Skip to main content

Revolutionary?





"The Broadband Militia" by Michael Behar



But the battle over broadband raises the important question of whether bandwidth is a commodity. Small entrepreneurs think it is. After all, they reason, can a flour company demand a cut of the profits from cookies you sell at a bake sale just because you baked them with their flour? Absurd as this question might seem, the Free Wireless movement is forcing ISPs and telecom companies to define the exact legal limits of bandwidth allocation. That, in essence, is the problem with Free Wireless: It's at the mercy of the Baby Bells and cable companies, which, once the movement reaches critical mass, will crack down hard when they discover they're losing market share to a bunch of hackers.
In keeping with my notion that you should learn something new every day, here's my new thing. I had no idea. Having read this article, it just seems so bloody obvious.



The notion is that Someone buys a broadband connection to the Internet. That Someone sets up a WiFi (IEEE 802.11b networking standard) base station and, voila, anyone with the appropriate NIC can connect. An example of this on a large scale is NYC Wireless. Then there's Boingo Wireless, which touts the "largest commercial Wi-Fi network." They produce and distribute a free app that allows your computer to "sniff out" WiFi networks, thus tying you into an existing connection and you're off to the races.



The problem (or at least one of the problems) is this resell of band width. At home I used AT&T Broadband via a cable modem. I have no choice in my area for broadband access; there is no DSL service and a local, small ISP literally owns all the T-1 bandwidth in town. In any event I've got my ATTBI cable modem, wired to my DSL/cable router/switch, which ties together two desktop PC's. When I need to update things fast on my laptop, I hook it into my little LAN. I added a small hub I had lying around. All told, something like eight computers can tie into my single cable access. ATTBI "load balances" by restricting speed to 1.5mbs, and I don't think they give a hoot how many people are sucking on that 1.5meg pipe; it's all they'll give me.



For a friend I'll be setting up the same thing, only now, for not much more than I paid for my router/switch, the same device adds wireless access. We'll cable one PC/Linux box to the switch, but every other computer in the house will be wireless, including our laptops.



Now if he and I were still neighbors, I can easily see just adding a wireless access point to my existing setup and letting him tap into it. This would in all likelihood piss AT&T off, and that would appear to be what the "wireless militia" is doing.



So the question is why do existing broadband ISP's persist in avoiding wireless? Why are they are dedicated landlines and cables and wires?



Ah, control....

Comments

Popular posts from this blog

Ant-Man and the Wasp: Quantumania

Wow, it’s been over a year. What a way to get back to this blog because… Are the films of the MCU getting worse? It’s a serious question because the latest that I’ve seen, Thor: Love and Thunder and Ant-Man and the Wasp: Quantumania , are strong arguments that the answer is “yes.” Summary: Ant-Man & Ant-Family get sucked into the quantum realm, where skullduggery is afoot. A load of crap ensues. I’m an Ant-Man fan. I loved the first film despite its flaws. It would have been wonderful to see what Edgar Wright may have wrought. It was clear, though, that replacement director Peyton Reed kept some of Wright’s ideas alive. The result was one of the MCU’s most intimate films, a straight-forward tale of a Scott Lang (Paul Rudd) desperate to remain in his daughter’s life while being “gifted” the life of a superhero. Ant-Man and the Wasp sorta stayed that course, but naturally, because this is the modern MCU, we had to have a female superhero take over, the titular Wasp (Hope van Dyne,

John Wick: Chapter 4

No sense in playing coy, this is a great film. I’ve seen it twice and while I don’t quite love it in the way I love the first, original John Wick , it’s my #2. It’s a little overlong, has some wasted space and time, has one absolutely pointless and useless character, and generally ignores the realities of firefights, falling, getting shot, hit, etc. All that notwithstanding, it’s a great action flick, has a genuine emotional core, and is well worth your time if you’re into that sort of thing. Like I am. Summary: John Wick (Keanu Reeves), last seen saying he was fed up with the High Table, goes to war to obtain his freedom. Some of the most incredible action scenes ever filmed ensue, culminating in a very satisfactory finale and a devastating post-credit scene. The first Wick film was a surprise hit. It was a simple, straight-forward tale of vengeance told in a simple, straight-forward manner. Where it stood out was its devotion to human stunt work, on exploiting long camera shots that

Rogan

The entire Joe Rogan controversy is an example of the kids being left in charge and the adults refusing to teach them any better. I’m not a regular consumer of podcasts. There are a couple I listen to from time to time, but nothing on a regular basis. While I’ve caught a few minutes of the Joe Rogan Experience on YouTube, I’ve never listened to his podcast. One of the primary reasons for that is that you have to subscribe to Spotify to do so, and I prefer Qobuz, Tidal, or even Amazon Music. Rogan is behind Spotify’s paywall and that’s that. But the nature of the fight is about more than who does or does not listen to Rogan. This fight goes to the very nature of the First Amendment and the fundamental concept of the United States. And yes, I understand that cuts both ways. What’s his name and Joni Mitchell are free to yank their creations from Spotify, no ifs, ands, or buts. I’m not denying their right, I’m questioning their reasons. Rogan talks to people. He does so largely unfiltered.