Obama's free WI FI for everyone.What happens to WI FI providers?

[BrentCrude]

One of Obama's stimulus ''keynesian socialist''plans ''schemes''is to provide WI FI internet for the entire country for free.So what happens to small companies that invested fortunes in providing WI FI services?Seems like they might end up in the SOL ''Sh%t out of luck'' club or a socialist casualty of the wheel of missfortune or the dangerous game with no rules.


Do you think if the government gives away internet service they aren't going to snoop on what you are doing or block websites they don't want you to see or use?Yup!

[jtuck]

Wi-Max technology is coming and will make those small companies useless anyway.

[Sinister Cat]

wouldn't this mean more business for internet providers, not less?

[pavyracer]

wouldn't this mean more business for internet providers, not less?

Does any post by BrentCrude make sense?

[InTheHole]

Bingo...the customer service will be great...sort of like when there was one telephone company...

[InTheHole]

Better yet...if the "government" is picking up the tab does that mean individual users give up certain privacy rights?

[Bluehorseshoe]

It means they'll eventually have more control over the internet in this country. There won't be need for private service.

[Willie Bee]

Do you think if the government gives away internet service they aren't going to snoop on what you are doing or block websites they don't want you to see or use?Yup!

I'm not sure about the government snooping, maybe they will, but I can't imagine the service they will provide would have the security that other WiFi providers offer.

Still the government has offered free services before and it didn't drive others out of business. You can go down and get your child or pet vaccinated for free, yet there are still plenty of pediatricians and vets in business. There are government sponsored soup kitchens where one can eat for free, yet still plenty of restaurants charging for meals. You can file your income taxes on line for free, yet there are still plenty of CPAs and H&R Blocks out there charging for their services.

[InTheHole]

^ you're a sharp man Willie Bee...no one would pay for Internet service if it was "free". Set up a soup kitchen within a 1 mile radius where I could conveniently go in and get some food and I would eat there 7 days a week.

[battered balls]

Frightening thought. I'm surprised the Bush admin didn't come up with this. The government's form of internet is unlikely to be as "open" as the one we currently enjoy.

They would be able to block IP's on any subject matter they deemed illegal, dangerous or otherwise. That's great for fighting child porn, but what about gambling, file sharing or even political dissent? China anyone?

I have great hope for the Obama admin, but this just sounds like a horrible idea. I may sound like a conspiracy nut, however it truly is a slippery slope.

[ryanspeer2001]

Even if we had Wi-Fi coast to coast for free. I doubt it would be a very high bandwidth network. I know I've been spoiled with downloading songs in 10 seconds or less and full DVD's in under 35 minutes with high-end FIOS internet. I would pay $20+ a month to have that over low-end broadband for free. But to each their own, ya know?

[BrentCrude]

I meant it's the exciting game without any rules.Got it from the movie Bang the drum slowly.

[Slim]

Obama will do more damage to this country than Bush did.

[losturmarbles]

nothing is free

[Bluehorseshoe]

Even if we had Wi-Fi coast to coast for free. I doubt it would be a very high bandwidth network. I know I've been spoiled with downloading songs in 10 seconds or less and full DVD's in under 35 minutes with high-end FIOS internet. I would pay $20+ a month to have that over low-end broadband for free. But to each their own, ya know?

It's going to be super fast. I posted an article in here about last month. "Internet on steroids."

Big vote: FCC approves white-space Internet broadband
By Steven J. Vaughan-Nichols
Created Nov 5 2008 - 10:54am

Obama won the election, but for technology, in the short run at least, the even bigger voting news was that the FCC, by a vote of five to zero, had unanimously approved the conditional unlicensed use of white-space television spectrum [1].

White space, the 700-MHz spectrum that's being freed up as TV channels switch from fat analog signals to thinner digital transmissions, has the potential to be used for many important uses. As Larry Page, co-founder of Google, wrote [2], "We will soon have "Wi-Fi on steroids [3]" since these spectrum signals have much longer range than today's Wi-Fi technology and broadband access can be spread using fewer base stations resulting in better coverage at lower cost."

This is more though than just Wi-Fi on steroids. This is the opening of a new era of broadband. Today, most of us at home use either cable, DSL or, God help us, modems to connect with the Internet. Cable can be fast, but its speed is cut by the number of subscribers on any given line. DSL delivers OK performance, and as for modems, the less said the better.

Even as its best, cable at about 20Mbps, though today's Internet demands even more bandwidth. It's not just file-sharing with BitTorrent and the like that's grabbing bandwidth. We're moving to IPTV (Internet Protocol Television) with devices like the Apple TV, Netflix Player [4], and TiVo [5]. Even the fastest Internet connections are stressed by 720p HDTV for these devices, and with 1080p HDTV just around the corner, our last mile bandwidth infrastructure simply isn't up to the challenge.

Besides just the technology limitations, the current broadband providers, like Comcast, are capping bandwidth [6]. Just when users need more bandwidth, the providers are trying to cut the supply now.

Mobile WiMax [7] is beginning to address some of those concerns. Sprint, with the support of Google and Intel, has started launching its Xohm network [8]. We need more though and that's where the white space spectrum comes in.

700MHz signals have greater range and penetration than the higher frequencies used by Mobile WiMax and conventional Wi-Fi. After all, television stations have effective transmission ranges of dozens of miles as compared to a few miles, Mobile WiMax, or a hundred yards, Wi-Fi. This means that it will cost far less to build a white-space Internet last mile service since it requires far fewer antennas and ground-stations.

How fast will it be? We really don't know yet. It will depend on the implementations. I won't be surprised though to see multi-channel, MIMO (multiple-input and multiple-output,) white-space 'modems' in a few years delivering 40Mbps speed. As someone who now lives in western North Carolina and was raised in West Virginia, I really want to see this happen.

In the rural areas of the country any broadband can be impossible to get. Over a year ago I had to fight BellSouth, now AT&T, all the way up to the president's office to get a promised 3Mbps DSL connection. If I, who knows the Internet and datacomm backwards and forward, had to go to that much trouble, imagine what it must be like for a regular guy!

Besides just opening up rural areas for broadband, anything that delivers higher speed, and competes with the existing broadband providers with their caps and restrictions has to be a good thing. The U.S. has dropped to the second-tier of Internet using countries. It's time all of us were shifted up to faster Internet speeds and the freeing up of the 700Mhz spectrum will be a big help in that direction.

http://blogs.computerworld.com/node/12368/print

[ryanspeer2001]

It's going to be super fast. I posted an article in here about last month. "Internet on steroids."

Big vote: FCC approves white-space Internet broadband
By Steven J. Vaughan-Nichols
Created Nov 5 2008 - 10:54am

Obama won the election, but for technology, in the short run at least, the even bigger voting news was that the FCC, by a vote of five to zero, had unanimously approved the conditional unlicensed use of white-space television spectrum [1].

White space, the 700-MHz spectrum that's being freed up as TV channels switch from fat analog signals to thinner digital transmissions, has the potential to be used for many important uses. As Larry Page, co-founder of Google, wrote [2], "We will soon have "Wi-Fi on steroids [3]" since these spectrum signals have much longer range than today's Wi-Fi technology and broadband access can be spread using fewer base stations resulting in better coverage at lower cost."

This is more though than just Wi-Fi on steroids. This is the opening of a new era of broadband. Today, most of us at home use either cable, DSL or, God help us, modems to connect with the Internet. Cable can be fast, but its speed is cut by the number of subscribers on any given line. DSL delivers OK performance, and as for modems, the less said the better.

Even as its best, cable at about 20Mbps, though today's Internet demands even more bandwidth. It's not just file-sharing with BitTorrent and the like that's grabbing bandwidth. We're moving to IPTV (Internet Protocol Television) with devices like the Apple TV, Netflix Player [4], and TiVo [5]. Even the fastest Internet connections are stressed by 720p HDTV for these devices, and with 1080p HDTV just around the corner, our last mile bandwidth infrastructure simply isn't up to the challenge.

Besides just the technology limitations, the current broadband providers, like Comcast, are capping bandwidth [6]. Just when users need more bandwidth, the providers are trying to cut the supply now.

Mobile WiMax [7] is beginning to address some of those concerns. Sprint, with the support of Google and Intel, has started launching its Xohm network [8]. We need more though and that's where the white space spectrum comes in.

700MHz signals have greater range and penetration than the higher frequencies used by Mobile WiMax and conventional Wi-Fi. After all, television stations have effective transmission ranges of dozens of miles as compared to a few miles, Mobile WiMax, or a hundred yards, Wi-Fi. This means that it will cost far less to build a white-space Internet last mile service since it requires far fewer antennas and ground-stations.

How fast will it be? We really don't know yet. It will depend on the implementations. I won't be surprised though to see multi-channel, MIMO (multiple-input and multiple-output,) white-space 'modems' in a few years delivering 40Mbps speed. As someone who now lives in western North Carolina and was raised in West Virginia, I really want to see this happen.

In the rural areas of the country any broadband can be impossible to get. Over a year ago I had to fight BellSouth, now AT&T, all the way up to the president's office to get a promised 3Mbps DSL connection. If I, who knows the Internet and datacomm backwards and forward, had to go to that much trouble, imagine what it must be like for a regular guy!

Besides just opening up rural areas for broadband, anything that delivers higher speed, and competes with the existing broadband providers with their caps and restrictions has to be a good thing. The U.S. has dropped to the second-tier of Internet using countries. It's time all of us were shifted up to faster Internet speeds and the freeing up of the 700Mhz spectrum will be a big help in that direction.


http://blogs.computerworld.com/node/12368/print

Awesome post thank you!!!!!!!

My only fear with regards to that. Is that they will have the authority to cap it down as much as they see fit. I don't know if they are ready to have consumers getting 500mb down speeds. Either way that article gives me a bit of hope , and maybe one less bill at some point.