Free Wi-Fi for everyone? FCC says maybe
Roswell resident Jan Oetinger uses the free Wirelesstown internet connection in Roswell Area Park. (Phil Skinner pskinner@ajc.com)
Follow us on Twitter @AJCBiz
(Updated 12:44 p.m.) What would you say to unlimited access to free super Wi-Fi networks across the nation – and possibly never having to sign up for a data plan?
The Federal Communications Commission is considering making free Wi-Fi- networks available to the public. While it could be years before it’s a reality, the proposal already has wireless service providers in a tizzy, according to The Washington Post.
The proposed Wi-Fi networks would be powerful enough to “penetrate thick concrete walls and travel over hills and around trees,” the Post said.
The idea is from FCC Chairman Julius Genachowski. “Freeing up unlicensed spectrum is a vibrantly free-market approach that offers low barriers to entry to innovators developing the technologies of the future and benefits consumers,” Genachowski told the Post.
A major obstacle would be getting the free Wi-Fi networks built, as Arstechnica.com points out. The Post report partly stems from a so-called “White Spaces” proposal that uses spectrum from empty TV channels and allows the airwaves to be used for Wi-Fi or “super” Wi-Fi, Artstechnica says. But the FCC only allocates airwaves. Someone would have to build the Wi-Fi networks.
According to Artstechnica, the talk about free Wi-Fi has re-emerged because the FCC is taking comments “from industry players about the agency’s plan to free up spectrum owned by TV broadcasters through incentive auctions. Newly freed spectrum in the 600MHz band could be used for Super Wi-Fi, and other services that might expand mobile Internet access.”
Opening up more Wi-Fi access could boost innovation, according to the Post. Because of the Super Wi-Fi networks’ reach, driverless cars might be able to communicate with other vehicles a mile away or hospitals might be able monitor patients from long distances, just to name a few of the ideas. In fact, Google, Microsoft and other technology companies support the proposal because of the anticipated explosion of new innovations.
AT&T, Verizon, T-Mobile and other carriers, however, say the government should stick to governing and sell those super airwaves to businesses who can then provide the public with access. Some opponents in the $178 billion wireless industry also argue that opening up the super Wi-Fi networks could interfere with existing cellular networks and television broadcasts.
Should the government put the plan into high gear, or should the airwaves be sold to businesses?
Tell us what you think about the site
Customer Care »
Vacation stops, manage subscriptions and more
AJC Services
Sections
Other Editions
Visitor Agreement | Privacy Statement
© 2013 The Atlanta Journal-Constitution
209 comments Add your comment
Pat
February 5th, 2013
11:45 am
So who will be paying for it?
Spanky
February 5th, 2013
11:46 am
This could have dangerous repercussions, but it’s a nice gesture…kinda.
K-Ster
February 5th, 2013
11:46 am
Open them up to free access! Why fork over so much money to the current carriers? They don’t customize plans to meet exactly the usage of payees (Europe charges individuals per usage, we’re backwards in the U.S., forcing payment on a psychic guess–when in reality it is a profit gimmick).
I’m sorry, businesses. But when you fail to make sense, you will eventually fail to make profit.
Sandor Burnes
February 5th, 2013
11:50 am
Look at who is objecting… the ones (AT&T, etc.) who want to soak you for every nickel they can. They do on their cell phones, on their cable service, and now they want to on wi-fi.
This is actually an inspired and forward thinking idea. Which is why big business will never let it come to pass.
ClayHall
February 5th, 2013
11:50 am
Nothing is ever “free.” Someone always pays for it, and it’s always the taxpayers.
PR
February 5th, 2013
11:55 am
Of course the cellular data providers don’t want this to happen. They are making BILLIONS off their steep internet charges, and most carriers don’t even offer unlimited plans anymore. I’m not sure internet access should be free… but we’re definitely getting overcharged as it stands.
stands for decibels
February 5th, 2013
11:56 am
You mean, behave like a civilized country and provide utility-style services to the citizens?
That’s crazy talk, FCC.
Greg
February 5th, 2013
11:56 am
Free is a weird term for this, because it won’t be free. Free means that it will paid by taxpayers. Where as if it was sold to businesses, it would be paid by users. Either way you will have to pay for it.
Anthony
February 5th, 2013
11:57 am
And free gasoline for all! And free healthcare for all! And free first class flight upgrades for all! And free breakfast for all! And free tickets to the Super Bowl for all!
Pamela
February 5th, 2013
11:57 am
I don’t trust it.
Xasthur
February 5th, 2013
11:57 am
Computers, telecommunications, the internet and countless other innovations were already paid for by taxpayers to develop them. Usually under defense spending. The internet was public for probably 30 years before it became private. Down with social costs and risk but private profit.
John
February 5th, 2013
11:58 am
Can we stop calling it “free”. I mean, it’s tax payer funded WIFI. It’s not free.
stands for decibels
February 5th, 2013
11:59 am
I’m sure the “providers” (yeah, right) have had a black-ops squad ready to go to work on this possibility for years, and if the Commission are the least bit serious, we’ll be hearing about various indiscretions involving FCC staffers and farm animals / live boys / dead girls in short order.
Jeff
February 5th, 2013
11:59 am
Yep, THAT is what I want… the government in charge of my internet! There’s no chance anything could go wrong with that!
*cough cough CHINA cough*
Hall Mom
February 5th, 2013
11:59 am
This would impact a huge amount of businesses who could no longer compete: cell carriers, phone companies, cable & sat., internet providers. Would be a great service for a city, subdivision, college campus, business park, mall, etc to provide to taxpayers/members, but free for everyone would cost a bunch for the half of us that pay taxes.
And this means you are looking at creating a new government monopoly. No, I would much rather be able to fire AT&T and hire Sprint when my service is bad.
Jim Strong
February 5th, 2013
11:59 am
I’m not sure if they people making the case for “free wifi to all” and “no profit to big business” realize they are making the case for Socialism. I shouldn’t be surprised, post Obamacare, free wifi is peanuts.
stands for decibels
February 5th, 2013
12:00 pm
Yes, we can stop calling it “free”, if the Galt’s Gulch crowd can stop having conniptions over the Government actually governing.
Anthony
February 5th, 2013
12:00 pm
If you would like the “free” internet that taxpayer’s funded, then break out your 28k modem. While I do believe that wireless carriers overcharge, they are adding value to the original internet infrastructure with 4G LTE and other high speed technologies.
Greg
February 5th, 2013
12:00 pm
Seems the best option for free wi-fi would be a usage tax. It would be free, but you’d have to pay a usage tax, say $25 a month to use it.
Sam the Sham
February 5th, 2013
12:01 pm
How do they propose providing this? Satellites? I live in an area that still doesn’t have cable TV and very poor cellular service. Sounds like another tax payer funded boondoggle.
mrgiarc
February 5th, 2013
12:01 pm
Pat have you ever heard of advertisements? The entire system can be paid for by advertisers and not by tax payers if that is your main concern. Americans with low incomes will be able to access the web at little or no cost. The added access will spur new internet devices and services which will create jobs. Republicans are always worrying about who is paying for something.
easystreet
February 5th, 2013
12:03 pm
Just another way for Big Brother to monitor you online activity. Think about it.
Glenn
February 5th, 2013
12:03 pm
The airwaves were supposed to belong to the American people until our self serving politicians on each end of the spectrum sold us out for coin . This would be a total boon to technology . But of course some companies/industries need their welfare .
Cammi317
February 5th, 2013
12:03 pm
Sounds good, but it’s probably a way to make everything you do on the internet even more accessible to the Government, not that much is private anymore anyway. Conspiracy theory aside, I think this move is one of those inevitable ones…
Antoinette
February 5th, 2013
12:03 pm
The air we breathe isn’t even free………and the FCC is talking FREE WIFI? Again, nothing is free. Therefore, why get us all in such a “tiz”??
mitrebox
February 5th, 2013
12:05 pm
Someone completely misread the FCC’s speech. FCC isn’t interested in making a WIFI network.
They only want to make the spectrum free. Frequencies are currently licensed. ATT, Verizon own parts of the spectrum and are opposed to opening it to other companies. Free frequency licensing is not the same as a free wifi network.
d
February 5th, 2013
12:06 pm
..One of the rare good ideas from the FCC…tho like all other forms of media its wide open to corruption, abuse and misuse…bnut the idea is sound…it’d open up a new world to the rural communities and could be a real plus when used for education, health care and communications…as far as cost…the Tax payers have payd for a lot of the infrastucture changes and hardware used by these Industries as it is,,,so sure its not free…but we’ve already paid and are still paying under the current deal…in the end it will lower the industry costs and allow more access for more people
Al Stein
February 5th, 2013
12:08 pm
Ofcourse the elite dont want it. It is a way of leveling the playing field. Folks cant see that they stop paying their carrier $75 for data, and now can pay government $25 for same service. Makes sense to me,but not big biznez or the right elite who want to keep us down.
James Chapman
February 5th, 2013
12:08 pm
The wifi market has massive economics barriers to entry and creates a de facto monopoly. The market hardly operates as a free market with the three (major) service provides being price setters and blatently price fixing. Thus all arguments towards this being socialism and anti capitalist are quite silly. I’m a staunch economic conservative but aside from the notion of this being “free”, the proposal is worth consideration.
1/137
February 5th, 2013
12:12 pm
I don’t think everyone should have access to the internet. It began in the academic realm, and it’s content quality has steadily degraded since. It only serves to clutter and congest an already cluttered and congested medium.
Pat
February 5th, 2013
12:12 pm
@ mrgiarc, I neither a Dem or Repub, but I do not see anywhere that states that advertisers will be paying for this and the question “who is paying for it?” should be answered. Most likely it will be taxes and I think that taxes need to be used for something more useful than giving everyone the ability to surf the internet at others expense.
haven't learned anything
February 5th, 2013
12:12 pm
Apparently people don’t learn, there is no such thing a free anything. Remember you were told you would get free healthcare under Obamacare, guess what they LIED you’re paying out the ying-yang for the so-called FREE healthcare. The government and the people who look for free things, need to get over themselves, get a job, budget your money more wisely and paid for your own stuff. Because quite frankly I’m over you FREELOADERS.
heck no
February 5th, 2013
12:13 pm
So wifi is now an entitlement?
Wow – what has happened to our country?
History fanatic
February 5th, 2013
12:13 pm
Nothing is free. Taxes pay for all of the so-called freebies handed out by governments. MitreBox seems to think that if the spectrum is freed up then the wireless would magically appear without any infrastructure to support it at all. Wireless requires infrastructure and who would be paying for that?
TekEye
February 5th, 2013
12:14 pm
Bad story! Misinformation hyped by folks who need to write something, already debunked: http://arstechnica.com/tech-policy/2013/02/no-free-wi-fi-isnt-coming-to-every-us-city/
Mo
February 5th, 2013
12:15 pm
I like Greg’s idea, It’s kinda like Europe. Europe enjoys 3X the speed at a cheaper rate. I would pay a $25 usage tax for a federal Wifi program, its 2/3 less then I am paying now.
Speed Racer
February 5th, 2013
12:16 pm
No.
Mo
February 5th, 2013
12:16 pm
Sprint, T- Mobile, Att, will all have to lower their over priced plans to compete… I love capitalism, even when it is jump started by the FED
t_height06
February 5th, 2013
12:17 pm
I say do it. I don’t think taxpayers will end up paying $360 yearly for it as I am with Verizon’s data package. As long as GA Power doesn’t have anything to do with this I’m all for it.
Reasonable
February 5th, 2013
12:17 pm
To everyone saying they don’t want to switch to “free” wifi because they don’t want the government watching their internet usage. Let me say this (as someone who works in the internet field) you are always being watched by someone. That’s a fact. It’s also a known fact that your internet activity is always being watched by the government in general. That won’t change if wifi goes “free”. Unless you are doing something illegal or questionable (creating red flags) then you have nothing to worry about. And lets say tax money does pay for this “free” wifi, so what? If taxes don’t increase because of it, I don’t have a problem with it. If taxes, do increase because of it, so what again? You’re going to pay for it either way, And at least there is a better safety net of not being price gauged for it if the government is running it. You’re scared the government is going to limit your internet usage? Then continue paying private companies for internet service, they won’t go anywhere just because it becomes “free”. You may even get a better deal now that they might have competition.
Lane
February 5th, 2013
12:20 pm
FALSE
http://arstechnica.com/tech-policy/2013/02/no-free-wi-fi-isnt-coming-to-every-us-city/
tmc
February 5th, 2013
12:23 pm
there is no F’ing way the government is going to provide a free super wifi.
to much money to be made by to many company’s.
who ever proposes this will be taken out… and it will never happen.
this is crazy
February 5th, 2013
12:25 pm
Under the belief that everyone gets everything, there is no incentive for working.
Thogwummpy
February 5th, 2013
12:27 pm
Government wi-fi will then set the table for the other power that the Left salivates to achieve—-regulating content; and being able to censor/fine/punish/arrest based upon what you tap into your computer….as well as track your activities. Orwell warned of thought police…and this would evolve into an instrument for that….for using the government wi-fi will establish for the courts an argument that your privacy—is actually public. Granted, it’s worth thinking about….but not rushing into without creating a debate over concerns dealing with State intrusion. I mean after all, it’s the FCC isn’t it!
Zooey
February 5th, 2013
12:28 pm
I love it! Free wi-fi and data plans – what a gift. The amount we need to pay for data usage is criminal. If you’re worried about “who’s paying for it” charge a fee of $20 a month – will still beat the $70 I have to pay now!
Kevin
February 5th, 2013
12:30 pm
Yay! It’s free! I’ll drive my cash for clunkers car to the hospital where I’ll have a procedure performed that I don’t have to pay for. While I’m waiting for my procedure, I can use my Obama phone to surf the free wi-fi.
It’s Free! Yippee!!!!
Jeff
February 5th, 2013
12:31 pm
So, what do we do when the Government decides to cut off access? We, the taxpayers, pay for it and Government controls it? No Thanks.
Lynnie Gal
February 5th, 2013
12:31 pm
YES! FREE WI-FI! The spectrum belongs to the public and is sold to businesses who then sell to the public. Why shouldn’t we get free Wi-FI? It belongs to We the People!
Sharad
February 5th, 2013
12:34 pm
this would be awesome….way to go FCC!!
CommonSense
February 5th, 2013
12:34 pm
Thank you to all the brilliant people realizing that someone has to pay for it. Is it your contention that it should not be done b/c someone has to pay for it? I would say go for it, cut out the middle man carriers that bilk us day in and day out. At least when the government does it, I get a say in it. I work for the largest carrier, I can tell you that the government would run this better than they do.
MelKel
February 5th, 2013
12:34 pm
It does not necessarily mean that taxes will be raised to pay for this. Many times, money is shuffled around and spent for things that we are not even aware of. It would definitely cost less than paying a private company a monthly bill anyway because private firms are out to make a profit; the government is not.
mitrebox
February 5th, 2013
12:34 pm
According to the Washington Post’s logic ending the federal licencing fees on drilling means we all get free gas.
Joy
February 5th, 2013
12:37 pm
Yes, I can get with Free Wi-fi…however, will consumers be taxed for it on the back end? I’m sure someone is going to have to pay for it, someway, somehow.
4minutestilwapner
February 5th, 2013
12:37 pm
Another nice way of saying “government controlled and monitored”…. Koop aids ready! Drink up!!
Liberty4All
February 5th, 2013
12:38 pm
There is no such thing as a free lunch. SOMEONE will be paying for this so-called free Wi-Fi.
Quira
February 5th, 2013
12:39 pm
First, it won’t be “free”. It never is. Having the government take over wireless is the quickest way to turn the internet into the post office. Ths is a terrible idea of the first order made all the more dangerous becasue of it’s surface appeal to the low information voter.
ReadyRBP
February 5th, 2013
12:39 pm
your tax dollars!!!
D man
February 5th, 2013
12:43 pm
So the Government is planning on stealing more from AT&T and other carriers by taking away the Wi Fi that they created and spent Billions on and taking it over? What happened to free enterprise that our country was built on? I think we need a revolution here in these Divided States of America. Just saying…
JeromeMJ
February 5th, 2013
12:43 pm
If the current providers did not abuse PUBLIC airwaves then no one would be proposing this. They are sticking it to the Americans who own the airwaves and as irresponsible over chargers they need to be removed.
Skidly87
February 5th, 2013
12:45 pm
We cannot as a nation pay for the infrastructure we have now. Let’s maintain our roads, and keep our bridges from falling into rivers before we pour billions into new guaranteed access infrastructure.
Skitty Fritty
February 5th, 2013
12:46 pm
I think cable TV, wifi, cell phone, mortgages, food, clothing, gas, cars, etc. should all be free!
Michael
February 5th, 2013
12:46 pm
Your official positions should be: Liberals — free stuff for everyone at everyone’s expense — like another $50 in taxes per taxpayer. Conservatives — government is bad and can do nothing right. Just privatize it and the market will set the price.
Current market price for hi speed internet — $40 to $100 per month. And those billions pay fat salaries to CEO’s and probably $50,000 salaries to thousands of workers who would otherwise be unemployed.
Pick your poison. Government socialism or privatized socialism. Ha ha ha ha ha.
CitizenTaxpayer
February 5th, 2013
12:46 pm
By all means make it “free”. This is after all the USSA. We wouldn’t want people to have to pay their own bills. We’ll need to give away “free” computers also, so that the people can access their “free” Wi-Fi. We’ll need to provide “free” batteries for the “free” computers so that the people can access their “free” Wi-Fi. I’m sure this is what our founding fathers had in mind, after all this is the land of the “free”.
Barack & Joe
February 5th, 2013
12:49 pm
yes it will be free along with your healthcare and free gas cards and free phone cards and free medicine and $100 in Obama bucks to spend any way you like and a wallet size photo of yours truly.
Mary
February 5th, 2013
12:49 pm
I say open them up. But then again, who is going to pay for it?
Mooch
February 5th, 2013
12:51 pm
Can I get free cable and free electricity while there at it. Most powerstations were built with government $.
Real Athens
February 5th, 2013
12:53 pm
Easystreet:
Do you really think your online activity isn’t already monitored by the government? Seriously?
Rush
February 5th, 2013
12:55 pm
MelKel = clueless
Ever considered private industry is much much more efficient than government?
SomeGuy
February 5th, 2013
12:55 pm
Good grief! You think you hate the cell companies now? Wait until the govt is the sole provider of WiFi. The really sad thing is all the comments here from people who actually believe that a govt-run WiFi service would actually be free.
Your Anti-Govt people are just dumb
February 5th, 2013
12:55 pm
That many of you argue against what could be a huge boon to millions “cause ya don’t like gubmt” is just dumb. What a great equalizer this would be. It comes down to this; we don’t guarantee equality of outcome in this country, but we could work toward equality of opportunity.
Woofey One
February 5th, 2013
12:56 pm
Who the heck is going to build out a “free” service withno revenues ? What are they smoking ?
Jim
February 5th, 2013
12:59 pm
I imagine a previous poster was right that it could be paid for through advertising, but I have a couple of concerns that should be considered.
First of all, a government monopoly, no matter which party is in charge, has no real incentive to improve. The competition between carriers has provided us with ever better and cheaper coverage. (Yes, I know we’re spending more money on cell phones, but I remember the days of a $20.00/month “emergency use” plan that gave you 30 minutes a month of talk time and charged roaming fees.) Without competition, the government-run or privately-run monopolies have no incentive whatsoever to try to provide better service for the customer.
My second concern has to do with censorship/access to information. How many of you want either political party (or bureaucrats appointed by elected politicians) to be able to decide what you should or shouldn’t be able to access on the internet? I’m a conservative and I don’t even want other conservatives to make that decision for me!
I think these two problems are enough to scare me away from the idea without even touching the “nothing’s really free” argument.
JR
February 5th, 2013
1:00 pm
Yeah… not sure what they are smoking. Current wireless rates are what they are because of demand. There is a limit to the amount of bandwidth available at any given time which is why “unlimited data” is now a rarity. Building a network that could handle the demands of free bandwidth to everyone is simply unrealistic.
No thanks, I’ll happily pay my monthly fee for fast reliable service capped at the amount I choose to use.
vw
February 5th, 2013
1:04 pm
I would be a disaster. Absolutely not. Tax payers will pay a fortune to manage and maintane the process, support, maint, etc that the market place provides today. Nothing is for free. Just like a free dog. You have feed it, and take to the vet….
Drudge
February 5th, 2013
1:09 pm
Um…”Free” is a tricky thing – see, it’s not really free, someone else has to pay for it.
Plus I’m sure everyone would be really excited to see a few million telecom employees laid off. Forward.
Drudge
February 5th, 2013
1:10 pm
PS – another great example of this administration’s “Bread & Circuses” approach to government. You get little tokens – free birth control, wifi – and it only costs you your future! How can you lose?
SBinF
February 5th, 2013
1:10 pm
“Having the government take over wireless is the quickest way to turn the internet into the post office.”
Tell me, how else can I mail a letter from here to California for less than 50 cents?
SBinF
February 5th, 2013
1:14 pm
“Current wireless rates are what they are because of demand. There is a limit to the amount of bandwidth available at any given time which is why “unlimited data” is now a rarity. Building a network that could handle the demands of free bandwidth to everyone is simply unrealistic.”
http://www.techdirt.com/blog/wireless/articles/20130123/12010721767/verizon-charging-you-more-as-bandwidth-costs-them-less.shtml
————————————————-
Verizon Charging You More, As Bandwidth Costs Them Less
from the caps-and-pap dept
As we just recently discussed, broadband providers appear to finally be willing to give up their pretend need for data caps due to the pretend costs of delivering service. The story they told essentially was that, without data caps, congestion would clog the interwebz tubes and that laying bigger tubes was way too costly. Perhaps noteably, this rarely resulted in actual hard caps on data, but rather provided a convenient excuse to charge more for more data service, regardless of the effect or cost of delivering that service.
Now Verizon’s 4G LTE money-making machine is giving us a glimpse into exactly how profitable providing bandwidth is becoming as the cost for delivering service drops and prices to consumers go up.
Verizon (VZ) posted a pretty impressive holiday quarter (one-time charges aside) with a good outlook on Tuesday, and the company’s share price rose as a result. There were also plenty of interesting takeaways from the carrier’s earnings call, but The New York Times’ Brian X. Chen zeroed in on one item of particular interest. Verizon launched new “Share Everything” plans last summer that make smartphone data more expensive for many users. The best thing about these plans for investors — and, not coincidentally, the worst thing about the plans for subscribers — is that Verizon is now making more money off of smartphone data as costs associated with transmitted that data are falling.
It really doesn’t get much simpler than that. The 4G LTE network is efficient to the point that delivering the service costs less than the 3G network, yet the price to consumers is going up. To be clear, the problem here isn’t that Verizon is making money. Rather, the problem is that this comes from the same company that built a business model around low caps and high overage costs while also claiming that caps were the sign of a “competitive market.” For those of you playing along at home, it’s precisely because of a lack of competition that Verizon can at once have its costs drop while raising prices on its services. Were there more competition, someone new would compete on price or value of service. As it stands, Verizon can use their faster service and low caps to further the aforementioned business model.
———————————————————-
Chew on that for a bit…
MadeinAmerica
February 5th, 2013
1:16 pm
Of course it can be free for the end user. Companies like Google can easily find ways to provide free access to the net and reap benefits from having a market for providing advertising and marketing to consumers. Well worth exploring.
In the long run, most of the money will be in content, not carriage.
Darryl Brooks
February 5th, 2013
1:17 pm
Wouldn’t this interfere with the navigational equipment on airlines? Imagine, planes falling out of the sky when they turn this on. It would be a disaster.
SBinF
February 5th, 2013
1:19 pm
“Wouldn’t this interfere with the navigational equipment on airlines? Imagine, planes falling out of the sky when they turn this on. It would be a disaster.”
I’m going out on a limb here, but I’m guessing it’s been a while since you studied the physics of electromagnetic waves, hasn’t it?
Simple Truths
February 5th, 2013
1:19 pm
Well if it’s “free”… More “free” government services. I can only imagine what support/help would be like when issues arise.
Free At Last, Thank God Almighty Wi-Fi's free At Last
February 5th, 2013
1:20 pm
Nuthin’s free. But I like the idea of not having to come out of pocket every month to AT&T.
A Conservative Voice
February 5th, 2013
1:20 pm
This is nothing more than another “entitlement” that will be given to those too lazy to work for anything. Another “vote buying” scheme by the most corrupt administration ever in the history of the USofA
SBinF
February 5th, 2013
1:22 pm
“This is nothing more than another “entitlement” that will be given to those too lazy to work for anything. Another “vote buying” scheme by the most corrupt administration ever in the history of the USofA”
Please, Conservative Voice, keep it up. You know, because hurling insults about the “makers” versus the “takers” worked so well for your camp last election.
Tom
February 5th, 2013
1:24 pm
I agree..Let it be free….Like Tv USED to be…Just buy the set and turn it on.To the big carriers: up your nose wida rubba hose! Let the advertisements pay for the infrastructure…Don’t worry, they’llpay.
stands for decibels
February 5th, 2013
1:27 pm
C’mon FTC. If Hitler and Himmler could do it, so can you. Wield your self-imposed power and make it happen for the collective. You can do it. Even if you have to break some eggs and stomp some heads, and who knows, maybe drone-kill some protesters…whatever it takes to advance the common social cause as we define it. Ohhh. I’m so wet now. I have to go and relieve myself….giggles and hot throbbing Alabama black snakes.
IRS Cometh
February 5th, 2013
1:27 pm
The article’s title should read: Yeah! Tax Increases for Everyone – You Can Pay Via the Governments Free Internet
stands for decibels
February 5th, 2013
1:29 pm
While I wasn’t kidding about the providers’ black ops plans, really the only thing truly standing in the way of free wi-fi would be any remaining public sentiment like this:
This is nothing more than another “entitlement” that will be given to those too lazy to work for anything.
I realize that kind of thinking is ignorant and foolish, but there’s a lot of it out there, and lots of those self-loathing, self-pitying people are useful idiots for the private companies who’ll be winding them up a LOT over this one.
Basically, they’ll be crying that the “makers” are going to get nothing out of this and the “takers” will be sucking up all the bandwidth. It’ll be really stupid and embarrassing to behold, but that’s the usual argument and there are always lots of dummies willing to advance it.
stands for decibels
February 5th, 2013
1:29 pm
name-jacker @ 1.27, by the way.
Fernando netro
February 5th, 2013
1:31 pm
Hmm I think it would be great idea now on the other hand having the government as an internet provider could be a problem when it comes to privacy issues.I mean how would you like for the government to know what you look at or what you watch.Also what would the government do to make sure the WiFi signal is truly secure because if anonymous hackers or other hackers can hack banks or even news web sites whats to stop them from hacking into WiFi signals and stealing peoples information .
Bobby
February 5th, 2013
1:31 pm
The only reason Verizon, AT&T and T-Mobile don’t like the proposal is it gives them one less way to gouge their customers.
Open up Wi-Fi.
Brenda Durden
February 5th, 2013
1:32 pm
Should the government put the plan into high gear, or should the airwaves be sold to businesses. The government should go ahead and put the plan in high gear. Businesses would only figure out how to charge us more. Too expensive already!
Taxi Smith
February 5th, 2013
1:34 pm
I’d like to remind everyone that before cableTV, television was by and large “free.” All you needed was a TV set and a good antenna. Now you’re paying $$$ for essentially the same thing.
Michael Covington
February 5th, 2013
1:36 pm
Free Wi-Fi: good. All Internet access through a government-run network: bad. The Internet is not presently government-run (in fact, its strength is that it has no headquarters; nobody controls it; it’s a huge glob of private networks linked together). The trouble with government-provided free Wi-Fi is that virtually all access to the Internet would be through the government.
Beaver Boy
February 5th, 2013
1:37 pm
No such thing as free! Kind of like those folks who get “free cell phones.” People who actually pay for their cell phone bill each month subsidize those folks. So people who pay taxes will front this project. Then people will see an increase on their voice plan from their cell phone carrier. Since when does government good at providing services! The WIFI service will probably blow.
But I guess if you feel “entitled” to something “free” then I can see why you would some would be excited….
SBinF
February 5th, 2013
1:37 pm
“I think it would be great idea now on the other hand having the government as an internet provider could be a problem when it comes to privacy issues.I mean how would you like for the government to know what you look at or what you watch.”
The government can already do that. Thanks, Patriot Act!
asdf
February 5th, 2013
1:38 pm
If you don’t mind getting brain cancer from all the radio waves, it’d be great.
Hedy Lamarr (inventor of frequency hopping)
February 5th, 2013
1:39 pm
You’re crazy if you don’t think your every click is being monitored right now. And your cable boxes are two-way devices, too. I say bring on nation-wide taxpayer-paid wi-fi. The cost will be much lower this way.
AtlJack
February 5th, 2013
1:40 pm
Limbaugh, Hannity, Coulter and other right-wingers must be thrilled reading how afraid some of the commenters on this site are. They’ve managed to brainwash low IQ people into thinking that anything that benefits all the people is “socialism”.
When telephones were first invented, the evil, scary GOVERNMENT set up a national program where a national network would be created to provide phone service at a low cost. It worked (we didn’t have Limbaugh and others to scream “socialism” at everything that benefited the majority of Americans).
When Hitler decided to rule the world, the evil, scary GOVERNMENT issued calls for citizens to grow victory gardens and rationed meat and other items for the war effort. Again, there was no Rush Limbaugh to call this “socialism”. So the Government directed a national effort that beat back Hitler and Mussolini and the Japanese war machine.
In the Constitution the preamble proclaims: “promote the general welfare” of the people.
Too bad little minds can’t get seem to understand that the government has an obligation to look for ways to benefit all Americans.
Sharon
February 5th, 2013
1:42 pm
The companies objecting specifically ATT should first provide everyone access as was promised before yelling about those who would give it free. Those of us in outskirts of cities still can not get access of any speed without expensive satellites.
Prez Obozo
February 5th, 2013
1:45 pm
I most likely would not use it since I pay bills online. Funny how these companies squeal like a stuck pig when their money may be affected but have no problem moving their ops over seas & putting people here out of jobs!
Tom
February 5th, 2013
1:46 pm
Robert Heinlein, one of the great science fiction writers of the past, used a phrase in one of his books: TANSTAAFL – There Ain’t No Such Thing As A Free Lunch. I would say that applies here. It won’t be free Wi-Fi. Somebody will be paying for it. If the government is involved, that means the taxpayer.
Scootabah
February 5th, 2013
1:47 pm
IT WILL NEVER HAPPEN
Can You Hear me NOW!
February 5th, 2013
1:47 pm
I am all for anything that improves the lame reception I get from AT&T in my home!
Glenn
February 5th, 2013
1:49 pm
Really stunned by some of these comments . You use wi-fi to operate your garage door opener . I never once heard someone say who is paying for this .
Kenman
February 5th, 2013
1:54 pm
Run for your life! Once again the government is planning to take over a private enterprise, like healthcare, and will control all internet access AND HAVE TOTAL CONTROL to more conveniently spy on what you e-mail, what you view, what you say on “private” forums with now meaningless password protection. In fact, they can easily capture all your password info, and who knows what can of worms that will open. There are government website hackers breaking in daily to even the most “secure” systems!
As usual, this is wrapped up like a present, again like the “free” healthcare to those that won’t pay for it. But the power grab of the current government should scare the h*ll out of you, and you don’t have to be a conspiracy nut to realize that all private internet channels will go bankrupt as the grand government uses OUR tax dollars to subsidize this new takeover, once again undermining the once Free Market.
Kate
February 5th, 2013
1:58 pm
The current providers already know building out wi-fi to every corner of the country, including rural areas, costs vastly – by orders of magnitude – more than any benefit it returns to anyone. Hint: That’s why they haven’t done it themselves already.
I work in the telecom field. Here’s the reality of how this would play out. The government can’t build this, so they would contract with existing providers (ie, Verizon, AT&T) to build and maintain this “free” country-wide network at whatever exorbitant and irrational cost it would take. Then they’ll create a layer of 1000’s of state and federal government staffers to act as the interface with those carriers, requiring detailed pointless reports every month, and writing vast regulatory documents that accomplish nothing, in order to justify their existence (that’s how it works with the current wired and wireless networks). No other entrants offering new technology will be permitted, because, of course, wi-fi would now be owned by the government. Complaints? Sorry, this is the government and it’s now a monopoly – too bad if you don’t like the service.
So big business wins either way. The government gets bigger and exerts more control over your life. More money comes out of your paycheck over which you will have zero control. Service and innovation degrade. Ask yourself if that’s REALLY what you want. Think carefully.
Stella
February 5th, 2013
1:58 pm
Oh yea, they can do it. The only people who will be eligible for this are the welfare clowns and the drug addicts and lets not forget the illegals. The rest of us will continue to pay the high cable bills and get our taxes raised yet again. I mean come on, we MUST pay our fair share right? Gag gag gag
Scooter
February 5th, 2013
2:00 pm
The more our government dictates how private producers serve their customers, the more we morph into a fascist economy. But hey, most people just think fascism is a word for bludgeoning conservatives and don’t know they are actually promoting fascism.
DAMN RIGTH!
February 5th, 2013
2:00 pm
Of course that is the right thing to do. And of course business will get upset if the government frees up access and prevent them from gouging the public….what did you expect?
Butch Cassidy (I)
February 5th, 2013
2:01 pm
Can someone please get Kenman a tinfoil hat. I think he’s ready for meltdown.
DAMN RIGHT!
February 5th, 2013
2:02 pm
It wont be free because it will be taxpayer supported….Duh… that’s like calling Social Security an Entitlement…. excuse me…. We pay for it… its not free…
DUH
Butch Cassidy (I)
February 5th, 2013
2:05 pm
The FCC already regulates the airwaves and the bandwith, are you people stupid or just plain dip sh!ts?
stubioge
February 5th, 2013
2:08 pm
Costs would either be passed back to us as taxpayers or more likely cable companies and cell phone providers would raise their rates on other services to make up the difference. Either way – not free.
DAMN RIGHT!
February 5th, 2013
2:09 pm
Kate I like you points but the reality is Im not happy with the services for either At&t, Verizon or T suck mobile.
They already have a monopoly and you can only get the service they want you to have in the neighborhoods they restrict. So your argument loses validity.
Since the “big 3″ already have a fix in… why should I have to pay for it outside of my taxes. Who do you think gets tax payers dollars to fund their expansion any way? AT$T, VERI$ON and T-Moble….
Duh?
Why pay taxes and the Cellular carriers?
DAMN RIGHT!
February 5th, 2013
2:10 pm
*Kate I like your points but the reality is I’m not happy with the services for either At&t, Verizon or T suck mobile.
David
February 5th, 2013
2:13 pm
Why is it the first people to complain about the I-85 HOT lanes are always the ones to say, “let big business do it”? Having an open datalink available to all has some huge potential benefits for state drivers. It could keep you from running into a car that’s stalled on the freeway. It could instantly update your GPS with reroute information so you could avoid traffic slow downs. It could warn you of a natural disaster when you’re far from home. It is all the advantages of the internet brought to you wirelessly wherever you go. It is infrastructure and therefor within the legitimate responsibilities of government. What you should really fear is the government turning around and outsourcing this network to companies like AT&T. Back when NASA designed their own rockets we could land Americans on the moon. Now that they outsource rocket design to defense contractors, they can’t even repeat John Glenn’s 1962 feat without renting a ride on an ex-Soviet Union designed rocket. Our Navy was 600 ships strong when they designed their own. Now that they’ve contracted out that job, they can’t keep 280 tubs afloat, and their Littoral Combat Ship costs more than an Iowa Class battleship.
Justineisu
February 5th, 2013
2:16 pm
This is the best idea from the federal government in a long time. I deeply resent having to pay hotels and airlines a mini fortune for internet asset when one travels. If we had free wifi a lot of people would drop a lot of stuff on cable. Personally between youTube, netflix and a couple of international free movie sites I have already dropped the alleged “premium” channels which rarely show anything new. TV should be free and so should wify!!!!!
Alphare
February 5th, 2013
2:20 pm
I am all for it. If the government can get ATT, Verizon etc’s CEO’s annual billion bonus to pay for it. It will actually be free for the taxpayers.
Big John
February 5th, 2013
2:22 pm
Let’s start small with city or municipality having free wi-fi then expanding it regionally. Many cities already have free wi-fi and this really cuts back on these overcharged data plans the big cell companies charge.
Gomer Pyle
February 5th, 2013
2:23 pm
Can you imagine what it will be like calling customer service for the government when you have a problem? Shazam!
Drudge
February 5th, 2013
2:26 pm
Consider this please – yes ISPs, carriers do make money off of you…that’s why they are in business. There is a lot of competition in this space – coverage, speed, price, etc. Competition breeds innovation – these companies strive to have the best product, value and attraction to paying customers. Without that competition, there is no more innovation. The networks won’t get faster, devices will be limited by infrastructure, there will be no real impetus to fix problems – they get paid either way. How much innovation do you see in the Post Office? How about Amtrak? Marta? There you go…
Listen if you feel like the inability to get online in our wireless world is a real roadblock to your future, you lack the cognitive ability to wander into the tens of thousands of free hotspots in this city and logon – then I don’t think your input will be missed very much.
Blue Helpdesk
February 5th, 2013
2:28 pm
Interesting article. I would be interested to see what the total costs of this program would entail. I’d also would like third party consumer advocate organizations to opine on two main issues I can think of right away. Privacy and Security.
Blue Helpdesk is an Atlanta IT Solutions Co.
woodrow
February 5th, 2013
2:28 pm
Free government wi-fi. LOL. Well we couldn’t get ‘free’ medical care so I guess we can try for ‘free’ wi-fi. I just wonder how much it will cost?
Drudge
February 5th, 2013
2:28 pm
Justineisu – this wouldn’t work at 41,000 feet, no terrestrial network does – the airplane actually houses the equipment to contact satellites or ground based repeaters (depending on providers). You are paying them to use their equipment, not access the internet.
dee
February 5th, 2013
2:29 pm
I think that as a society we are already moving in that direction. Our WIFI is already becoming over loaded with activitie and it is starting to cause a problem. Sooner or later the governement is going to have to do something anyway. They failed to mention the schools systems could benifit from it too. They are already are encouraging kids to bring their own devices to school think of the money the schools could save and redistribute to other areas. No matter how big or small a savings is a savings and if it brings equality in education, medical help and safety along with mirads of other things then why not?
Greg
February 5th, 2013
2:30 pm
The amount I will pay in tax increases is substantially less than am I paying to these worthless internet providers. They grossly overcharge for wi-fi and deserve to have their business model shot to pieces.
Yo Amos
February 5th, 2013
2:37 pm
The government has never given anything free. Somebody is going to pay and you bets believe it will be the working people. The low income, non-working people will get Wifi free, but not us that have to work for it. In all reality it will probably end up costing us more. I do not trust the government as far as I can throw them.
Glenn
February 5th, 2013
2:37 pm
Kate that doesn’t make sense . AT&T’s carrot for taking over T-Mobile was that they would be able to build out there network to rural areas even though it wasn’t profitable . I love my AT&T dividends but I’m starting to view it maybe as stealing from Paul to pay Peter . Entrants are already being barred due to lack of free spectrum . The telco’s have been taking advantage of that have they not ?
Kate could the government do any worse than AT&T when they were a monopoly not that that would happen . Do you remember when calls were so expensive that relatives were always called on Sunday evening ? My guess is no .
Kate if this was a government takeover why would Microsoft & Google support this ? Because they could cut out your industry right ; ) Apps ahoy !
dee
February 5th, 2013
2:38 pm
Got that right.
Lexi
February 5th, 2013
2:41 pm
THEN WHAT IS GOING TO HAPPEN TO THOSE PPL WHO WORK FOR INTERNET COMPANIES??!! MORE UNEMPLOYMENT? DEFINITELY NOT! WE ARE LETTING TECHNOLOGY HENDER INSTEAD OF HELP…
ughhhh
February 5th, 2013
2:44 pm
It is only free if you do not pay taxes…..go Obama go….
Glenn
February 5th, 2013
2:45 pm
Lexi we can save money by having them push a boulder in a circle 40 hrs a week or they can find niches in different areas . They will open up . Maybe we try and find it exciting .
Not Surprised
February 5th, 2013
2:48 pm
For the record “WE” are already being watched & monitored, that’s nothing new. And for the IDIOT that wants to blame Obama for EVERYTHING, there’s a reason your an IDIOT & NO you haven’t learned ANYTHING!! GET A FREAKING LIFE!!
Devil's Advocate
February 5th, 2013
2:49 pm
HAH, anyone for this obviously doesn’t care that the government would have unmitigated access to every byte of data you transmit or receive.
Intellectually Superior
February 5th, 2013
2:50 pm
Do you naysayers have any idea what’s the difference between cost and value? Yes, the taxpayers will pay, genius. Just like you pay for those good for nothing highways that the government monitors and licenses you to be on. Gosh, things would be so much better in this country if we would have saved that money we spent on highways, am i right?.
Did you know that the internet has been the biggest driver of economic value for a couple decades? Do you have any idea, what happens when bright young minds have access to the worlds information? Unencumbered communication greases the wheels of commerce, how hard is that to understand? And no, this would not put anyone out of business. By connecting, extending and building on this platform (as with highways, the water system, airports, trains, the space program etc.) businesses are offered (for free) a platform to build premium services while accessing new markets.
In America, we have a long history of private/government partnerships that create opportunities by investing in big ideas. That’s the key to America’s (past) economic might. That’s why Americans invented every major technological breakthrough. Moaning and playing the victim didn’t do it. I’m so sick of you simple minds spouting off like you know something.
Not one of you naysayers has created something of value for humankind and you don’t intend to. You’re negativity is holding you back. Just relax, pipe down, and leave the big thinking to those who are equipped for it.
Look closer
February 5th, 2013
2:53 pm
Terribly written article. This isn’t about free wifi it is about opening up access to unused frequency. I love how all of the welfare supporters jump in because after all the internet is a right not a privelage. Somebody has to pay for the transmitters and receiver and all of the associated utilities. There is no free lunch here.
Lulu
February 5th, 2013
2:54 pm
A real problem is wifi availability. Two ISPs are only available in my area and both have proven beyond ANY reasonable doubt to be incompetant at providing reliable wifi service. I pay $49.99 per month for internet service only and though overpriced the few problems I encounter are better than that of the wifi ISPs. I need wifi for ebooks. As already noted forget FREE. Allow the other ISPs to offer pd wifi and availabilty through this nationwide network can pay for itself. CERTAINLY THE FCC SHOULD MAKE CERTAIN PAID WIFI IS AVAILABLE NATIONWIDE BY ALLOWING FREE COMPETITION AMONG ISPs.
singletracker
February 5th, 2013
2:55 pm
AT&T & Comcast have the worst customer ratings of any companies and continually gouge us all, whether you’re a customer or not. No government regulators have been able to do anything about their duopolies (?), so it’s time for the government to replace them. No one here is likely to remember the Rural Electrification program that was the U.S. government’s make to the biggest change in human history. Nothing compares to the REA efforts of the 1930’s, but fully available wi-fi might come close.
Look closer
February 5th, 2013
2:55 pm
Intellectually superior is just the person I was referring to. Of course we should pay more taxes and give internet to everyone. Why shouldn’t a mother of four with no job not be able to update her facebook status or the 20 yr old high school dropout not get to play world of warcraft. By the way genius, capitalism is what has made this country great, not your socialistic ideals.
Synonomous
February 5th, 2013
2:58 pm
The trouble is, we’ve been paying the telecom/current internet providers extra money for years to build out greater wi-fi and internet infrastructure in this country. We’re the leaders in internet technology, but our service speeds in this country are a fraction of what they are in Europe or Japan. But the companies like AT&T have been charging us through the nose for those slow speeds, as well as taking in extra ‘fees’ for the infrastructure build-out that they and other companies never completed.
b6542
February 5th, 2013
3:01 pm
Santa Claus is coming to town !
obamaSIN LADEN
February 5th, 2013
3:03 pm
no mo guvment. plees
Alphare
February 5th, 2013
3:03 pm
AT&T and Verizon are no different than a small country government. The difference is, the small country governments don’t pay billions of bonus to their leaders. If you cut out billions of bonus to those executive cons, you will get your powerful WIFI to $20 per month.
A brand new everywhere WIFI will shut out those executives, and thus leads to a cheaper and more powerful WIFI.
Innocent Bystander
February 5th, 2013
3:05 pm
“The problem is getting a network built.” How about eminent domain? Seize something useful for once.
Synonomous
February 5th, 2013
3:06 pm
I repeat, we’ve been paying the telecoms and ISPs extra to build out IT infrastructure in the US for years. They took the money and built very little.
Glenn
February 5th, 2013
3:06 pm
Look closer . Your exactly who Intellectually Superior was talking about . Truth hurts yes ? You do know the spectrum that was the public’s was sold to companies and then sold back to us after our politicians got what they wanted . I guess you were a big proponent of the bank bailouts . Ya know giving tax money , actually borrowing money , to give to the banks so they could give it back to us with interest ; )
L-Dorrado
February 5th, 2013
3:06 pm
Butch Cassidy (I)
February 5th, 2013
2:05 pm
The FCC already regulates the airwaves and the bandwith, are you people stupid or just plain dip sh!ts?
Hate tends to allow you the luxury to see things as you see fit… Nothing like a Communist, Socialist, Marxist, Fascist, Islamic, Kenyan as the POTUS for mental clarity… LOL!!! question…..can you be a communist AND fascist at the same time? LOL!!
Gov’t subsidizes high speed internet in South Korea… they have TRUE highspeed wireless internet over there (nothing over here compares) and the “PEOPLE” pay a small flat monthly fee for it…even out in the isolated rual areas. People need to realize that in several ways technically WE are behind other countries. Time for us to catch up! BTW….. if not for the Gov’t and it’s funding for research, there would be no internet as we know it.
bikerchick
February 5th, 2013
3:10 pm
The idea of “free” wi-fi is misleading. The reason that you can tune into a radio station or tv station is because someone “owns” that broadcasting spectrum and noone else is allowed to use it. What the FCC is proposing is to take all of the old analog tv spectrums that were the property of broadcasters (but are no longer in use) and “freeing” them up to be used to send wi-fi signals. See below for the explantion from Matthew Yglesias, a financial reporter for MoneyBox:
“The FCC does have a good idea here and the telecommunications companies are evil, but there is no such plan.
The key issue is the difference between a wireless spectrum that’s owned by private firms and a wireless spectrum that’s “free” and “open” to whomever. The reason you can tune into a TV or radio station and get a clear signal is that it’s illegal for anyone other than the owner of the frequency in question to broadcast on it. The same is true for the spectrum bands owned by the different mobile phone operating companies.
But Wi-Fi doesn’t work like that. You buy a router, plug it in, turn it on, and bam—you’re broadcasting a Wi-Fi signal. The reason that works is that Wi-Fi routers operate on a band of spectrum that isn’t in private hands. It’s left “open” for anyone to use. Garage door openers operate on a similar principle.
The controversy Kang’s writing about is a longstanding dispute over what to do with analog television broadcast spectrum that TV stations were given long ago. There are many ins-and-outs to this, but the basic issue is that telecom companies want as much spectrum as possible to be sold to telecom companies while FCC chairman Julius Genachowski wants to sell less spectrum to telecoms and leave more of it “open” for public use. He and major Silicon Valley firms believe that this spectrum could be used in a way that’s comparable to Wi-Fi, except with stronger, more robust signals. But just because Wi-Fi spectrum is free doesn’t mean that Wi-Fi service is free. Any kind of “super Wi-Fi” is the same.
Perhaps if the spectrum were open and the technology worked, some cities would use it to build municipal broadband networks, but there’s no need for it to be used that way. Garage door opener spectrum is free, but there’s no municipal garage door networks.”
Synonomous
February 5th, 2013
3:12 pm
@L-Dorrado:
As I’ve said, there shouldn’t have been a need for this to be subsidized by the government. We’ve already been paying the ISPs and telecoms extra money for years, money they were supposed to use to build out greater network capactiy, speed, and service areas.
They basically pocketed the money.
James
February 5th, 2013
3:14 pm
All of you that say this can’t work seem to forget that it worked for 50 years with television driven by advertisement. Now we pay for the waves that we all as a people own and still deal with advertising. Talk about getting the wool pulled over your eyes! If you don’t understand the way something works, then you should shut up and learn something instead of spouting off your political nonsense. You don’t just open the hood of your car and rebuild your engine if you don’t know anything about engines.
James
February 5th, 2013
3:16 pm
@Synonomous:
You are exactly right. The Federal Excise Tax is one example.
L-Dorrado
February 5th, 2013
3:18 pm
Synonomous… Yes I am aware of that but I was giving the example of what big scary Gov’t has done in S. Korean at a small flat cost to the people… I would be MORE than happy to pay $50 a month for 100MB up and down for wireless wifi…. then I would GLADLY abandon my grandfathered unlimited data plan from Verizon and switch to unlimited voice…. and I would tell Xfinity to kill my internet service “EL PRONTO!”
DawgNole
February 5th, 2013
3:21 pm
Simple Truths
February 5th, 2013
1:19 pm
Well if it’s “free”… More “free” government services. I can only imagine what support/help would be like when issues arise.
___________________
As if “support/help” were worth a damn now. Typically, you get a robot who can barely speak English, who reads from a script, and who must “check my sources” (while putting you on hold for hours) to answer all but the simplest of questions.
Drudge
February 5th, 2013
3:22 pm
Free everything is called Communism – and that always works out well…
Jon
February 5th, 2013
3:22 pm
The FCC has no plan to create free Wi-Fi networks, this article is false. This is the real story: http://arstechnica.com/tech-policy/2013/02/no-free-wi-fi-isnt-coming-to-every-us-city/
it was quoted in this article, but not linked to.
Disclosure: I wrote it.
L-Dorrado
February 5th, 2013
3:23 pm
James…. you are wasting your time. These are the SAME people that thought the earth was flat, and if you taught otherwise, they called you a heretic. Same people that conducted Witch hunts in New England…same people that sat quiet for 8 years as we ran through surplus, started two unfunded wars (which almost bankrupted the country..See former USSR) and off shored american job…that are NOW the most vocal about how BAD the Gov’t is and how their freedoms are being taken away (name me 1 you’ve lost)… History has always shown that you will have nuts that hate and fear anything they don’t understand…and History as equally shown that you can’t stop progress… Thank God!!
JTK
February 5th, 2013
3:23 pm
I think the Post Office should run the free internet!
Union
February 5th, 2013
3:24 pm
@ Christopher Seward …. err.. fact check much?
Marty
February 5th, 2013
3:27 pm
So when our President gets pissed with us because we maybe do not agree with one of his policies, i.e. Obamacare, he can ground us and take away our internet. I believe the gov’t has its hand in enough already. I would rather pay the high prices I currently pay.
Rick
February 5th, 2013
3:29 pm
So who you going to call when your “service” goes down? Like anything else the government gets it’s hands on, they will screw it up. When you go to a McDonald’s and the line is too long, you can go across the street to the Burger King. When the government monopolizes internet connectivity, they will use it to spy on you and they don’t give a damn about customer service. Ever seen a short line at the post office?
Reverie
February 5th, 2013
3:30 pm
Obama dun giv me the free Internets! This is another scheme of the left to force the working class to subsidize the worthless class. Yep. Worthless. Drains on production. Drains on society. Drains on the safety, security and most of all prosperity of the nation. The more “free” the government controls, the more we sell our souls to mother government. Anyone that claims otherwise amounts to just another leach, a human Remora. You are content to ride along doing nothing and getting everything handed to you. You have completely de-incentivized success to the point the US is now a bad place to do business. The sad thing is that I actually do think our government has an obligation to help those that cannot help themselves. However, I am tired of being asked, as a working person, to supplement those that will not work. Right now there are four signs seeking employees to take on low wage jobs. When I was unemployed I took those jobs in order to work my way out of poverty. I wasn’t born with a silver spoon in my mouth nor was I allowed to accept charity. If I take charity it steals it from those that cannot help themselves. Almost fifty percent of our nation thinks that is just fine. I’m ashamed of you. Comment or don’t about what I have just written. It does not change the fact that I am right. Your greatest nightmare is those of us that actually producing withdrawing our income by retiring. That reality is coming soon. They thieving class will have to devour itself at that point.
Glenn
February 5th, 2013
3:34 pm
Thanks Jon . Insightful read .
Oy!
February 5th, 2013
3:34 pm
Amazed no one’s thought to comment on the health risk this could have – WOW! Who needs a pulse anyway. (o.O)
L-Dorrado
February 5th, 2013
3:35 pm
So when our President gets pissed with us because we maybe do not agree with one of his policies, i.e. Obamacare, he can ground us and take away our internet. I believe the gov’t has its hand in enough already. I would rather pay the high prices I currently pay.
I still waiting for him to make Arabic the official Language, Islam the official Religion, and putting white people in the fields to pick cotton…i mean that IS what we were told that he would be doing…. what’s Taking him so long?! Darn…. Socialist, Marxist, Communist, Racist, Activist, ageist, economist, adventurist, novelist, Kenyan president…
Brasstown
February 5th, 2013
3:39 pm
Yes, and the interstate highway system was just a way for the government to get access to you quicker to steal your children in the middle of the night.
The paranoid responses here are just embarrassing.
dean
February 5th, 2013
3:43 pm
More Free Stuff!!!
Run like hell from this idea.
L-Dorrado
February 5th, 2013
3:45 pm
“Yes, and the interstate highway system was just a way for the government to get access to you quicker to steal your children in the middle of the night.”
CLASSIC!!!!!! LOL!!!!!!!!!!!! no wonder so many are pushing back on background/mental checks for Guns…. people aren’t even remotely qualified to be walking around with the general populus let along carry deadly weapons.
Reverie
February 5th, 2013
3:45 pm
Call it what you will, Brasstown. Your comparison is lame. Unless the government had a way to fold the interstate highway system each night, they are hard pressed to keep us off of it. Let me help you understand this, my technologically backward friend. Internet access is turned off or throttled at the click of a mouse. Also, the Internet is already used to track people. The government freely acknowledges this. You may want to sell your soul for free internet but have the decency to not sell the souls of your children.
Intellectually Superior
February 5th, 2013
3:47 pm
Well, Look Closer, I want the highways closed and my money back then, because those people use the roads too!
You are in fact the whiny, entitled, victim mentality that I was referring to. I speak of innovation and value. You speak of dropouts and welfare mom’s. Do you see patterns emerging in your small mind as your world closes in? Can you find a new meme?
Sorry to wreck your theory, I am a conservative. Let me enlighten you. Socialism is when the government controls the means of production and determines prices, ok? I have owned two businesses (with employees) and am quite aware and fond of capitalism. It’s created more opportunities than any other economic system. It also created a thing called monopolies, which “the government” (i.e. the people of this fine country) had to break up. (oil, steel, railroads, movie studios, telecommunications). It created child labor and safety abuses around which laws had to be made so children could flourish in school instead and men wouldn’t fall into vats of wax. Capitalism is not manna from heaven, it requires thoughtful implementation. Not you are using your capital in any way that will benefit our country. Not that you would risk a thing, to make the world a better place as I and other entrepreneurs do every day. (entrepreneur: that’s just a fancy elitist word for business person who doesn’t wait for someone to “give” them a job.)
Capitalists did not make any of the programs I mentioned in my earlier post without the explicit backing and subsidy of citizen’s tax dollars. That’s just a simple fact that you can be mad about tonight while you seethe over your 401k and the welfare moms on facebook.
Johnny Craven
February 5th, 2013
3:50 pm
OK being a tech all sounds nice but issues that will come up 1.) $178 BILLION is not FREE that is paid for by the tax payers so no it is not free 2.) Big government control of the internet means government control over the internet … the net is watching you (well it is already now anywho) 3.) Gvt can have control over what sites to show and what to block … no thanks I will pay my $60 a month for my internet thank you
T DOG
February 5th, 2013
3:50 pm
I have studied to be a Networking Consultant, and I have found that AT&T and Verizon stole the governments money the last time they were supposed to upgrade our internet access and broadband. If you go to Europe, where they invested in networks about a decade ago, their speed is about 5 times faster than our “high speed” is. It’s time for us to move into the 21st century and it’s time for the monopolies of communication giants to end.
L-Dorrado
February 5th, 2013
3:51 pm
Intellectually Superior…. Hate inhibits the ability to reason….
“To those that know, no explanation is needed, to those that don’t no explanation will suffice.”
However keep up the good work!!
Johnny Craven
February 5th, 2013
3:52 pm
Another add on … are we not already out of IP Addresses .. this will make it even worse …. can we say denial of service
Joey M
February 5th, 2013
3:53 pm
This would do 2 things. First, it would mean we get to pay even more in taxes. Second, it would give the government access to what we look at on the web. This is a very bad idea. When will the Liberals and big brother stop this intrusion and give us laissez faire???
Phil Baker
February 5th, 2013
3:53 pm
I am sure the democrats and obama will love the idea. It will allow them to stay connected to their constituents who dont pay for anything else. Add free wifi to their free cell phone, so the can contact the food stamp agency and apply for free housing. All for the price of a vote. LOL We have become a welfare state.
L-Dorrado
February 5th, 2013
3:54 pm
Hate is something else…. No matter WHAT is going on with whatever…they can ALWAYS tie it back to Government…. “Man I think I’m coming down with a cold” Yeah I went to CVS the other day and I noticed they had cameras up EVERYWHERE, even by the bathroom door…. Never noticed them having that many……….(wait for it)……………. Until Obama got into office. Sigh….. big gov’t looking over everyone’s shoulder nowadays and sticking it’s nose in ALL of our business….. this isn’t my Dad’s America anymore.
lexi3
February 5th, 2013
3:55 pm
Quote du jour: “Republicans are always worrying about who is paying for something.”
No such thing as “free.” Depends on who is being forced to pay. What we can be sure of is that once the government makes it “free,” the true costs will be hidden and magnified. And, yes, you can bet that the government will control content. The Obama administration has an open war declared on Fox now. It will only get worse folks. While the parasitic class dances a jig, John Peter Zenger and Tom Paine will roll over in their graves.
ITS ALL BUSH"S FAULT
February 5th, 2013
3:56 pm
Only an inbred red state tool would look at this as something bad for the people… get a life con losers…
erik
February 5th, 2013
3:57 pm
GOVERNMENT WASTE!!!!!!
JD
February 5th, 2013
3:58 pm
Be sure that it will not be free. Someone has to pay and in this case it will be the taxpayers paying for one more effort to supplant capitalism with socialism. But look on the bright side all of you folks who want a free ride; Big Brother will finally arrive in the form of a government network that can record, monitor and track every movement, conversation and thought.
Billy
February 5th, 2013
3:59 pm
After the liberals have made such a mess of this country, we’re going to entrust to them yet another responsibility? Great Idea! BTW, all you leftists who don’t know, yet talk down to those that do, “free” internet will have a cost. You can whip out all your liberal calculators, but the real math says it all. Someone will have to pay, more than likely the responsible taxapayer, not the irresponsible person who made all the wrong decisions in life and now thinks it’s “unfair” if someone makes more money than he doesn, regardless of any other factors. Yeah, you idiots have all the answers; that’s why we’re running zero deficits and have full employment, because you people know everything. Next subject…
L-Dorrado
February 5th, 2013
4:01 pm
Big Brother will finally arrive in the form of a government network that can record, monitor and track every movement, conversation and thought.
Already done…it’s called the patriot act. The USA PATRIOT Act (commonly known as the Patriot Act) is an Act of the U.S. Congress that was signed into law by President George W. Bush on October 26, 2001.
Mike
February 5th, 2013
4:08 pm
I say lets get it going, but the service providers will have there way and everyone will probably end up spending twice as much for service. CAPITALISM!
Mark
February 5th, 2013
4:09 pm
Bad idea! How could free Wi-Fi possibly be construed to be a valid role for the federal government? And who pays? You do. Can we afford another give-away program? No. Why don’t we have our federal government fix its current spending problems before we think up ways to add to that problem and to extend the role of the federal government into places it does not belong and has not been before!
L-Dorrado
February 5th, 2013
4:11 pm
“I say lets get it going, but the service providers will have there way and everyone will probably end up spending twice as much for service. CAPITALISM!”
Short memories…… capitalism ran amuck from 2001-2009…. me and my 401K had our fill thank you very much…
Joey M
February 5th, 2013
4:14 pm
@ITS ALL BUSH”S FAULT Not anymore. It’s Obama’s fault. That idiot is a disgrace to the people of America. You are a disgrace to your family for making such ignorant comments.
“Only an inbred red state tool would look at this as something bad for the people”
Really? An “inbred red state”? Let’s look at blue states. Michigan and California. Michigan has had Liberalism run rampant since the 1960’s. There has not been a Republican to hold any seat with power in almost 50 years. What does Michigan look like today? What about Detroit? You use words like “inbred” to describe Georgia. I will use words like “ignorant” and “racist” to describe states that are blue. Voting for someone solely because of the color of their skin is racist and wrong. Hopefully one day you will take a reading comprehension class (this is where you learn how to understand what you read) and you will see the light. I say hopefully because I also say “Hopefully I’ll win the Lottery”. I don’t play so it’s impossible. I doubt you have the intellectual capacity to understand anything but “handout”, “food stamps”, and “free stuff”.
L-Dorrado
February 5th, 2013
4:17 pm
question to people labeling others a Liberals…. “Who on earth is 100% liberal or 100% conservative about everything? On some things I have very conservative views and with other things I have liberal views, but I don’t know anyone that is 100% in either direction. Not a very smart label to place on anyone… regardless of your political ideology…
ATLJono
February 5th, 2013
4:26 pm
I think many are missing the point. I highly doubt this is about the government creating a massive new wifi per se. What’s interesting here is what will our access to the internet look like in 10-20 years? Is every aspect of our lives going to be wired in some way? What kind of universal service will be needed to support that? Why does internet servce need to come from the phone and cable companies? Is this going to be more like turning on the radio? Or the air traffic control network… or the National Weather Service? Something that’s just there that we don’t even think about… In a short period of time we’ve gone from dial up to ISDN to wifi, could something like this be the next big leap?
creative
February 5th, 2013
4:26 pm
This article is just another reason to get lazy LIBS and moronic CONS calling each other names on a post. Please go back and read LANE’S comment on the first page. When you read it (you wan’t understand it unless you are in the industry) you can stop commenting. Actually let’s just keep calling one another names. You commie liberal nazi neocon. There I feel much better. Thanks Fox and MSNBC for creating these mindless people in chat rooms.
Nativebird
February 5th, 2013
4:28 pm
This country is going to hades in a hand basket. Once and for all: NOTHING IS FOR FREE. real Americans, those that work and provide for themselves have always known this. Tis is just another way for these sleazy power hungry bearuacrats to take more of your freedom away. These people believe THEY are Gods. That’s because they have no God.
L-Dorrado
February 5th, 2013
4:30 pm
ATLJono…. for people that would like to turn the clock back to 1950 no…but for the rest of us yes. The cost of technology decreases, and this has so many benefits …..it’s crazy. REAL time smart traffic updates, Smart Cars, news, video broadcasting, next level navigation, etc etc……
MrLiberty
February 5th, 2013
4:34 pm
Nothing is free. There is nothing about this proposal that has anything to do with the free market. There have been absolutely NO safety studies whatsoever regarding this kind of penetrating emission technology. The last people who should have their hands in this pie is the government. Private businesses should be able to purchase bandwidth and should have to fully develop, insure the safety of, and be held liable for any damages related to this technology.
As it currently stands, it sounds like just another typical government vote-buying scheme at the expense of the productive sector of society.
Intellectually Superior
February 5th, 2013
4:41 pm
You know, there IS a socialist party active here in the US. Why don’t all you people crying about socialism find out what THEY think? hmm?
You people griping about socialism:
a) can’t be bothered to click to a dictionary because your brain would explode.
b) are the ones screeching that government owes us more jobs. (but not government jobs!)
c) are the same crowd screeching that Obama isn’t doing anything about gas prices.
You’re all a bunch of tools at best. Anti-American at worst. If it were up to me you’d all be sent to privatized prisons for conversion therapy and a spanking or two. Obviously, someone spared the rod on you whiny pieces o’ S. And I’m positive not one of you have come up with a single innovation in your lives and won’t ever. Yep someone else is going to do all the heavy lifting for you to make this country great again… all you have to do is get up in the morning and get to that job someone GAVE you.
You wouldn’t risk a day or a dime or a bead of sweat to create some value for the good of America. You are mentally impoverished. You’re a taker. Go look in the mirror and repeat. “I hate myself” 100x
East Cobb RINO, Inc (LLC)
February 5th, 2013
4:42 pm
I guess it comes down to who do you want sniffing your packets? Greedy big business? Or corrupt Big Brother?
L-Dorrado
February 5th, 2013
4:43 pm
Intellectually Superior (Standing Ovation) You DID that!!
hryder
February 5th, 2013
4:45 pm
Anyone who currently pays the bills of the moocher class knows that it is our wallets that will be thinner since there is little incentive to pay your own way when one sells his/her vote in exchange for “free stuff” because it is the moochers’ right to the “free stuff”, just ask the Big O.
Intellectually Superior
February 5th, 2013
4:49 pm
Haha, thanks L, I’ve seen you’re posts. You can take a bow as well.
Archie
February 5th, 2013
4:50 pm
Come on people, don’t get your hopes up! This article if full of holes. The most blatant hole in this story is that the technology this article is describing is NOT the same thing as “Wi-Fi”. The term WiFi is local to the building where you’re located. You wirelessly connect to the building’s LAN, and that LAN shares one internet connection for all users in the building. The building owner pays for however much connection speed they need for the number of users in the building. The “Super Wi-Fi” described in this article is nothing more than “mobile broadband”, which is the technology that cellphones and smartphones work through. That’s the 2G, 3G, 4G technology, which we obviously already have and it’s obviously not free. This “Super WiFi” would be a competitor to, not a replacement for, the cellphone companies and internet service providers. It would not be free because those cellular towers don’t just build themselves, and that radio frequency don’t just broadcast itself.
L-Dorrado
February 5th, 2013
5:00 pm
Intellectually Superior I just wish people would stop hiding behind “THINGS” and just SAY why they hate POTUS and Gov’t…..because WE already know why, and they aren’t fooling anyone but themselves. To your point on “priviledge”…. they don’t see THAT and people with their hand out as one in the same. I grew up middle class, neither poor or rich, and I was taught to work HARD, and to understand that some will simply get BY because of who they are and who they know. I learned to network, along with good work ethic and I’m doing well (by the world’s standards)…however I always give and help those that are in need of help. We all are standing on someone’s shoulders to get to where we are in life…. kills me to see all of these God Fearing, patriotic REAL americans looking down their noses at other Americans as if they are lower than dirt….. yet they so love the Lord…. and that constitution…which neither of whom they’ve read.
jms
February 5th, 2013
5:04 pm
There are no free lunches. Someone pays.
jarvis
February 5th, 2013
5:18 pm
“Republicans are always worrying about who is paying for something.”
Was this tongue and cheek?
Lance
February 5th, 2013
5:23 pm
Sounds awesome!!! Lets make the American people so damn dependent on government. And let me ask you this? We will be paying for it period and I garuntee you the FCC will regulate and monitor every action you take. You are dreaming if you think you will not be assigned a user id which the goverment will track and know more about you. Wake up people! NOTHING IS FREE.
This country is being set up to depend on the government. They are all crooks. Dems, Repubs, Libertarians. You want free stuff? Go to McDonalds and get a Fu**ing happy meal.
jarvis
February 5th, 2013
5:28 pm
@L-Dorrado, I’ve lost the freedom to have no insurance. I’ve lost the freedom to choose a plan that doesn’t cover abortion (not that I’d want one that doesn’t). I’ve lost the freedom to choose a lower cost health plan that doesn’t mandate that every woman that spits out a kid gets a $300 breast pump.
As of today I’ve apparently lost the right to have my elected Senators approve National Labor Board appointments.
By the way, I’m not a Republican nor am I God Fearing.
willydoit?
February 5th, 2013
5:40 pm
So this would be like the “old days” when we could watch broadcast television for free? The advertisers would pay for commercials that would keep everything going? If that is the case, sign me up.
However, if the FCC gets involved, would they then begin to censor our internet content as they did on free TV?
woodrow
February 5th, 2013
6:03 pm
It costs a lot of money to provide telecommunications services. You are paying more for gasoline than you are for the most advanced telecom service in the history of the world. If you feel like you can do without voice and data communications, sign off and disconnect. Nothing about the information revolution is free. And the good thing about it is that it is driving industry and that is an American industry so far.
Nutmeg
February 5th, 2013
6:25 pm
As a taxpayer, I think this is a stellar idea–but then, I see the wisdom in having some monopolies.
Interesting Observation
February 5th, 2013
6:40 pm
@Jeff
February 5th, 2013
11:59 am
Who is in charge of the airwaves you receive radio programs on? Who is in charge of the airwaves you receive TV programs on? Egg on your face? That’s okay. You’re forgiven.