It's not a question of if most Internet access will be wireless but when. Land-line based services suffer from large number of drawbacks. Take a look at the explosion of cell phone usage to get an idea of how such technology changes.
Short-range radio-based networks, like Wi-Fi, are probably the next big step in Internet connectivity. Longer range networks using cell-phone-like technology are probably further off, or may be completely by-passed by something we can't or are not imagining yet. Ten years ago did you think you would be arguing with people about Minneapolis issues on a computerized distribution list such as this one?
If indeed Wi-Fi technology can effectively reach 2 miles with current or soon to arrive affordable technology, and if the vast majority of addresses in Minneapolis are within such distance of one of the 49 park recreation centers or other park facitilies, the Park Board may be just the right people to implement this idea.
A primary reason that businesses are not jumping in to do this is because none of them have the geographic spread of facilities -- they would have to find willing property owners to lease space and antenna real-estate all over the city. Despite such hurdles, there are already businesses getting into providing wide-area wireless Internet services. There are a number of rural services in Minnesota providing it now (one example in a recent Star Tribune article: http://www.startribune.com/stories/535/4051054.html). I know of at least one local ISP (Internet Service Provider) who is looking at it, as well. Real-estate and infrastructure investment are the big hurdles. Perhaps the Park Board could partner with a private company to build this out, as a way to handle some of the financial considerations.
Contrary to the belief of some, having a city-wide Wi-Fi network is not just a benefit for the "wealthy" few who own laptops. Anybody with a computer is a good potential user. Such a network could be used by desktop computers which never move. If it is considered a desirable public good to make access to the Internet available to as many citizens as possible, this is one big way to help further that effort. It is true some people cannot afford computers, and fewer can afford Internet access, but those numbers decrease each year. Having a city-run, city-wide network could well cost less than other forms of Internet access (DSL, cable, etc.) and given current technology, would be faster as well.
One cannot argue against publicly-provided, economical Internet access for all who own computers (ignoring for the moment, the improved ability to provide public use computers such as in libraries and neighborhood centers that such a network would allow), unless one also argues against any other public service that not all can afford. Not everyone can afford a car. Should we not build public parking lots? Not everyone can afford a sailboat. Should we not install docks and anchors in the city lakes?
The biggest real argument against having a Park Board sponsored wireless Internet system could well be the unfair competition to private Internet access providing companies. Owners and management of such companies are not going to be happy to have their services undercut by a governmental agency. In some instances, such unfair governmental competition is actually illegal, is it not?
There's no reason why some or all of the cost cannot be recouped via fees of some sort or another. Minneapolis residents need not be the only ones who would use it, nor just individuals. Depending on capacity and the question of competing with private business, such wireless access could be sold to commuters, workers, visitors, businesses and others.
Security is both a simple and hard problem. It is simple in that it is just a question of technical effort and policy. It is hard in that complete security is nearly impossible at any cost. Better to design a system that is "secure enough" and allow some "bandwidth theft" much the way a grocer calculates in the spoilage of some inventory as just part of the cost of doing business. The hard questions will be in defining secure enough in a way that people can live with it and that it can be implemented in a cost-containable manner.
The idea is worth a thoughtful and complete investigation, however. If Minneapolis can be on the forefront of enabling its citizens to be among those with the earliest and best access to new information, commerce, educational and idea-sharing technologies, we will be much better off for it.
Chris Johnson Fulton Former principal of a local, successful ISP
TEMPORARY REMINDER: 1. Don't feed the troll! Ignore obvious flame-bait. 2. If you don't like what's being discussed here, don't complain - change the subject (Mpls-specific, of course.)
________________________________
Minneapolis Issues Forum - A City-focused Civic Discussion - Mn E-Democracy Post messages to: mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Subscribe, Un-subscribe, etc. at: http://e-democracy.org/mpls
