopolies have no need for public relations.
- inactive, on 10/12/2007, -1/+35Greedy bastards...
- Bobius, on 10/12/2007, -0/+28These people are idiots. I'm from New Orleans, born and raised in St. Bernard Parish, which pretty much no longer exists. I still live in the city. Hearing this bull just really pisses me off. The wifi isn't even city wide. It's only located in the CBD (Central Buisness District), so it doesn't even really effect residental customers. How many buisness order the crappy 256Kbs service, which the broadband companys offer?
There are basically two major broadband providers down here, Cox and BellSouth. Sure they're systems were all destroyed by the storm also, but they're not hurting because of the CBD wifi. They get their money from residental customers like me who have to pay $50/month for a 4Mb/s connection that doesn't always work.
They don't understand that their buisness has dropped mainly because people don't have houses. Seriously, do you actually know how many people are living in trailers? It's been over 6 months since the storm and there are litteraly over 100,000 trailers in the New Orleans Area. 95% of the people who stayed in St. Bernard are living in them. It's what happens when your house is under 11 feet of water and 3 feet of oil for 3 weeks or so, and FEMA says "f*** you" you didn't fill out your application correctly.. no help for you!
I guess it doesn't really matter.. Next hurricane season we're all gone anyway. We'll still have levees made out of sand bags.
Just my $0.02. - tdkme, on 10/12/2007, -1/+21if they can't make money from it, they want to block it. It is a shame.
- Chipper, on 10/12/2007, -0/+19Municipalities should support infrastructure that is critical to economy. This is why roads and public transit are maintained by public tax dollars. They are simply too important to relegate to the whims of capitalism. Is WiFi that necessary? I think it is becoming so where so much of our economy is based on telecommunications. Think of the impact of our economy if we returned to almost every road being a private way requiring tolls paid to private land owners over which they passed. I'm obviously exaggerating for effect, but when something becomes intertwined with the well being of the state, the private sector has to agree that it's survival is subject to control of infrastructure by government.
- ezweave, on 10/12/2007, -0/+19Again...
THIS IS NOT CAPITALISM
This is the opposite of a free market economy. This is a type of monopoly. True capitalism has failures, but this is not it. This is NOT A FREE MARKET ECONOMIC problem. This is what happens when lobbyists cement a monopoly through legislation. - AhmedF, on 10/12/2007, -2/+20Time to start writing letters again.
- marillion, on 10/12/2007, -2/+19Government does not have an unfair advantage. It does not have unlimited supply of funds. The ability to raise taxes is limited by the electorate's tolerance for higher taxes. The ONLY advantage government has is a lack of profit incentive.
- buffymcmuffy, on 10/12/2007, -1/+18I would have thought that they could argue that 'OK, once you have phone and net coverage back to the level it was before the storm we will take the wifi down.' or does that just make sence?
- derherr, on 10/12/2007, -2/+18And in 2011 the city could be wiped off the map by another hurricane.
- JasonPrini, on 10/12/2007, -0/+16China bans VoIP, Corporate America trying to ban, no, CRIMINALIZE!!! Free WiFi.... FCC saying the telcos can extort sites...
China doesn't look so bad next to the US these days; at least when it comes to telcom. - jasoneisen, on 10/12/2007, -0/+15Just think, this gives New Orleans the ability to rebuild their infrastructure from scratch. Hopefully they take advantage of it with things like this. By 2010 they could possibly be the most technologically advanced city in the US. Hopefully they lay down the law on those telcos.
- dclowd9901, on 10/12/2007, -5/+20Stand up to the Telcos. They're evil *****. We'll stand behind you, in whatever way we can.
- garyinthehouse, on 10/12/2007, -2/+16What the hell is this thing against free wifi??! I get so pissed b/c wifi is very inexpensive and since it is inexpensive, all these major telcos are against it. Screw them
- toad3k, on 10/12/2007, -3/+17If a company can't compete with the government at their own specialty, it should get into a different business.
- tysonkam, on 10/12/2007, -1/+15There will soon be a prevailing opinion that broadband is as critical a part of a community's infrastructure as water and sewer. The telco's will fight it all the way.
- Blaze312, on 10/12/2007, -2/+15I say let it stay up forever. If cable/dsl companies still want some of the action they could offer cheap service at speeds greater then 512kbps.
It's my opinion that this entire country is going to be one free wifi network eventually anyways.
I live in MI and there is a city just north of me that has free WiFi. I am not sure on the speed though, and it doesn't cover the whole city either, they just have APs like every half mile. Still a useful resource though. - thegreatfoo, on 10/12/2007, -0/+12That is the guy I want running my city. Willing to stand up to anyone for the city. GO GO Gadget Arms
- llbbl, on 10/12/2007, -3/+14@xocomil
Exactly dood. I'm frikkin sick of slow ass over priced garbage for high speed service. Its about time the Telcos get a kick in the shorts. The gov needs to step in more frikken often because capitalism is NOT getting the job done. The Telcos have turned into a monopoly that just extort money out of people and other businesses at any chance they can get without actually improving their infrastructure. All the money just goes to their bottom line. - Intertron, on 10/12/2007, -1/+11I honestly can't understand how the Telcos have any say whatsoever when cities want to have free wi-fi. If I want to stand on the corner and give out free candy, can Russell Stover march himself down and command I stop? Mindblowing! Compete or get the hell out of town.
- theitmonkey, on 10/12/2007, -0/+10The thing that is humorous to me is that I believe the Telco in question thought they could get away with it. They thought no one, other than those directly effected by it, would be aware of it. These people sell Internet access, you would think that they would just KNOW that word of this would spread like wild fire on the net. True, the mainstream media will probably not cover it outside of the area but the Internet sees all and knows all.
God I love the interweb! - ronintetsuro, on 10/12/2007, -0/+9Telco's can go rot. They fight change like dogs chase cars. And change drives technology industries, so telco's are just being a pain because they're greedy.
- Intertron, on 10/12/2007, -0/+9Unbelievable. You only got your phones up two weeks ago and they pull this crap??? Forget about unfair business practices- they are violating universal rules of common decency to other human beings.
- ezweave, on 10/12/2007, -0/+9They are greedy.
They have effectively created a cross between a local and a coercive monopoly: they are the only game in town AND they use government regulation to enforce this. This makes people mad because they are preventing the free market from working to provide a better solution. Their arguments are usually: we provide alot of jobs and we provide something you NEED.
This is actually the opposite of the Free Market forces of capitalism and a bastard one at that: at least if Uncle Sam ran the Telco's they would have more control over this kind of thing (which could be very bad).
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Coercive_monopoly - Ahnteis, on 10/12/2007, -4/+12Writing letters to the lawmakers. (Does this NEED a "DUH"?)
Sheesh. - thomasthecat, on 10/12/2007, -0/+7More often than not on the municipal level, a referendum needs to be called if the city/county is going to raise taxes so that the citizens themselves have a chance to specifically agree or disagree to paying for a government provided service.
This whole story seems to be yet another instance of companies trying to hold on to old business models and practices in an era where technology is quickly requiring much more creative thinking from them. The Internet has become such an important aspect of most Americans' daily lives that I think having it as a free government provided service makes a lot of sense. If the telecom companies don't like it, then it's their job to figure out what to do with themselves to stay viable. Slowing the natural progress of human/technology interaction is not an option, and the companies that don't figure that out will go the way of the proverbial dinosaur soon enough. - beasty_dave_Mk2, on 10/12/2007, -1/+8“We are talking to Yahoos and Googles to step up and access the rest of the city,”
Dugg for making yahoo and google a plural. lol...I love the internets!
(and the guy has ethics...something the world needs more of) - hlynch1, on 10/12/2007, -1/+8This sucks bc i live in new orleans and we just got our phones back up like 2 weeks ago or so. still no cable or dsl in my area. so i am stuck using dial up that doesnt want to connect faster than 28.8.
- saso, on 10/12/2007, -0/+7It is great to see someone standing up for consumers - nay, citizens. I can understand why the telcos are worried about their business model, but free WI-fi will generate a lot more the overall economy than the profits of telcos.
Wasn't the infrastructure built with tax dollars and government incentives anyway? Internet should be like a utility, nominal fee and free access.
Too bad the lobbyist control the government. - Hubris, on 10/12/2007, -0/+6Regardless of whether they SHOULD have any say.....they have already successfully lobbied to have laws making city-provided free networking illegal, since it would make it very difficult for them to sell incredibly expensive cellular data services. Now they're pushing to have the laws enforced, because they don't want a precident set that allows cheap competition.
Politicians in their pockets...you see. - nebunezzar, on 10/12/2007, -0/+6Perhaps instead of whining about the free internet access, how about making a service worth paying for? Asian countries have much faster internet for a lot less than we currently pay. The telcos seem more interested in grabbing every last cent from people than bettering their services.
- z.unit, on 10/12/2007, -0/+6'This city, will be a Wi-Fi city!"
- BobTurtle, on 10/12/2007, -1/+7That is what they are saying! The article does a poor job of explaining the actual debate so your question is valid. When New Orleans "state of emergency" is lifted (later this year, not yet), the city is suppose to go back to offering wifi speeds slower than 128kbps. The issue is that the CIO says he intends to keep offering 512kbps wifi after the state of emergency has ended.
- nebunezzar, on 10/12/2007, -0/+6I almost hate to say it, but it's about time data lines became a utility like water and electricity and become heavily regulated as such. It's all about content anyways so the telcos should switch to providing telephone, television, and internet services insteading of bitching over the pipes.
- MattH, on 10/12/2007, -0/+5One town that is nearby me is setting up thier own Muni WiFi becuse T3 lines run through the town but the ISPs wont comint to a rollout becuse of the low population density of the town near a popular Ski Area in Southern vermont .
- inactive, on 10/12/2007, -1/+6I assume BellSouth is worried that a government Internet service will unfairly interfere with their business. Please! When has government services ever been able to keep up with private sector over time? Oh yeah, we're talking about BellSouth. I guess a mammoth, sluggish quasi-monopoly might have something to worry about.
- LooterMcBeer, on 10/12/2007, -1/+6Congress will step in since its new Orleans and dont be suprised if they dont tell the telcos to piss off for once in their life New Orleans is a touchy subject and with the wrong decision they dont get back into office. Congressmen as of late having been turning away from telcos cause they see it going downhill fast before too long
- DougieD, on 10/12/2007, -1/+5And then in 2012, all of the world will come to an apocalyptic end (well, at least according to the Mayans.)
- obeseotron, on 10/12/2007, -2/+6That this is happening in New Orleans is really unbelievable. I can imagine no city or state where a majority of the people would agree the municipal wifi should be illegal, maybe a majority wouldn't want one built, but not to the point of illegality. The telcos will scream Communism and all kinds of other nonsense, while they get the FCC to shut down competition on their lines. Duplicitous *****. This isn't the free market or state planning, this is the worst aspects of both those things combined.
- johnhummel, on 10/12/2007, -1/+5In a lot of ways, this system reflects the change from private electrical power to public utilities. "The public doesn't want the government to provide this service - private industry should!" These arguments were made back in the 1890's - and it was only when the state started putting in the water/electrical systems did the industrial revolution really take off.
The same is true here: telecommunications has reached a point where it is as necessary as water, home heating, and electricity, and I see no logical reason why this can not be a public provided service. Allow private industry competition for innovation, but allow municipalities and cities to provide a basic service to the citizens.
So far, it appears to have been working for New Orleans, and has been very beneficial to that city. I wonder what kind of a fight the big TelCos will have on their hands? Sounds like by this one CIO a bigger one than they thought. - MrStylz, on 10/12/2007, -0/+4PA has banned free WiFi except in Philly. The govener was bribed (I mean campaign funded) by the telecoms to put the bill through. Funny that he's from Philly and it was the only exclusion...
It's BS if you ask me. Even with free WiFi, it comes with strings attached, usually with bandwidth and speed. I wouldn't see a lot of people using it as thier home connection, anyway. - iiftmlis, on 10/12/2007, -0/+4Cities and other organizations frequently offer food for free without the interference of grocery stores.
Cities certainly do not have "unlimited funds" and they cannot "simply raise taxes" anymore than a company can simple raise prices. Tax levels need to be set very carefully as do prices. - supasonicsage, on 10/12/2007, -0/+3I don't know. I live in New Orleans and the only place this wifi network works (if it does, I haven't seen it) is in the Central Business District. There are not a whole lot of residential customers that are using this. You also have to keep in mind that an election is coming up here and these politicians want to keep the businesses happy for election contributions.
I guess what I am saying, is that like everything else in New Orleans, I will believe it when I see it, and even then, New Orleans is famous for putting something in and then taking it out again.
"The ONLY advantage government has is a lack of profit incentive." Not in New Orleans, my friend. Believe me. - Intertron, on 10/12/2007, -1/+4And our argument is that internet access is as basic as water, electricity, and sewer. When everyone has cheap access to it, the city prospers.
On a related note, if the city can offer it free, don't you think you are being slightly overcharged at $24.99-49.99 a month or more from a telco? It's just not that expensive anymore to provide internet access or, especially, phone service. Telcos refuse to acknowledge this and, like engorged ticks, just want to forever suck blood from their cash cows- us. - ronintetsuro, on 10/12/2007, -0/+3Aren't you over reacting a bit here? We're talking about providing the internet to people in a devestated zone, not federally sanctioned schooling.
The internet can be used as a tool to communicate to other people, purchase goods, and recreate. Three things those people are more than deserving to have. Some ***** ex-monopoly telco wants to keep them from having that for free so that later (when they deem it necessary and not before) they can roll it out at slower speeds and at higher cost to the consumer.
Can YOU honestly say you advocate that? That's pretty sick man. - KyleRayner, on 10/12/2007, -0/+3"What if your city started offering free groceries to everyone?"
Thats a false dilemma. In this case, New Orlean's free WiFi is the equivalent of the state giving out emergency rations for free.
"Why is wireless access somehow different then any other service offered in a free market?"
Most folks here are trying to make the point that wifi access (or internet access period) is now as necessary in America as highways, water service, and sewer service, all of which are provided by cities, and regulated. - mesoed, on 10/12/2007, -0/+3This fight is going on all over the place. It's essentially this:
Have we advanced to the point where Internet access is a UTILITY such as water, gas, electric, phone? Even though the net is essentially run on phone circuits, the telcos still want to differentiate Internet access as something other than a utility. Labeling Internet access as a utility opens the door for government control on a whole variety of things... including pricing. -
Show 51 - 100 of 132 discussions
The Digg Toolbar for Firefox lets you Digg, submit content, and keep track of Digg even when you're not on the Digg site. Download the official 
© Digg Inc. 2009
— Content created and posted by Digg users is