Hacker News Board Hacker News, browsed like a classic message board
Live data from Hacker News

Google will pay for free wireless in S.F. parks

sfchronicle.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

31–40 of 47 posts

Re: Google will pay for free wireless in S.F. parks

#31

Post by jrockway »

philip1209 wrote: post #9
cromwellian wrote: post #4

Earlier quoted context omitted.

For Google, $600k is a rounding error. It's the cost of one engineer. Even if somehow spending $600k could net a 10x return, it would still be relatively pointless. Remember, Google routinely kills off working products that bring in far more revenue and collect far more data. Google would have collected far more data from Reader alone. Sometimes a cigar is just a cigar and a charitable act is a charitable act. If you…

I think it's more reasonable to say that it's worth it for Google to put free wifi in parks if a few of their engineers get work done because of it.

They already buy us mobile broadband, so we can do work without needing to be near WiFi :)

Re: Google will pay for free wireless in S.F. parks

#32

Post by wutbrodo »

rhubarbquid wrote: post #21
ryanobjc wrote: post #5

I know there is a lot of negativity around big companies like Google doing "free" things like this. There is even mis-trust over a sense of unease at the notion of "there is no such thing as a free lunch." These feelings are totally valid, and they unfortunately can prevent the rest of the community from acquiring a valuable resource. Free wifi in San Francisco (One of the techiest cities in the world) feels like a "…

It seems most likely the motivation here is to make sure all of the Googlers in SF are able to be online and thus able to work from more places. Many of Google's benefits are about making sure employees never have to stop working...

That would be using a cannon to kill a mosquito. Subsidizing tethering plans for employees would make far more sense.

Re: Google will pay for free wireless in S.F. parks

#33

Post by yapcguy »

cromwellian wrote: post #4
yapcguy wrote: post #3

No such thing as a free lunch/wifi. I suspect Google want to capture data which they are currently missing out on due to people using 3G/4G networks. Also it doesn't hurt to improve their image in San Francisco. Non-paywall article: http://techcrunch.com/2013/07/24/free-wifi-san-francisco-goo...

For Google, $600k is a rounding error. It's the cost of one engineer. Even if somehow spending $600k could net a 10x return, it would still be relatively pointless. Remember, Google routinely kills off working products that bring in far more revenue and collect far more data. Google would have collected far more data from Reader alone. Sometimes a cigar is just a cigar and a charitable act is a charitable act. If you…

Have you forgotten Google's history? i.e. StreetView cars guzzling down Wifi access point data.

Re: Google will pay for free wireless in S.F. parks

#34

Post by yapcguy »

justinpombrio wrote: post #26
sbashyal wrote: post #20

Earlier quoted context omitted.

many many Googlers feel VERY STRONGLY about not doing creepy/immoral things like that Many Googlers != All Googlers != Google How would you explain this? http://mashable.com/2012/02/17/google-caught-tracking-safari...

Reading that article and the follow up[1], it looks like Google made use of a quirk in Safari to give third-party cookies that would otherwise be blocked. No other major browser blocked third party cookies in this way, so the workaround just made Safari act like, e.g., Firefox. The quirk was relatively well-known, used by other advertisers and "like" buttons and such, and the article says that "Facebook even encourag…

Google is a serial offender when it comes to privacy violations. Not really different from big banks who are caught committing fraud but always manage to settle with a big wad of cash, without having to admit any guilt whatsoever.

Re: Google will pay for free wireless in S.F. parks

#35

Post by calcitriol »

yapcguy wrote: post #33
cromwellian wrote: post #4

Earlier quoted context omitted.

For Google, $600k is a rounding error. It's the cost of one engineer. Even if somehow spending $600k could net a 10x return, it would still be relatively pointless. Remember, Google routinely kills off working products that bring in far more revenue and collect far more data. Google would have collected far more data from Reader alone. Sometimes a cigar is just a cigar and a charitable act is a charitable act. If you…

Have you forgotten Google's history? i.e. StreetView cars guzzling down Wifi access point data.

Is that wrong? It allows them to offer location based services without making people use GPS. This is a service that you can disable, by the way.

I don't see anything wrong with collecting SSIDs that are being broadcasted onto public roads.

But to get back on topic- Google is doing a good thing here and should be commended for it.

Re: Google will pay for free wireless in S.F. parks

#36

Post by cromwellian »

yapcguy wrote: post #33
cromwellian wrote: post #4

Earlier quoted context omitted.

For Google, $600k is a rounding error. It's the cost of one engineer. Even if somehow spending $600k could net a 10x return, it would still be relatively pointless. Remember, Google routinely kills off working products that bring in far more revenue and collect far more data. Google would have collected far more data from Reader alone. Sometimes a cigar is just a cigar and a charitable act is a charitable act. If you…

Have you forgotten Google's history? i.e. StreetView cars guzzling down Wifi access point data.

Have you forgotten that everyone does this as it's the cheapest way to provide accurate location service on mobile devices even if you have AGPS?

If you don't want your SSID or Wifi public, disable SSID broadcast in your AP and turn on WPA2. The biggest threat to you isn't Google slurping up your SSID/Mac Address, it's some dude standing stationary outside your house capturing everything you do.

If you want SSID broadcast but don't want to be indexed, add "_nomap" to your SSID and Google will ignore it. But Skyhook, Apple, and others probably won't.

Re: Google will pay for free wireless in S.F. parks

#37

Post by jrockway »

revelation wrote: post #14
freeasinfree wrote: post #11

Google Wifi in Mountain View is horrible, I can't imagine this will be much better. 2.4GHz is always a shit-show in any major city. 5GHz is an option, but not nearly as many mobiles have it, and the available channels on each device vary wildly. Plus that would start creating noise for a certain WISP I have a fondness for and don't want to see them affected.

5GHz comes with less range. As in life, there is no free lunch in wireless signalling.

Don't most working large-scale WiFi installations intentionally limit range? More computers talking to one AP is cheaper, but also doesn't work at all. So the question is: how much money does one want to spend on access points (and their locations)? If the answer is a lot, 5GHz makes a lot of sense.

(Also, how much does open air attenuate 5GHz signals, anyway?)

Edit: Interesting reading: http://www.qsl.net/kb9mwr/projects/wireless/pwr.html

Re: Google will pay for free wireless in S.F. parks

#38

Post by jes5199 »

I sort of wish that google wasn't a private company anymore. Their service is so pervasive and so fundamental to society that I think it should really be nationalized. Or, since it's international, taken over by the U.N.

Or: to attack the same problem from another angle: I'd be happier if we had either decentralized replacements for Google and Amazon and Ebay.

I'd prefer these platforms - and the vast wealth and power they create - to be either in the hands of the general public, or in the hands of democracy, than to be controlled by the whims of the nouveau riche.

Re: Google will pay for free wireless in S.F. parks

#39

Post by pvdm »

freeasinfree wrote: post #11

Google Wifi in Mountain View is horrible, I can't imagine this will be much better. 2.4GHz is always a shit-show in any major city. 5GHz is an option, but not nearly as many mobiles have it, and the available channels on each device vary wildly. Plus that would start creating noise for a certain WISP I have a fondness for and don't want to see them affected.

I could barely get a signal as a Mtn View resident. I'd regard this as just a publicity stunt.

Re: Google will pay for free wireless in S.F. parks

#40

Post by peferron »

jes5199 wrote: post #38

I sort of wish that google wasn't a private company anymore. Their service is so pervasive and so fundamental to society that I think it should really be nationalized. Or, since it's international, taken over by the U.N. Or: to attack the same problem from another angle: I'd be happier if we had either decentralized replacements for Google and Amazon and Ebay. I'd prefer these platforms - and the vast wealth and powe…

The NSA would love it too.
Post reply on HN