"Liimatta tried to convince Google to install connections in community buildings, to power a cheap WiFi service in low-income areas. The company refused, saying it violated its terms of service. “It’s our biggest disappointment. We would have loved to have taken Google Fiber to the worst places, where it could have really made a difference.”
Is there a study that shows that the low income population makes better use of high speed bandwidth? Right now it's mainly just a luxury product for HD video streams and the majority of the educational gains of an Internet connection can be had with 5-10mbps.
"Cheap WiFi" implies to me that they would still be charging users for access. Reselling a connection is obviously against their terms of service. Community organizations will probably have better luck simply paying for connections, and then running open access points to provide free access to the community.
Ha, community organizer talks about the ups and downs of what happened. Article presents complex issue without simplifying it. HN poster posts a clickbait quote.
