modulating barriers to access

[Eric Butler]

Who are the "Geeks in SWN"? SeattleWireless is a _community_ wireless
network. This means anybody with an idea is more than welcome to
implement it. I have not seen you at any event in at least the past
year, and with the exception of maybe three people, none of the people
currently active in the group has any idea who you are. If by "Geeks in
SWN" you are referring to the people who are actually participating and
trying to build a network, then you are completely out of line to go on
a public mailing list and say what "we" think. Claiming that we are not
sympathetic to the need for free porn is a completely un-based claim,
and I demand an apology.

Your second comment is basically like saying that DSL/Cable modems
should be able to play videos.

A SeattleWireless node is just like a broadband modem - it is a gateway
device that connects your LAN into another network. There is no shortage
of open-source applications that could take advantage of SeattleWireless
to provide the user with services like TV, Phone, Radio, etc.

We don't need faster nodes with 3d cards, we just need more nodes spread
out around the city.

Most people pay over $40/month for a connection that can only upload
files at 50KB/s or slower. Remember, it's not all about the download
speed when you want to share content, as you're describing. With no
recurring costs, SeattleWireless could provide you with a network that's
much faster. Where did you come up with your "[the commercial internet
is] 100 times faster" number?

In response to recent discussion on the list, I am working with some
people to try to improve the website. If anyone has specific comments, I
am happy to hear them, but remember that the website is a wiki, so if
you see something that you'd like to change, just click the "Edit" button.

 - Eric


Todd Boyle wrote:
> At 12:48 AM 12/28/2006, Jason Feeser wrote:
>> So, why haven't more people put up seattlewireless nodes???
>> Large scale public mesh is what we want... right???
> 
> There's
>  - the chicken-and-egg theory,
>  - the negative-value-proposition theory, and
>  - the technical-hurdles-for-nongeeks theory.
> 
> The chicken and egg theory is moot since there's negative value
> proposition to the general public.  Things people want from an
> edge network are free telephony, free filesharing, ie movies
> songs and porn, and hard anonymity for things like political
> organizing and graymarket commerce and digital cash.  
> Geeks in SWN have never been sympathetic to any of these,
> even those which are lawful.  There is unanimous solidarity that
> applications are not part of the mission.   So, the SWN routers
> sit there and can't do *anything* that isn't already available
> 100 times faster and more reliably on cableco/telco networks.
> 
> If the SWN architecture was a VIA EPIA motherboard (now $100 on ebay)
> it could have the router uncoupled from the radios or *whatver* link
> is on the ethernet)   It could be setup with Community Television (to
> recurse
> thru whatever video files it can find locally or on SWN and give you
> choices with a standard infrared remote.) and Community Phone
> (that lists whatever telephony resources or connections or directories
> it can find.)     At least you'd ahve something that got attention.
> 
>> Are we waiting for 'N' to land???  Will 'N' solve current limitations???
>>
>> Can we have a self-configuring household mesh appliance that people
>> would be
>> happy to pay $100-$200 for in order to get "free" internet???
>>
>> Or are most people here (industry professionals aside) just pointing
>> antennas down the street in order to save $50.00/month???
>>
>> I would love a free network from West Seattle to the UW to get at my free
>> internet.  But for now, Comcast it is.
>>
>> Jason
> 
> In all mature industries, prices and terms are modulated by the
> dominant firms, to shape the behavior of the market.  That's why
> these cableco and telco networks are just easy enough to
> share, to prevent a hardening of opposition and competition.
> This is a universal principle, it can be found in all systems
> of control.  
> 
> -  The amount of resources it requires to enforce behavior
> on the last 5% of the population would take more resources
> than the other 95%, it just isn't worth it, but furthermore,
> 
> - When you do try to coerce the last 5% it creates such
> a hardcore jihadist resistance that it's unwise even for
> the most power-lusting greediest egomaniac.   They
> are well aware the jihadist with nothing to lose, can unhorse
> them if they so choose.   So, Microsoft lets people copy their
> software, the media lets people copy their material, the IRS
> lets people cheat a lot, the military lets soldiers defy commanders,
> and Verizon and Comcast will /never /use all their tools to enforce TOS.
> 
> They will use their power to modulate the revenue stream,
> instead of just trying to gun the engine full speed.  
> 
> They will use their power *just enough* to maximize their
> longterm position. That means, they will use *all* their
> power from time to time, if they see a genuine competitor.
> 
> The rest of the time, the geeks and 'hackers' will always
> be allowed to steal bandwidth.   It shuts them up, and they
> self-marginalize and isolate themselves.  This is how the
> financial industry, medical industry works, too.  They allow
> quite unethical and illegal practices for some mysterious
> reason.  First, the violators are keeping very quiet about
> all their stealing.  But there are also, so many doctors, lawyers,
> accountants and congressmen who are doing illegal things,
> that you can't get a majority who thinks its in their
> best interest to clean it all up.
> 
> Todd
> A Nation of Liars: crude prose http://ledgerism.net/theInfoGap.htm
> 
> 
> ------------------------------------------------------------------------
> 
> _______________________________________________
> Talk mailing list
> Talk at seattlewireless.net
> http://seattlewireless.net/mailman/listinfo/talk