@jerv – I guess my thought would be if a distributed network becomes superior for some reason like vulnerability to attack, what keeps the companies in the cell phone business, who have greater resources, a greater need to keep their network up, and a dedicated workforce from implementing it with existing customers without the need for an early adopter period?
@koanhead – the examples were illustrations that people don’t necessarily move towards “free” simply because of price. As far as ad hoc networks working on existing infrastructure, I’d argue the infrastructure only exists in this case if
a) enough people to make a viable network know it exists
b) they decide to use it
I don’t think either is met right now to make a competitive nationwide network. Which brings me back to my original point. It (“the people’s network”) doesn’t offer anything that a commercially available product doesn’t.
I feel like I’m coming across as negative on the idea, and that’s not my intent. My intent was just to point out that people don’t flock to free, they flock to easy. Right now the cell phone companies are doing pretty well on easy so the challenge with the whole idea wouldn’t be the technology alone. In my opinion (just my opinion) the greater challenge would be to reach the “critical mass” outlined in the original idea. Until you can beat commercial products on more than price, I don’t believe it’s compelling enough to draw the crowds you need.
As far as linux use, I was only quoting desktop use, because every user of facebook or other websites doesn’t choose the hosting platform, they do choose a platform for their desktop so I think it’s more indicative of consumer preference. At a minimum it shows their level of awareness for each option. Linux is still (proudly) in the realm of enthusiasts when it comes to desktops.