[isf-wifidog] fon is having pretty remarkable uptake with their method of deployement

Rein Petersen rein.petersen at gmail.com
Lun 6 Fév 10:42:34 EST 2006


Michael,

At WT, we have encountered a few (residential) areas in Toronto that (for a
large majority of the residents) have barriers to accessing the internet. We
have even been approached by organizations that have asked us to consider
what can be done to remedy the situation.

It was my feeling that "Neighbor-node" style functionality in Wifidog could
be a solution to this sort of problem - especially where we can subsidize
access to the internet in low-income households.

In one such area we studied, we found a high-density, low-income population
in a poorly planned "drive-in" style area with scant public spaces. While we
would still intend to make free hotspots of what few public spaces they do
have, I felt that "neighbor-node" style hotspots would do more to create
access for people in their homes on affordable computers.

I think few people in these neighborhoods can afford wireless laptops and
there is little incentive for the local "drive-in/take-out" shops in the
area to make free wireless available.

I would be very much interested in a "neigbor-node" style option in Wifidog
but, at Wireless Toronto, we haven't discussed it at length so I'm only
speaking for myself.

Rein

On 2/6/06, Michael Lenczner <mlenczner at gmail.com> wrote:
>
> ah - i understand.  we had miscommunication about this.
>
> when I suggested a commercial version and a residential version I was
> *not* suggesting a for pay version and a free version.  I meant a
> version that had a captive portal suited for public spaces and a
> version that had a captive portal suited for residential spaces.
> Both would be free.  I imagine the residential version being a copy of
> neighbornode's forum-style portal.
>
> I just like their method of getting more hotspots by allowing people
> to intall their own firmware.  It would be in addition to our current
> model.  But it could allow us to target some different populations and
> accordingly have a different orginizational strategy.
>
> because I don't really see us getting residential uses - or
> non-montreal uses with our current model.  not that those are
> currently goals.
>
> mike
>
> On 2/5/06, Dana Spiegel <dana at nycwireless.net> wrote:
> > What's the point?
> >
> > Fon is a parasitic money generating business. It presents 2 problems:
> >
> > 1) Density. Only people who live right next to each other have the
> > possibility of sharing internet through Fon. Most people live too far
> away.
> > Even if they didn't. The likelihood of someone else putting up a fon
> hotspot
> > that I could use is close to zero.
> >
> > 2) Even if (1) weren't the case, the vast majority of people aren't
> going to
> > bother putting this up. Now, they could pay fon for access to hotspots,
> but
> > that discourages the creation of new hotspots. In economic terms, this
> is an
> > unstable equilibrium. As more people want to get access, they pay for it
> or
> > ignore the system completely. This doesn't cause the growth of the fon
> > installed base so there's no positive reason why I as an entrant should
> want
> > to create a "Linus" type node. Instead, it causes me to put up a "Bill"
> type
> > node, but as more appear, I make less and less. So I have little reason
> to
> > keep my fon hotspot online, which drives down the installed base of
> "Bills",
> > and puts even more negative pressure on me establishing a "Linus" node.
> >
> > Frankly, Fon needs a critical mass in order to be even close to
> successful.
> > Until then, they're just going to try to make as much money as they can.
> >
> > For Wifidog, what's the big drive to create a "consumer" and a
> "business"
> > version? If you are a consumer, you learn about this and do it yourself.
> If
> > you are a business, and you want to hire someone to do it for you, you
> hire
> > a consultant to install it. Billing is such a headache and expensive to
> > operate, that you'd have to have significant usage if you were to
> profitably
> > invest in this.
> >
> >
> > Dana Spiegel
> > Executive Director
> > NYCwireless
> > dana at NYCwireless.net
> > www.NYCwireless.net
> > +1 917 402 0422
> > Read the Wireless Community blog:
> > http://www.wirelesscommunity.info
> >
> >
> > On Feb 5, 2006, at 3:24 PM, Michael Lenczner wrote:
> >
> > I really think we should talk seriously about having two firmwares
> > which people can download and install by themselves.  two different
> > kinds - one for a residential network and one for public hotspots.
> >
> > I know that there are lots of reasons *not* to do this, but we need to
> > look at the reasons why we should as well.
> >
> > http://english.martinvarsavsky.net/fon/a-dream-come-true.html
> > _______________________________________________
> > WiFiDog mailing list
> > WiFiDog at listes.ilesansfil.org
> > http://listes.ilesansfil.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/wifidog
> >
> > _______________________________________________
> > WiFiDog mailing list
> > WiFiDog at listes.ilesansfil.org
> > http://listes.ilesansfil.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/wifidog
> >
> >
> _______________________________________________
> WiFiDog mailing list
> WiFiDog at listes.ilesansfil.org
> http://listes.ilesansfil.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/wifidog
>



--
Rein Petersen MCP MCP+I MCSE MCDBA MCAD
Software Engineer
-------------- section suivante --------------
Une pièce jointe HTML a été enlevée...
URL: http://listes.ilesansfil.org/pipermail/wifidog/attachments/20060206/09f34f1e/attachment.htm


More information about the WiFiDog mailing list