[MLB-WIRELESS] Is Melbourne Wireless dead?

[Winder]

Hey Dan,

 All good points.

 But what good is a free network if there is no content?

 It really needs MW to take the next step. I love the suggestion
 for MW to make a PLAN.

 As for me, well, I have ADSL and have done for ages. I also have node
 hwh http://www.melbournewireless.org.au/maps/view?id=hwh up for offer
 to help create something that MW can use. I repeat my offer to setup
 node hwh aka project rooster for MW use, is MW can decide on what they
 want it to do. It is a factory, so there is nothing on site to use it
 and no where to host servers but as an AP or hop in a link it might
 be of use. I posted pics before, but here they are again:

 http://members.iinet.net.au/~winder/view%201.jpg

 You can't make out the antenna as my camera is only a 1.2 megapixel
 job, but it's in the circle.

 http://members.iinet.net.au/~winder/view%202.jpg

 That's the pole that is not in use.

 So, I'm still keen. Funny how the talk of death seems to have sparked
 some live.

 Speaking of dead, hows AAF Sneeze? ;)

Regards,
g at z.



-----Original Message-----
From: Dan Flett [mailto:conhoolio at hotmail.com]
Sent: Thursday, 20 January 2005 1:46 PM
To: 'Winder'; melbwireless at wireless.org.au;
syd-wireless at lists.sydneywireless.com
Subject: RE: [MLB-WIRELESS] Is Melbourne Wireless dead?


Hi Gaz,

These are very good questions.  We the proponents of community wireless
networking must continually ask ourselves "why are we doing this?" and also
ask "What attraction does wireless networking have for the average user?"

As you point out, a couple of years ago, ADSL download limits were
restrictive and somewhat expensive and that spurred much of the initial
interest in Wireless Networking as a way to beat the ISPs at their own game.
Those that saw a Community Wireless Network (CWN) purely as an "Internet
Alternative" have understandably lost much of their interest.  But some of
us see more important uses for such a network.

The main attraction of a CWN is that it is Free.  Certainly the hardware
costs aren't free, but they are relatively cheap and are getting inevitably
cheaper.  And these are a one-time cost, whereas ISP fees go in forever.

The whole point of the CWN is to create a Metropolitan-Area-Network (MAN)
which has no data-carriage fees, ever.  Meaning that, in theory, it should
be easy for any point in the city to be able to exchange data with any other
point in the metropolitan area, for free.  How that data gets from
point-to-point and how mobile those points can be is something for the CWN
group to decide and organise for themselves.

It may be difficult to see at this time why such community-owned
infrastructure is necessary, especially in the face of commercially-owned
infrastructure that already exists and already is more capable.

Commercial networks charge for access, and charge like wounded bulls for
mobile access.  The cost of installing and operating a mobile network in a
city is far lower than laying copper wires throughout the same city, so why
are mobile phone bills higher than an equivalent fixed-line bill?  Because
the company can charge what it likes - there are few competitors, and people
pay for mobile access.

With a community-owned network in place, which - by government regulation
-can't charge for access, suddenly there exists an alternative to
exorbitantly-priced telco networks.  Certainly there are laws which limit
what CWNs can do in Australia.  The ACA is keeping an eagle-eye on us making
sure none of us are making "commercial" arrangements with any possible
"customers".  Nonetheless, as a grass-roots network, we are growing.

A CWN can stay within the law and still be a major benefit to the city in
which it is located.  It can be free for personal use amongst all its
participants, but I would argue can also supply free data services to
non-profit and community organisations.  As Dawid Ostrowski pointed out in
his post - public libraries could benefit.  I would also add community
centres, charities, volunteer organisations, community legal services,
community radio and TV stations, student unions, disability and health
support groups, animal welfare groups - the list is almost endless.  And
when each of these organisations adds a node to the roof of its building,
the network as a whole expands and increases in capability.

With just a few of these organisations involved in the network, politicians
would see the network as a force for public good and would be more
sympathetic to relaxing the restrictions on "commercial" arrangements.
Politicians would be much less sympathetic to a network that was flouting
telecommunications regulations to simply provide discounted Internet access
to p2p-geeks.

There are a couple of "tipping points" which, when achieved, will make CWNs
much more appealing.  First is ease of use:  At the moment it is difficult
for the average user to build and configure a wireless node.  If a
prefabricated and user-friendly node were available for sale at a reasonable
price, more people would participate.

The second point is network coverage:  People are much less likely to put up
a node if they can't connect to the network.  This is Metcalf's Law -
explained here:
http://www.mgt.smsu.edu/mgt487/mgtissue/newstrat/metcalfe.htm
Putting nodes in as many strategic locations as possible will accelerate
this growth.  These two points affect each other, but both must be at a
certain minimum point before the network becomes truly useful and popular.

So, if you were interested in wireless networks purely as a way to get cheap
or free Internet for yourself, then maybe you should be paying for it
instead.  If you are interested in the idea of helping to create a free data
network that benefits the wider community (and therefore yourself as well),
then please, get involved.

Cheers,

Dan

> -----Original Message-----
> From: owner-melbwireless at wireless.org.au [mailto:owner-
> melbwireless at wireless.org.au] On Behalf Of Winder
> Sent: Wednesday, 19 January 2005 5:56 PM
> To: melbwireless at wireless.org.au
> Subject: [MLB-WIRELESS] Is Melbourne Wireless dead?
>
> I've noticed over the last few months that the amount of email I get from
> the list has decreased from many every day, to maybe a few a week.
>
>  Is Melbourne Wireless dead? All the reasons I joined are now taken care
> of
> by ADSL. Most of the work I see is simply people trying to hook up to
> their
> mates. Granted there is a bunch of dedicated few who still drive MW, but
> is
> that enough to stop MW being pointless?
>
>  Thoughts?
>
> Regards,
> g at z.




To unsubscribe: send mail to majordomo at wireless.org.au
with "unsubscribe melbwireless" in the body of the message