DISQUS

WOOF · 4 years ago

likely be paying at the bloated prices .

Doubt it will be more expensive than my cable provider and I am going to guess the service will be better.

Look at conectivity as a public utility like roads and water. You want to buy a quart of Evian go ahead, or go to the kitchen faucet if you prefer.

The Whistler · 4 years ago

I'm sure having free internet all over will be a boon for Sex Perverts and web criminals.

robert108 · 4 years ago

Glad you mentioned public utilities. As the recent "energy crisis" illustrates, it's high time to make utils private. After all, since utils, at least like electricity, have always been publicly subsidized monopolies, we do not know the real price(market price). Besides, private utils would not constantly have supply probs, if we get the enviro extremists out of the picture. It is wrong for the govt to confiscate our pay for the purpose of competing with private enterprise in any area. The govt has no incentive to be efficient. On the contrary, they have incentive to constantly increase their budgets. So what? It's not their money, after all.

robert108 · 4 years ago

Election is an incentive to deceive, not to be efficient. Enron is the perfect example of what is wrong with public utils. They traded in a commodity whose real market value is unknown. Thus the failure. Enron is not an example of private enterprise, it is an example of the failure of alliances between govt enterprise and the public trust. Enron profited under Clinton and went broke under Bush. You figure it out.

robert108 · 4 years ago

I guess that is public benefit.

WOOF · 4 years ago

The govt has no incentive to be efficient.

The incentive is called election.

Think privatize, think Enron.

Sphagnum · 4 years ago

I heard about the idea for San Francisco, since it's relatively close to where I live, and if it's the same idea that I heard about, IT IS FREE.

I believe it was google, can't remember for sure, wanted to provide free wi-fi access all around the city. The only catch is that when you sign on, you are automatically directed to google's special homepage where they make their money on advertising. It's kinda like Juno and Netzero ISPs a couple years back that gave out free dial-up internet as long as you sat there and stared at their internet ad banner while you were logged on. I had it and that thing was annoying so i payed a few bucks to upgrade.

Similar setup here. If you want the ad-free version, you are going to have to get comcast or SBC.

Sigivald · 4 years ago

Woof: Who loses their job in an election if SF's wireless system doesn't work very well?

Nobody is elected "wireless accountability guy", so he can't lose his non-job. The Mayor? I doubt anyone would blame the Mayor for such a thing, or that it would cost an election. Local councilmen (if SF has such a thing, I don't know how SF local government works)? Likewise, none of them are really accountable for it; they have no real power over it, and who's going to vote someone out over that?

Elections are great at keeping politicians accountable for major things that people hold them personally responsible for. Wireless access just isn't one of those things.

"It would be nice if everyone had X" is not a sufficient argument for the proposition "the government can and should provide X", let alone "the government would do better providing X itself".

If you want a chance of making headway here, suggest government incentives for people to make their own 802.11 wireless networks publicly accessible, as is increasingly popular with restaurants and coffee-shops.

WOOF · 4 years ago

OK you go with Comcast, I'll go with the people who bring water to my tap.

nobrainer · 4 years ago

If Google wants to provide the service for free, let them. But at the same time let any other company capable do the same thing.

The last thing I would want to see is for a city to contract with one company. As WOOF complains about Comcast, THE problem with cable is that you get one choice of company, depending where you live. You end up with high prices, a bunch of channels you don't want, and a company that probably isn't very well run because it barely has to compete to survive.

robert108 · 4 years ago

Public Utility=Taxpayer supported monopoly

Say Anything - North Dakota&#8 · 4 years ago

[...] Call me crazy, but maybe New Orleans should focus on reducing the threat of hurricanes and flooding to the city before they start worrying about blanket wi-fi coverage. Not to mention all the other reasons why tax-funded “free” internet connections are stupid. [...]