TKJunkMail
Enjoy the sun
Premium
join:2002-03-03
Avalon, NJ
 ·Sprint Mobile Broa..
 ·Comcast
|  Pols are like ants at a picnic; inevitable but annoying
Just more delays and the question is why? And the answer is they are still trying to figure out a way to feather their own nests and control the WiFi system instead of letting the providers commissioned to build the system control it.
--
--
Internet News
My BLOG
My Web Page |
|
ftthz
If love can kill hate can also save
join:2005-10-17 | well the longer they take...
the more likely nothing will be done ... politics and internet in this case is like trying to mix oil and water. |
|
Transmaster
Don't Blame Me I Voted For Bill and Opus
join:2001-06-20
Cheyenne, WY
1 edit | Big Surprise
This just illustrates the fact in the liberal world of San Fransisco politics they feel beggars can be choosers.
--
The older I get the more I prefer the company of my dogs over that of man kind. |
|
Placebo
Premium
join:2005-12-14
Huntley, IL
·Comcast
| Data mining?
Doesn't seem to bother the New York Times:
»www.villagevoice.com/nyclife/071···,15.html
So, they were against it before they were for it?
--
If everyone is thinking alike, then somebody isn't thinking.
- Gen. George S. Patton |
|
Time4aNAP
Premium
join:2007-04-09
Des Plaines, IL | Is It Just Me...
...or does the idea of giant Internet content providers like Google seem like a bad idea? It just seems wrong somehow to let any single player have the opportunity to monopolize too much of the Internet. |
|
Blackened
Your Freedom Fries Are Stale
join:2003-09-29
| Privacy issues and deployment chief concerns
I'm more skeptical than before that Wi-Fi will work for San Fran. It's been stamped all over these articles that many will see difficulty in being connected because of it's geography. If it's the chief concern of San Francisco to get their people connected, then perhaps it's a better idea to consider other options such as fiber, DSL, or even distributed cable that aren't so limited in these circumstances. Personally, Wireless is, perhaps, the best and cheapest idea, but clearly, as shown here, it doesn't apply to everywhere.
Another issue I take up:
quote:
Mirkarimi said he also wants to see addressed concerns raised by the American Civil Liberties Union that EarthLink and Google would have the power to collect and store information about individuals that could later be used for marketing purposes or by the government.
There's no way in hell a city government should be sanctioning collection of personal information by corporations of those using this. I can understand if they want to advertise things like colleges, government aid, or resources for finding jobs, for some sort of return investment (since I can't see their budget, I have to believe them when they say financially they can't afford it) -- but taking advantage of citizens by giving their personal information away for marketing purposes and data mining is trash. No to both Google and Earthlink if this is the case. |
|
TKJunkMail
Enjoy the sun
Premium
join:2002-03-03
Avalon, NJ
·Sprint Mobile Broa..
·Comcast
| reply to Transmaster
Re: Big supprise
said by Transmaster  :This just illustrates the fact in the liberal world of San Fransisco politics they feel beggars can be choosers. I also like the way the Chronicle reporter kept referring to the opponents of the plan as the "progressive" left. No bias there, right? Everyone knows that "progressive" and "left" are mutually exclusive. 
--
--
Internet News
My BLOG
My Web Page |
|
nixen
Rockin' the Boxen
Premium
join:2002-10-04
Alexandria, VA
·Cox HSI
 ·Speakeasy
| reply to Blackened
Re: Privacy issues and deployment chief concerns
said by Blackened :There's no way in hell a city government should be sanctioning collection of personal information by corporations of those using this. I can understand if they want to advertise things like colleges, government aid, or resources for finding jobs, for some sort of return investment (since I can't see their budget, I have to believe them when they say financially they can't afford it) -- but taking advantage of citizens by giving their personal information away for marketing purposes and data mining is trash. No to both Google and Earthlink if this is the case. While generally not in favor of data mining, one has to look at things rationally. If the fee structure is such that the network would be operated at a loss, there has to be some form of recovery mechanism to make operating the network financially tenable. If that means data mining, then that's the price you pay for your subsidized usage.
--
Everyday, thousands of new cars are delivered to their new owners with poorly-selected radio station presets. |
|
Blackened
Your Freedom Fries Are Stale
join:2003-09-29
| said by nixen :While generally not in favor of data mining, one has to look at things rationally. If the fee structure is such that the network would be operated at a loss, there has to be some form of recovery mechanism to make operating the network financially tenable. If that means data mining, then that's the price you pay for your subsidized usage. To repeat, I don't know San Fran's budget, but ideally if something like this is going to be provided, it should be expected to operate at a loss. This is where government services can be provided with some return investment, without a collection of personal information. It's been shown, from banks to credit unions, how shoddy companies are at keeping personal information secret. They lost my trust ages ago.
I think about it this way. Financial aid for my schooling doesn't require a return investment -- not everything does. It's based off of taxes. However, colleges do raise tuitions (or require more funding) to pay for their wiring of students. Difference? Just in size. Likewise, if San Fran. can't find a way to trim something less important off of the budget for a necessary service like this, then they should raise taxes, find other city-owned possibilities, or nix the plan until they can figure something reasonable out. A government handing over personal data to corporations, on the other hand, is not an option. Just like handing my FAFSA information over to Earthlink or Google is not an option.
Another thing to add onto that is service related to Google. Google has enough trouble getting Mountain View correctly wired. The service (read: signal strength) is crummy, despite there being so many access points. In many areas you practically have to be standing on the sidewalk next to the access point just to get their service. Defeating for people in their houses, parked in their car, or at a shop. |
|
Time4aNAP
Premium
join:2007-04-09
Des Plaines, IL
| said by Blackened :A government handing over personal data to corporations...is not an option. I hate to break it to you this way, but you're too late to the party, and you're out of options. There's even a database somewhere that keeps track of how often you flush the toilet, and it's for sale to anyone with enough money. |
|
calvoiper
join:2003-03-31
Belvedere Tiburon, CA
| reply to TKJunkMail
Re: Big supprise
Actually, the Chronicle was trying to be accurate. In SF politics, there are only variations of the "left", there is no center or right. This is demonstrated by the fact that Mayor Newsom was the pol who ordered city employees to perform and register gay marriages, causing him to be viewed nationwide as a left winger. Nonetheless, he is on the "right" of most of the Board of Supervisors, and was called everything from a totalitarian to a Nazi when he implemented welfare reforms which directed more money into homeless services (housing, food, etc.) and less money into direct grants (cash payments).
Describing the more extreme left factions of the Board of Supervisors as "progressives" is pretty common, fairly accepted, and well understood in the SF Bay area.
calvoiper
--
VoIP--the death knell of remaining voice monopolies! |
|
lesopp
join:2001-06-27
Land O Lakes, FL | So there is a left to the left of the left, right? |
|
calvoiper
join:2003-03-31
Belvedere Tiburon, CA
| reply to Blackened
Geography not as much a problem as you think
I beg to differ with Shoreline (and Supervisor Mirkarimi) on the "geography" issue. WiFi tends towards line-of-sight, which isn't necessarily easier on a "mobile" or "portable" basis in level terrain because you may be effectively shooting through more buildings, trees, etc.
In hilly terrain, there may actually be a better chance that a WiFi AP is line-of-sight with fewer walls and trees in between because it may be mounted on the side of an adjacent hill. In the skyscraper downtown area, either terrain is going to have big problems--but in the neighborhoods full of 2 and 3 story homes and apartment buildings, the hilly terrain may actually be an advantage.
calvoiper
--
VoIP--the death knell of remaining voice monopolies! |
|
calvoiper
join:2003-03-31
Belvedere Tiburon, CA
| reply to lesopp
Re: Big supprise
said by lesopp :So there is a left to the left of the left, right? Sure! Three lefts make a right--haven't you ever driven in a city where all the streets are one-way?
(Or maybe it's that three rights make a left when all of the streets are two-way and left turns aren't allowed?)
calvoiper
--
VoIP--the death knell of remaining voice monopolies! |
|
Time4aNAP
Premium
join:2007-04-09
Des Plaines, IL
| said by calvoiper :Three lefts make a right--haven't you ever driven in a city where all the streets are one-way? Ugh. Waco, Texas. I drove four miles to go one block. |
|
Jeremy_in_SF
@sbcglobal.net
 from:
Blackened
| the full story on the wi-fi hearing
For in depth coverage of the hearing, check out this excellent blog post: »sfciviccenter.blogspot.com/2007/···ing.html
Kimo Crossman is a local activist who knows this issue as well as anyone. Here's an excerpt from his comments on what's wrong with this deal:
“This isn’t a public/private partnership. This is a franchise agreement, just like the Comcast agreement. Also, we keep hearing this thing about “universal access.” Well, there’s no service level agreement in this contract. You look at the contract today, and it doesn’t say 90% indoor coverage, it doesn’t say 95% outdoor coverage. It says NO percentage committed coverage in it.
"If Earthlink and Google think coverage is so great, and they have all the problems solved, up in the fourth and fifth floors, then why don’t you put it in the contract to require them to give free DSL to anyone who can’t get the coverage? Let them put their money where their mouth is, especially in poor district neighborhoods.
"The city would be wise to do as Philadelphia did and insist on a pilot before a contract is agreed to. That’s completely reasonable. Philadelphia insisted on the pilot, so why can’t San Francisco insist on a pilot?
"And let’s remember, Google is giving one megabyte, 1,000K speed, for free to Mountain View. San Francisco’s only getting a third of that speed. What’s up with that? That’s not fair. We should at least ask for a thousand K."
This blog post has a youtube clip of Crossman's full two-minute testimony.
»sfwillie.blogspot.com/2007/05/ki···ero.html |
|
