People were tossing around why they were involved in this project. JerrittCollord wrote this to the mailing list:

(My credo precis.)

That technology will triumph, over limitations of any particular corporate implementation.

That what we identify as "communities" must exist to ensure ubiquity and interoptability.

That the implementation of a technology must fundamentally benefit the greater good. (...and *no*, I'm not in the mood to ponder Luddism.)

That it is the people who engineer and believe and work who drive technology revolutions, and dedicated, intelligent people can achieve anything.

(Then, the devil in the details.)

Maybe I drank the Kool-Aid somewhere in listening to somebody's buzzwords but sometimes they don't sound so bad. Pardon me as I indulge and speak too broadly and expose layer after layer of ignorance.

Specifically, here's my wishlist... That I can carry around my Mobile Multimedia Convergence Device that:

1) is publicly addressable via IP... 2) ...the infrastrucutre does mobile IP handoffs as necessary 3) has safely a 64k/128k connection probably burstable to megabit 4) has about 40ms-60ms latencies to the Big Networks 5) is about IPAQ form-factor 6) yeah, has service pretty much anywhere 7) the software is the easy part... if it's based on an Open platform 8) the content will come too

I have a $200/mo. bit/voice bill and this in its preferred embodiment will eventually subsume a large portion of this, as long-haul fiber becomes cheaper and optical switching is deployed (these become VOIP clients for all comm purposes).

If nonprofit or for-profit companies want to play nice and offer this service according to my guidelines (or better ones-- somebody enlighten me), I'm all for paying through the nose for it. I have resisted getting a cell phone because I hate the technology (and it's offensive that someone can interrupt my life). It stinks. Those 2-way pagers are too expensive. CDPD e.g. Omnisky isn't fast enough. 3G is a big hiccup. GSM should have been here two years ago. Blah blah blah.

Essentially I want to nationalize [http://www.worldcom.com WorldCom], [http://www.intersil.com/ Intersil] and [http://www.dlink.com/ DLink]. That would about cover it. (Totally kidding, but I do wish I lived in an e.g. Nordic country that is a bit more aggressive in adopting technology).

I do think that there are ventures that are too much investment risk for a single private corporation to sustain. The public capital market has changed inestimably in the last year. I do think there is a role for government or community organizations in promoting technology in this

There is room in technology for neither capitalist zealot nor communist zealot. The technologist respects and performs hard work and is rewarded in his own ego, in the social good created, and of course financially. A good technology is affordable and ubiquidous, enabling much more to be built on it.

I want wireless for selfish reasons and I want it for reasons of public good.

I have some ideas about sustainable, workable business models in this new technology but I'm going to keep them to myself for now. I am neither seasoned, successful capitalist nor genius developer but I have been around a while and have seen some interesting things, and also have seen many of those interesting things fail miserably.

Why do some people like to play with technology? I honestly can't explain it.

Whatever. End of Rant.