Government Wants to Create Free Public 'Super Wi-Fi'

[HFWR]

My primary concern for "free" wifi is security...

I occasionally use wifi at the airport, and it seems that several times I soon noticed strange activity on my yahoo mail address, and/or on Facebook, like someone either intercepted a password, or somehow spoofed my email address.

 

[W2R]

After Katrina, we were given free highspeed wifi throughout New Orleans to help with the recovery! Wahoo! Let the good times roll.

Well, just downtown, to begin with.

Well, that was too ambitious so just a 6x8 block area at the start.

Well, you could only connect from some places in that 6x8 block area, mostly outside, because the signal was too weak and was being blocked by buildings and walls.

Well, even if/when you could find the signal some place outside, and connect, it was erratic and ridiculously slow.

I think they took it down at some point, although it would be hard to tell.

But hey, let the good times roll. And sorry if I am not more excited about government run internet.

 

[marko]

While not a fan of the gov't running anything, let's also remember that it was the government that invented the internet (sorry Mr Gore) with the development of ARPANET/DARPANET.

Fact is, the town over from me has had free wifi throughout all of downtown for almost ten years.

 

[Bikerdude]

I'm all for it, but...here's the fly in the ointment: Once there is ubiquitous wifi you'll be able to make free phone/cell calls via the likes of Google, Skype, etc etc...

Anyone really think that ATT, Verizon, TMobile and crew will allow a billion dollar industry to go away?

+1. Sell the cell carriers!

 

[imoldernu]

The US would not be the first country to have free WIFI.
Niue - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

I am convinced it will happen here... when...

 

[Midpack]

But hey, let the good times roll. And sorry if I am not more excited about government run internet.

FWIW, free wi-fi everywhere is what got my attention...

 

[donheff]

So, is all of this brou-ha-ha over a proposal that doesn't exist?

 

[Midpack]

So, is all of this brou-ha-ha over a proposal that doesn't exist?

We'll see, but "if it sounds too good to be true, it probably is." Thanks for the link.

Off to dream up a dead end topic for tomorrow...

 

[ejman]

I just hope the government doesn't stick its nose into the GPS system. I like the system that Garmin has set up and don't want to see anyone mess with it.

Yup, it warms my heart to know about those Garmin satellites whizzing about up there without a lick of government involvement and certainly no tax payer dollars

 

[Midpack]

I just hope the government doesn't stick its nose into the GPS system. I like the system that Garmin has set up and don't want to see anyone mess with it.

Yup, it warms my heart to know about those Garmin satellites whizzing about up there without a lick of government involvement and certainly no tax payer dollars

Shhhhhhhhh...

The cost to the Air Force in 1973 – 2000 to develop and procure the GPS satellites (not including military user equipment or launch costs) was approximately $5.6 billion in 'Year 2000' dollars. The approximate annual cost to operate and maintain the constellation, including research and development and procurement of new satellites, is $750 million.

The projected cost to maintain GPS over the next several years is about $400 million per year.

GPS became the world's premier position, navigation and timing information service. Civilian users around the globe rely upon GPS as well. In fact, the system serves millions of civilian users with over a 1.4 million handheld and vehicle-mounted GPS receivers having been produced each year since 1997. The rapidly growing GPS market, including equipment and applications, reached $6.2 billion in 2000 and was expected to surpass $50 billion by 2010.

 

[Koolau]

Over the past century or so, the gummint got involved in a number of things to insure everyone got a shot at the "good stuff" (rural free delivery, rural electrification and others.) These were provided, ostensibly because it wouldn't have happened (certainly not as quickly) if left to private enterprise. Now, while not everyone has WiFI (I don't) virtually everyone has access to the internet (some slower, some faster - but access).

So, one needs to question why this is being considered. Beyond the usual suspects (buying votes from "poor" people with "rich" peoples money, for instance) what's the big attraction? What's in it for the gummint? Couldn't it be just one more way to keep closer tabs on folks? The gummint pitched a royal fit when people found out that they could so effectively encrypt that the gummint could no longer eves drop (with warrents, of course, heh, heh - can you spell fisa??). Call me paranoid, (but just because you're paranoid doesn't mean they aren't out to get you.) One more subject where it could get political, so let me just say that YMMV. (Oh, and don't ask "what have you got to hide?")

 

[M Paquette]

So, one needs to question why this is being considered. Beyond the usual suspects (buying votes from "poor" people with "rich" peoples money, for instance) what's the big attraction? What's in it for the gummint? Couldn't it be just one more way to keep closer tabs on folks?

Meh. Most folks already carry cellphones. That already permits position tracking and past position history to be collected from 'routine business records" of the cellular companies without warrants. (Ever wonder how those cell calls find their way to the right tower and directional antenna? Your phone and the cellular provider exchange information to keep your position up to date in the call routing database.)

http://m.nbcnews.com/technology/technolog/aclu-police-track-cellphones-too-625114

Oh, and what you say? Federal law enforcement officials may eavesdrop on and record telephone conversations without a court order under the so-called "one party consent provision" (18 USC 2511(2)(s)). Telephone company employees may listen to your conversations when it is necessary to provide you with service, to inspect the telephone system, to monitor the quality of telephone service or to protect against service theft or harassment. Employers generally may monitor and even record their employees' phone conversations with few restrictions (18 USC 2511(2)(a)).

WiFi networks are effectively privacy-free zones. Anyone can and will record whatever you do. Packet sniffers and cracking software is widely available, as are systems that can be run on a laptop to execute man-in-the-middle attacks. Ever fire up a laptop or gadget in an airport and see multiple networks? There's the one the airport runs ("SFOWiFi"), and then there is that one that looks right ("Free Public WiFi"). Oh, and I also see "SFO WiFi", and "SFO Wi FI". Guess which ones will steal your Yahoo Mail password? Encryption outside the WiFi domain is essential, through something like a VPN connection to a trusted network.

 

[donheff]

Well, maybe this story has more to it than my earlier link asserted. The Washington Post has an article about it this morning. But, if the Post is correct, all the FTC is doing is considering setting aside a portion of the new available spectrum it will auction off in the future for innovative, unlicensed uses that would be free to consumers. As the article says, they did something similar that allowed things like baby monitors and garage door openers. This one would allow other developments, including free "super wifi" that cities or outfits like Google are interested in trying.

None of this resembles the Government gone amuck speculations. It doesn't even involve Government developing anything. Seems like the prudent thing for citizens to do is evaluate the concept and join in the discussion to help shape the final (if any) offering.

 

[Koolau]

<SNIPS>

Meh. Most folks already carry cellphones. That already permits position tracking and past position history to be collected from 'routine business records" of the cellular companies without warrants.

Oh, and what you say? Federal law enforcement officials may eavesdrop on and record telephone conversations without a court order under the so-called "one party consent provision" (18 USC 2511(2)(s)).

Though I'm a proud Luddite, I was aware of all this. I just see more and more examples of our privacy being eroded. To suggest 'because we've already lost a lot of privacy, a little bit more loss isn't so bad' seems the wrong sentiment. The old 'frog being slowly boiled' story comes to mind.

See also my tag line, but as always, YMMV.

 

[W2R]

WiFi networks are effectively privacy-free zones. Anyone can and will record whatever you do.

Oh good! Anyone or any organization dastardly enough to be recording what I do on wireless, deserves what he will get - - - being bored to death! I chuckle whenever I think about it.

The internet track of a 64 year old retired woman like me can be awfully tame. If someone is recording my internet activity, there probably isn't much I can do about it but this potentially could be great revenge.

 

[ERD50]

Though I'm a proud Luddite, I was aware of all this. I just see more and more examples of our privacy being eroded. To suggest 'because we've already lost a lot of privacy, a little bit more loss isn't so bad' seems the wrong sentiment. The old 'frog being slowly boiled' story comes to mind.

See also my tag line, but as always, YMMV.

I always look at the pros and the cons. I see more and more bad guys being caught, and innocent people protected, by the use of these tracking systems, surveillance cameras and such.

I guess I don't see any of it as an 'invasion of my privacy' unless it is actually harming me in some way, and I don't see that. Some people seem to get upset about these things, I say 'bring 'em on' - I feel safer with them. That's more important to me and my family than some perceived invasion of privacy that doesn't seem to have any negative (that I am aware of). If some computer somewhere knows that I went to Trader Joe's yesterday to by pizza fixin's, so be it.

As far as misusing tools, sure. But if Big Brother is motivated to misuse them, the laws and technology won't have much effect. Resistance organizers were 'disappeared' in the 1950's in Communist controlled countries, and they didn't need any stinkin' technology.

There are some views that modern tech is helping to keep an eye on Big Brother, more so than the other way around. Hard to say, but I think it's very possible/probable.

So yes, YMMV applies - just my POV.

-ERD50

 

[deserat]

I am sorry but of all the things the government should be doing creating a public wi fi system is damn near at the bottom of my list. Not because it wouldn't be a good thing, but because the government track record in developing technology standards and deploy them is so awful that anyone even seriously letting the government design and build such a thing is crazy.

At the end of last century there we approximately zero public wi fi networks. Nowday practically every shopping mall, Starbucks, restaurant, school, airport, has a wi fi network that you can log into for free or a nominal charge. Most cities have providers which let you get mobile wi fi anywhere. Plus most 4G phones allow you to set up a wi fi hotspot.

Developing industry technology standards is hard enough with tech giants, and small company. If you add the government to the mix you roughly triple the time it takes to something, and you run the very real risk of standard setting process being so slow, that technology makes the standard obsolete.

I know plenty of you are old enough techies to remember the official DOD and Government computer language ADA. For those of you unfamiliar with ADA. The government designed a computer language ADA starting in the 1970s that was going be the next great computer language. All DOD computer program would have to be written in ADA, and possibly all government computer programs also. 25 years later they more or less the pulled the plug. In the meantime billion of dollars and countless man years were wasted. I only had limited involvement in ADA, but still I wasted weeks of my life learning about, and planning for ADA, and pursued software vendors to support it.

+2 and it isn't free....we do end up paying for it one way or another. Plus, the speeds or access are not the best - when I was in Barcelona for the Mobile World Congress, most attendees had issues getting a mobile phone or wi-fi signal...the customer density in a small area overloaded the capacity of the infrastructure throughput....these people were paying and there were issues - with free you usually end up with many people clogging a limited infrastructure.

 

[Koolau]

I guess I don't see any of it as an 'invasion of my privacy' unless it is actually harming me in some way, and I don't see that. Some people seem to get upset about these things, I say 'bring 'em on' - I feel safer with them. That's more important to me and my family than some perceived invasion of privacy that doesn't seem to have any negative (that I am aware of). If some computer somewhere knows that I went to Trader Joe's yesterday to by pizza fixin's, so be it.


So yes, YMMV applies - just my POV.

-ERD50

I appreciate your point of view and actually agree with you that good things have been accomplished by more stringent vigilance. It's also true that if police/gummints had free access to our houses, cars, phones, computers, bedrooms, etc. etc. (no warrants) they would catch even MORE bad folks. 200+ years ago, the founders made a choice. They were aware of the advantages of free access to citizens private affairs. They were also painfully aware of what happened when this access was abused (overused, used as a punishment, used for intimidation, etc, etc. etc.) The founders attempted to put limitations on such activities - KNOWING that there was a cost in "safety". Now, it seems, we are attempting to do away with the protections provided to us by the founders (who actually LIVED under a system with very limited freedoms.) If at some point we wake up and realize "this time they've gone to far", it will be too late. Remember what it cost to stop the abuse 200+ years ago.

Saying (in effect) "well, I don't do anything illegal, so why should I care?" is a very slippery slope. One thing I will almost assure you (not you, specifically, ERD50 - just in general), most of us have broken laws that we are not even aware of. Most of us have broken laws we were aware of, but chose to ignore. 99% of the time, even the police don't care. 99% of the time, no one would go to trial with such a trivial offence. BUT, if someone chose to, we would be liable for our "crimes". While we feel "good" about our morality, citizenship, etc., if a gummint wished to coerce us in some fashion, they could find a broken law in our past (or, as is happening now, write new laws to create more "crimes" for us to commit - think EPA regs - fill in a wet spot in your back yard and you may have committed a felony. Forget and take nail clippers through TSA screening, they probably will just take them away from you. But make no mistake you HAVE committed a crime. You COULD be prosecuted. etc., etc.).

I'm not talking about some vast conspiracy here. I'm saying only that gummint is just like a tiger. We put them in cages, not because they are intrinsically evil, but because we know their nature. A tiger will tear you apart absent control. If you wanted to be "safe" from outsiders, you could build your house with a big fence and let the tiger loose in the yard. No one will come in to molest you. Unfortunately, you can no longer leave your house or the tiger will eat you.

Gummints seek more authority, power, control, etc., not because they are "evil", but because it makes their job easier and more effective. At some point we are all "safe" from bad people, but not safe from the gummint (tiger) who reverts to its nature.

Not intended as a rant, but it's starting to sound like one, so I'll stop since YMMV.

 

[Lazarus]

I appreciate your point of view and actually agree with you that good things have been accomplished by more stringent vigilance. It's also true that if police/gummints had free access to our houses, cars, phones, computers, bedrooms, etc. etc. (no warrants) they would catch even MORE bad folks. 200+ years ago, the founders made a choice. They were aware of the advantages of free access to citizens private affairs. They were also painfully aware of what happened when this access was abused (overused, used as a punishment, used for intimidation, etc, etc. etc.) The founders attempted to put limitations on such activities - KNOWING that there was a cost in "safety". Now, it seems, we are attempting to do away with the protections provided to us by the founders (who actually LIVED under a system with very limited freedoms.) If at some point we wake up and realize "this time they've gone to far", it will be too late. Remember what it cost to stop the abuse 200+ years ago.

Saying (in effect) "well, I don't do anything illegal, so why should I care?" is a very slippery slope. One thing I will almost assure you (not you, specifically, ERD50 - just in general), most of us have broken laws that we are not even aware of. Most of us have broken laws we were aware of, but chose to ignore. 99% of the time, even the police don't care. 99% of the time, no one would go to trial with such a trivial offence. BUT, if someone chose to, we would be liable for our "crimes". While we feel "good" about our morality, citizenship, etc., if a gummint wished to coerce us in some fashion, they could find a broken law in our past (or, as is happening now, write new laws to create more "crimes" for us to commit - think EPA regs - fill in a wet spot in your back yard and you may have committed a felony. Forget and take nail clippers through TSA screening, they probably will just take them away from you. But make no mistake you HAVE committed a crime. You COULD be prosecuted. etc., etc.).

I'm not talking about some vast conspiracy here. I'm saying only that gummint is just like a tiger. We put them in cages, not because they are intrinsically evil, but because we know their nature. A tiger will tear you apart absent control. If you wanted to be "safe" from outsiders, you could build your house with a big fence and let the tiger loose in the yard. No one will come in to molest you. Unfortunately, you can no longer leave your house or the tiger will eat you.

Gummints seek more authority, power, control, etc., not because they are "evil", but because it makes their job easier and more effective. At some point we are all "safe" from bad people, but not safe from the gummint (tiger) who reverts to its nature.

Not intended as a rant, but it's starting to sound like one, so I'll stop since YMMV.

+1

 

[Nodak]

I appreciate your point of view and actually agree with you that good things have been accomplished by more stringent vigilance. It's also true that if police/gummints had free access to our houses, cars, phones, computers, bedrooms, etc. etc. (no warrants) they would catch even MORE bad folks. 200+ years ago, the founders made a choice. They were aware of the advantages of free access to citizens private affairs. They were also painfully aware of what happened when this access was abused (overused, used as a punishment, used for intimidation, etc, etc. etc.) The founders attempted to put limitations on such activities - KNOWING that there was a cost in "safety". Now, it seems, we are attempting to do away with the protections provided to us by the founders (who actually LIVED under a system with very limited freedoms.) If at some point we wake up and realize "this time they've gone to far", it will be too late. Remember what it cost to stop the abuse 200+ years ago.

Saying (in effect) "well, I don't do anything illegal, so why should I care?" is a very slippery slope. One thing I will almost assure you (not you, specifically, ERD50 - just in general), most of us have broken laws that we are not even aware of. Most of us have broken laws we were aware of, but chose to ignore. 99% of the time, even the police don't care. 99% of the time, no one would go to trial with such a trivial offence. BUT, if someone chose to, we would be liable for our "crimes". While we feel "good" about our morality, citizenship, etc., if a gummint wished to coerce us in some fashion, they could find a broken law in our past (or, as is happening now, write new laws to create more "crimes" for us to commit - think EPA regs - fill in a wet spot in your back yard and you may have committed a felony. Forget and take nail clippers through TSA screening, they probably will just take them away from you. But make no mistake you HAVE committed a crime. You COULD be prosecuted. etc., etc.).

I'm not talking about some vast conspiracy here. I'm saying only that gummint is just like a tiger. We put them in cages, not because they are intrinsically evil, but because we know their nature. A tiger will tear you apart absent control. If you wanted to be "safe" from outsiders, you could build your house with a big fence and let the tiger loose in the yard. No one will come in to molest you. Unfortunately, you can no longer leave your house or the tiger will eat you.

Gummints seek more authority, power, control, etc., not because they are "evil", but because it makes their job easier and more effective. At some point we are all "safe" from bad people, but not safe from the gummint (tiger) who reverts to its nature.

Not intended as a rant, but it's starting to sound like one, so I'll stop since YMMV.

+2

 

[ERD50]

Not intended as a rant, but it's starting to sound like one, so I'll stop since YMMV.

I don't see it as a rant, I thought is was an interesting and valid POV.

Sure, we don't want abusive intrusions into our private lives, but so far, I haven't seen these technology things as abusive in any way. Some of these regulations are crossing a line I think, but I see that as a different beast.

I'm currently halfway through "The Dawn of Innovation", a history of technology developments in the early US. Steam power, textiles, water power, military weapons, railroads, etc. It's interesting just how improper govt influence and corruption there was, including acts by our Founders. I worry about the 'slippery slope' also, but I'm not sure we see evidence of it the technology/privacy area. Over-Regulation, yes (and unfortunately, under-regulation in some important areas).

Yes, we must be vigil, and correct any wrong-doings, but let's not throw the baby out with the bath water.

-ERD50

 

[samclem]

Gummints seek more authority, power, control, etc., not because they are "evil", but because it makes their job easier and more effective.

We've historically (and correctly, I think) protected ourselves from government's power largely by limiting the information that the government is allowed to collect and to keep. I've thought it would be interesting to do a study/SF story, etc on the impact of changing this line to remove restrictions on collection and instead halt government overintrusion by:
1) Significantly raising the bar on what is illegal
2) Instituting severe penalties on government personnel who mishandle the information (blackmail, unauthorized disclosures, harassment of citizens, etc).

We'd catch a lot more real bad guys and, in theory, our lives wouldn't change much. We'd be safer. But I don't think it would be worth it, and I doubt it could be made to work: People in power would mis-use the information (and how would a citizen prove who had done it?) and just the idea of folks knowing our secrets would diminish our lives.

 

[travelover]

OK, so did we decide if the government is going to make us use this free wifi?

 

[deserat]

I appreciate your point of view and actually agree with you that good things have been accomplished by more stringent vigilance. It's also true that if police/gummints had free access to our houses, cars, phones, computers, bedrooms, etc. etc. (no warrants) they would catch even MORE bad folks. 200+ years ago, the founders made a choice. They were aware of the advantages of free access to citizens private affairs. They were also painfully aware of what happened when this access was abused (overused, used as a punishment, used for intimidation, etc, etc. etc.) The founders attempted to put limitations on such activities - KNOWING that there was a cost in "safety". Now, it seems, we are attempting to do away with the protections provided to us by the founders (who actually LIVED under a system with very limited freedoms.) If at some point we wake up and realize "this time they've gone to far", it will be too late. Remember what it cost to stop the abuse 200+ years ago.

Saying (in effect) "well, I don't do anything illegal, so why should I care?" is a very slippery slope. One thing I will almost assure you (not you, specifically, ERD50 - just in general), most of us have broken laws that we are not even aware of. Most of us have broken laws we were aware of, but chose to ignore. 99% of the time, even the police don't care. 99% of the time, no one would go to trial with such a trivial offence. BUT, if someone chose to, we would be liable for our "crimes". While we feel "good" about our morality, citizenship, etc., if a gummint wished to coerce us in some fashion, they could find a broken law in our past (or, as is happening now, write new laws to create more "crimes" for us to commit - think EPA regs - fill in a wet spot in your back yard and you may have committed a felony. Forget and take nail clippers through TSA screening, they probably will just take them away from you. But make no mistake you HAVE committed a crime. You COULD be prosecuted. etc., etc.).

I'm not talking about some vast conspiracy here. I'm saying only that gummint is just like a tiger. We put them in cages, not because they are intrinsically evil, but because we know their nature. A tiger will tear you apart absent control. If you wanted to be "safe" from outsiders, you could build your house with a big fence and let the tiger loose in the yard. No one will come in to molest you. Unfortunately, you can no longer leave your house or the tiger will eat you.

Gummints seek more authority, power, control, etc., not because they are "evil", but because it makes their job easier and more effective. At some point we are all "safe" from bad people, but not safe from the gummint (tiger) who reverts to its nature.

Not intended as a rant, but it's starting to sound like one, so I'll stop since YMMV.

+3

 

[grasshopper]

I will see wifi, right after I see cell service.