San Francisco One-Ups Redmond

The citywide Wi-Fi meme catapulted to another level yesterday when San Francisco Mayor Gavin Newsom boldly announced that,

"We will not stop until every San Franciscan has access to free wireless Internet service," he said in his annual state of the city address. "These technologies will connect our residents to the skills and the jobs of the new economy." [Reuters by way of...geez, quite a few emails and blog posts have been flying my way this AM.]

The timing of this announcement is interesting.

Politcians across North America (and probably Europe and Asia as well) are fumbling for their political calculators about now. How much will it cost me? Surprisingly little. What will be the payback? Quick! Somebody conduct a scientific poll to determine what us voters think of cheap, high speed Internet service (and throw in ala carte cable, will ya?).

Would you be more or less willing to vote for a mayor or city councilmember who supports the provision of high speed, ubiquitous, wireless Internet connectivity for a cost of pennies on the dollar to your current service?

Comments

• Anonymous
  October 22, 2004
  The comment has been removed

• Anonymous
  October 22, 2004
  The comment has been removed

• Anonymous
  October 22, 2004
  When has government ever provided cheaper/better service than industry? Why stop at internet service then? Couldn't cable and phone also be provided for pennies on the dollar?
  

• Anonymous
  October 22, 2004
  The comment has been removed

• Anonymous
  October 22, 2004
  The comment has been removed

• Anonymous
  October 22, 2004
  I'm curious: what do the ISPs / telcos / cable providers in Redmond think?

• Anonymous
  October 22, 2004
  Any politician that even knows what Wi-fi is - or what the difference between a hub and switch is - has at least an ounce of intelligence and that's worth electing him or her alone.
  
  I know that here in Redmond they've been pushing for it. It's good to hear of a larger city that has actually implemented it. I'm sure that will prove positive for the policitian here (I forget his name) that has been pushing hard for it.
  
  And to Scott Allen, the cable providers in the US are few: they are remnants of a divided AT&T. Comcast controls pretty much the western seaboard while Mediacom covers almost all of the midwest (where I'm from originally, and I can assure you Comcast is much better). I doubt a 45,000 person city is any threat to them, especially since they still have a monopoly (in this region) on cable/digital cable television.

• Anonymous
  October 23, 2004
  Heath got the real problem - both phone and cable companies still have a monopoly. That's why you don't see any real services from them, because they simply have no competition.

• Anonymous
  May 28, 2009
  PingBack from http://paidsurveyshub.info/story.php?title=korby-parnell-s-social-software-wunderkammer-san-francisco-one-ups

• Anonymous
  May 31, 2009
  PingBack from http://woodtvstand.info/story.php?id=2936

• Anonymous
  June 09, 2009
  PingBack from http://insomniacuresite.info/story.php?id=1896

• Anonymous
  June 11, 2009
  PingBack from http://castironbakeware.info/story.php?title=korby-parnell-s-social-software-wunderkammer-san-francisco-one-ups

• Anonymous
  June 15, 2009
  PingBack from http://einternetmarketingtools.info/story.php?id=3775

• Anonymous
  June 16, 2009
  PingBack from http://lowcostcarinsurances.info/story.php?id=4157

• Anonymous
  June 19, 2009
  PingBack from http://mydebtconsolidator.info/story.php?id=6411