4 ms·

Your first point hinges on using existing infrastructure which even within the US is a questionable situation. Being at the mercy of the infrastructure, where

Your first point hinges on using existing infrastructure which even within the US is a questionable situation. Being at the mercy of the infrastructure, where it exists at all, greatly limits the value they can create - a project on Kickstarter could achieve the same result. I'm skeptical about your second point too as many businesses can afford internet connections, especially if there are any advantages to be had sharing them publicly. Your final point, it is hard to imagine google caring to offer western audiences free internet. This is a very incremental benefit to a modern country, something like 87% of the USA [1] may already be online. I think this is practice for doing it globally where internet can be very niche. [1] http://www.internetworldstats.com/am/us.htm http://www.internetworldstats.com/am/us.htm

deleted 12y ago
[deleted]
minthd 12y ago
I read some article about bandwidthX which is a wifi bandwidth exchange. And the estimate there was that wireless providers could get around $5 gigabyte.That's far above internet connection charges, and together with the other benefits i mentioned could be a decent reason for businesses(at least in dense traffic areas) to install this. As for the demand side, it's hard to determine that, but i assume it could be considerable , especially if video is involved. And if they succeed in building infrastructure that way, that's the whole game. The part about the free wireless,yes 87% of the u.s. is online, but with regards to mobile internet, maybe some people prefer a zero bill, and in general zero(even with an option to premium) is a good marketing technique. But that's just one option.
- benologist 12y ago
  You could be right - maybe they're just trying to fix a broken system of shitty download limits, there's precedence with their gigabit fiber addressing a political situation. I hope it's for the whole world, in addition to their Loon project you mentioned they also made a billion dollar investment in SpaceX to prepare for a multi-planet internet - http://www.theverge.com/2015/1/19/7853099/google-spacex-funding-satellite-internet http://www.theverge.com/2015/1/19/7853099/google-spacex-fund..., they're looking globally and interplanetary, one already-connected country seems like such a tiny goal.

deleted 12y ago

[deleted]

minthd 12y ago

I read some article about bandwidthX which is a wifi bandwidth exchange. And the estimate there was that wireless providers could get around $5 gigabyte.That's far above internet connection charges, and together with the other benefits i mentioned could be a decent reason for businesses(at least in dense traffic areas) to install this. As for the demand side, it's hard to determine that, but i assume it could be considerable , especially if video is involved. And if they succeed in building infrastructure that way, that's the whole game. The part about the free wireless,yes 87% of the u.s. is online, but with regards to mobile internet, maybe some people prefer a zero bill, and in general zero(even with an option to premium) is a good marketing technique. But that's just one option.

benologist 12y ago
You could be right - maybe they're just trying to fix a broken system of shitty download limits, there's precedence with their gigabit fiber addressing a political situation. I hope it's for the whole world, in addition to their Loon project you mentioned they also made a billion dollar investment in SpaceX to prepare for a multi-planet internet - http://www.theverge.com/2015/1/19/7853099/google-spacex-funding-satellite-internet http://www.theverge.com/2015/1/19/7853099/google-spacex-fund..., they're looking globally and interplanetary, one already-connected country seems like such a tiny goal.