FCC: U.S. doesn't need free wireless broadband

People like Chuck definately

People like Chuck definately work for global nega cueos and believe in the complete domination and exploitation of the masses; beginning to look like communism, where the govermment try to feed its people bullbonk. Chuck should move to Russia or China were the government makes rhe decisions for him.

Chuck ... have a little

Chuck ... have a little faith in American ingenuity. Broadcast TV, FM Radio, Netscape, Yahoo, and Google are all free services that people never would have thought possible before their respective times. There's an easy solution to your concern -- the FCC simply makes a "free" service a required condition to granting M2Z a license. And so if M2Z delivers, consumers benefit. If they don't, the FCC yanks the license and the "rat" dies.

This is a scam. Anyone who

This is a scam. Anyone who takes a second to consider the total number of access points required to provide the service nationwide and the network required to support it, and figures the cost would know that this is well outside the realm of reality. In addition, the 20 MHz of spectrum is inadequate for such ubiquitous coverage with any reasonable user bandwidth expectations. Lastly, all one needs to do is to look at the areas that have engaged in large-scale ubiquitous coverage arrangements with "free access" to see that even county-wide projects invariably do not meet even a small percentage of expectation. In other words, I smell a rat.

In my opinion Chris is

In my opinion Chris is missing the point. M2Z is aiming to provide access to the internet for FREE to the consumer. This means poor kids in rural and urban areas get access to internet at similar speeds to my kids and can eventually get the same kind of jobs. If you are only considering the "rights" of companies, maybe Chris has a point. But what about considering the needs of people?

The truth is that free

The truth is that free spectrum is already available for wireless broadband providers in the 900Mhz, 2.4Ghz, 5.3Ghz and 5.8Ghz bands. Hundreds of small companies are using these bands to provide broadband access in rural America. I would think that everyone of these company would consider providing free, 384K download service in trade for interference free spectrum that the FCC can auction for millions of dollars. Why should M2Z be given preferential treatment.

We have to stand up against

We have to stand up against this. Please sign my petition at freewifijackson.com.

I wrote a letter to the FCC

I wrote a letter to the FCC in the spring supporting M2Z's new network plan and the FCC totally blew it off. None of the thousands of consumer comments were considered. Free broadband across the country is too hard for them but they will jump over backwards for the big companies. At least now we know who they are working for.

This it outrageous!! How on

This it outrageous!!
How on earth can they put restrictions on something like this. This is a great leap of our time.

I sent a letter to the

I sent a letter to the chairmen of both major political parties concerning what they have to do to get my vote. It stated that I wanted to see evidence that these politicians were working for the benefit of their constituents and the country rather than for lobbyists.

Basically, my vote will go against the incumbent if there is not clear evidence that the incumbent is working for the country and the voter, not for the lobbyists.

This story is a matter of lobbyist support against the individual voter.

Please join me and send your letters.