[Advisors] Re: [CommunityInformaticsCanada] FW: [governance] US: FCC proposes
large public WiFi networks; tech, telecom giants take sides
Helen Hambly Odame
hhambly at uoguelph.ca
Wed, 6 Feb 2013 11:32:08 -0500 (EST)
Thanks Adam, Susan, James, Gary and all
In RURAL/small town areas of southern Ontario youth and adults are saying t=
hat broadband is essential service and that past attitudes of what I say is=
a "wait and it (IT) will come" just don't work -- Canadian/Ontario's farm=
families and rural businesses continue to lose out ... and that like roads=
BB infrastructure is essential to moving everything in and out of rural co=
mmunities - production to (new) markets as well as access to better prices =
on inputs, services, ag-food info, e-govt services, access to online traini=
ng/education, health care, etc
... a couple updates from here: OMAFRA is funding a feasibility study is no=
w underway enabling the Western Ontario Wardens Caucas to move beyond the "=
wait for it" ... in 04/13 two reports will be out - a public user report =
and a service provision report for all 15 counties/lower tier municipalitie=
s and separated municipalities covered by WOWC (www.wowc.ca)
SWEA is also undertaking a feasibility study for their Intelligent Region =
Initiative: Info/contact here: www.swea.ca
So we are moving in SW Ontario in a good direction what James calls collect=
ive self-interest ... move it/we must.=20
regards
Helen
Helen Hambly Odame, PhD
Associate Professor
Capacity Development & Extension
School of Environmental Design and Rural Development
Ontario Agricultural College
University of Guelph
Canada
N1G 2W1
http://www.uoguelph.ca/~hhambly
----- Original Message -----
From: "adam fiser" <adam.fiser@gmail.com>
To: "Susan O'Donnell" <susanodo@unb.ca>
Cc: "James Van Leeuwen" <jvl@ventus.ca>, "Gary W Kenward" <garykenward@east=
link.ca>, "michael gurstein" <gurstein@gmail.com>, "civicaccess discuss" <c=
ivicaccess-discuss@civicaccess.ca>, cracin-canada@vancouvercommunity.net, a=
dvisors@tc.ca
Sent: Wednesday, February 6, 2013 10:43:54 AM
Subject: Re: [Advisors] Re: [CommunityInformaticsCanada] FW: [governance] U=
S: FCC proposes large public WiFi networks; tech, telecom giants take sides
Hi all. =C2=A0Alison's work on the Fred eZone began under a project called =
CWIRP (Community Wireless Infrastructure Research Project) circa 2006-2008,=
co-lead by Catherine Middleton (Ryerson), and colleagues. =C2=A0CWIRP's fi=
nal report from 2008 could be useful to you, as it compares Fred to several=
other community wireless projects across the country. =C2=A0Links:=20
http://digitalcommons.ryerson.ca/cgi/viewcontent.cgi?article=3D1025&context=
=3Dtrsitm (final report)=20
http://www.cwirp.org/ (research site archive)=20
regards,=20
Adam Fiser=20
=C2=A0=C2=A0=20
On 6 February 2013 09:48, Susan O'Donnell < susanodo@unb.ca > wrote:=20
Hi all,=20
James I've been enjoying your last few posts, thank you.=20
I wanted to add some info to the situation in Fredericton, since the quote =
from our mayor Brad Woodside:=20
"We don't charge you to walk on our sidewalks. Why would we charge you for =
broadband?=20
... generated some discussion around free public access to wifi. The City o=
f Fredericton launched the first municipally-run free-to-users public wifi =
network in Canada (as far as I understand). It WAS developed by municipal t=
ax dollars (ie property tax) and became known as the Fred eZone. However th=
e city is very business-oriented and the municipal fibre network that suppo=
rts the Fred eZone and many other applications was developed primarily to a=
ttract and support business development in the downtown core (Fred eZone is=
also available on the university campus and the airport). Many other appli=
cations on the network are purely business-oriented. The fact that the free=
wifi can be accessed downtown by anyone is from the city's perspective a n=
ice bonus to the core business. So it is a business and run as a business. =
I think it is a great model that can be replicated elsewhere.=20
BTW, a case study of the Fred e-zone and the municipally-owned wireless net=
work will be included in a Journal of Community Informatics issue available=
later this year, special issue on the "First Mile" of broadband infrastruc=
ture. The Fred e-Zone has also been the subject of at least one PhD dissert=
ation by Alison Powell when she was with the CRACIN project. I just googled=
that and found only a few dead links - maybe someone else can circulate th=
e publication.=20
Thanks and regards,=20
Susan=20
Dr. Susan O'Donnell, Researcher and Adjunct Professor=20
Department of Sociology, University of New Brunswick=20
PO Box 1122, Fredericton, NB, Canada E3B 5C2=20
susanodo@unb.ca=20
Office: 506-444-0374=20
Cell: 506-238-7572=20
http://videocom.firstnation.ca=20
http://firstmile.ca=20
From: cracin-canada-owner@vancouvercommunity.net [ cracin-canada-owner@vanc=
ouvercommunity.net ] on behalf of James Van Leeuwen [ jvl@ventus.ca ]=20
Sent: Wednesday, February 06, 2013 4:26 AM=20
To: Gary W Kenward=20
Cc: michael gurstein; civicaccess discuss; cracin-canada@vancouvercommunity=
.net ; advisors@tc.ca=20
Subject: Re: [Advisors] Re: [CommunityInformaticsCanada] FW: [governance] U=
S: FCC proposes large public WiFi networks; tech, telecom giants take sides=
=20
Gary,=20
we are going to be raising taxes here in Alberta, because the dummies who r=
un this place (voters) are finally realizing they can't have their cake and=
eat it too.=20
And if anyone mentioned the notion of making universal access a right, it w=
asn't me.=C2=A0=20
It's a notion fraught with numerous and intractable legal perils, and we li=
terally can't afford to go there.=C2=A0=20
So, good thing it's irrelevant.=C2=A0=20
We are dealing here with a rather simple matter of collective self-interest=
, or at least, enlightened self-interest.=C2=A0=20
Which gets to the very heart of the issue:=C2=A0=20
Lack of enlightened self-interest on the part of far too many Canadians.=20
The essential value of our public infrastructure is its utility in meeting =
our collective economic and social needs and interests more efficiently and=
effectively, including all of the needs and interests you rattled off in y=
our reply.=20
It has enabled us to achieve far greater security and prosperity than we co=
uld have otherwise, to the benefit of the great majority of Canadians past =
and present (but not all, and more importantly, what we have is not sustain=
able).=C2=A0=20
This foundational economic knowledge seems desperately lacking in Canada to=
day, to our growing detriment.=20
What do our youth consciously understand of the costs and benefits of the r=
oads and sidewalks they use?=20
What do their parents and grandparents understand?=20
What do they understand of social responsibility?=20
The impact of broadband on the efficiency and effectiveness of our economy =
will not be incremental.=C2=A0=20
It will be transformative, and it won't take legislation to affect the tran=
sformation.=20
It will take learning and leadership.=C2=A0=20
There is an initiative underway to provide what you've identified as the mi=
ssing piece of the equation for 'universal' free access, namely, a=C2=A0com=
pelling "argument for the greater common good".=20
Even with this in hand, it will indeed be challenging to convince many Cana=
dians that public interests will do a better job than private interests.=C2=
=A0=20
Thankfully, industry makes it easier for us by the day:=20
wordsbynowak.com/2013/02/06/shaw-rogers/=20
I really wish we didn't need any more convincing than this, but apparently,=
a lot of us do.=C2=A0=20
We are no longer the nation that built this amazing legacy of public infras=
tructure that has brought Canada its unprecedented prosperity.=20
Frankly, I don't know what nation we are today.=C2=A0=20
I'd just like us to be working on becoming the nation we want to be.=C2=A0=
=20
JvL=20
On 2013-02-05, at 11:09 PM, Gary W Kenward < garykenward@eastlink.ca > wrot=
e:=20
"We don't charge you to walk on our sidewalks. Why would we charge you for =
broadband?=20
Sidewalks are paid for by taxes. So people are charged, whether the want si=
dewalks or not. Sidewalks are, like all things in life, not free.=C2=A0=20
Given current spending cutbacks, which government services would you sugges=
t people are willing to give up in order to provide universal free access t=
o broadband? Which issue do you feel "boomers and seniors" care more about?=
Health care, unemployment, pensions, public safety, defence, the environme=
nt, education, or free access to the Internet? Food, shelter and safety wil=
l always take precedence. Even with younger generations.=C2=A0=20
Free communications via mail, telephony, radio, television and carrier pige=
on has never been considered a universal right. So there is a remarkable pr=
ecedent to be set.=20
What's missing in much of the current dialogue around universal free access=
is an argument for the greater common good that convinces the majority tha=
t its worth government intervention - and spending. That truly convinces th=
e majority that governments can do a better job then the private sector. Gi=
ven recent trends to privatize - with voter support - this will be difficul=
t.=20
Gary=20
Plus ca change, plus c'est le meme chose=20
On 2013-02-05, at 5:16, James Van Leeuwen < jvl@ventus.ca > wrote:=20
"We don't charge you to walk on our sidewalks. Why would we charge you for =
broadband?=20
--=20
--------------------------------------------------------=20
Adam Fiser=20
tel: +1-416-799-0052=20
http://adamfiser.com=20
--------------------------------------------------------=20