JOURNAL: Grassroots Emergency Networks

In my Fast Company article, "Power to the People" I anticipated the development of parallel communications networks for first responders (which will expand to encompass much of the population in the area):

"Corporate communications monopolies will crumble as cities build their own emergency wireless networks using simple products ..."

There are signs of life on this front. New York City, an innovator in grassroots security, is doing this already for first responders. They have an request for proposal (RFP) out for a wireless network (full document). Here's the highlights (of course, this points to a great opportunity for companies building turn-key wireless networks bundled with bundled applications/software for first responders):

The New York City Department of Information Technology and Telecommunications (DoITT) is seeking a systems integrator (hereinafter referred to as the “Integrator”) qualified to design, construct, manage and maintain a citywide wireless network or networks (“Network(s)”) sufficiently robust to satisfy the varied and demanding requirements of New York City’s public safety agencies.

At some point, after these networks are built, they are likely to become "hardened" back-ups to commercial networks for business and personal use.

Comments

[Sean]

www.wortfm.org

Madison's Ccmmunity sponsered listener radio.

30 years in your ears.

[daCascadian]

Many communities already have public wireless proto-networks created by "geeks"' for their own satisfaction

For instance see "Building Wireless Community Networks" by Robb Flickinger (published by O`Reilly) or do a Google search on community wireless networks

They are "everywhere" & most are just waiting for something "real" to do

"The pessimist complains about the wind; the optimist thinks it will change; the realist adjusts the sails." - William Arthur Ward

[John Robb]

Very true. Although, many community initiatives are being shut down by monopoly pressure. The security card may be a way to trump that and get them rolled out.

[Cardenio]

I thought the ' security card ' would work the opposite way , and trump the grassroots. The goverment types are pointy haired and will always look for a standard ( like MicroDick )

[John Robb]

It won't and this is mostly due to the fact that the central government doesn't have anything of value to offer local security people (other than money, and that is already used up). They do have some information that they could share to make interop with them valuable, but they won't since they are still stuck in the compartmentalized and highly classified cold war mentality (which was built to defend us from a different foe than the one we are fighting).

[Grimgrin]

New Orleans provides an interesting case study for this. After the hurricane hit the city opened up and expanded the wireless network it had deployed for security purposes to cover the city. Allthough in this case it was a natural disaster and not a terrorist attack, the cities network did get back online far faster than telephone services.

http://news.com.com/New+Orleans+to+offer+free+Wi-Fi/2100-7351_3-5975845.html
http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2005/11/28/AR2005112801773.html?referrer=email

http://www.redherring.com/article.aspx?a=16232

And the securty card won't be enough to keep entrenched telecos from attempting to shut these networks down.

It assumes that State and Federal lawmakers actually care about security. As far as I've been able to tell they care about giving the appearance of security. Most of their actions are designed for the benifit of entrenched economic interests. If that weren't the case the U.S. would probably have effective border controls, food inspection and airport security that was able to stop smuggled bombs ( http://archives.cnn.com/2002/US/03/25/airport.security/ http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/world/americas/4101201.stm ) instead of providing e-bay with a steady supply of confiscated pocket knives. ( http://www.reviewjournal.com/lvrj_home/2004/Jan-25-Sun-2004/news/23065384.html http://search.ebay.com/NTSA )

[g510]

Grassroots security infrastructure that works in cooperation with established public safety and defense frameworks, seems reasonable enough.

However I do take issue with the premise in your _Fast Company_ article, of socially stratified private security where the upper class has "net jets" for transportation between "lily pads," the middle class hires private-sector police, and the lower class huddles in their hovels making do with the remnants of government-provided public safety services. That is the formula for the balkanization (or perhaps Iraqification?) of America.

The entire political spectrum, from right to left, libertarian to authoritarian, individualistic to socialistic, agrees that the legitimate core purposes of government include providing for the common defense & public safety. The stratified system you advocate (either directly or by claims of inevitability) would necessarily lead to a shift in allegiances: from the common ground of national and local government, to the fragmented ground of economically-determined tribalism. One might even say it sets the stage for class conflicts of the type that Marxism feeds upon.

Not everyone is eager to see nation-states devolve into patchwork fiefdoms. And while those at the upper end of the economic spectrum might benefit somewhat, they would also do well to remember that "the self-made man" is an illusion (humans are not over-unity machines) and their own successes arose in large part due to being born in a nation-state that is free and safe.

What *is* potentially beneficial, is private activity undertaken in a context of participation in, rather than withdrawal from, the commons. Grassroots wireless networks, municipal networks, neighborhood watches, civilian defense activities; all of these are helpful within the paradigm that we are all in it together. Contrary to the hype about terrorist nuclear weapons, the most likely terrorist WMDs are biologicals, that do not respect the borders of gated communities, net jets, lily pads, or other fanciful attempts to self-segregate or stratify. If terrorists don't, then avian flu will make this point clear.

In the most pragmatic sense, stratification merely *shifts* and does not *eliminate* the systempunkts. A gated community with its own electric power plants may be immune to a terrorist attack on the power grid, but the distribution networks that supply it with food, water supply, sewage and refuse disposal, and so on, are still vulnerable. Net jets, along with mass air carriers, are still vulnerable to dispersed low-tech jamming of the RF spectrum near airports. Consider strategic disruption of sanitary sewers (doesn't even require explosives). Consider bombings of refuse transfer stations. Consider chemical attack on the milk supply (apparently quite easy). For that matter, a few suicide bombers in shopping malls the day after Thanksgiving would trigger a recession that would reach into the furthest corners of the self-segregated and stratified.

There are no separate solutions. We're all in this together.

[Navy nerd]

Is each city creating its own system healthy or hurting? It seems ok to me.

[Marshall]

The New Orleans situation made the USA Today today,

http://www.usatoday.com/money/industries/telecom/2006-03-28-new-orleans-wifi_x.htm

Note that the local monopoly had already bribed the legislature to forbid this :

-----
State laws ban municipalities from giving away broadband services. The city got around the ban because the governor declared a state of emergency after Hurricane Katrina. The state of emergency is expected to be lifted this year. When that happens, the broadband network would have to shut down.

BellSouth has opposed proposed legislation that would allow New Orleans to keep its Wi-Fi network running. The carrier, which provides phone service in Louisiana, stands to lose phone and wireless customers if other cities follow New Orleans' lead.
-----

At least you can't claim that they are not consistent...

[revontulet]

also in new orleans is Common Ground Relief, a grassroots organization that is building a decentralized network of relief operations and clinics, more or less in conflict with local and federal govt.
www.commongroundrelief.org