On Tue, 10 Aug 2010 14:05:58 -0700, in
<4of36694noob4mrvhdvf8qql2rhj9g8hp5@4ax.com>, John Navas
<spamfilter1@navasgroup.com> wrote:
>On Tue, 10 Aug 2010 15:25:00 -0500, in
><qbd366133clbrpap70igi7bk648ot87kfq@4ax.com>, Paul Miner
><pminer@elrancho.invalid> wrote:
>
>>On Tue, 10 Aug 2010 12:48:35 -0700, John Navas
>><spamfilter1@navasgroup.com> wrote:
>>
>>>Again: Spectrum is free. It only becomes not free when government (we)
>>>decides to sell it to a commercial entity.
>>
>>I think the word you're looking for is lease or license, rather than
>>sell.
>
>When there's no real danger of losing the license, which becomes a form
>of entitlement, it's effectively a sale.
cf FCC v Nextwave
FCC Licenses and Insolvency
<http://www.sheppardmullin.com/publications-articles-1.html>
Value Of Radio Wave Spectrum Is On The Rise
Again As Competing Carriers Bid For Licenses
<http://www.marthabuyer.com/pdfs/Tele0308.pdf>
--
John FAQ for Wireless Internet: <http://wireless.navas.us>
FAQ for Wi-Fi: <http://wireless.navas.us/wiki/Wi-Fi>
Wi-Fi How To: <http://wireless.navas.us/wiki/Wi-Fi_HowTo>
Fixes to Wi-Fi Problems: <http://wireless.navas.us/wiki/Wi-Fi_Fixes>
In article <tcf366pl0iuvqjj297p5l5fn768puv6rdd@4ax.com>, John Navas
<spamfilter1@navasgroup.com> wrote:
> "State budget cuts threaten free Internet service at 200 New Jersey
> public libraries" <http://goo.gl/pw9E> Is that convincing enough?
no. that's just one example and it only 'threatens' free internet
service, it didn't say it was actually cut. no doubt it's a political
tactic to scare the masses. plus, 200 libraries is nothing.
let's see some *actual numbers*. how much does it really cost them?
if offering free wifi was such a huge expense, why do so many places
offer it? even dumpy motels have big signs saying free internet.
On Tue, 10 Aug 2010 14:05:58 -0700, John Navas
<spamfilter1@navasgroup.com> wrote:
>On Tue, 10 Aug 2010 15:25:00 -0500, in
><qbd366133clbrpap70igi7bk648ot87kfq@4ax.com>, Paul Miner
><pminer@elrancho.invalid> wrote:
>
>>On Tue, 10 Aug 2010 12:48:35 -0700, John Navas
>><spamfilter1@navasgroup.com> wrote:
>>
>>>Again: Spectrum is free. It only becomes not free when government (we)
>>>decides to sell it to a commercial entity.
>>
>>I think the word you're looking for is lease or license, rather than
>>sell.
>
>When there's no real danger of losing the license, which becomes a form
>of entitlement, it's effectively a sale.
You would be the first to call someone on this if they made the same
mistake, so it's only fair that you accept the correction gracefully
instead of what you're doing.
On Tue, 10 Aug 2010 13:57:06 -0700, John Navas
<spamfilter1@navasgroup.com> wrote:
>On Tue, 10 Aug 2010 15:27:25 -0500, in
><ndd3669bot2jq10opum13sjtgelhg1tbil@4ax.com>, Paul Miner
><pminer@elrancho.invalid> wrote:
>
>>>Not true:
>>> * Support is a huge ongoing cost.
>>> * The pipe usually is much bigger than it would have to be otherwise.
>>> * Complaints from slow performance are a big headache.
>>
>>Support is a huge ongoing cost? Again, only if you get to stretch the
>>definition of huge so that it includes the tiniest bit of noise in the
>>weeds. Ongoing cost is practically nonexistent.
>
>It's actually quite significant,
No, it's actually not significant at all.
>just as it is for commercial
>enterprises. The only reason it's small is that budgets don't permit
>proper funding.
In two back to back sentences, you've termed it "quite significant"
and "small". I like the way you cover your bases.
On Tue, 10 Aug 2010 16:20:08 -0500, in
<1ig3661uet0htd4dq21kfbf26c8vc1cr0a@4ax.com>, Paul Miner
<pminer@elrancho.invalid> wrote:
>On Tue, 10 Aug 2010 14:05:58 -0700, John Navas
><spamfilter1@navasgroup.com> wrote:
>
>>On Tue, 10 Aug 2010 15:25:00 -0500, in
>><qbd366133clbrpap70igi7bk648ot87kfq@4ax.com>, Paul Miner
>><pminer@elrancho.invalid> wrote:
>>
>>>On Tue, 10 Aug 2010 12:48:35 -0700, John Navas
>>><spamfilter1@navasgroup.com> wrote:
>>>
>>>>Again: Spectrum is free. It only becomes not free when government (we)
>>>>decides to sell it to a commercial entity.
>>>
>>>I think the word you're looking for is lease or license, rather than
>>>sell.
>>
>>When there's no real danger of losing the license, which becomes a form
>>of entitlement, it's effectively a sale.
>
>You would be the first to call someone on this if they made the same
>mistake, so it's only fair that you accept the correction gracefully
>instead of what you're doing.
It was deliberate, as explained, not a "mistake".
--
John
If the iPhone and iPad are really so impressive,
then why do iFans keep making excuses for them?
On Tue, 10 Aug 2010 14:29:19 -0700, John Navas
<spamfilter1@navasgroup.com> wrote:
>On Tue, 10 Aug 2010 16:20:08 -0500, in
><1ig3661uet0htd4dq21kfbf26c8vc1cr0a@4ax.com>, Paul Miner
><pminer@elrancho.invalid> wrote:
>
>>On Tue, 10 Aug 2010 14:05:58 -0700, John Navas
>><spamfilter1@navasgroup.com> wrote:
>>
>>>On Tue, 10 Aug 2010 15:25:00 -0500, in
>>><qbd366133clbrpap70igi7bk648ot87kfq@4ax.com>, Paul Miner
>>><pminer@elrancho.invalid> wrote:
>>>
>>>>On Tue, 10 Aug 2010 12:48:35 -0700, John Navas
>>>><spamfilter1@navasgroup.com> wrote:
>>>>
>>>>>Again: Spectrum is free. It only becomes not free when government (we)
>>>>>decides to sell it to a commercial entity.
>>>>
>>>>I think the word you're looking for is lease or license, rather than
>>>>sell.
>>>
>>>When there's no real danger of losing the license, which becomes a form
>>>of entitlement, it's effectively a sale.
>>
>>You would be the first to call someone on this if they made the same
>>mistake, so it's only fair that you accept the correction gracefully
>>instead of what you're doing.
>
>It was deliberate, as explained, not a "mistake".
Deliberately wrong is just as wrong as accidentally wrong.
"John Navas" <spamfilter1@navasgroup.com> wrote in message
news:tcf366pl0iuvqjj297p5l5fn768puv6rdd@4ax.com...
> On Tue, 10 Aug 2010 14:41:39 -0500, in
> <i3sbk6$6uv$1@news.eternal-september.org>, "NotMe" <me@privacy.net>
> wrote:
>
>>"John Navas" <
>>>>
>>>>The public entities that provide wireless do it with tax money, but it's
>>>>such an inconsequential cost that it's lost in the noise.
>>>
>>> The cost of Wi-Fi service at (say) public libraries is actually a
>>> significant measurable cost.
>>
>>How so? Cost of equipment is basically a one time capital cost. web
>>access
>>is part and parcel of the library's back haul and is at most a incremental
>>cost which is subsidized regardless.
>>
>>I did pro bono support at a few rural library systems and the cost of
>>aftermarket ink and paper for the printer/fax was higher then the cost of
>>the wifi system and support even if we factored in my labor cost at FMV.
>>
>>The number of patrons served was increased by folk bringing their own lap
>>tops without an increase in the number of hardware seats and associated
>>cost.
>
> "State budget cuts threaten free Internet service at 200 New Jersey
> public libraries" <http://goo.gl/pw9E> Is that convincing enough?
I note that the quote refers to internet service and not wifi.
John Navas <spamfilter1@navasgroup.com> wrote in
news4f366lrdb8gvn38msa5j2u6h1s176a9fu@4ax.com:
> Nope. See my prior response for why.
>
>
What if we just divert, say, 1 trillion dollars in DoD money away from the
warmongers? How much serious wifi can we buy our people for just 1
trillion of the hundreds of trillions wasted by the Department of WAR every
year?
What if we just divert all the money wasted by the elite researching how to
get them off the Earth when the resources are finally used up? Let's
divert the money AND THE ENGINEERS from NASA onto the problem of providing
a usable wifi signal for every American. Any engineer who can drive around
Mars by remote control, just for kicks to see what's there, can figure out
how to provide wifi on every 3rd utility pole across America with those
same funds, costing "the taxpayers", no more than they're being ripped off
for now and getting nothing in return. We'll just stop looking for other
planets to move the elite to because that's never gonna happen as the
planet doesn't have enough resources to get there. All that money wasted
can provide your laptop/netbook/iPad/cellphone with unlimited service paid
for by the same horrible taxes you're gonna pay ANYWAY!
If we stop wondering about religious fantasies the government has been
funding for 10K years, we'll have money to burn on infrastructure, putting
people back to work making millions of miles of usable hotspots in a new,
unrestricted network unhobbled by some corporate fatcat trying to sell you
every ****ing byte like the sellphone fatcats are doing to you now!
Chew on that for a while.....before the bashing starts.
On 10/08/10 2:22 PM, Paul Miner wrote:
> On Tue, 10 Aug 2010 13:57:06 -0700, John Navas
> <spamfilter1@navasgroup.com> wrote:
>
>> On Tue, 10 Aug 2010 15:27:25 -0500, in
>> <ndd3669bot2jq10opum13sjtgelhg1tbil@4ax.com>, Paul Miner
>> <pminer@elrancho.invalid> wrote:
>>
>>>> Not true:
>>>> * Support is a huge ongoing cost.
>>>> * The pipe usually is much bigger than it would have to be otherwise.
>>>> * Complaints from slow performance are a big headache.
>>>
>>> Support is a huge ongoing cost? Again, only if you get to stretch the
>>> definition of huge so that it includes the tiniest bit of noise in the
>>> weeds. Ongoing cost is practically nonexistent.
>>
>> It's actually quite significant,
>
> No, it's actually not significant at all.
Here's an example of one library's budget for wireless:
$1800 the first year, no cost in subsequent years.
If you look at the wireless budgets for other public libraries they only
bother to include the hardware cost in the budgets, and the cost of the
internet connection for the public wireless is not broken out separately
from the cost of internet connection for the library's own use.
"stevev" <stevev@addlebrain.com> wrote in
news:i3qg4f$4ou$1@adenine.netfront.net:
> We price discriminate in this country all the time. It's our system.
> In principle, what's wrong with charging extra for premium services on
> a segregated network. Your phone company does it (land line or
> mobile), your television company does it (cable or satellite), and
> hundred upon hundreds of other businesses do it. Electric drills with
> nylon bushings vs. stainless steel ball bearings. Poly/cotton pants
> vs. gabardine. "Would you like to SuperSize that?" Bet your Senator
> has better health care than you do, at a much lower premium. My view
> is that the government's role should be to insure that everyone has
> access to the basic service...or has the internet become an
> entitlement now also? If so, what next, electric drills? The
> government sets mileage, emissions and safety standards for car
> maufacturers, but they don't require them to make a Mercedes and sell
> it at a Ford price. There has to be some middle ground here.
>
Why is it every time someone advocates government actually doing
something to benefit our people, there is this horrible opposition,
whether it's installing new sidewalks down your street or making a new
park for the kids to play in, instead of Disney opening a private park
and charging a hundred dollars a kid to use it?
What's wrong with government providing anything of benefit to the common
man....in comparison to, say, providing a few trillion dollars a month
to invade a foreign country most Americans had no idea was even there,
much less this horrible threat that required us to invade their country
and try to impose Pat Robertson's brand of religious government upon
them?
What's wrong with swapping healthcare for everyone, even those that
cannot currently afford to pay a ****ing doctor $1600/hour to have him
look in their eyes and guess why they get headaches, for the hodgepodge
of insurance company ripoffs taking most Americans' life savings in a
terror tactic we have now? What would be wrong with healthcare for
little kids, instead of the greatest cause for daddy's bankruptcy,
MEDICAL BANKRUPTCY, we have now?
Are we all so stupid and brainwashed we cannot see beyond our noses how
dumb this country has become? If the PEOPLE want something, say free
wifi for everyone, there's this horrible heresy planted that government
will collapse providing it. If the MILITARY wants 500 trillion dollars
to bomb the **** out of some ragheads on a desert island into
submission, noone bats an eye. Fox News sells the idea and all the
bobble headed idiots are shaking their bobble heads yes, yes, YES!
.....and every ****ing time we catch some government employee, no matter
how self-important, elected or not, taking a free Coke from any
corporation, or advocating giving our money away to any foreign entity,
we hang their sorry, corrupt asses in the Capital Rotunda so the rest of
them can see what happens to them if they cross us.
George <george@nospam.invalid> wrote in news:i3reig$6ab$1@news.eternal-
september.org:
> He is one of those folks where "free" means the government forcibly
> takes it out of someone elses pocket to pay for his service. Obviously
> businesses are evil because he would have to pay to recover the billions
> spent in infrastructure, salaries, licenses etc.
>
>
So, what do we do, genius, let some megalomaniac like Jobs take over the
country and TELL us what's good for us? Tell us he will take care of us if
we hand over our money to him and his corporation?
"Zeppo" <zeppo@hotmail.org> wrote in
news:8cd3qkFucdU1@mid.individual.net:
> Interesting, I hadn't heard of that before. I haven't seen that on the
> east coast yet, but I don't travel too far outside the northeast all
> that much.
>
> Jon
>
>
We have alligators to feed any bureaucrats thinking along these lines in
the South. We're rather unforgiving. The DOT bureaucrats were all set to
put up toll booths (to pay for the bridge ********) on the new bridge from
downtown to Mt Pleasant in Charleston. Many of them are no longer with us,
but I don't think any were fed to our wildlife. You can drive your car any
place in South Carolina without paying a penalty to do so beyond the always
forgotten 14 cents per gallon Federal Load and the 16.8 cents per gallon
State of SC Load to do so. We figure we're already paying through the nose
to drive over OUR OWN bridges, thank you!
"Larry" <noone@home.com> wrote in message
news:Xns9DD0C73A3C459noonehomecom@74.209.131.13...
> "stevev" <stevev@addlebrain.com> wrote in
> news:i3qg4f$4ou$1@adenine.netfront.net:
>
>> We price discriminate in this country all the time. It's our system.
>> In principle, what's wrong with charging extra for premium services on
>> a segregated network. Your phone company does it (land line or
>> mobile), your television company does it (cable or satellite), and
>> hundred upon hundreds of other businesses do it. Electric drills with
>> nylon bushings vs. stainless steel ball bearings. Poly/cotton pants
>> vs. gabardine. "Would you like to SuperSize that?" Bet your Senator
>> has better health care than you do, at a much lower premium. My view
>> is that the government's role should be to insure that everyone has
>> access to the basic service...or has the internet become an
>> entitlement now also? If so, what next, electric drills? The
>> government sets mileage, emissions and safety standards for car
>> maufacturers, but they don't require them to make a Mercedes and sell
>> it at a Ford price. There has to be some middle ground here.
>>
>
> Why is it every time someone advocates government actually doing
> something to benefit our people, there is this horrible opposition,
> whether it's installing new sidewalks down your street or making a new
> park for the kids to play in, instead of Disney opening a private park
> and charging a hundred dollars a kid to use it?
>
> What's wrong with government providing anything of benefit to the common
> man....in comparison to, say, providing a few trillion dollars a month
> to invade a foreign country most Americans had no idea was even there,
> much less this horrible threat that required us to invade their country
> and try to impose Pat Robertson's brand of religious government upon
> them?
>
> What's wrong with swapping healthcare for everyone, even those that
> cannot currently afford to pay a ****ing doctor $1600/hour to have him
> look in their eyes and guess why they get headaches, for the hodgepodge
> of insurance company ripoffs taking most Americans' life savings in a
> terror tactic we have now? What would be wrong with healthcare for
> little kids, instead of the greatest cause for daddy's bankruptcy,
> MEDICAL BANKRUPTCY, we have now?
>
> Are we all so stupid and brainwashed we cannot see beyond our noses how
> dumb this country has become? If the PEOPLE want something, say free
> wifi for everyone, there's this horrible heresy planted that government
> will collapse providing it. If the MILITARY wants 500 trillion dollars
> to bomb the **** out of some ragheads on a desert island into
> submission, noone bats an eye. Fox News sells the idea and all the
> bobble headed idiots are shaking their bobble heads yes, yes, YES!
>
> ....and every ****ing time we catch some government employee, no matter
> how self-important, elected or not, taking a free Coke from any
> corporation, or advocating giving our money away to any foreign entity,
> we hang their sorry, corrupt asses in the Capital Rotunda so the rest of
> them can see what happens to them if they cross us.
>
Because the ****ing companies spend their ****ing dollars to provide the
****ing improvements, and if they are required by the ****ing government to
give those ****ing improvements away for ****ing free they will stop ****ing
providing them. That's why, dick head. I said MIDDLE GROUND, and you sound
like a real ****ing middle-of-the-road guy.
And I just wonder if Disney wasn't required to make street improvement, or
even fund a park, to get a permit to build Disneyland...not to mention the
tax dollars they have generated for those very same expenditures since
opening.
On Tue, 10 Aug 2010 16:29:09 -0700, SMS <scharf.steven@geemail.com>
wrote:
>On 10/08/10 2:22 PM, Paul Miner wrote:
>> On Tue, 10 Aug 2010 13:57:06 -0700, John Navas
>> <spamfilter1@navasgroup.com> wrote:
>>
>>> On Tue, 10 Aug 2010 15:27:25 -0500, in
>>> <ndd3669bot2jq10opum13sjtgelhg1tbil@4ax.com>, Paul Miner
>>> <pminer@elrancho.invalid> wrote:
>>>
>>>>> Not true:
>>>>> * Support is a huge ongoing cost.
>>>>> * The pipe usually is much bigger than it would have to be otherwise.
>>>>> * Complaints from slow performance are a big headache.
>>>>
>>>> Support is a huge ongoing cost? Again, only if you get to stretch the
>>>> definition of huge so that it includes the tiniest bit of noise in the
>>>> weeds. Ongoing cost is practically nonexistent.
>>>
>>> It's actually quite significant,
>>
>> No, it's actually not significant at all.
>
>Here's an example of one library's budget for wireless:
>
>"http://www.olis.ri.gov/grants/erate/includes/tpred09.pdf"
>
>$1800 the first year, no cost in subsequent years.
>
>If you look at the wireless budgets for other public libraries they only
>bother to include the hardware cost in the budgets, and the cost of the
>internet connection for the public wireless is not broken out separately
>from the cost of internet connection for the library's own use.
John will be along shortly to declare that "no cost in subsequent
years" is still "quite significant". If only all of my bills were that
significant.
On Tue, 10 Aug 2010 23:22:01 +0000, in
<Xns9DD0C4EFEC482noonehomecom@74.209.131.13>, Larry <noone@home.com>
wrote:
>John Navas <spamfilter1@navasgroup.com> wrote in
>news4f366lrdb8gvn38msa5j2u6h1s176a9fu@4ax.com :
>
>> Nope. See my prior response for why.
>
>What if we just divert, say, 1 trillion dollars in DoD money away from the
>warmongers? How much serious wifi can we buy our people for just 1
>trillion of the hundreds of trillions wasted by the Department of WAR every
>year?
hundreds of _billions_
But yes, we are bleeding ourselves to death with military spending.
The analogies to the fall of the Roman empire is truly scary.
Why not WiMAX instead?
--
John
"There are three kinds of men.
The one that learns by reading. The few who learn by observation.
The rest of them have to pee on the electric fence for themselves."
-Will Rogers
On Tue, 10 Aug 2010 16:29:09 -0700, in
<4c61e0ad$0$22174$742ec2ed@news.sonic.net>, SMS
<scharf.steven@geemail.com> wrote:
>On 10/08/10 2:22 PM, Paul Miner wrote:
>> On Tue, 10 Aug 2010 13:57:06 -0700, John Navas
>> <spamfilter1@navasgroup.com> wrote:
>>
>>> On Tue, 10 Aug 2010 15:27:25 -0500, in
>>> <ndd3669bot2jq10opum13sjtgelhg1tbil@4ax.com>, Paul Miner
>>> <pminer@elrancho.invalid> wrote:
>>>
>>>>> Not true:
>>>>> * Support is a huge ongoing cost.
>>>>> * The pipe usually is much bigger than it would have to be otherwise.
>>>>> * Complaints from slow performance are a big headache.
>>>>
>>>> Support is a huge ongoing cost? Again, only if you get to stretch the
>>>> definition of huge so that it includes the tiniest bit of noise in the
>>>> weeds. Ongoing cost is practically nonexistent.
>>>
>>> It's actually quite significant,
>>
>> No, it's actually not significant at all.
>
>Here's an example of one library's budget for wireless:
>
>"http://www.olis.ri.gov/grants/erate/includes/tpred09.pdf"
>
>$1800 the first year, no cost in subsequent years.
That's not the full cost.
--
John
"It is better to sit in silence and appear ignorant,
than to open your mouth and remove all doubt." -Mark Twain
"A little learning is a dangerous thing." -Alexander Pope
"Being ignorant is not so much a shame,
as being unwilling to learn." -Benjamin Franklin
On Tue, 10 Aug 2010 18:11:10 -0500, in
<i3smbu$lag$1@news.eternal-september.org>, "NotMe" <me@privacy.net>
wrote:
>"John Navas" <spamfilter1@navasgroup.com> wrote in message
>news:tcf366pl0iuvqjj297p5l5fn768puv6rdd@4ax.com.. .
>> "State budget cuts threaten free Internet service at 200 New Jersey
>> public libraries" <http://goo.gl/pw9E> Is that convincing enough?
>
>I note that the quote refers to internet service and not wifi.
Wi-Fi without Internet service would seem to be a bit pointless.
--
John
"Assumption is the mother of all screw ups."
[Wethern’s Law of Suspended Judgement]
On Tue, 10 Aug 2010 17:14:32 -0700, in
<i3sq1b$1ing$1@adenine.netfront.net>, "stevev" <stevev@addlebrain.com>
wrote:
>"Larry" <noone@home.com> wrote in message
>news:Xns9DD0C73A3C459noonehomecom@74.209.131.13.. .
>> Why is it every time someone advocates government actually doing
>> something to benefit our people, there is this horrible opposition,
>> whether it's installing new sidewalks down your street or making a new
>> park for the kids to play in, instead of Disney opening a private park
>> and charging a hundred dollars a kid to use it?
>>
>> What's wrong with government providing anything of benefit to the common
>> man....in comparison to, say, providing a few trillion dollars a month
>> to invade a foreign country most Americans had no idea was even there,
>> much less this horrible threat that required us to invade their country
>> and try to impose Pat Robertson's brand of religious government upon
>> them?
>>
>> What's wrong with swapping healthcare for everyone, even those that
>> cannot currently afford to pay a ****ing doctor $1600/hour to have him
>> look in their eyes and guess why they get headaches, for the hodgepodge
>> of insurance company ripoffs taking most Americans' life savings in a
>> terror tactic we have now? What would be wrong with healthcare for
>> little kids, instead of the greatest cause for daddy's bankruptcy,
>> MEDICAL BANKRUPTCY, we have now?
>>
>> Are we all so stupid and brainwashed we cannot see beyond our noses how
>> dumb this country has become? If the PEOPLE want something, say free
>> wifi for everyone, there's this horrible heresy planted that government
>> will collapse providing it. If the MILITARY wants 500 trillion dollars
>> to bomb the **** out of some ragheads on a desert island into
>> submission, noone bats an eye. Fox News sells the idea and all the
>> bobble headed idiots are shaking their bobble heads yes, yes, YES!
>>
>> ....and every ****ing time we catch some government employee, no matter
>> how self-important, elected or not, taking a free Coke from any
>> corporation, or advocating giving our money away to any foreign entity,
>> we hang their sorry, corrupt asses in the Capital Rotunda so the rest of
>> them can see what happens to them if they cross us.
>
>Because the ****ing companies spend their ****ing dollars to provide the
>****ing improvements, and if they are required by the ****ing government to
>give those ****ing improvements away for ****ing free they will stop ****ing
>providing them. That's why, dick head. I said MIDDLE GROUND, and you sound
>like a real ****ing middle-of-the-road guy.
And rip us off in the process, which is a big part of why health care
costs are so out of control they threaten to bring down the system.
We should have just extended Medicare to younger people (gradually)
and have been done with it. Medicare works. Private insurance doesn't.
--
John
"Facts? We ain't got no facts. We don't need no facts. I don't have
to show you any stinking facts!" [with apologies to John Huston]
In article <ihs366p0gbsppv14e5tq76oudvphihcqmp@4ax.com>, Paul Miner
<pminer@elrancho.invalid> wrote:
> >>> It's actually quite significant,
> >>
> >> No, it's actually not significant at all.
> >
> >Here's an example of one library's budget for wireless:
> >
> >"http://www.olis.ri.gov/grants/erate/includes/tpred09.pdf"
> >
> >$1800 the first year, no cost in subsequent years.
> >
> >If you look at the wireless budgets for other public libraries they only
> >bother to include the hardware cost in the budgets, and the cost of the
> >internet connection for the public wireless is not broken out separately
> >from the cost of internet connection for the library's own use.
>
> John will be along shortly to declare that "no cost in subsequent
> years" is still "quite significant". If only all of my bills were that
> significant.
good call.
In article <3ss366taus8rar2frq9ihpov6787ljdlh4@4ax.com>, John Navas
<spamfilter1@navasgroup.com> wrote:
> >$1800 the first year, no cost in subsequent years.
>
> That's not the full cost.
> They do this in Southern California on a limited basis. For example,
> the 91 Express (toll road) runs from Riverside to Orange County in the
> median of the existing State "freeway". It has limited access, but
> includes access to high-occupancy vehicles (used to be called car pools)
> and motorcycles. There are no toll booths with fees being collected
> using the FasTrak system (an RFID transponder). It costs about a dollar
> a mile to use and has been hugely successful.
The toll for this 10 mile long toll road varies from $1.30 up to $10.25
during the peak time (eastbound, 3 pm on Friday). The toll is less than
$4 most of the time (over 95% of the time).
On Tue, 10 Aug 2010 17:53:26 -0700, John Navas
<spamfilter1@navasgroup.com> wrote:
>On Tue, 10 Aug 2010 17:45:38 -0500, in
><bil3669us2i131a443robo0qpadm4qts7o@4ax.com>, Paul Miner
><pminer@elrancho.invalid> wrote:
>
>>On Tue, 10 Aug 2010 14:29:19 -0700, John Navas
>><spamfilter1@navasgroup.com> wrote:
>
>>>It was deliberate, as explained, not a "mistake".
>>
>>Deliberately wrong is just as wrong as accidentally wrong.
>
>Except it wasn't wrong.
Wrong, but I admire your ability to deny, deny, deny.
nospam wrote on [Tue, 10 Aug 2010 14:07:53 -0700]:
> In article <j5f366l5ho8ai52rm8q9asbvfeg18hd2e7@4ax.com>, John Navas
> <spamfilter1@navasgroup.com> wrote:
>
>> >>Not true:
>> >> * Support is a huge ongoing cost.
>> >> * The pipe usually is much bigger than it would have to be otherwise.
>> >> * Complaints from slow performance are a big headache.
>> >
>> >Support is a huge ongoing cost? Again, only if you get to stretch the
>> >definition of huge so that it includes the tiniest bit of noise in the
>> >weeds. Ongoing cost is practically nonexistent.
>>
>> It's actually quite significant, just as it is for commercial
>> enterprises. The only reason it's small is that budgets don't permit
>> proper funding.
>
> if it's significant, then they're mismanaged because as i said, in the
> libraries i've used wifi, support was basically the cost of printing a
> sheet of paper. i've been in commercial enterprises where support is
> even *less* than in a library. i can think of a couple of hotels, where
> you were basically on your own.
I was in a hotel where the "free internet access" was a dial tone for a modem
to call a local access number, if you knew of one and paid for some ISP
that had a local access number.
On Tue, 10 Aug 2010 20:31:33 -0500, in
<hav366pjhf9mc7amju8fqu2polk487ovpp@4ax.com>, Paul Miner
<pminer@elrancho.invalid> wrote:
>On Tue, 10 Aug 2010 17:53:26 -0700, John Navas
><spamfilter1@navasgroup.com> wrote:
>
>>On Tue, 10 Aug 2010 17:45:38 -0500, in
>><bil3669us2i131a443robo0qpadm4qts7o@4ax.com>, Paul Miner
>><pminer@elrancho.invalid> wrote:
>>
>>>On Tue, 10 Aug 2010 14:29:19 -0700, John Navas
>>><spamfilter1@navasgroup.com> wrote:
>>
>>>>It was deliberate, as explained, not a "mistake".
>>>
>>>Deliberately wrong is just as wrong as accidentally wrong.
>>
>>Except it wasn't wrong.
>
>Wrong, but I admire your ability to deny, deny, deny.
Whatever you say, Paul.
--
John
"Never argue with an idiot. He'll drag you down to his level
and then beat you with experience." -Dr. Alan Zimmerman
"John Navas" <spamfilter1@navasgroup.com> wrote in message
news:lvs366d05oqulomovrsffvb0p08q4ii91s@4ax.com...
> On Tue, 10 Aug 2010 17:14:32 -0700, in
> <i3sq1b$1ing$1@adenine.netfront.net>, "stevev" <stevev@addlebrain.com>
> wrote:
>
>>"Larry" <noone@home.com> wrote in message
>>news:Xns9DD0C73A3C459noonehomecom@74.209.131.13. ..
>
>>> Why is it every time someone advocates government actually doing
>>> something to benefit our people, there is this horrible opposition,
>>> whether it's installing new sidewalks down your street or making a new
>>> park for the kids to play in, instead of Disney opening a private park
>>> and charging a hundred dollars a kid to use it?
>>>
>>> What's wrong with government providing anything of benefit to the common
>>> man....in comparison to, say, providing a few trillion dollars a month
>>> to invade a foreign country most Americans had no idea was even there,
>>> much less this horrible threat that required us to invade their country
>>> and try to impose Pat Robertson's brand of religious government upon
>>> them?
>>>
>>> What's wrong with swapping healthcare for everyone, even those that
>>> cannot currently afford to pay a ****ing doctor $1600/hour to have him
>>> look in their eyes and guess why they get headaches, for the hodgepodge
>>> of insurance company ripoffs taking most Americans' life savings in a
>>> terror tactic we have now? What would be wrong with healthcare for
>>> little kids, instead of the greatest cause for daddy's bankruptcy,
>>> MEDICAL BANKRUPTCY, we have now?
>>>
>>> Are we all so stupid and brainwashed we cannot see beyond our noses how
>>> dumb this country has become? If the PEOPLE want something, say free
>>> wifi for everyone, there's this horrible heresy planted that government
>>> will collapse providing it. If the MILITARY wants 500 trillion dollars
>>> to bomb the **** out of some ragheads on a desert island into
>>> submission, noone bats an eye. Fox News sells the idea and all the
>>> bobble headed idiots are shaking their bobble heads yes, yes, YES!
>>>
>>> ....and every ****ing time we catch some government employee, no matter
>>> how self-important, elected or not, taking a free Coke from any
>>> corporation, or advocating giving our money away to any foreign entity,
>>> we hang their sorry, corrupt asses in the Capital Rotunda so the rest of
>>> them can see what happens to them if they cross us.
>>
>>Because the ****ing companies spend their ****ing dollars to provide the
>>****ing improvements, and if they are required by the ****ing government
>>to
>>give those ****ing improvements away for ****ing free they will stop
>>****ing
>>providing them. That's why, dick head. I said MIDDLE GROUND, and you
>>sound
>>like a real ****ing middle-of-the-road guy.
>
> And rip us off in the process, which is a big part of why health care
> costs are so out of control they threaten to bring down the system.
> We should have just extended Medicare to younger people (gradually)
> and have been done with it. Medicare works. Private insurance doesn't.
>
> --
> John
>
> "Facts? We ain't got no facts. We don't need no facts. I don't have
> to show you any stinking facts!" [with apologies to John Huston]
How did we get from the internet (communication/entertainment) to health
care? I certain didn't mention health care. I simply stated that companies
need to make profits to survive...AND THAT'S A FACT. Nothing is free, and
you know it. Premium services are not free in other forms of communication
and entertainment, so why should we assume that they would be free with
regard to the internet. What's wrong with a solution that meets both
private and public interests?
I am not going to debate the merits or demerits of the current health care
system, but Medicare does NOT cover all medical costs. For all practical
purposes it requires that you have a supplemental plan to get full coverage.
And guess what, you pay extra for this premium service.
On Tue, 10 Aug 2010 20:37:57 -0700, in
<i3t5uo$28cr$1@adenine.netfront.net>, "stevev" <stevev@addlebrain.com>
wrote:
>"John Navas" <spamfilter1@navasgroup.com> wrote in message
>news:lvs366d05oqulomovrsffvb0p08q4ii91s@4ax.com.. .
>> And rip us off in the process, which is a big part of why health care
>> costs are so out of control they threaten to bring down the system.
>> We should have just extended Medicare to younger people (gradually)
>> and have been done with it. Medicare works. Private insurance doesn't.
>
> How did we get from the internet (communication/entertainment) to health
>care? I certain didn't mention health care. I simply stated that companies
>need to make profits to survive...AND THAT'S A FACT. Nothing is free, and
>you know it. Premium services are not free in other forms of communication
>and entertainment, so why should we assume that they would be free with
>regard to the internet. What's wrong with a solution that meets both
>private and public interests?
>
>I am not going to debate the merits or demerits of the current health care
>system, but Medicare does NOT cover all medical costs. For all practical
>purposes it requires that you have a supplemental plan to get full coverage.
>And guess what, you pay extra for this premium service.
As you should -- no full payment plan can work because that removes any
motivation to control costs. The Medicare model is far superior to the
private insurance model.
--
John
"Assumption is the mother of all screw ups."
[Wethern’s Law of Suspended Judgement]
On Tue, 10 Aug 2010 19:41:38 -0400, Larry <noone@home.com> wrote:
> "Zeppo" <zeppo@hotmail.org> wrote in
> news:8cd3qkFucdU1@mid.individual.net:
>
>> Interesting, I hadn't heard of that before. I haven't seen that on the
>> east coast yet, but I don't travel too far outside the northeast all
>> that much.
>>
>> Jon
>>
>>
>
> We have alligators to feed any bureaucrats thinking along these lines ...
Lovely image, Larry: alligators, in tuxes, I presume, feeding bureaucrats :-) .
What are they feeding them, I wonder? Pork (out of the barrel)? Do they serve
from the left, and clear from the right? Is there a sommelier?
Sorry, Larry, I couldn't resist!
Cheers, -- tlvp
--
Avant de repondre, jeter la poubelle, SVP
On Tue, 10 Aug 2010 18:58:59 -0700, John Navas
<spamfilter1@navasgroup.com> wrote:
>On Tue, 10 Aug 2010 20:31:33 -0500, in
><hav366pjhf9mc7amju8fqu2polk487ovpp@4ax.com>, Paul Miner
><pminer@elrancho.invalid> wrote:
>
>>On Tue, 10 Aug 2010 17:53:26 -0700, John Navas
>><spamfilter1@navasgroup.com> wrote:
>>
>>>On Tue, 10 Aug 2010 17:45:38 -0500, in
>>><bil3669us2i131a443robo0qpadm4qts7o@4ax.com>, Paul Miner
>>><pminer@elrancho.invalid> wrote:
>>>
>>>>On Tue, 10 Aug 2010 14:29:19 -0700, John Navas
>>>><spamfilter1@navasgroup.com> wrote:
>>>
>>>>>It was deliberate, as explained, not a "mistake".
>>>>
>>>>Deliberately wrong is just as wrong as accidentally wrong.
>>>
>>>Except it wasn't wrong.
>>
>>Wrong, but I admire your ability to deny, deny, deny.
>
>Whatever you say, Paul.
stevev wrote on [Tue, 10 Aug 2010 20:37:57 -0700]:
>
> "John Navas" <spamfilter1@navasgroup.com> wrote in message
> news:lvs366d05oqulomovrsffvb0p08q4ii91s@4ax.com...
>> On Tue, 10 Aug 2010 17:14:32 -0700, in
>> <i3sq1b$1ing$1@adenine.netfront.net>, "stevev" <stevev@addlebrain.com>
>> wrote:
>>
>>>"Larry" <noone@home.com> wrote in message
>>>news:Xns9DD0C73A3C459noonehomecom@74.209.131.13 ...
>>
>>>> Why is it every time someone advocates government actually doing
>>>> something to benefit our people, there is this horrible opposition,
>>>> whether it's installing new sidewalks down your street or making a new
>>>> park for the kids to play in, instead of Disney opening a private park
>>>> and charging a hundred dollars a kid to use it?
>>>>
>>>> What's wrong with government providing anything of benefit to the common
>>>> man....in comparison to, say, providing a few trillion dollars a month
>>>> to invade a foreign country most Americans had no idea was even there,
>>>> much less this horrible threat that required us to invade their country
>>>> and try to impose Pat Robertson's brand of religious government upon
>>>> them?
>>>>
>>>> What's wrong with swapping healthcare for everyone, even those that
>>>> cannot currently afford to pay a ****ing doctor $1600/hour to have him
>>>> look in their eyes and guess why they get headaches, for the hodgepodge
>>>> of insurance company ripoffs taking most Americans' life savings in a
>>>> terror tactic we have now? What would be wrong with healthcare for
>>>> little kids, instead of the greatest cause for daddy's bankruptcy,
>>>> MEDICAL BANKRUPTCY, we have now?
>>>>
>>>> Are we all so stupid and brainwashed we cannot see beyond our noses how
>>>> dumb this country has become? If the PEOPLE want something, say free
>>>> wifi for everyone, there's this horrible heresy planted that government
>>>> will collapse providing it. If the MILITARY wants 500 trillion dollars
>>>> to bomb the **** out of some ragheads on a desert island into
>>>> submission, noone bats an eye. Fox News sells the idea and all the
>>>> bobble headed idiots are shaking their bobble heads yes, yes, YES!
>>>>
>>>> ....and every ****ing time we catch some government employee, no matter
>>>> how self-important, elected or not, taking a free Coke from any
>>>> corporation, or advocating giving our money away to any foreign entity,
>>>> we hang their sorry, corrupt asses in the Capital Rotunda so the rest of
>>>> them can see what happens to them if they cross us.
>>>
>>>Because the ****ing companies spend their ****ing dollars to provide the
>>>****ing improvements, and if they are required by the ****ing government
>>>to
>>>give those ****ing improvements away for ****ing free they will stop
>>>****ing
>>>providing them. That's why, dick head. I said MIDDLE GROUND, and you
>>>sound
>>>like a real ****ing middle-of-the-road guy.
>>
>> And rip us off in the process, which is a big part of why health care
>> costs are so out of control they threaten to bring down the system.
>> We should have just extended Medicare to younger people (gradually)
>> and have been done with it. Medicare works. Private insurance doesn't.
>>
>> --
>> John
>>
>> "Facts? We ain't got no facts. We don't need no facts. I don't have
>> to show you any stinking facts!" [with apologies to John Huston]
>
>
> How did we get from the internet (communication/entertainment) to health
> care? I certain didn't mention health care. I simply stated that companies
> need to make profits to survive...AND THAT'S A FACT. Nothing is free, and
> you know it. Premium services are not free in other forms of communication
> and entertainment, so why should we assume that they would be free with
> regard to the internet. What's wrong with a solution that meets both
> private and public interests?
Private interest is almost always to screw the customer as much as possible all
the time, 24/7. What is "premium" about wifi at a library?
> I am not going to debate the merits or demerits of the current health care
> system, but Medicare does NOT cover all medical costs. For all practical
> purposes it requires that you have a supplemental plan to get full coverage.
> And guess what, you pay extra for this premium service.
The current system is a mess and setup to confuse everyone involved. Doctors
don't know how much anything costs, patients have no way to know what a surgical
procedure will cost, there are often several bills for each person involved
in a hospital stay. Explanation of benefits don't explain squat.
Re: NEWS: Google and Verizon unveil Web plan 
4f366lrdb8gvn38msa5j2u6h1s176a9fu@4ax.com:
Linear Mode
