Navajo Nation Losing Internet Access 360
An anonymous reader writes "Due to contracts that are allegedly FUBAR, and associated wrangling, the Navajo Nation is being cut off by its satellite ISP. This is the final stage of the process, which already deprived chapter houses of access last April. While the business mechanisms play themselves into the expected ludicrous snarl, the real question may be: Is there a place for an inexpensive ham/technogeek/FOSS solution that could bypass the antics of the for-pay providers?"
Re:Are you asking for a free internet solution...? (Score:2, Insightful)
Everybody wants something for free.
Re:Nations vs. Internet (Score:5, Insightful)
The world is full of unimaginable horrors and humans being deprived from basic necessities and rights. The idea of a nation is to divide the world into blocks that are small enough that you could possibly do something about the terrible condition in which you and your fellow citizens exist.
How much more likely are you to be able to uplift the condition of a small nation than a large one? A great deal.
How likely are you to be successful in attempts to uplift the condition of all men in all nations? Not very likely.
All the networks belong to the corporations. (Score:4, Insightful)
"Is there a place for an inexpensive ham/technogeek/FOSS solution that could bypass the antics of the for-pay providers?"
That question is just as relevant for the rest of the world as it is for the Navajo nation. What happens when AOL/Time Warner/Microsoft/CNN/MSNBC/Taco Bell and Carl's Jr. take over the world? There is no Net neutrality anymore. Everything we do is being watched, and reported to the corporations of the world. In the future we won't be able to sneeze or fart without someone knowing about it somewhere.
When are we going to get together to start forming our own backbones? We need a fat pipe that will always remain open and free and that can't be taken over by corporate greed. But, how would you pay for such a thing? How would you create it? How would you maintain it?
I'd be willing to pitch in $80 / month for a truly neutral network. What's your price? How much would you be willing to pay to have access to a FREE (as in speech) Internet connection?
Ask the Telcos (Score:3, Insightful)
See if the local telco will set something up for them. They can use fixed wireless links from the nearest CO if running fiber costs too much.
The telcos have a vested interest in keeping various local, state and/or federal governments out of the broadband business. Its the old slippery slope argument. First, its just a publicly owned system for the Navajos. Next thing you know, they'll be wiring up _my_ neighborhood. (One can hope.)
Re:Nations vs. Internet (Score:1, Insightful)
Are the United States and Japan small nations? Can you think of any small nations living in destitution? In what way do small divisions help? Would you rather live in the forming nation of Europe, or in Sierra Leone?
Splitting peoples into little groups pits them against each other, isolates them, and makes them unable to amass enough power/resources to do anything about their position.
Uniting peoples into one global internet makes everyones' lives better, and has little spinoffs like the end of war and terrorism.
Re:Government as usual (Score:-1, Insightful)
Re:Government as usual (Score:5, Insightful)
Perhaps they could pay for their own Internet access. Like, ya know, everyone else.
Re:Government as usual (Score:5, Insightful)
Totally insensitive to the actual reprecussions of their actions, some GS weenie, probably balding and fat and fearful of doing anything constructive to solve problems because it might screw up his/her next stepping increase in the future, consigns thousands of people to being offline.
Government just doesn't really work.
You might want to RTFA a second time.
USAC, which administers billions of dollars in FCC grants every year to provide Internet service to rural areas and low-income consumers, is refusing to continue funding after an audit by the tribal government revealed questions over payments by the Navajos to their Internet provider, OnSat. As a result, another company, SES Americom, which provides satellite services to OnSat, is scheduled to pull the plug today.
USAC says the provider is under investigation, after the audit raised questions about the bidding process and possible overpayment. But the provider rejects the findings and plans to fight them in tribal court.
Surprise surprise, there was a corrupted bidding process overseen by an Native American Tribe.
Unfortunately, many of the Native American Tribes have poor &/or corrupt governance, none of which is the fault of the U.S. Government. If the Tribe was really serious about resolving the issue, they would conduct the quickest inquiry ever and do everything possible to create immediate reforms in order to regain the confidence of the USAC.
BTW - the USAC is a non-profit corporation, so they're not technically part of the US Gov't
Re:Nations vs. Internet (Score:1, Insightful)
Andorra or Zimbabwe? Belgium or China? Chile or India? The first one in each pair is smaller and most definitely in a better condition.
You are arguing for a further homogenization of the laws and culture of humanity. That is a terrible, terrible idea. If I have different values than the people around me then I should be free to leave here and find a place that is different. How could a person do that if every nation was governed the same way and had the same laws and culture?
Re:Government as usual (Score:2, Insightful)
Is tribal governance not handled by some kind of tribal government?
Government screws stuff up. Tribal government, local government, federal government, doesn't really matter. If there's government involved, something is probably being forced to work inefficiently.
Re:Government as usual (Score:2, Insightful)
Oh please! You've had since 1973 to find an alternative or three. That's 35 years of sitting on your asses yelling "please,sir, may I have another?".
Re:Nations vs. Internet (Score:2, Insightful)
Re:Government as usual (Score:5, Insightful)
Is tribal governance not handled by some kind of tribal government?
Government screws stuff up. Tribal government, local government, federal government, doesn't really matter. If there's government involved, something is probably being forced to work inefficiently.
True, but...
1. Native American Government is much much less transparent about their business than is normal in a 'Western' government, allowing shenanigans that even their own people would protest. We're not talking inefficiency here, we're talking about a (apparently/allegedly) broken bidding process.
2. The OP specifically singled out "some GS weenie".
GS = General Schedule [wikipedia.org] = US Federal Government
This problem is of the Tribe's own making and as I pointed out,
the USAC is not the Federal Government.
http://www.usac.org/about/usac/ [usac.org]
The Universal Service Administrative Company (USAC) is an independent, not-for-profit corporation designated as the administrator of the federal Universal Service Fund by the Federal Communications Commission (FCC).
A lot of the Native American Tribes need to join the modern era and create some transparency in their governance. It's one thing when their malfeasance/corruption benefits a minority of members, it's another thing entirely when it publicly harms the entire Tribe. How hard is it to run a kosher bidding process? They could have hired a bonded and insured company that adheres to Federal Standards to do it for them.
Re:Government as usual (Score:4, Insightful)
That's a very simplistic viewpoint and runs counter to historical experience and the majority of accepted non-partisan political theory. It is a viewpoint that mostly goes along with governments that use Fear, Uncertainty and Doubt (FUD) as weapons of political terrorism. The United States does an exceptional job at creating FUD. Indeed, every government created by violence or fear has perpetuated itself through violence and fear, whereas governments formed by peaceful consent almost never use either violence or fear, they survive by consent perfectly well.
(I'm not going to argue over whether or not the war of independence was necessary or not, to me that is irrelevant. What matters is that the war is still going on in the minds of those who run the country, and all is "fair" in love and war - even when the war is a delusionary one.)
Re:Oh the government works... (Score:3, Insightful)
Great idea. Too bad no one alive today is responsible for the murders and theft of the past, and the Native Americans alive today only exist because of such interference in the first place.
"We" didn't do it. Quit using that word to further your political agendas, Mr. Noam Chomsky Quote. People did it in the past, yes, but that doesn't mean the sin magically transfers to all the people still alive, like some sort of "original sin" from the bible.
Why not /technomancer? (Score:3, Insightful)
Just because it's
Right... (Score:2, Insightful)
...the concentration of wealth has nothing to do with who controlled the land and resources of this country which were taken by force.
We did it, and we still benefit from the economic prosperity of our forefathers. Stop trying to pretend that you'd be where you are without the trampling of indigenous people. Just because you don't want to feel bad isn't excuse enough.
Of course, this doesn't apply if you are the minority or descendant of the oppressed where you live. But that's doubtful given your opinion on the matter.
What book is that? (Score:5, Insightful)
Just checking.
I'll be laughing my ass of when the Chinese knock you off your land and say, "Look at that white trash. Just sits in his trailer all day and drinks. Can you believe they could only support 300 million people on their land?"
Natives worked less hours, had cleaner air, water, food, and lived sustainably. It's better than we seem capable of. But you probably measure wealth in dollars. How's that been treating you lately? 401K looking good? Oh, and that lack of road thing is probably refuted by every piece of archeology in the western hemisphere, unless your definition of road needs asphalt, in which case there were no roads until the 20th century. Which seems kind of inaccurate.
I imagine your kids are getting some kind of education!
Re:Government as usual (Score:2, Insightful)
You honestly believe the United States got to be one ofthe richest, most powerful countries in the world by scaring its citizens with "political terrorism"? And you're sure it has nothing to do with our being one of the freest countries in the world? And you also have some explaination for why countries like Cuba, North Korea, Laos, East Germany, and the Soviet Union are/were shitholes, despite their massively invasive communist governments, right?
Unless you can provide any kind of evidence, I have to disagree. In fact, some people might say [heritage.org] there's roughly an inverse relationship between goverment control and the well being of the people in a country. But hey, don't let facts and evidence get in the way of your bullshit.
Can you even name a single real life government based on "peaceful consent" that hasn't sucked? I agree it sounds great on paper, but it just wouldn't work in real life.
Re:Right... (Score:5, Insightful)
We did it, and we still benefit from the economic prosperity of our forefathers.
You may have done it, but I didn't. I moved to the US 6 years ago, so neither I, nor my wife and child owe anything to anyone. Just because I'm a white westerner doesn't mean I'm guilty by association. And just because I'm a white westerner, doesn't mean I'm guilty due to descending from governments who abused the poor native. I'm Irish. I have a good claim to whinge about my ancestors being abused by a rich European government.
In case your sarcasm detector is broken, I'm not claiming anyone owes me anything. I'm just trying to point out the idiocy (and horrendous complexity) in trying to figure out who owes who what.
Do people who's families have been here for 6 generations owe more than people who have only just arrived? What about kids of mixed marriages? In terms of slave reparations, do we just go on skin colour, or do people have to prove that their ancestors were slaves and didn't move here 50 years ago? What about a slave descendant who married a non-slave descendant -- do their kids get less?
What about someone who is half Native American, a quarter German and a quarter English, married to someone who is half Irish, and half Polish-Jewish? How do you settle the English/Irish, German/Jewish, English/Indian, debts there?
It's complicated to the point of being unsolvable, and it's too old. Forget it.
No one gets government handouts due to the particulars of their parentage.
Re:All the networks belong to the corporations. (Score:2, Insightful)
How about Fidonet?
Re:Government as usual (Score:4, Insightful)
If they can't govern themselves, employ themselves, feed themselves, or keep the lights on maybe it's time for them to join the U.S.A.
Nonsense (Score:3, Insightful)
While one worldwide society might SEEM like a worthwhile goal and good idea on its face, the shortcomings are insidious and subtle but all too real, and not just potentially but almost certainly disastrous in the long run. It is NOT a good idea.
--
"The greatest dangers
Re:Government as usual (Score:5, Insightful)
Remember, my theory says NOTHING about success, wealth, power, influence or even freedoms. It states that a system will typically be maintained by the means by which it is created. You can have a violently maintained nation that still has enormous freedoms. In the most trivial sense, the fact that US cops carry guns is all about maintaining law and order through the threat of them shooting you. If that wasn't an effective threat, why would they bother?
You can also have FUD and freedom. Classic example - the raising of the national alert status for the Democratic Convention in 2004. Wonderful example of deliberate scare tactics, but it didn't alter anyone's freedom to attend. Margret Thatcher routinely used scare tactics to frighten people away from voting Labour, superb FUD work, but she never stopped anyone supporting them or voting for them.
My first claim is that you cannot have a nation that was founded through violence that uses neither FUD nor violence to survive - such methods guarantee real and imagined grievances will make it unsafe for such a nation to ever renounce such methods. Any nation that tries will inevitably get itself replaced. You have shown me no counter-example. All your examples verify this claim.
My second claim is that you cannot have a nation that was founded through peaceful means that uses either FUD or violence to survive - should it try, the backlash will always exceed its capacity to deal with both the rebellion and whatever caused it to adopt such tactics in the first place. There are rather fewer examples of such societies, but they have existed (Skara Brae is a good example, surviving 1,500 until finally being beaten by the environment) and they do exist (Iceland is considered the most peaceful in the world, has been a genuine democracy since 930AD and I don't recall it getting mentioned here for Big Brother tactics).
I make no other claims, although since you brought up America's wealth, I would point out Iceland is one of the wealthiest nations in the world. This would indicate to me that any nation is capable of wealth, that wealth is wholly independent of the means to sustain the government.
(Please note: I dislike Iceland's stance on many issues, but I respect them for being honest in their views. I wouldn't want to live there, and I do choose to live in the US freely even though I regard the current regime as a bunch of mindless thugs and don't expect any future regime to improve on that.)
Re:HAM is right out. (Score:3, Insightful)
.
not to mention the geek's blithe ignorance of geography.
the Navajo Nation is 26,000 square miles in size, with a population density of about 7 people per square mile. desert icons like Monument Valley are to be found there.
Wrong on at least one point: (Score:3, Insightful)
The more distant and more abstract -- and more powerful -- the enemy is perceived as being, the more potential "unity" against this "enemy" that can be achieved close to home, and thus more central power can be asserted.
The threat of "terrorists of uncertain origin" is one excellent example of the use of this technique. Sound familiar?
Re:Oh the government works... (Score:3, Insightful)
The only thing we're robbing Native Americans of is a free lunch. And often times, not even that.
Many of them (depending on the tribe) are free to do absolutely nothing, and get paid every month in order to do it. I think that MORE than qualifies for "reparations".
What's more, if any of them actually want to get a college education, guess what! They're all but guaranteed to get full scholarships since they're Native American. They can go to college for free, and not have to work their way through it. The catch? They actually have to DO it. That's the tough part.
When my tax money is paying someone to do nothing, and would pay for them to get an education if they actually bothered to go get it, and they still won't... I don't really feel very bad for them.
Re:Right... (Score:4, Insightful)
You may have done it, but I didn't
Correct. No one else alive today did it either. All the people who did it are dead. The institutions who did it are still around though, as institutions (governments and companies) outlast people. That's the whole idea of Governments and companies. They provide continuity beyond any one person's death. Think of an institution as an immortal person, whose hands are its employees. Liability doesn't die with the employees but lives on with the institution. Any person can sue another person/government/company for events which cause them disadvantage before they are legally a person [wikipedia.org]. Why single out an indigenous person to be denied that right?
No, you don't owe anything, but your adopted government does. The government existed before you arrived and your arrival doesn't change the government's past actions.
Re:Internet Access Singularity (Score:1, Insightful)
the racism cuts both ways.
Native americans have abused anti-discrimination laws to double-cross and interfere with scientific organizations and kept potentially ground breaking archaeological finds tied up in murderous litigation for decades.
I dunno about this. If people don't want scientists digging up graves on their land and litigate against them, isn't that fair a use of the system?
The deeper point is that the system is philosphy neutral. I and the scientists believe that graves contain just bones. Religious people believe that they have in some way sacred. If you start digging up graves and ignoring other peoples beliefs then there is a conflict which the system should resolve peacefully. But in the US that means litigation.
Re:Please stop saying "liberal" (Score:4, Insightful)
Thank you VERY much for the post. I, personally, have adopted the Gliberals for the leftiest.
The very idea that we're turning more and more into a nanny state makes me want to cram a sharpened stick into my eye but by the time I get said stick ready there will be a law requiring anyone to register their sharpened sticks. "Liberals" my ass.
Re:What book is that? (Score:5, Insightful)
That you know about. Period.
Most North American indian cultures were nomadic or semi-nomadic. They therefore had oral cultures because when you move constantly, you don't tend to pack big libraries around, just the tools you need to survive. So no great inventors in North America - I'll give you that one. But authors or musicians? You really have no idea. Were any of the troubadours in the Dark/Middle Age Europe any good? Most of them would have been illiterate so there's no telling is there? If a first millennium musical prodigy hadn't been interested in writing hymns for the church, there would be little trace of his output except in unattributed folk songs that survived hundreds of years to be incorporated into symphonies and pieces by 18th and 19th century composers, or Paul Simon.
Now mind you, if you go south into Mexico and further, the Inca, Aztec, and Maya empires had roads, irrigation, and cities comparable to a lot of Europe, as well as writing, oh and bloodthirsty religions and governments. Now certainly, they stopped evolving technologically after a certain point, but water monopolies have a tendency to suppress research that might upset the status quo. And when your government controls its people through fear, it tends to have a deleterious effect on the production of art.
What I'm getting at is that the lack of the types of artists and creative peoples that you point to as a sign of their savagery is often more due to environmental conditions. There are for instance very strong artistic and cultural traditions in the Pacific Northwest native communities, even though a large number of examples of those artworks were pilfered by missionaries in their zeal to replace the native religions with Christianity. For generations, the government actively worked to suppress native culture by making its core ceremonies illegal. That tends to have a fairly strong negative impact in the transmission of music and myths in a culture with oral traditions.
Note that the same thing happened with native cultures in the Pacific islands like Fiji, Tahiti, etc. because those cultures also had very rich oral and musical traditions. So your statement is only founded on an ignorance of, and ensured by, white missionaries and invaders.
Re:Government as usual (Score:4, Insightful)
You also forgot:
United States - founded by a combination of violent revolution and violent conquest.
Re:Are you asking for a free internet solution...? (Score:5, Insightful)
You have alot of interesting stuff here, but off the beaten path of what is being asked I think.
What the Navajo Nation is needing is Tier 1 access, or in the alternative, as suggested by the article, become a Tier 1 provider. I think within the reservation, using high power (50W) access points upon hill and mountain tops to wirelessly distribute to the end points would actually be a worthwhile solution, close to what 802.11 was designed for, then link the access points wirelessly again with a point to multi point backbone as they should all have line of site of each other. Now it is just a matter of getting it connected to the net. And from the geographic location of the reservation, and them needing to be their own provider, a DS3 to San Jose and Dallas or Chicago to peer at the NAPS. I don't think the big boys will be anal about peering with their community at the NAPS like they are with peering with other for-profit providers.
I peered at the Ameritec NAP through most of the 90's in Chicago and was able to pass most of my traffic there, over 50%, as a for profit provider, so MCI/Sprint/UUNet wouldn't peer with our network, but would gladly sell transit over the NAP, which would give the Navajo the option if needed. Reading TFA doesn't make clear if the Navajo or the USAC budget is $2.25b/yr, but I'm going to assume the USAC budget is that, so what I've suggested and what the Navajo budget are still might be within the costs on an ongoing basis of what their contract with OnSat was costing, and much better service, but the initial hardware cost might be out of reach for them
Re:Nations vs. Internet (Score:1, Insightful)
Granted, one is more likely to improve the lives of a small rather than large number of people, but what of those under repressive governments who are unable to escape? The restrictions that nations impose on the movement of their people gives them power. If the nations bordering Zimbabwe allowed free movement between them, I'm sure there would be very few people left in the country for Mugabe to control.
The concept of me "belonging" to a country based on the simple geographical location of one's birth is absurd! Why should one feel any loyalty to their country in the first place? What's more, one cannot simply renounce their citizenship since their government can refuse to recognise a stateless person.
Why should anyone be forced to abide by laws with which they do not agree, and then told they aren't able to vote with their feet?
ironically, my captcha was "warfare"
Re:Please stop saying "liberal" (Score:3, Insightful)
To do so tarnishes the good name of the men and women who have fought and died to bring the light of freedom into the world.
Depending on which side you are on, those men and women could be seen as "freedom fighters" or "terrorist" as well as "traitors". Perspective is a hell of a drug.
By Your "Logic"... (Score:3, Insightful)
By your, umm, logic, hardly anyone on the planet merits a description as a native resident. Unless you live somewhere near the Olduvai Gorge, your ancestors went walkabout.
The word "native" is typically applied to people who appear to be the first, i.e., original, inhabitants of a territory. Today's Indians are descendants of the first people to successfully settle in the Americas. How those folks got here is irrelevant.
Re:HAM is The answer (Score:1, Insightful)
They are a nation. They have a communications commission. The Navajo should simply change the rules for that within their nation.
Internet use over ham can be restricted to tribal members. End of problem.
Who will get upset? The jackass provider who has threatened the entire Navajo nation with this shutdown.
Re:Political solution (Score:3, Insightful)
Because the State of Arizona and the Navajo Nation get along so fantastically well!
Heck, they can't even agree on the time of day for most of the year.
Not necessarily (Score:1, Insightful)
Singapore seems to thrive these days, and it's just one city. The US, at least in theory, is supposed to consist of 50 self governing states with a constitutionally guaranteed republican form of government. It would be a good system if we didn't have states and cities always looking to Washington for someone to pick up their garbage or drive their school buses.
Some organization of society works best at a local level.
The Dineh people ought to have encouragement to maintain their traditions while taking advantage of technology. I was first out in their area in 2004 and was impressed by how widely their homes are scattered. They seem perfect candidates to test out improved home wind power. The people I visited had switched from wind powered well pumps to solar, because the old Aero windmills were too hard to maintain.
Re:Nations vs. Internet (Score:5, Insightful)
By your logic, the US would become a much better place if all the States became sovereign nations. They're already the size of nations. Heck, there's three sovereign nations in Europe that could each fit inside Rhode Island.
The original plan laid down by the Founding Father's had the states as something more than administrative districts, but something less than sovereign nations. So that most of went on within a state's boundaries was governed by the state, and the federal government only dealt with matters that genuinely crossed state lines.
Then we had a Civil War, in which the issue of states' rights became entangled with the issue of slavery. And as a result we now have an all-powerful federal government, and the states *have* been reduced to little more than administrative districts.
I suspect we *would* be better off if the US was more like the EU, with states actually having some degree of independence. Large, central governments are *much* easier for special interests to manipulate, since far fewer people have to be convinced (or bribed).
Re:Wouldn't You Need To Run a L-O-T of Cable? (Score:2, Insightful)
I also take exception to your making this some kind of political feel-goodery. I would fully support my tax dollars going to providing some form of internet access to the Navajo nation not because it would make me feel good, like some kind of reparations. The hard fact of reality, as you put it, is that native American populations are dropping like a rock, and a lot of that is because they DO leave the reservations because of things like this.
I am more uncomfortable being a part of ongoing ethnocide-by-apathy than I would be with a few fewer dollars per year. Because this is a free country, I fully respect your, or anyone else's, right to have a different opinion or outlook. However, I can't even come up with a word good enough for someone who thinks a relocated and invaded culture is "whining about" their plight like they had a choice in whether or not they're "cut off". Jesus, look at a map. The Navajo nation is huge and in the middle-of-nowhere. Do you really think they're the ones that drew the borders?