RE: [nycwireless] New Yorker Article
On Saturday March 18, Jim Henry wrote: > And you SHOULD have the right to manage your network the way you > see fit. The market will decide the wisdom of your decisions. In the long run, I think you are right. Computers are programmable and everybody will twist and turn theirs to do all sorts of (dirty) tricks, such as running TCP over DNS. :-) If carriers were forced to prioritize VOIP packets, people would start to masquerade their FTP downloads as VOIP packets. If VOIP or streamed video is treated like any other data, and this works very well and all users are happy, carriers will start to introduce random delays until some customers start paying extra for priority service. I think there will be a great market for random delay gateways. They can do this, and so they will do this. We need to get over it, or hack around it. -- Lars Aronsson ([EMAIL PROTECTED]) Aronsson Datateknik - http://aronsson.se -- NYCwireless - http://www.nycwireless.net/ Un/Subscribe: http://lists.nycwireless.net/mailman/listinfo/nycwireless/ Archives: http://lists.nycwireless.net/pipermail/nycwireless/
[nycwireless] Wi-Fi in Trondheim, Norway
There is a Google TechTalk video about the planned Wi-Fi network in Trondheim, Norway, being built right now. http://video.google.com/videoplay?docid=-9041070853343993488 The city is home to Norway's Technical University, the company FAST (remember alltheweb.com?) and now also a Google office. -- Lars Aronsson ([EMAIL PROTECTED]) Aronsson Datateknik - http://aronsson.se -- NYCwireless - http://www.nycwireless.net/ Un/Subscribe: http://lists.nycwireless.net/mailman/listinfo/nycwireless/ Archives: http://lists.nycwireless.net/pipermail/nycwireless/
RE: [nycwireless] Municipal Broadband - Must read!
Jim Henry wrote: > specific. I never said nor do I believe I inferred that my > broadband sucks. I think it's great! I have 3 cable modems each > providing 8 mbs download and 1 mbps upload. Two of the 3 I have > aggregated through a twin wan port router. I love it. I don't > think it's expensive at all. I hope this means we're back to discussing broadband. Good. Jim, how many physical lines suitable for broadband (phone, cable TV, fiber, etc.) enter your home? This can be a critical factor for achieving competition and thus lower prices for broadband. My apartment has 3 lines: phone, cable TV, and the aforementioned CAT-5 ethernet. The copper phone line belongs to the old incumbent, the national telecom, now named Telia-Sonera. In theory they are forced to open their facilities to competing DSL providers, and this works reasonably well in a city where I live, but in many smaller towns or rural areas the telco often gets away with claiming that their facilities are booked full and there is no practical way to allow competitors in. Telecom deregulation came later to Sweden than to the U.S., and our FCC is weaker. Our old incumbent is stronger, and has been able to maintain more of its old monopoly situation. This is bad, the only good solution is to avoid the phone network all together. The TV cable belongs to the cable company which also provides broadband Internet access, but doesn't allow any competition over this line, and there is no legal requirement for this. Vertical integration from the physical cable to the services offered is bad for competition. The third line, the LAN, is necessary for providing broadband in true competition with the two other lines. Unfortunately, the LAN is now owned by the ISP who installed it, so in a way this is another case of vertical integration. I would have preferred that my coop had built its own LAN and then connected two or more ISPs to the switch in the basement. But this would have required a technical insight that the coop didn't have in 1999. This is not a perfect solution, but it's one of the best that I've seen in Sweden. Maybe the best part is that it is totally independent of the old hated telco. The municipal street fiber that connects the LAN to the ISP is a monopoly, but I haven't heard that it has been mismanaged. Some smaller towns want to be service providers as well as fiber owners (vertical integration again) and this would inevitably lead to bias against other service providers. Broadband seems to work better in reasonably big cities, and worse in smaller places. So it should work better in New York City than anywhere else. -- Lars Aronsson ([EMAIL PROTECTED]) Aronsson Datateknik - http://aronsson.se -- NYCwireless - http://www.nycwireless.net/ Un/Subscribe: http://lists.nycwireless.net/mailman/listinfo/nycwireless/ Archives: http://lists.nycwireless.net/pipermail/nycwireless/
RE: [nycwireless] Municipal Broadband - Must read!
Jim Henry wrote: > We're getting way off topic now. We could go on and on, but > before someone rightfully objects, I just wanted to address the > point that broadband is NOT cheaper elsewhere than it is in the > U.S. I'm sorry that I was fooled into a discussion with you Jim. I thought that you honestly wanted to discuss broadband and how it could be made cheaper, but you only wanted to push your own ideas about taxes and politics. Perhaps you should do this on some political mailing list instead of this technical context. -- Lars Aronsson ([EMAIL PROTECTED]) Aronsson Datateknik - http://aronsson.se -- NYCwireless - http://www.nycwireless.net/ Un/Subscribe: http://lists.nycwireless.net/mailman/listinfo/nycwireless/ Archives: http://lists.nycwireless.net/pipermail/nycwireless/
RE: [nycwireless] Municipal Broadband - Must read!
Jim Henry wrote: > I'd be willing to bet you are not counting the taxes you and > your fellow subjects pay for that municipal fiber network as > part of that $40/month. Does every ISP in Manhattan dig the streets to lay down their own cables? How does that work in this era of telecom deregulation? Since city streets (and street lights) are a municipal monopoly, it makes sense to have one municipal ditch with one municipal fiber infrastructre, where telcos and ISPs can rent fibers or bandwidth at or near cost price. My ISP is a private corporation that pays for using the municipal fiber, and their money comes from my $40/month. I don't see where any subsidy would come in. You're probably right that I pay a higher income tax, and I'm not defending that. I'm just curious how you could help me to find a more efficient broadband solution than the one I already have. Where and how do you live and what do you pay for broadband? -- Lars Aronsson ([EMAIL PROTECTED]) Aronsson Datateknik - http://aronsson.se -- NYCwireless - http://www.nycwireless.net/ Un/Subscribe: http://lists.nycwireless.net/mailman/listinfo/nycwireless/ Archives: http://lists.nycwireless.net/pipermail/nycwireless/
RE: [nycwireless] Municipal Broadband - Must read!
Jim Henry wrote: > Just curious, does anyone know if in these countries where > broadband is cheaper and more prevalent than the U.S., is it > really cheaper or is it subsidized by the government? I honestly > don't know the answer. I would like it to be cheaper here also > and more widespread, but not at the expense of free enterprise. > If it takes socialism to accomplish this, I don't want it. I heard that socialism has gone away now that "cialis" is caught in the spam filters. Seriously, though, I have yet to see street lights operated on a pay-per-view commercial basis. Somebody paid once-and-for-all to pave and light the streets, and it could be tax money. Does that make it socialism? In Sweden I pay 320 SEK/mo ($40) for 10 Mbit/s. This is possible because I live in a coop apartment building, where every apartment is wired by an ISP, and the in-house switched LAN is connected to a municipal fiber in the basement. This ISP (www.bredband.com) was founded with venture capital during the dotcom boom and got a contract with the largest national association of apartment coops (www.hsb.se). Through this contract, apartment coops that are members have a very streamlined procedure for signing up to get their apartment buildings wired. This spring, the ISP is introducing a reduced price 2 Mbit/s offering (still over CAT-5 twisted pair ethernet, so I guess it is really 10 Mbit/s but bandwidth limited) and at the same time my line is upgraded to 100 Mbit/s at unchanged price. As far as I know, there is no direct government subsidy, but a lot of factors work together: * Compared to the U.S., more people here live in apartments. People living in private homes cannot get broadband as cheap, simply because wiring a dozen apartments in one building is a lot cheaper than wiring a dozen private homes. * Coops is a very common form of apartment ownership in Sweden since the 1930s, and the national associations work pretty well. The nationwide template contract made it easier for a lot of small coops to sign up, who don't have the technical insights to do their own negotiations. * The dotcom boom provided the venture capital for this broadband-only ISP. You could call this "subsidized by stupid investors". I guess the stock price has fallen, but at least this company is still around. * The old national telco is not involved at all in this solution. * The ISP rents dark fiber from the municipal utility between my building and the ISP's facility in this town. The municipal water, sewer, electricity, and heating utility is operated as a whole-owned corporation (www.tekniskaverken.se) and I don't know exactly how they have financed the build-out of the municipal fiber network. I guess most of these conditions could also apply to New York City, more than to rural or suburban America. -- Lars Aronsson ([EMAIL PROTECTED]) Aronsson Datateknik - http://aronsson.se -- NYCwireless - http://www.nycwireless.net/ Un/Subscribe: http://lists.nycwireless.net/mailman/listinfo/nycwireless/ Archives: http://lists.nycwireless.net/pipermail/nycwireless/
Re: [nycwireless] Google Offers Free Wi-Fi VPN
Dana Spiegel wrote: > http://wifi.google.com/faq.html > > Google plans own WiFi service: Web site > By Adam Pasick > http://news.yahoo.com/s/nm/20050920/wr_nm/google_wifi_dc Thanks! > "Becoming a service provider would be quite a stretch for > Google, but considering the billions of dollars Google could > throw at the problem it could become a reality," Ovum analyst > Roger Entner wrote in the wake of the Business 2.0 article. This reinforces my view that Wi-Fi operation is a business for those who already have too much money (such as T-Mobile and Google). I still think Wi-Fi is an excellent *technology* (and a business for Taiwanese equipment makers), but I fail to see the business case for operators. Will Google buy Starbucks next? -- Lars Aronsson ([EMAIL PROTECTED]) Aronsson Datateknik - http://aronsson.se -- NYCwireless - http://www.nycwireless.net/ Un/Subscribe: http://lists.nycwireless.net/mailman/listinfo/nycwireless/ Archives: http://lists.nycwireless.net/pipermail/nycwireless/
Re: [nycwireless] bluetooth phones?
Jon Baer wrote: > Well I have to say the fact that SE is dropping Bluetooth is a bit > of a shock I don't think Sony Ericsson is dropping Bluetooth from their telephones. Are they? What's happening is that Ericsson (half owner of Sony Ericsson) is closing a subsidiary for designing its own Bluetooth chips and chip modules (Ericsson Technology Licensing, http://www.ericsson.com/bluetooth/ ). Bluetooth is an industry standard now and I guess Sony Ericsson can buy chips from Korea and Taiwan just like anybody else. If there is any pattern to Ericsson's actions, they tend to keep products that generate subscription business (I call this B2T or business-to-telcos) and drop products that become commodities. Sony also followed this pattern when they teamed up with Ericsson to make telephones and then dropped their line of PDAs. Lars Aronsson, [EMAIL PROTECTED] -- Aronsson Datateknik -- NYCwireless - http://www.nycwireless.net/ Un/Subscribe: http://lists.nycwireless.net/mailman/listinfo/nycwireless/ Archives: http://lists.nycwireless.net/pipermail/nycwireless/
Re: [nycwireless] Intel Says Notebooks to Have WiMax by 2006
Jon Baer wrote: > I find this to be a bold prediction ... I might as well predict > intergallactic cards installed by 2020. In the 1920s, when radio was new (as in "new to most people", just like the Internet was "new" in the 1990s), lots of people predicted that television would be everywhere within five years. That helped build the stock market bubble that burst in 1929. I guess some people just continued to make wild hi-tech predictions all through the 1930s. Eventually TV did come along in the 1940s and was "everywhere" by the mid 1950s or so. Reading radio tech magazines from the 1920s brings such a dejavu of all the crazy Internet predictions from this last decade. If you read some Swedish, you might enjoy the ones I've digitized at http://runeberg.org/radioama/ and http://runeberg.org/popradio/ -- Lars Aronsson ([EMAIL PROTECTED]) Aronsson Datateknik - http://aronsson.se/ -- NYCwireless - http://www.nycwireless.net/ Un/Subscribe: http://lists.nycwireless.net/mailman/listinfo/nycwireless/ Archives: http://lists.nycwireless.net/pipermail/nycwireless/
RE: [nycwireless] T-Mobile brings in $13 bucks a day
Nigel Ballard wrote: > Add staff, marketing, the kickback to Starbucks, IBM Global Services, > Insurance, marketing etc. It starts to look like a very ugly business > model. If you see the public hotspot wifi as a separate business, the best model to cover the costs is to make a big old telco hide it in its gigantic balance sheet. The telco pays the wifi losses and gets the prestige of "the wireless Internet of the future" in return. That's why T-Mobile owns it, if you ask me (and Telia-Sonera in Sweden and Finland). The most affordable way to do public hotspot wifi is to use DSL or cable access at cost level (i.e. below the price of residential broadband, which is already far below the price of business broadband), something only incumbent telcos or cable-TV companies can do with their own cables. That's what Verizon started to do in Manhattan pay phones. How did that go? -- Lars Aronsson ([EMAIL PROTECTED]) Aronsson Datateknik - http://aronsson.se/ -- NYCwireless - http://www.nycwireless.net/ Un/Subscribe: http://lists.nycwireless.net/mailman/listinfo/nycwireless/ Archives: http://lists.nycwireless.net/pipermail/nycwireless/
RE: [nycwireless] alt.coffee ixnays the owerpay
Daniel Thor Kristjansson wrote: > It's not about the power usage. I asked one of the counter persons and > she listed things like people unplugging lamps, things getting stuck in > outlets, people sitting in the best seats all day. Even though > they had tried to accomidate the customers with power strips. Basically > a number of problems can be traced to the laptop users. This should be a lesson or problem for laptop manufacturers, who have the most to gain from the possibility that more people get into the mobile computing lifestyle. (Not just buying laptops, but actually using them.) Ever since wireless networks for laptops got affordable in 2000, we've heard about these visions. Newspaper ads show beautiful women with thin laptops sipping their latte at the desk of a San Francisco or Stockholm style café(*). Yeah, right. It's time to realize that it doesn't happen. Those who have tried it know: They are guys, they know far too much about computers to really care for the style, and they are alone. Seldom do you see another person with a wireless laptop in the same place at the same time, and when you get comfortable, reading halfways through your full inbox, the cafe staff starts looking at you like "if you don't order something new, you better leave this place". It's been four years now. Anything new? (*) Telia HomeRun brochure, http://www.homerun.telia.com/doc/files/homerun_folder_A4.pdf I guess my next laptop must have a full day-light screen the kind that the NEC Versa E120 DayLite used to have (did they discontinue that model?), so I can leave the cafe and enjoy more of my mobile computing out in the park. And really good batteries. -- Lars Aronsson ([EMAIL PROTECTED]) Aronsson Datateknik - http://aronsson.se/ -- NYCwireless - http://www.nycwireless.net/ Un/Subscribe: http://lists.nycwireless.net/mailman/listinfo/nycwireless/ Archives: http://lists.nycwireless.net/pipermail/nycwireless/
Re: [nycwireless] Free Wi-Fi at Dozens of NYPL Branches
Anthony Townsend wrote: > broadband, or was a digital divide type initative. The money invariably > came from the library's own budget, as there's only been cutting back, > not new funding from the city. Now that public libraries have Wi-Fi, all the jobless geeks will start to hang around libraries (instead of expensive latte cafes), giving librarians a chance to inform them about the library budget cutbacks. The geeks will start to spread the word through their blogs and lists, and this will create the necessary political pressure to reverse the situation. At the same time, these libraries can show more visitors in their annual statistics. This is a secret conspiracy among librarians, and I wish they succeed. -- Lars Aronsson ([EMAIL PROTECTED]) Aronsson Datateknik - http://aronsson.se/ -- NYCwireless - http://www.nycwireless.net/ Un/Subscribe: http://lists.nycwireless.net/mailman/listinfo/nycwireless/ Archives: http://lists.nycwireless.net/pipermail/nycwireless/
[nycwireless] Re: [BAWUG] WiFi on trains: You can even blow the horn
Sameer Verma wrote: > The Burlington Northern and Santa Fe Railway Company (BNSF) has found a > novel use for Wi-Fi. It has started using the wireless networking > technology to control trains remotely. > http://www.theregister.co.uk/content/69/34101.html Is this really 2.4 GHz IEEE 802.11b ??? These things are normally done with 400 MHz, which has better reach and less (but enough) bandwidth. I've seen it in operation at a Swedish freight rail yard. -- Lars Aronsson ([EMAIL PROTECTED]) Aronsson Datateknik - http://aronsson.se/ -- NYCwireless - http://www.nycwireless.net/ Un/Subscribe: http://lists.nycwireless.net/mailman/listinfo/nycwireless/ Archives: http://lists.nycwireless.net/pipermail/nycwireless/
Re: [nycwireless] Connectivity emergency in brooklyn
Kevin Arima wrote: > Most likely it's Verizon's loop concentrator. What happened was NYNEX > back in 93-94 decided that it'd be more cost effective by bringing in > fiber to the basement of a building, then putting in a mini-CO there to > connect to the NID of each apartment. I recall this being done to my old Having fiber into the building shouldn't be all that bad. Couldn't you just build your own ethernet in the building, put a switch or router in the basement, and buy a single 10 or 100 Mbps connection for the entire building? At the same time, you could install VoIP and get rid of the phone company for ever. -- Lars Aronsson ([EMAIL PROTECTED]) Aronsson Datateknik - http://aronsson.se/ -- NYCwireless - http://www.nycwireless.net/ Un/Subscribe: http://lists.nycwireless.net/mailman/listinfo/nycwireless/ Archives: http://lists.nycwireless.net/pipermail/nycwireless/
Re: [nycwireless] Wifi-Hog - Info / Talk
Dana Spiegel wrote: > Yes, the reaction that this may be a bad thing and that it can be used > as a bad thing to try to kill our network is a valid one, and one that > needs expressing. But, where do we go from here? It was only a matter of I cannot speak for others, but my reaction was not of this kind. I think that the Wifi-Hog is just an obvious idea, like a kid that shouts and screams to draw attention, and that this is not a threat at all. Most people grow up and stop to scream and shout, and there are ways to deal with those who don't. It should be very easy to detect a jam transmitter, locate it, and remove it, and tell the owner to leave the place. The real harm, in my opinion, comes from people who try to sell this idea as being a threat, to draw attention to their own person and spread fear, uncertainty and doubt among those less experienced. Especially if they pretend to be enlightened, better positioned to "question the technology" than the rest of the movement. The same sort of people could as well lobby for requiring a license for the purchase of kitchen knives "because they are potentially lethal weapons". Maybe go out stab somebody just to prove the point. The Wifi-Hog is not a threat. Saying so is a hoax that needs to be debunked. It is not an innovation. -- Lars Aronsson ([EMAIL PROTECTED]) Aronsson Datateknik - http://aronsson.se/ -- NYCwireless - http://www.nycwireless.net/ Un/Subscribe: http://lists.nycwireless.net/mailman/listinfo/nycwireless/ Archives: http://lists.nycwireless.net/pipermail/nycwireless/
Re: [nycwireless] Wifi-Hog - Info / Talk
Jonah Brucker-Cohen wrote: > tend to get past that to see that there is a need to question the > technology we use and have grown so accustomed to - esp Wi-Fi which This is where you are wrong. There is no such need. The only thing we have to question is people like you. If a kid decides to scream and shout in public, we tell it to shut up. If you think you are any different from that kid, you've got to explain why. -- Lars Aronsson ([EMAIL PROTECTED]) Aronsson Datateknik - http://aronsson.se/ -- NYCwireless - http://www.nycwireless.net/ Un/Subscribe: http://lists.nycwireless.net/mailman/listinfo/nycwireless/ Archives: http://lists.nycwireless.net/pipermail/nycwireless/
Re: [nycwireless] Wifi-Hog - Info / Talk
Jonah Brucker-Cohen wrote: > * Wi-Fi Hog is personal system for a laptop or portable computer that > enables people to gain complete control over a public access wireless > network. The idea comes as a reaction to the utopian vision of > wireless networks being open, shared, and utilitarian for everyone. Here is another project: If you walk into a cafe and scream and shout all you can, nobody can have a conversation in there! Until they throw you out. So, what's the innovation? -- Lars Aronsson ([EMAIL PROTECTED]) Aronsson Datateknik - http://aronsson.se/ -- NYCwireless - http://www.nycwireless.net/ Un/Subscribe: http://lists.nycwireless.net/mailman/listinfo/nycwireless/ Archives: http://lists.nycwireless.net/pipermail/nycwireless/
Re: [nycwireless] Can Verizon go underground?
Terry Ewing wrote: > Interesting. With all this wireless stuff it looks like we're moving back > toward something similar to uucp where you wait for a link to become > available, then you send and recieve email/ web pages/ rss feeds/ etc. It'd > be cool for my email to hit my wireless PDA (if I had one) when the train > came to a stop on it's way downtown. Even if you get coverage everywhere, the available bandwidth is likely to vary from spot to spot. Syncing technologies that are able to "catch the opportunity" should be good tools for the future. One of my favorites of the last few years is the "Unison" file synchronizer, http://www.cis.upenn.edu/~bcpierce/unison/ These tools (unison and uucp) assume that once you have connectivity, you are connected to the entire net. But what if you get connected to a portion of the entire net? Something like the old IRC net splits. That could easily happen in a mesh network. Or in an application like Groove, in a meeting with less than the full group. -- Lars Aronsson ([EMAIL PROTECTED]) Aronsson Datateknik - http://aronsson.se/ -- NYCwireless - http://www.nycwireless.net/ Un/Subscribe: http://lists.nycwireless.net/mailman/listinfo/nycwireless/ Archives: http://lists.nycwireless.net/pipermail/nycwireless/
Re: [nycwireless] Legality/morality of use of unsecured APs [WAS:Goal...]
Michael Yellin wrote: >According to the Cabin analogy, if it is left open, can I use anything I > want. Can I use the TV and your electricity (assuming the place has > electricity) What about eating the food and using the supplies. I think I might have introduced this "cabin analogy" in another discussion, and I'm sorry I don't have any hard references for it. It seems that in the old Scandinavian (and possibly Anglo-Saxon) tradition, the dishonor was not in committing the crime, but in hiding from your guilt. If you openly admitted to the crime and paid your fines, all was ok. (The word "steal" is related to "stealth", to do something in hiding.) The Old Norse and Icelandic sagas are full of anecdotes like this, e.g. http://sunsite.berkeley.edu/OMACL/Njal/ If I was the hiker, lost and frozen, I guess I would eat the food in the cabin, and leave a note with my phone number and some cash. That seems like the most practical solution to me. That doesn't mean I have the right to walk into any cabin at any time and eat what I want, or that the people who forget to lock their cabins are morons. All it means is that there is a balance between respect and need. -- Lars Aronsson ([EMAIL PROTECTED]) Aronsson Datateknik - http://aronsson.se/ -- NYCwireless - http://www.nycwireless.net/ Un/Subscribe: http://lists.nycwireless.net/mailman/listinfo/nycwireless/ Archives: http://lists.nycwireless.net/pipermail/nycwireless/
Re: [nycwireless] Re: Verizon Only Network
dgoody wrote: > They probably payed for the entire network out of the DSL marketing budget. Have you got any numbers, so we can do the math? Does the Verizon Wi-Fi network only cover Manhattan? How many access points? How many DSL subscribers does Verizon have in Manhattan? In New York City? In New York State? Nationwide? Are they going to encourage their subscribers to use Wi-Fi on their home DSL line, so to extend the Wi-Fi reach to other Verizon DSL subscribers? This is an old idea, that a DSL operator could obviously implement. Verizon would be the first to actually do so, as far as I know. -- Lars Aronsson ([EMAIL PROTECTED]) Free Wireless Networking - http://elektrosmog.nu/ -- NYCwireless - http://www.nycwireless.net/ Un/Subscribe: http://lists.nycwireless.net/mailman/listinfo/nycwireless/ Archives: http://lists.nycwireless.net/pipermail/nycwireless/
Re: [nycwireless] Re: Fwd: telecom-cities digest: December 03, 2002
Alan Levy wrote: > visit the Intel Press Room at: > http://www.intel.com/pressroom/archive/releases/20021205corp.htm > [...] > AT&T plans to provide network infrastructure and > management. IBM plans to provide wireless site > installations and back-office systems. It seems the owners are trying hard from the beginning to make the operation of this company as expensive as possible. IBM will benefit if every installation takes two hours instead of one. AT&T will benefit if there is a per-megabyte charge on traffic, and unstable equipment with a huge need for network management. It's not like a small operator that hangs a zero-maintenance commodity access point off of an affordable residential DSL line, but more like a replay of MobileStar/Starbucks. The burn rate is there, as if this was 1999, but how much have they got to burn? Is this perhaps a sign that AT&T and IBM really don't have anything better to do? It seems like a stupid project, but perhaps it was the least bad they could come up with? During the time Cometa burns its venture capital, both AT&T and IBM Global Services can show an increased demand for their services, perhaps at a very high prices, which isn't too bad these days. Only the VC firms lose. -- Lars Aronsson ([EMAIL PROTECTED]) Aronsson Datateknik Teknikringen 1e, SE-583 30 Linuxköping, Sweden tel +46-70-7891609 http://aronsson.se/ http://elektrosmog.nu/ http://susning.nu/ -- NYCwireless - http://www.nycwireless.net/ Un/Subscribe: http://lists.nycwireless.net/mailman/listinfo/nycwireless/ Archives: http://lists.nycwireless.net/pipermail/nycwireless/
Re: [nycwireless] mention in New York mag
Anthony Townsend wrote: > There's Internet in the air: Hot spots all around the city let you log > on without a phone line. Grab a laptop with a wireless network card, > and stop by these locales for a high-quality signal. When they put it like this, I'm getting concerned the readers will believe that it's OK to stop by and grab my laptop... -- Lars Aronsson ([EMAIL PROTECTED]) Aronsson Datateknik Teknikringen 1e, SE-583 30 Linuxköping, Sweden tel +46-70-7891609 http://aronsson.se/ http://elektrosmog.nu/ http://susning.nu/ -- NYCwireless - http://www.nycwireless.net/ Un/Subscribe: http://lists.nycwireless.net/mailman/listinfo/nycwireless/ Archives: http://lists.nycwireless.net/pipermail/nycwireless/
Re: [nycwireless] [Article] Want Wi-Fi? Verizon takes it home
On the NYC Wireless list, Christopher Mc Carthy wrote: > Quelle surprise ! "Not all broadband providers are jumping on the Wi-Fi > wagon. Time Warner Cable does not yet have any plans to sell Wi-Fi > equipment, a representative said Wednesday." > http://news.com.com/2100-1033-961463.html?tag=fd_top_10 Looking back at these two years of the Wi-Fi revolution, it is striking how many areas this technology touches. It should be no surprise that people start to think of it as a solution for everything. I'm reading magazine articles that sales of equipment is growing fast, and at the same time that "WLAN is a failure" just because some hotspot operator failed to attract paying subscribers. Yesterday, the U.S. supreme court hearings started in the case Eldred v. Ashcroft and guess what - the Yale law school has a weblog, where they write: PS. This blogging brought to you via 802.11b equipped PDA (please excuse typos, etc.) and warchalked wireless access point, somewhere in the vicinity of the Supreme Court building (thanks warchalkers!) http://research.yale.edu/lawmeme/modules.php?name=News&file=article&sid=392 This week I hosted the WLAN session of the annual conference of the Swedish chapter of ISOC, and had four speakers, talking about - Antenna technology for point-to-point links - Effects on the human body of radio and microwave radiation - Security issues and encryption - Small rural communities using Wi-Fi links for broadband In my introduction I had to apologize that we didn't have time for speakers on 5-6 other areas (e.g. ongoing standardization, commercial hotspot operators, management of large corporate WLANs, sniffing tools, mesh networks, trends and hypes like warchalking). -- Lars Aronsson ([EMAIL PROTECTED]) Aronsson Datateknik Teknikringen 1e, SE-583 30 Linuxköping, Sweden tel +46-70-7891609 http://aronsson.se/ http://elektrosmog.nu/ http://susning.nu/ -- NYCwireless - http://www.nycwireless.net/ Un/Subscribe: http://lists.nycwireless.net/mailman/listinfo/nycwireless/ Archives: http://lists.nycwireless.net/pipermail/nycwireless/
Re: [nycwireless] Secret Service meets 802.11 in DC ...
Jon Baer wrote: > Agency Probes D.C. Wireless Network > The Associated Press > Sep 29 2002 1:40PM > [...] > A Pringles can is ideal because of its shape - a long tube that lets > someone to point it at specific buildings - and its aluminum inner > lining. It acts like a satellite dish, collecting signals and bouncing > them to the receiver, which is then wired into a laptop. My own measurements indicate that the aluminum-colored lining of the tube is not an electric conductor, and thus the Pringles antenna is not a waveguide antenna (and not a satellite dish either, obviously). Instead, I think it is a yagi antenna. Can anyone confirm or deny this? Other models described on the web have the same rod-and-washers (yagi directors) but a plastic tube instead of the Pringles can. http://www.oreillynet.com/cs/weblog/view/wlg/448 http://www.netscum.com/~clapp/wireless.html -- Lars Aronsson ([EMAIL PROTECTED]) Aronsson Datateknik Teknikringen 1e, SE-583 30 Linuxköping, Sweden tel +46-70-7891609 http://aronsson.se/ http://elektrosmog.nu/ http://susning.nu/ -- NYCwireless - http://www.nycwireless.net/ Un/Subscribe: http://lists.nycwireless.net/mailman/listinfo/nycwireless/ Archives: http://lists.nycwireless.net/pipermail/nycwireless/
Re: [nycwireless] Warchalking is theft, says Nokia
Anthony Townsend wrote: > wouldn't this be so much more interesting if people actually were > warchalking. sometimes i think there are more journalists writing about it > than people actually doing it This is what happened to WAP (the Wireless Application Protocol, the telcos' "wireless web") in its European hype three years ago: More newspaper headlines, than actual lines of running code. Somebody should set up an equotion for this and become the Einstein of the new century. Something like Usefulness x hype = constant. -- Lars Aronsson ([EMAIL PROTECTED]) Aronsson Datateknik Teknikringen 1e, SE-583 30 Linuxköping, Sweden tel +46-70-7891609 http://aronsson.se/ http://elektrosmog.nu/ http://susning.nu/ -- NYCwireless - http://www.nycwireless.net/ Un/Subscribe: http://lists.nycwireless.net/mailman/listinfo/nycwireless/ Archives: http://lists.nycwireless.net/pipermail/nycwireless/
Re: [nycwireless] TWCNYC?
On Wed, 24 Jul 2002, rick tait wrote: > And then of course, the reporter from the Newhouse News Service that > interviewed me (http://www.newhouse.com/archive/story1c070302.html) > apparently got some info from a TWCNYC engineering exec, who let slip > that they were looking into making their OWN combined cable > modem/WAP/router/etc that will allow TWCNYC to "see" through the NAT and > figure out what people are doing behind it. Also, he allegedly mentioned > that these new boxes can be remotely managed from TWCNYC's end, in that > they may be able to ratchet down the signal strength a bit, so you and I > and all our friends couldn't WAP together as we do now. > > How f*cked up is that? Haha, great story! For you it is totally Big Brother, of course. For the telco/cableco, this could be a lot smarter than building a cellular network, where they have to buy the right to mount an antenna on your building. If they control the WAP, they can allow their other customers to access the net through your node - without you even knowing. This would be a fun engineering project, but maybe not totally realistic. For the hacker community, having one of these boxes *behind* your own filtering gateway could be a lot of fun. First you pass all the traffic while logging it, decoding the various monitoring requests from the network control center to your WAP. Then you start to fake the answers you want them to see. Their equipment is in your place. You own them. -- Lars Aronsson ([EMAIL PROTECTED]) tel +46-70-7891609 http://aronsson.se/ http://elektrosmog.nu/ http://susning.nu/ -- NYCwireless - http://www.nycwireless.net/ Un/Subscribe: http://lists.nycwireless.net/mailman/listinfo/nycwireless/ Archives: http://lists.nycwireless.net/pipermail/nycwireless/
