how-to block ads
|
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! | |
Time4aNAP
Premium
join:2007-04-09
Des Plaines, IL
| reply to Blackened
Re: Privacy issues and deployment chief concerns
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. | |
Blackened
Your Freedom Fries Are Stale
join:2003-09-29
| reply to nixen
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. | |
nixen
Rockin' the Boxen
Premium
join:2002-10-04
Alexandria, VA
 ·Cox HSI
 ·Speakeasy
| reply to Blackened
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
| 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. | |
|
