Re: Kitsap County
"Rob S" <[email protected]>
| Newsgroups | gmane.network.wireless.seattle.general |
|---|---|
| Message-ID | <[email protected]> |
Let me make myself clear: I have suggested is that SWN might take advantage of networks that the City/regional government make available. You don't have to do anything. I haven't suggested that you change what you are doing, abort anything, or build anything specific. The fact of the matter is that many cities and regional governments are increasingly putting in fiber optic and wireless networks. And some community wireless network groups are parrticipating in these efforts. I think that makes it a topic for dicsussion but if you don't think so that is entirely up to you and others. It would be a good thing to have SWN express an interest to the local governments to have fair and open access. Is that so controversial? ----- Original Message ----- From: Matt Westervelt To: SeattleWireless Talk List Sent: Monday, December 13, 2004 11:54 AM Subject: Re: Kitsap County OK OK. I'm really tired of you guys (RobS, ToddB, KenM) arguing about the future of CWN and what 'WE' should do. Maybe you haven't noticed, but people around here do stuff, you guys wax on about how important or non-important it is, what sort of impact it might or might not have, and that maybe it's not serving -enough- people. Seriously. Either put up or shut up. It makes me cringe to open up the talk folder now, and I'm sure I'm not the only one. If you want to go talk to the city about your plans, fine. Just remember, you don't speak for me. You apparently don't speak for each other either. It's likely you don't speak for the hundreds of other people involved here, but they're too polite to bitch you out in public. None of you have done anything -for- seattlewireless or CWN other than make stinky on the list. By the way. http://seattlewireless.net/LakeUnion If people care about regulations, check out <http://saschameinrath.com/> for a list of barriers that are being put in place by state governments. If you want to do something about them, contact <http://newamerica.net> Cheers. -matt On Dec 13, 2004, at 11:29 AM, [email protected] wrote: Like I said Todd, you are free to pursue whatever it is that you think will work. I personally don't think alternative broadband networks are more than for hobbyists. Now maybe that will become similar to short wave radio which has been active but a secondary development for decades. I frankly have little interest in spending time on that type of effort. Judging from the 'success' of alternative networks so far, it looks like they will remain obscure niches for only the few enthusiasts to enjoy imo. Why are you even bringing this up in the first place? You should simply say that you aren't interested. My suggestion was about how CWN could participate in broader Internet access and media content. If your vision is entirely to create an alternative network then just say so and then don't bash attempts for others to pursue different goals. Seems that you want everyone to comply with your solitary vision of networking to the exclusion of other networks. The vast majority of the world is pursuing those other alternatives. A stand alone network is distinct from networks that wish to have access to the broad Internet and media content that is expected to become available. OK, I get it. I can't expect any support from you to promote open access to fiber optic networks that the City and regional governments own and control. These are not owned or controlled by your Green Meanie telecomms. They certainly play a role and have influence but deservedly so - they are providing services however expensive you might consider them to be - to millions of users. My goals is to help influence these networks to accommodate access to community wireless projects as well ass to commercial interests. Your position it to say "If we can't have it entirely our way then screw you!". Sorry but I don't think that the real world will work that way. ----- Original Message ----- From: Todd Boyle To: SeattleWireless Talk List Sent: Sunday, December 12, 2004 2:27 PM Subject: Re: Kitsap County Rob Syputa wrote: ...SWN should be political realists, not 'extremists'. I don't think it reasonable or advisable to play the adversarial game against incumbent communications providers. They are better organized, extremely better financed, and know how to play the political game. And they know how to advertise and sell their products to consumers and corporations. It's natural to feel that those you disagree with are extremists, but not very useful to anybody reading your comments. Regaring "adversarial game against incumbents", that's your term, now repeated more than once. Please don't depict my remarks as adversarial games. I strongly recommended ignoring Comcast and Verizon and Qwest altogether, and building a 3rd network. I strongly recommend no games or transactions whatsoever, with these government-protected monopolies. We live in a society where property rights over network assets --like any other property --are to be controlled by whoever installed and paid for them. In fact, the direction of policy continues to place even *more* power, rather than less, in the hands of cablecos and telcos--as well as broadcasters and media corporations. They use that power to corrupt, limit and bias the content flowing over those media. Look what has happened to the electoral process the past 20 years. I told you the problem. I told you my solution. You ignore both the problem and my solution, choosing instead to talk about Wimax from a relatively geekish viewpoint, almost a small-entrepreneur viewpoint. An entrepreneurial viewpoint would argue that something gets built, quickly, efficiently, with quality, but *regardless* of what is sacrificed in the social or cultural plane. This is like the technocrat philosophy --regardless of economic equity-- I say, what's been built by the telcos and cablecos is OVERPRICED and gold plated, precisely because governments have been 'reasonable' with incumbents. You could build a whole new network, and leave behind the entire accumulated cost base and salary structures and profits of the incumbents. Community wireless efforts could benefit from having access to fat pipes of a fiber optic network and broader Internet connection. I think that a reasonable goal is to seek open access to FTTN metro grid. If the FTTN metro grid is financed and built by the incumbents they will get up early and work all day long to ensure that their pricing and market posiiton is never impacted by it. They will never voluntarily agree to share their assets. Don't you agree? Based on the incredibly discriminatory actions against CLECs and independent ISPs blocking access or equipment from the COs? It seems clear to me that no elected politicians, nor permanent staffs of municipalities, are any match for the persistence, technical knowledge, legal resources etc. of the global telecoms companies. The best thing municipalities can do is require that anybody digging any trench whatsoever, must put some type of telecom utility duct or conduit as part of the transaction. Eventually there would be a lot of ducts for our children and grandchildren to work with. Todd The message to government should be that SWN/CWN wants a 'fair chance' to provide service to their community of users. And those same users may also want services from commercial cellular and broadband companies. The message SHOULD NOT BE opposed to commercial involvement. I think that becomes self destructive because it does not fit reality of politics and mass market appeal. SWN is not going to take over the world of communications. It can play a part which could become significant over time. But it's much more likely to get their through being cooperative rather than through belligerence imo. There you go again! Since when is it belligerent to walk away from a casino, where the game is rigged??! _______________________________________________ Talk mailing list [email protected] http://seattlewireless.net/mailman/listinfo/talk _______________________________________________ Talk mailing list [email protected] http://seattlewireless.net/mailman/listinfo/talk ------------------------------------------------------------------------------ _______________________________________________ Talk mailing list [email protected] http://seattlewireless.net/mailman/listinfo/talk _______________________________________________ Talk mailing list [email protected] http://seattlewireless.net/mailman/listinfo/talk