Google Defends Wi-Fi Network Plans on Eve of Launch
Google's gone on the offensive to try and allay any privacy and coverage concerns about a wireless Internet network it plans to switch on later in June in Mountain View, Calif. The message Google's been delivering recently via local media interviews and meetings with local businesses and citizens is, to paraphrase, "don't worry, just surf." As to how extensive the network is, it'll reach most of the city, but expect some dead zones in out-of-the-way places, and the local golf course. Google's outreach blitz coincides with the impending launch of its first wireless Internet network. By July 1, beta testers will get their first crack at the Wi-Fi network Google's built in Mountain View, its hometown. The Mountain View network isn't expected to become available to the general public until later this year. Google also has plans to take part in a municipal wireless network in San Francisco, being built by Internet provider EarthLink, and possibly one in New Orleans. So its experiences in Mountain View will be very telling indeed as to its future wireless endeavors. Perhaps the most troubling thing about Google Wi-Fi is the concern that its networks are capable of tracking users' whereabouts. The answer is yes, according to Chris Sacca, Google's head of special initiatives. But it's not to the pinpoint degree of accuracy many detractors think it will be, he said during two interviews this week. Privacy advocates fear the worst: that by virtue of Wi-Fi technology Google's using, the firm will know someone's whereabouts within a few feet. And that adds a very new and uncomfortable level to the private information that Google already has about its consumers. To be sure, Google will gain a level of geographical certainty about a Wi-Fi network user, but it's going to be within a few football fields of accuracy, which is the range of any one single Wi-Fi access point, Sacca said. He added Google will have little more than a user's e-mail address to match to their location, which reveals very little personal detail, he said. That's not to say Google doesn't plan to take a look at using more accurate location-based technology, wherever it might be found. Such technology would help Google further two of its goals: to serve up more locally targeted ads, which businesses are calling for, and to provide new, more locally based content to Google consumers. Law enforcement is a wild card in this debate. As with any request from law enforcement, Sacca said Google would only respond to valid and appropriate requests for user's whereabouts, should police ever ask. "We have some tried and true principles of how we do business," Sacca said. "We have a deep commitment to privacy." Another question Google faces is just how much of Mountain View will ultimately be covered by the network. Google's goal is 100 percent, wall-to-wall, but that's likely not going to be the case when Google lights the network, Sacca says. Rather, one of the purposes of the June launch for beta testers is to get a better idea of just how much of the city is covered. Sacca already has a good idea of what areas might not be -- a few trailer parks for instance, and a golf course. But he said he believes the majority of the city will be. |
Create, Communicate, Collaborate with IT Professionals at Ziff Davis Enterprise IT Link
Comments (2)
I think finally people are seeing the light on Muni Wifi - thanks for your coverage. The Indoor coverage issue is bigger than acknowledged: If outdoors based Muni WiFi is going to be ad supported then one needs eyeballs - where do people use their computers the large majority of the time? OOPS Indoors. SF asked for 90% indoor coverage - (not just for perimeter rooms that have windows or are below the 2nd floor). CPE isn't going to get a signal typically above 2nd floor and nonethless you gotta have a window or rooftop facing a transmitter - otherwise you probably can't even draw in WiFi. Who wants to check their email in their PJ's in the middle of the night by taking their laptop outside and standing under a lightpole? If the city is going to provide exclusive access for a ISP like Earthlink/Google for their Vertical Assets (Earthlink asked for 10 years + 8 year extension) Basically a WiFi monopoly franchise then it is only politically viable if everyone gets similar coverage - otherwise you haven't solved the Digital Divide buzzword SF TechConnect WiFi Franchise: City hearing Monday 6/12 10am PST - watch live online too How will your privacy be protected? Can we get more than 300k speed (Mtn Vw gets 1000k) Digital Inclusion funding (philly got 10,000 computers) How well will it work indoors (SF asked for 90% indoor coverage) Will there be significant Pilots before the contract is signed? You can also watch online live streaming at SFGTV http://sfgov.org/site/sfgtv_index.asp?id=11463 Agenda: http://www.sfgov.org/site/bdsupvrs_page.asp?id=29796
Posted by kimo crossman | June 11, 2006 12:26 PM
http://www.redherring.com/Article.aspx?a=16991&hed=Google%E2%80%99s+Tangled+Wireless+Push§or=Industries&subsector=InternetAndServices Google’s Tangled Wireless Push Exec dishes on challenges search giant faces in its plan to unwire two California cities. May 24, 2006 Chris Sacca, Google’s municipal Wi-Fi champion, has been spending a lot of time outside the comforts of the geeky Googleplex recently negotiating the often-frustrating world of city politics. And it hasn’t always gone smoothly. For example, at a public meeting in Google’s hometown of Mountain View, California, an angry elderly gentleman took a swing at Mr. Sacca after claiming Wi-Fi hardware had negative effects on health. “When you put a box in someone’s neighborhood, it really changes the game,” Mr. Sacca said after a panel discussion at the Red Herring Spring conference in Monterey, California, on Wednesday. As a result, he said Google has to be very nimble when trying to alter public perception. But the company has more than just a public relations campaign on its hands. The search giant also has the mighty tasks of building and running wireless networks. In April, Google and EarthLink won a bid to build a wireless network for San Francisco, and Google plans a similar network in Mountain View . A driving factor for the Mountain View project, explained Mr. Sacca, is the prospect of Google engineers using the network at home, potentially to create more useful applications. However, building infrastructure and acting as a service provider isn’t something with which Google has much experience. “It’s a process of learning. There are a lot of things that we wish we knew six months ago,” said Mr. Sacca, who is the company’s head of special initiatives. Obstacles Ahead Already Google is facing hurdles in the slow-moving, very political process of building what some perceive as a public service. To start with, Google’s local advertising revenue from the network won’t come anywhere close to the estimated $15 million in infrastructure costs, said Mr. Sacca. That’s because neither the technology nor business model is yet in place to start driving a location-based advertising economy around local businesses. “These networks aren’t even close to repaying themselves. Revenues from an ad-based model are at least two years away,” he said. First Google must overcome the layers of bureaucracy surrounding city politics and the real-world intricacies of building a citywide network. The search giant, which prides itself on its “bottom-up” innovation process and flexible approach to development, now has to contend with hiring union workers for network construction and attending endless meetings with public committees and review boards. (if they don't want to use city property to cheaply roll out their network, then they wouldn't have to deal with these issues - like solving the Digital Divide etc - kimo) Mr. Sacca sees common complaints about the Google Wi-Fi projects as alarmist concerns, and has a firm response to each of them. For example, he argued that the radiation from access points on light posts is nothing compared to what’s emanating from the cell phone in your pocket. He also downplayed concerns about user privacy. The amount of personal information—a user name and password—required under the San Francisco plan is far less than that demanded by a cable provider or a mobile carrier, he noted. (Why is login required at all for the Free network? - kimo) Light at the End But amid all the repetitious questions and headaches, Mr. Sacca thinks helping wireless broadband access become cheaper and more ubiquitous is worth it. “There’s been a barrier to cheap wireless broadband,” he said, referring specifically to moves by the cable and phone incumbents to protect their franchises. “Our goal is to help with that.” (Google isn't doing this out of the goodness of their heart to break those franchises - kimo) Mr. Sacca reiterated that Google has no plans to move beyond the two San Francisco Bay Area networks. If the company had ever entertained such thoughts, nine months’ worth of rolling with the punches must have changed its mind.
Posted by kimo crossman | June 11, 2006 1:29 PM