I did say I'd keep quiet (sorry), but the discussion is interesting:Yes, technology becomes obsolete - that's a given. And, in my opinion, many stages of 'development' are geared towards raping consumers and suffer from squables over standards, etc...it's sad. My vision includes ideas similar to those posted regarding BitTorrent/Limewire systems. Gnutella's open-protocol, prejudice-free (yeah right) environment and the BitTorrent idea of distributing large amounts of data "widely without the original distributor incurring the entire costs of hardware, hosting and bandwidth resources (Wiki is more articulate than I).Arguments here regarding (and based on) 'typical' or existing systems and protocols is rather behind the times, in that new protocols and system architectures are needed to be developed with 'assumptions' (for lack of a better word) that individual users committ to a 'sharing' system (here's where we all have to grow up and learn to share) that requires their personal resources, availability, input, and among many other things, collective vision - NOT in the development phase (except for testing purposes 'betas' etc.) but to host the final deployment; which, will be an endlessly developing technology.802.11b, g, n ....etc. are standards, but (and forgive me for sounding ignorant) progamming languages like Java are platform independant due to it using a VM for each OS it encounters. Therefore, the WiFi system required for community-based environments would need to be completely independant of hardware standards, using a VM of-sorts, or maybe a push towards hardware that provides a more dynamic interface, instead of limited ROM-based embedded programs that are difficult (near impossible) or expensive to upgrade, thus slowing the upgrade process.If the WiFi Community is large enough, big biz will kowtow to its interface in order to access its population (and pay for it).So, with that said, is it at all possible to build on a BitTorrent concept, as with NASA's SETI program, that depends upon and is deployed over a mega-wide area network (did I coin this phrase? MWAN) that taps into unused, or dedicated processing cycles (trying to sound smart) facilitating a completely hybrid, adaptable, upgradable, community-based wireless system that grows with new users and ideas (social networking involvment: MySpace, Second Life, etc. help at this point) requires very little money in comparrison to what it takes to contract with major wireless companies at the user level, but WILL cost a lot (overall), with much of the money being provided by big biz contracts negotiating for their piece of the pie....which will be governed by some 'body' that YOU ALL will delegate.Hey! SETI did it, UNIX to LINUX to REDHAT did it, JAVA happened. Open up the development process (find a way) and it will happen. Look at it this way: These open-source developers may be crazy to write code for free so some corporation can make tons of money on it, then outsource their job to some low paying country. But crazy is exactly what's needed to get this off the ground...free development (already taking place), a big corporation (the people's collective) who port later development overseas (worldwide and at no cost) to get a wider development process going. All countries benefit. In addition, the vision here....please share it with me...is that ALL the major players: Big Biz, Media, Entertainment, Political Candidates and Government, etc. PAY for their 'position' in the new world (Lol, I'm sounding like PNAC). They do not have control over the people, as they do in todays matrix, but are forced to concede to the people's will - in THEIR community.It's a win-win situation because regardless how brainwashed and seemingly mindless we consumers can be (forgive the lack of PC), the bottom line is that this 'community' has the ability to shut the door on monopolies that are used to bursting into our homes and private lives, with little effort. IT'S ALL PERSPECTIVE! YOU THINK YOU HAVE THE POWER - YOU HAVE THE POWER. Create a 'constitution' that declares the new community free and unpossessable by anyone other than the people...make it a law....it's about taking back what belongs to the people - control - all of which hinges on the U.S. government NOT regulating the spectrum. Can we make this happen before the government clues in?Sorry for speaking, again. Thanks for your patience.J --- On Sat 09/22, Dave Close < [EMAIL PROTECTED] > wrote:From: Dave Close [mailto: [EMAIL PROTECTED]: [EMAIL PROTECTED]: Sat, 22 Sep 2007 20:54:23 -0700Subject: [SOCALWUG] Re: LA WiFi Town Hall Meetings and Survey"Chris Smith" wrote:>In general, the costs of infrastructure like this are justified with>reduced costs providing other services, reduced costs of living for>residents and businesses, and most importantly: improved tax revenues>from the economic stimuli's of the service.I defy you to show an example of any city where this has been true.Granted, there aren't a large number of municipal wireless systems,but there are a few that have been running for a year or two. Havethey made any measurable difference for those cities?Wireless Internet is a fast-moving target. Not long ago it was 802.11b,now people want 802.11g, it won't be long before they want 802.11n. Andwhat comes after that? Maybe UWB/USB from every light pole? Citiesare not too bad at building things that have twenty- or fifty-yearlife spans; I don't think they are good at things that will have tobe replaced every two years. I'm reasonably certain that their budgetsdon't account for the costs of periodic upgrades. The result is certainto be a system that is allowed to become obsolete, and then unusedand useless; a cost to the taxpayers, not a revenue source.If cities had decided that municipal cell phone service was importantat roughly the same stage in cell technology development as we are todayin wireless technology, they would have built an AMPS network. Dependingon a political system to keep technology current is a fool's choice.-- Dave Close, Compata, Costa Mesa CA +1 714 434 7359 [EMAIL PROTECTED] [EMAIL PROTECTED] "Though the people support the government, the government should not support the people." -- Grover Cleveland _______________________________________________ Join Excite! - http://www.excite.com The most personalized portal on the Web!
--~--~---------~--~----~------------~-------~--~----~ You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "SOCALWUG" group. To post to this group, send email to [email protected] To unsubscribe from this group, send email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] For more options, visit this group at http://groups.google.com/group/SOCALWUG SOCALWUG website: http://www.socalwug.org -~----------~----~----~----~------~----~------~--~---
