Restoring Communities Through the Internet

I have an idea that can bring back culture to the world, and give free internet access to everyone (accept the people in remote locations, they have to get there own wi-fi, etc.)

Imagine in the center of each town there is a giant tower with a really high powered wifi signal at the top, that spans the whole city. It gives internet to everyone through tax dollars. This allows internet access for everyone with a computer.

At the age of 13, each child is given a username and password to there computer needed for the internet. There are 5 internet levels, county, local, state, country, and world. For the local, county and state internet, you need your username and password that is given to you.

On the local level there are webpages for each place. (a local cafe, the library, schools, etc.) Each one has chat options, a website, ordering for a restraunt, etc. On the restraunt ordering, if you want to eat there you can put your order online and walk in and get your food. The library one has an online check out like many do, but you can also read books online. The school websites would have a chat feature for each of the classes, so if someone is online, you can discuss homework, review work, etc. There will be things like facebook, and myspace for the local level for general chat.

For county level it is alot of the same, but larger. The only thing not accessable is the school things, unless you are a member of that school. You can still order food, or do library check outs, and that stuff.

On the state level it is mainly for big businesses on the state level, and online chatting. There would be many chat rooms, etc.

On the country level it would be like our internet now, but only in the country your in.

World Wide would be what we have now.



I see this as completely possible in the future if there was a way to keep hackers and stuff like that out.

This isn't even very futuristic, and it seems highly possible.

Please give your criticism, comments, or complements. I want to see what is everyone's thought about this idea. Sorry for any missspellings

S+F !

We need more people who think like you do.

Originally posted by lucentenigma
S+F !

We need more people who think like you do.

Thanks! I hope someone steals my idea. I really don't want money from people, I just want something like this to work for everyone. With this idea though everyone would scream "Socialism! Socialism!" If it got very big though.

Like I said, I reaaaly hope some engineer and program steals my idea and gets it working, I don't want to be recognized or get cash, although it would be nice, I just want the world to be better for everyone.

It seems to me a rather utopian idea.

While great in concept, in actual practice of networking, its hard to control even a network of 100 people from sharing passwords, logging in as eachother, etc. and identity fraud would be through the roof--- not even counting in people who find ways to hack the system.

Also, someone would be in control of these "super community routers" which would have the ability, simply due to how the technology and hardware works, to track, restrict and spy on people, which would encroach on our basic human rights.

Originally posted by SlasherOfVeils
It seems to me a rather utopian idea.

While great in concept, in actual practice of networking, its hard to control even a network of 100 people from sharing passwords, logging in as eachother, etc. and identity fraud would be through the roof--- not even counting in people who find ways to hack the system.

Also, someone would be in control of these "super community routers" which would have the ability, simply due to how the technology and hardware works, to track, restrict and spy on people, which would encroach on our basic human rights.

Personally, I think a super computer, with no human controller, should control the system, so it is non biast. I agree, it is Utopian, but they can still track us with a username or not. I don't get why anyone would steal peoples accounts, if all of the accounts are the same, and everyone has one., it's not worth it. The only thing that would be on there that is important is information, unless you saved your credit card number to it or something.

The problem with technology is the more we use it the more we rely on it and the more vulnerable we are because of it. People are naturally malicious and I don't think there's much we can do to change that but something like this might be needed in the future according to this thread:

Bill would give president emergency control of Internet

It might almost be better for everyone to host their own server. This kind of reminds me of linux and it's open source. Either way it's not a bad idea.

Originally posted by SlasherOfVeils
It seems to me a rather utopian idea.

While great in concept, in actual practice of networking, its hard to control even a network of 100 people from sharing passwords, logging in as eachother, etc. and identity fraud would be through the roof--- not even counting in people who find ways to hack the system.

Also, someone would be in control of these "super community routers" which would have the ability, simply due to how the technology and hardware works, to track, restrict and spy on people, which would encroach on our basic human rights.

Or, to be fair, there didn't have to be usernames or passwords for the system. Anyone could get on, just as long as you are in the area of wi-fi. Each town would have it's username and password though, just so you cant get into other towns areas. There could also be usernames and passwords for other things like the cahts in the schools, ect. Like there is now. In reality, it isn't that different than right now. They can already spy on us. I just want to find a way where this could work well. If you could give some ideas that would be great,

Originally posted by N3krostatic
The problem with technology is the more we use it the more we rely on it and the more vulnerable we are because of it. People are naturally malicious and I don't think there's much we can do to change that but something like this might be needed in the future according to this thread:

Bill would give president emergency control of Internet

It might almost be better for everyone to host their own server. This kind of reminds me of linux and it's open source. Either way it's not a bad idea.

No one should be in control but a preprogrammed supercomputer. I don't believe there should be one controller for it. Humans are malicious, thats what I'm trying to fix about this idea, so that humans cant use badly.

reply to post by Phlynx


Someone still has to program that supercomputer. Not to mention what would keep that supercomputer safe? It still requires human maintenance which mean someone has access.

Even if there was something like this, I would still maintain my own for my home. I can see anyone connecting to my own router and connection. A public one, I cannot.

Just a quick suggestion on the infrastructure (and not the whole utopian ro whatever side of things).

Why have this 'one powerful' transmitter in the centre of every town??

Why not have a more ad hoc, lower power distributed approach? There are many many internet connection points already, and as upgrades/repairs on say mobile phone masts or other structures out there are done it wont take much to add another Wi-fi node on there to improve coverage.

Now what you do is tinker with the Wi-fi protocols slightly so that a single user does not actually have to be in range of a wi-fi node, no they only have to be in range of another wifi computer! - you see as long as there is a continuous web or even just a chain and there is at least one internet connection to share then every computer can share the available bandwidth! (I believe this system is already used - it's like haveing every desktop or laptop or other mobile device doubling up as a mini repeater station).

Also you have to keep in mind the upcoming wi-fi mk2.... Now that the analogue TV/radio channels are being cleared up they are looking at what they call white-fi... that could have a 100 MILE range with much greater bandwidth - so you really are going to see some changes over the coming years.

Mind you we do live in a capitalist system - you gotta think to your self will anyone provide tech/services that don't bring in the bucks??

edit - I was wrong on the 100 mile claim!

The terribly named “White-Fi” is a research effort to bring WiFi transmission to the unlicensed TV spectrum — the so-called “whitespace” (get it? White-Fi!) of TV channels in the UHF band . Big whoop, right? Well, with transmission ranges up to 1 kilometer, that actually is a pretty big deal. Mesh networking is also in the works. But most interesting of all are the requirements that the FCC has imposed on White-Fi devices to make sure they don’t interfere with any television broadcasts or wireless microphones. Basically, any White-Fi device needs to immediately switch frequencies the instant it detects a signal from a television or microphone.

Consider: at ranges of 1 km, a frequency that’s free to use at one end may be in use at the other end. White-Fi devices will need to figure out some way to find a shared free frequency. And they’ll need to be able to find a new frequency to use quickly should something else pop up on that frequency somewhere.

linkey

[edit on 28/8/2009 by Now_Then]

reply to post by Phlynx


If only we could really 100% trust the governments that give us tools like the Net in the first place.