[wsfii-discuss] Press Release: guifi.net has reached the thousands!

Thu Oct 26 07:57:12 UTC 2006

I have followed this with interest as this goes to the very heart of the 
OPLAN <www.oplan.org> proposition, namely that although the attention to 
date has been almost exclusively been focussed on 'internet access', the 
real 'prize' I believe from open local access infrastructure is that it 
will enable communities and cities to discover for THEMSELVES how to use 
the network to further support and enhance their EXISTING social and 
economic activities and help them 'dream' of new ways of being a 
community.  As Walter Lippmann, the influential US writer, journalist 
and political commentator said, "The role of a press is to keep a 
community in conversation with itself".   I suggest that likewise, a 
primary function and benefit of a local open access (neutral) network is 
to keep a community in /even richer /conversation with itself.  Indeed, 
despite the current lemming-like swarming towards the likes of G-Mail 
and Yahoo - the opportunity for communities, once they have established 
an OPLAN, to house their own local e-mail and other servers - will 
emerge.  This localisation will not only have benefits of security and 
trust for the community itself but also ease the amount of traffic 
needlessly transitting the internet.

Although we certainly need to fight to maintain  INTERnet -neutrality - 
we need to fight to WIN LOCALnet neutrality.
Regards
Malcolm Matson
The OPLAN Foundation

Ramon Roca wrote:
>
> Thanks Julian, we do fully share same points of view. I think this is 
> never will an old thread, instead is one of the main topics.
> Just let me add a few comments. I'm seeing quite often when talking 
> about service providers over neutral.networks people do imagine we are 
> talking about global big ISP. And really that's a part of the story, 
> but not all.
> We are experiencing that the openness facilitates a much varied 
> ecosystem of small and medium enterprises, and that's a quite obvious 
> opportunities. In fact their support is a key, although their 
> investments are quite limited or localized to their interests, by 
> aggregating them is a key of success.
> By that I mean just network participants, such as farmers, or very 
> likely any activity with dispersed but local branches or facilities, 
> like small retailers etc, as well as the universe of service 
> professionals and local companies who provide services to those SME as 
> well to the citizens.
> On neutral networks in some cases they can find better ROI and even 
> better quality of service.
> And this have to be taken instead of a competitive issue (neutral 
> networks never can compete against anybody by its own nature), as a 
> prove that help in enrich local business in a fair environment.
> For going there, neutral networks have to gain some credibility, and 
> very likely a current battle is there.
>
> Ramon.
>
> En/na Julian Priest ha escrit:
>> On Mon, Oct 23, 2006 at 11:23:36PM +0200, Ramon Roca wrote:
>>  
>>> At wifi we decided to make a press release at the point we reach > 
>>> 1.000 thousands active nodes. That happened last Thursday.
>>>     
>>
>> Congratulations Guifi!
>>
>>  
>>> A LOT MORE THAN JUST A LIST OF ?HOTSPOTS?
>>> guifi.net isn't just a list of access points. Is much more: Is a big 
>>> neutral network where the nodes use to have stable wireless links 
>>> between them and therefore creating an autonomous stable mesh 
>>> network, either on urban areas or rural areas where in some cases 
>>> there was no High-Speed internet access before.
>>>     
>>
>> This neutral network aspect looks like a good one to publicise right
>> now with the efforts in the US to fight for the net neutrality bill's
>> passage into law and the http://savetheinternet.com campaign.
>>
>>  
>>> AN OPEN AND NEUTRAL FREE NETWORK
>>> In the current times where the original universal spirit of the 
>>> internet is being mediated by private telecommunications operators, 
>>> by having neutral networks in the last mile guifi.net is 
>>> contributing to counterbalance the strict commercial driven 
>>> interests. To provide warranty on this commitment guifi.net adopts 
>>> the Wireless Commons License.
>>>     
>>
>> The early wireless freenetworks always discussed that the creation of
>> a neutral wireless access network was partly as a counter to potential
>> control of the internet by the owners of the core network. The net
>> neutrality fight in the US is showing that sadly this _was_ a real
>> threat after all.
>>
>> The legaslitive fight in the US to enshrine net neutrality in law is a
>> fantastic initiative, but the growth of municipal wireless and
>> networks like guifi maybe shows that there is an effective
>> practical/market approach as well.
>>
>> It seems to me that building net.neutral access networks where
>> services (like internet access) are made available by third parties -
>> provides two mechanisms for users to put pressure on backhaul
>> providers to be net.neutral.
>>
>> The first is that the net.neutral network organises groups of users
>> (aggregation).
>>
>> These groups can then have political and group purchasing power which
>> creates a viable negotiating position with backhaul network owners (or
>> perhaps even a basis for building backhaul networks).
>>
>> This is going to be the best way to operate where there is only one
>> backhaul provider (or none).
>>
>> The second is that a net.neutral access network effectivley creates a
>> competitive market for backhaul (and other) services across it. Users
>> can the choose the services that have the properties they want,
>> neutrality, high speed, low cost etc.
>>
>> This will work better where there is the possibility for multiple
>> backhaul service providers.
>>
>> It seems pretty weird to me that municipal wireless had such a bad
>> time with anti-competition law. I would have thought that providing
>> net.neutral access networks provides precisely the possibility for a
>> deep competitive market for services that competition law tries to
>> establish with flawed measures based on duplicating infrastructure or
>> artificial unbundling.
>>
>> .. appologies if this feels like an old thread ;)
>>
>> cheers
>>
>> /julian
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>> _______________________________________________
>> wsfii-discuss mailing list
>> wsfii-discuss at lists.okfn.org
>> http://lists.okfn.org/mailman/listinfo/wsfii-discuss
>>
>>
>>   
>
> _______________________________________________
> wsfii-discuss mailing list
> wsfii-discuss at lists.okfn.org
> http://lists.okfn.org/mailman/listinfo/wsfii-discuss
>
>

-- 

*=============================================================*

*                                         **Malcolm J Matson*

*                   77 Andrewes House, **London** **EC2Y 8AY**, **UK*

*                     t: +44(0)20-7638 2344        
<callto://londoncityman/>*

*                              ** e-mail: cityman at city.co.uk 
<mailto:cityman at city.co.uk>*

*=============================================================*