The article mentions a problem is the mesh goes down and they rely on volunteers to fix it. Furthermore the “volunteer” who installed required a $50 tip to come out. I get why this is so much cheaper but without an organizational structure with people paid to come fix stuff you will always have situations where stuff is busted. Plus as more non-tech, non-ideological folk get connected they will abuse the volunteers when they come to help just as people do with any tech support, and volunteers are under no obligation to assist if they get annoyed. I think a formal non-profit structure with employees will be required to make this work. If the goal is an under-the-table donation at fixed prices then this can work as a tax dodge for informal employment (which is also interesting) but again, this isn’t a sustainable model.
Their model goes beyond creating a community based network. They also encourage a fair amount of self education. The non-technical market is not the market for nyc mesh and probably never will be. If you want an internet connection that is serviced you should pay a service provider.
The goal of nyc mesh is not capitalism or to become a standard ISP.
I don’t see how anyone goes through the hassle of installing this for a, “eh, maybe it works sometimes” internet connection. This has nothing to do with capitalism other than the basic understanding that people won’t give their time away for nothing on a reliable, ongoing basis.
If you do not understand why you would install equipment and grow a network owned and operated by a community that gets better with each addition, then you are not part of the market for this.
No one said it only works sometimes or wasn’t reliable. You just won’t be using it to binge watch TV shows or competively gaming.
NY Mesh now has an official contract with the city to wire up housing projects and low income housing, according to the article. This is not a hobbyist situation where all of the working class will learn how to be network engineers. I don’t think you understand what is going on.
Well as a member of the NYC Mesh network and someone who advocated for the city to contract NYC Mesh two years ago when De Blasio announced a city wide internet initiative, I’d like to think I have some idea. I guess time will tell, good luck fighting it.
Well if you speak for the NY Mesh project as you claim, and your stance is that taxpayer dollars should go to wire up residents with internet they can’t rely on, can’t get support on, and have to pay for help with a tip-based system or else learn to be a networking engineer, then I think anyone reading can understand our differences in opinion and how sustainable each of us thinks this is. I wish you luck your informal, no-employment, black-market-yet-taxpayer subsidized internet service that no one should expect to rely on in an emergency.
I didn’t claim to speak for NYC Mesh, I claimed to have advocating that De Blasio’s initiative utilize the NYC Mesh network.
This isn’t the first time the city has given an ISP to provide internet access for NYC and previous attempts by large ISPs were either a lie or unsuccessful. Yes I do think internet should be community operated and owned and if that means the city pays NYC Mesh some money to install and maintain it, then that’s good for the city. That’s tax money being invested into the quality of the neighborhoods. Where did you get this information that the contract excludes any sort of maintenance?
The current system for ANYONE who wants to be apart of the network but not install is tipped based. There is nothing that indicates the contract between the city and NYC Mesh would operate that way.
These networks are so easy to set up that almost little to no maintenance is required. And this is the first step to city wholly owned and maintained networks that is a good thing. That means the people in the city are better off and more self sufficient when it comes to internet access.
NYC Mesh has an excellent track record of providing and maintaining service (maybe at a cost or not). Large ISPs have continually failed in that regard. So yes this is a better and more visible use of money.
I invite you to get involved and be more than an arm chair critic.
I think it can work but I wish you and the NYT would acknowledge this for what it is - a government subsidized black-market internet business. I think it would easy to start many businesses by replacing “employees” with “volunteers” and “wages” with “tips” to avoid all of the record keeping, payroll taxes, legal liability, regulations, and all of the issues that make running a normal organization in a liberal city (or any city with the rule of law) difficult and expensive. Even easier when the tax payers gave me money to do so.
I’m all for this, but I hope you realize operating something like this at scale is only possible because you aren’t paying even a minimum wage and are avoiding all the hassles and rules that make doing this according to what society wants for all other non-profit and profit entities. This is gig-economy ISP which apparently is great here but the NYT and leftists hate for all other places.
No I think it’s a great blueprint for other places, that’s one of the most exciting parts of it. Listen it might eventually evolve into a more standard operation but why does everything have to be profitable and have employees and be set up as a business? This is working until it doesn’t and their track record shows no sign of slowing. All the issues for this ISP still apply to other ISPs. This one just happened to grow out of the interests of the community.
> “NYT and leftists”
No reason to politicize this and pigeon hole advocates.
My understanding from your original comment about “capitalism” was that there is a strong ideological bent to this which is why I mentioned that. We are in agreement on the actions and ends but probably disagree on the means, whereas I come from a strong capitalist bent. I wish we could apply the same no-entity, no regulation, no-taxes, no formal employment model to many other things including housing and education. But for this one thing it’s OK, but for others it’s not. I wish we could let lots of experiments exist free of the strangling governmental structures.
Uh, do you apply this argument to open source software as well? That open source libraries are a “black-market internet business”?
Honestly it’s wild to see this kind of logic of HN. Goes to show how much technology has become more about business culture than about the technology itself.
You must agree that open source software and physical hardware installed on buildings powering a critical service are different things? The ISPs have enormous labor forces that are represented by telecom unions, this is an extremely regulated heavily subsidized industry. Open source software has nothing to do with this.
http://guifi.net has worked for well over a decade, providing monthly fee free internet connectivity to tens of thousands of homes and businesses across Spain.
NYC Mesh's model isn't groundbreaking, rather it is set up like Guifi.net to encourage other small businesses to crop up supporting individuals who want to join the network.
I’m certainly all for community projects like this, but you’re right. This is just creating an under-the-table economy. For some reason The NY Times gets mad at people who do legal tax avoidance, but supports the “little guy” making outright under-the-table income.
