Photo by Hilary.
The consortium that operates the wi-fi kiosks that have replaced phone booths throughout the neighborhood is turning off internet access to them. Too many people had been hanging out at the kiosks for extended periods watching movies of the PG and porn variety, and it was creeping people out. In a statement, the company said “the kiosks were never intended for anyone’s extended, personal use.”
But only the Internet feature is changing, for now.
“Other tablet features—free phone calls, maps, device charging, and access to 311 and 911—will continue to work as they did before, and nothing is changing about LinkNYC’s superfast Wi-Fi.”
The company will work with the city to determine whether other changes are needed, including possible time limits.
In recent days we’ve heard more complaints about the stations.
“This morning I walked past the new wifi kiosk (whatever it is called) a 72nd and Broadway where the book vendors used to be,” one reader wrote on Monday. “An apparently homeless person was on a rolling office chair parked in front of the screen (and USB charger ports) of the kiosk making it unusable to anyone but himself (except wirelessly, of course.) Is this legal? Does anyone care? It would seem that the only effect of this new street furniture is more ads and some linked-in bums.”
We examined the kiosks and the city’s “digital divide” in more depth here.
The person in the rolling office chair is one of the booksellers. There’s another kiosk right across the street if he was preventing her from plugging in (which I highly doubt), plus it’s wireless, so I think this particular complaint is a little off base.
Once you give something away for free, slobs, pigs, and the mentally ill take advantage of it. Ever been to some event open to the public that has free food? Same thing here.
Philharmonic in the Park. Attended by NYC’s basket of deplorables.
It is NOT free. We are all paying with our eyeballs. Just an excuse to inflict massive electronic billboards on us. And I thought the Bloomburg administration sold us out. Di Blasio is much, much worse. The entire city is for sale!!
so everything needs to be sold?
kind of dystopian
The abusive bookseller (the one with the scraggly beard) has been sitting on a chair in front of the kiosk on Broadway and 72nd Street all week. I think he was listening to music.
Yes I saw him there as well, off his meds or whatever and screaming and cursing. There is no end to these booksellers and their abusive behavior. These guys still feel they own that block. They are the embodiment of everything that is bringing our neighborhood and our city back to the crazy, dirty days of the 70’s. Get them out of here already. They have no respect for anything. We knew those kiosks would fail here…bet they’re doing just fine in the West Village etc. I wouldn’t touch that kiosk for anything. Can’t Chase Bank end this charade and rid us of them? We’ve had more than enough
Of this.
Just like the pay telephones they replaced those kiosks are where they are for a reason; that part of the curb is NYC property. As such the City can do pretty much what it sees fit, just as when they take away parking spaces for Citi Bike use.
For a so called “world class city” New York is very much behind places like Paris when it comes to free WiFi access.
Good move promptly discontinuing use.
I am so tired of people over looking or ignoring inappropriate behavior by homeless just because they are homeless. Public safety and quality of life is paramount.
What a waste the whole thing is! Meanwhile PS191 needs more financial support!
Since these kiosks don’t cost the taxpayers a dime, I’d say your comment doesn’t have any merit.
If PS191 needs more financial support, I’m sure the PTA would have some ideas on where and how much your check should be.
PS191 needs more financial support? What exactly does PS191 not have that PS199 has that could possibly explain the difference in performance? I suppose that if PS191 had the most powerful computers in the world they would not have found themselves on the dangerous school list, right?
I hear the teachers at PS191 are absolutely wonderful.
It is plain insanity, literally, at this point to equate a school’s performance or lack thereof with lacking financial resources. Look to the students themselves.
99% of a school’s performance has to do with the work ethic of its children and their parents. Let’s stop turning a blind eye to this fact.
“99% of a school’s performance has to do with the work ethic of its children and their parents.”
So Teachers don’t count, Administration doesn’t count, Library doesn’t count, facilities don’t count…?
Another family with a child who accomplished everything on their and the families efforts.
So, then who needs Community?
“So Teachers don’t count, Administration doesn’t count, Library doesn’t count, facilities don’t count…?”
Of course they do danny boy. PS191 has every bit as good teachers and administration as PS199 does if not even BETTER. PS191 is a GREAT school actually with amazing teachers. THE PROBLEM WITH PS191’s PERFORMANCE IS NOT THE TEACHERS OR THE LACK OF MONEY.
Let’s make up an experiment for illustration: let’s say that next year, the students from PS199 go to the PS191 building instead of the PS199 building, and vice versa. The PS199 students have the PS199 teachers, library, etc. I don’t think I have to tell anyone that the performance of each school is not going to change one bit from what it was the prior year. IT IS NOT THE BUILDING OR THE TEACHERS. THE TEACHERS AT PS191 ARE AMAZING.
If I give you 30 kids who have involved parents, who do their homework on time and who pay attention in class, they are going to do well.
STOP BLAMING THE TEACHERS AT PS191 FOR THE PERFORMANCE OF THAT SCHOOL’S STUDENTS.
That being said though, I do think that the city should ban PTA money altogether. There is no reason that one school should get more money for supplies etc than another. That to me is disgusting. That being said though, I think that the PTA money makes VERY LITTLE DIFFERENCE in the scheme of things.
It is unfair to teachers to judge them for student performance without taking into consideration the quality of student from an academic perspective that is in their classroom. This is the trick that advocates of charter schools do. Charter schools have a student body composed of serious and caring parents who want their children to do well and are serious enough to go through the application process, etc. No wonder that charter schools perform better! Charter schools pretend that they have better teachers… Poor teachers. Nobody wants to tell the truth.
George,
the whole idea of discussion is, well discussion. sometimes i hear of some ‘silent majority’ and feel bad for their not speaking.we should air our differences of opinion, if we are to preserve Democracy.
also,you repeatedly encourage me to get out more, but i am out a great deal. on my way out pretty soon. see ya’
danny boy, work ethic has nothing to do with race buddy. You really do need to get out more often. And why is it that you argue with everyone here all the time? Can’t you find anything better to do with your days?
“You need to get out more often danny boy.”
that is your advice?
enjoy the Segregation that you want to protect.
danny boy says: I believe that the children need to be in schools that are mixed with all abilities. Kinda’ like a PUBLIC SCHOOL.
Mixed abilities? You don’t think that PS199 already has kids of mixed abilities? You need to get out more often danny boy.
If what you really want is to mix students that don’t care at all about school with others that do, then just say it.
“STOP BLAMING THE TEACHERS AT PS191 FOR THE PERFORMANCE OF THAT SCHOOL’S STUDENTS.”
I would never blame the teachers for the problem. I believe that the children need to be in schools that are mixed with all abilities. Kinda’ like a PUBLIC SCHOOL.
More importantly… Meanwhile, there are potholes and cracks all over the streets and sidewalks that need to be attended to!
This is a matter for the ACLU.
Move to Westchester if you don’t like life in the big city.
Mark, perhaps you like navigating dog shit on the sidewalks and letting your kids be harassed by vagrants, but to most of us, living in the city doesn’t mean having to give up our self-respect. Why anyone would be opposed to fighting for a cleaner, safer environment – no matter where they live – is truly bewildering.
Respect is something you have no concept of. In your head everything is always about property values and policing others, two very unfriendly and suburban qualities. Why are you in New York City to begin with if you hate it so much? Who held you hostage and forced you to move here with how the city is? Disparaging poor folks and always trying to eliminate those who don’t fit into your version of what the Upper West Side’s quality of life should be? Speak for yourself and the tiny margin of 311 calling addicts like yourself, the city will be just fine without you.
Holy cow, Mark – is your world so upside down that you actually believe that people don’t have a right to their own safety or protection of their investments just because they choose to live here? That fighting for cleaner streets and sidewalks are “very unfriendly and suburban” concepts? Your desire to shroud everything in a classism rant notwithstanding, I refuse to believe that you have trouble grasping the fact that that these ideas and living in NYC are not mutually exclusive.
Mark, I wish you would see the real point. No one really benefits from these heinous me monoliths just advertisers and the city that sold us out. Wonder how patents feel about the lingerie ads up there. Not too far off from the porn the poor are tuning in to.
Paul RL: Just wanted to commend this and your other posts in this thread. Quite good.
Ah, the liberal surrender mantra, just let the barbarians take over. You would fit in well in France, Mark.
What a ridiculous comment and ignorant opinion…quality of life isn’t limited to the suburbs. When will you libs realize that the city was revived when restoring quality of life was made a priority ( under Giuliani & Bloomberg)!
Mark: Don’t you mean PIG city. That’s the ticket for foolish people..or are you that guy on the box? The idea is to make our city better not dirtier, not more disgusting, not a homeless haven …get it?? Try to aspire to a better life.
Wanting to better your city, keep it clean, etc., is so elitist for many liberals. In Japan, they would laugh if they heard that it is a high moral position to let people piss on the street, sleep on the sidewalks, and wait a half hour for a bus.
George, you in Japan?
Moving to Japan?
Japanophile? (see urbandictionary.com)
Perhaps a venture capitalist will invest in added features to the Link NYC kiosks…such as privacy screens for those watching porn…it could be marketed as “Masterbation Stations.”
Or even an on-line dictionary, so people could look up the correct spelling of words.
Like “masturbation”.
Would this be the same Cato who lashed-out at me for correcting grammatical errors in an WSR article? I also seem to recall a ‘Cato’ doing the same to at least one other poster here for pointing-out such errors in a comment that was posted.
Not only “would” it be — in fact it is!
Then you might want to avail yourself of that dictionary– to look-up hypocrisy.
Unless said bator is a highly experienced one, then “master” might actually make sense.
The kiosks are a good thing. We used one last week to locate a bank (I know. How crazy does that sound. They are on every corner.) We like not carrying our phones in the evening.
Let’s hope they can adjust the software
to prevent people from commandeering a kiosk. HOWEVER, policing porn usage is a stupid and shameful effort. There must be a way to insure that one person cannot use a kiosk for longer than a limited and reasonable time.
Oh? Is it? Really?
Do you also consider the “policing” of billboards, the screens in taxis and any number of other public displays to restrict sexually explicit content to be “a stupid and shameful effort”?
—-
Incidentally, have any objections to the ubiquitous “gentleman’s entertainment” ads on the tops of taxicabs ever been voiced? What a fine means of imbuing the next generation with wholesome concepts of sexuality and respect for women as more than mere sex-objects.
There must be some intrepid street photographer out there who has captured the ironic contrast of a tender child in the same frame as one of the aforementioned scabrous images.
We shouldn’t police porn on a public kiosk? So technically any 12 year old boy walking home from school could access porn at one of these kiosks, but only for a limited amount of time?
That 12 year old boy likely can find all the porn he wants using his phone or tablet. That and or one or more of his friends/schoolmates have the ability.
Porn easily viewed by using the most mundane search words on any engine like Google, then clicking various images.
And nearly all of it makes the Playboy that was all the rage for generations of pre-digital-dissolution-era adolescents look downright wholesome by comparison. Ah, progress.
“We like not carrying our phones in the evening.”
No problem Tony, we will endure these advertising beacons projecting ads for amazon to ourselves and our children for people like you who like to avoid carrying your phones in the evening while still needing them to locate banks, etc. No problem Tony, we got your back. Have a great day.
Historically advertising has been part of city living like from forever. Overtime they tear down a building you get get a glimpse of an ad painted on the side of an old wall from a like a hundred years ago. This isn’t anything new. Just a new format or platform if you will.
Paper posters are very different from high def blaring digital. Shameless.
These “kiosks” and the advertising they feature are more obtrusive than that of telephone booths and other, already-existing forms. It also comes in addition to the many other instances and forms of bombardment that we are already subjected-to.
If they limit on-screen internet sessions to 2-3 min and force a few minutes of delay In between sessions it would probably solve much of the problem. I saw the armchair a guy on west side of Bway/73 on Saturday afternoon. He was watching a ballgame.
It is disconcerting to say the least to see people have made street corners their personal living space.
The picture that is shown of newspapers boxes being used as furniture, i.e., couches is not uncommon on the Upper West Side. Just check any corner on Broadway between 72nd and 76th Streets.
It is scary. You don’t feel safe walking by there at night. The bigger question, however, is really how safe is it for you to charge your phone at one of these kiosks? Do they put “cookies” in your phone and track you?
Look out your Smart TV is watching what you do.
“It is disconcerting to say the least to see people have made street corners their personal living space.”
Yes, we all need to work together to solve the housing needs of people.
Your housing is taken care of being that you’re living in a rent controlled apartment while you tell everyone else how greedy they are.
One can certainly argue over whether or not Shamir’s criticism of dannyboy is valid but how, as dannyboy claims, would Shamir’s statement be a “lie”? Which part of Shamir’s statement would dannyboy contend is factually incorrect?
That dannyboy lives in a rent-controlled apartment? Hasn’t he acknowledged as much himself?
As for the second part of the statement, would dannyboy actually deny, as a matter of simple fact, that he has repeatedly accused others of greed and chastised them for it? Is it really necessary to dig-up examples to cite?
ALL OF IT!
your demand for me to “prove my innocence” is disheartening”. I thought we were better than that.
Somebody’s been binge-watching reruns of Law and Order.
Shamir,
I mentioned that your communication skill need…well communication skills.
In this case I wrote: “Yes, we all need to work together to solve the housing needs of people.”
To which, you responded: “Your housing is taken care of being that you’re living in a rent controlled apartment while you tell everyone else how greedy they are.”
How is that discourse?
I am trying to help you.
stevieboy,
Shamir has been repeating this lie on a regular basis, sometimes I ask that the Moderator remove his lies, but in this case I thought to engage him in some helpful dialogue.
Of course you picked up on the lie like a fly to…oh well, I guess that’s your Nature.
The Moderator will continue to remove your Comments,as done in the past, when you…well lie.
So the truth finally comes out Dannyboy. Makes a lot of sense now. A lot of sense.
Typical bleeding heart liberal, counting and spending others peoples money….and then criticizing them for having it in the first place.
Oh Dannyboy, why am I not surprised. However, this will probably not get posted like most of my comments. Seems like you have more than a few guardian angels….including the taxpayers of NYC.
Who didn’t see this coming ??
Why not just have a time limit?
They must have anticipated porn and movies, people do that at the library too. I don’t get what the shocking big deal is.
That’s what the library is there for. That’s not why these charging stations are there.
Cato,
They aren’t just charging stations. If people weren’t expected to sit and watch movies or even spend time reading and replying to the West Side Rag, what was the intent of the internet browsers?
Check bus or subway info. Look-up directions to a place or its hours. Get a weather forecast. Those are some examples of usage for such a service/structure that seem more appropriate and legitimate than sitting and watching a movie, much less grossly indecent imagery.
“This is not a matter of any special “rules” of mine or anyone else in particular but of simple, universal logic, common sense, courtesy, consideration and basic decency.”
at least 4 of the Commenters in this discussion think differently than you on this, yet, for you deem yours the “simple, universal logic, common sense, courtesy, consideration and basic decency.”
where is there that is ‘simple, universal logic’ if 4 people disagree in this one discussion?
what is ‘common’ sense if there are 4 people who disagree?
what is ‘basic’ dignity if 4 people aren’t included in the basis.
Quit defining what is “simple, universal logic, common sense, courtesy, consideration and basic decency.” based on what you decide alone.
dannyboy:
This is not a matter of any special “rules” of mine or anyone else in particular but of simple, universal logic, common sense, courtesy, consideration and basic decency.
1.) The screens on these kiosks can only be used by one person-at-a-time (or, at most two, but only if they are viewing the same site). In contrast to the examples I gave for usage of the screens, watching a film on them ties them up for an extended period of time, during which others cannot use the screen.
2.) In the case of content that is graphically sexual or violent, we already restrict what can be displayed in public view such as the case of billboards, ads on buses, subways and taxis, etc. (and have always done so). Why should such regulation be any less warranted or justified in the case of these WiFi kiosks? (at least for the screens and perhaps for the Internet connection itself as well) The fact is that said screens can be visible to anyone passing by them– including young children as well as any number of other members of society who would find the aforementioned sights offensive, disturbing or even downright traumatizing.
(As desensitized and corrupted as we have become as a society, I still do not think we have sunk to the point that the average parent is ready to accept a world in which their young child, while simply walking on the street, is likely to be assaulted by hardcore pornographic imagery.)
“watching a movie” is out?
i guess you got your rules
Independent Rules
unpublished but leaves one open to criticism
ouch!
“That’s what the library is there for…”
watching porn?
i’m just asking out of curiosity
Wouldn’t anyone, homeless or not, using these to charge their phone be there for a while? And while charging they would probably spend that time web surfing if that option is available. For that matter wouldn’t anyone who uses the internet at a kiosk monopolize it for a time? I thought the stated purpose of these was to bring the internet to the less fortunate. It seems that people are angry about the kiosks being used for precisely what they were built for.
These were advertising beacons and never intended to offer any service of value to anyone. The wifi was just the bait needed to dupe gullable new yorkers into thinking that this stupid project was to benefit us. And let me just say, that anyone actually using these stations for wifi (i don’t know a single person) as they walk down the street is a loser for so many reasons I can’t even begin to mention them.
Amen.
I know many people who use the wifi. Many people I know have data limits on their phone plans so it is helpful not to burn through data when walking around the neighborhood. Similarly, many work in offices with firewalls that limit their internet usage, so they go out at lunchtime and briefly use the wifi. For example, I have a colleague who gets sent videos of her toddler during the day so uses the free wifi to pull them down rather than burning through her data allotment. I think the screens are a disaster and need to be eliminated for all of the reasons others have stated, but the wifi certainly has benefits.
“I think the screens are a disaster and need to be eliminated for all of the reasons others have stated, but the wifi certainly has benefits.”
but the screens are needed if people don’t have a computing device. baby pictures, not withstanding.
Maybe the whole argument supporting these kiosks is now discredited. They could be removed now.
Wow, the vitriol in these comments (mostly but not exclusively against the homeless) is astonishing to me. Wasn’t it Anatole France who said that both the rich and the poor have the right to sleep under the bridge at night?!
we are only as worthy as we treat our weakest.
Thank you, Julia. The number of Trumpster divers in the comments section is appalling. This is the UWS, not Westchester! Broadband is a universal good in many countries, the US lags as we do in many community mental and physical health standards. We need to welcome community health, even if the “free-market economy” requires that it be paid for by advertising.
I am hoping that the elimination of internet usage on these kiosks will help phase out some of the less savory commenters on WSR…
Anon:the comments expressed here are simply indicative of the deterioration of our neighborhood…the upper west side. Whether it’s Gale Brewer, Ms. Rosenthal, or a do-nothing mayor….we live in a dirty, decaying neighborhood and it’s getting worse. It depresses everyone to walk along broadway from
70th st. to @79th st. How is it possible that we as a community cannot rid ourselves of the mentally ill guy screaming obscenities on the corner? Or the man living with all his possessions strewn on the sidewalk exposing himself to anyone passing by…..everyone I know says “this is not the America I grew up in” SO SAD.
The mentally ill guy is part of the community, too, not some random vermin to “get rid of.” If you can’t summon the ability to speak of such people with basic respect, you obviously can’t be trusted to advocate policies that take care of everyone.
Sorry, Sarah – but we as a community have a right and even a duty to remove anyone who is exhibiting abusive and dangerous behavior to others. The fact that that person might be mentally ill or homeless is irrelevant.
Sarah, the air must be thin way up high where your soapbox is, because you seem rather confused. Accepting those in need as part of our community doesn’t mean there is an obligation to accept the behavior that some of them exhibit on our streets. If your definition of “acceptance” is turning a blind eye to the problems we have and lecturing anybody who complains about it, I suppose that’s your prerogative if it makes you feel better. But in my book, that just makes things worse – and it makes you a bad neighbor.
Keep working on the concept that the homeless guy is PART of the community, not some alien rat infestation; maybe someday you’ll get it.
Talking about “us” ridding ourselves of the foregin undesirables is shameful. People ought to know where that kind of talk leads.
Does that mean people should be left to sit in their own trash? No. The whole point of understanding that these people are part of their community is accepting that they need and deserve care from us.
If this is not a problem to you, then please call the company that creates these kiosks, ask them to place one directly in front of your front door, round up all of the neighborhood homeless people, and serve them finger sandwiches and tea as they sit there watching porn.
i looked it up
“FENCING
a quick return thrust following a parry.”
Hear, hear!
Great riposte.
I vote for all three
Somebody can’t take a joke…
these boys are dead serious
might take the law into their own hands, by the sound of ’em
riled about them stinkin'”mentally ill guy …Or the man living with all his possessions”
Bravo!
You tell ’em Cjberk!
Unfortunately this is just a symptom of how bad homelessness is in NYC. It needs to be cleaned up on the streets and on trains to keep this place livable. No one likes to constantly harassed walking down the street or riding on a train.
Let’s all help solve this problem now!
Well, I already pay my Federal, State and Local taxes plus sales taxes and a SIGNIFICANT amount of property taxes….as do everyone in my family. What do you do?
All of this pays for some of the best homeless shelters, jails, and mental institutions in the state…and apparently your apartment too Dannyboy. True?
no
FALSE AGAIN
hardly worth reading you justifications for disliking people.
HOPELESS
These things are just poor excuses to put more digital advertising on our streets. Remove them please.
Surrendering a good for many because a few are abusing. Enforce laws: no you cant sit on an overturned crate and block the pedestrian traffic. Why must all public place be diminished because of the abuse of a few ie no seats to be found at major transit hubs, why don’t want vagrants setting up shop, its outrageous.
Efforts underway to help the homeless can always use support.
MOST PREDICTABLE OUTCOME EVER.
I cannot imagine that anyone did not presume this was a likely outcome. Up in the low 100s, I see kids and some “unsavory” characters spending hours surfing the internet, watching videos, and arguments ensuing about getting to use it. They should disable the Internet, or at least limit it to mapping, and other useful information (like they do in some airline Terminals and other public locations), and allow for WiFi connections — which is very useful for tourists who don’t have US phone plans or those with limited data on their plans. If indigent people need to surf the Internet, and they have the right to do so, we have a fantastic free library system where you can reserve one or more hour-blocks of time.
” If indigent people need to surf the Internet, and they have the right to do so, we have a fantastic free library system”
that’s been curtailed too.
what next?
The homeless using the internet has been curtailed in libraries, or just curtailed in general? I haven’t been to a library in years but I’ve been meaning to look for one on the UWS.
Thank you for the info on libraries everyone. A coworker just told me that she hasn’t had cable for months and she gets all of her DVDs there as well. I will definitely check it out. 🙂
HelenD
It is the libraries and library hours that have been curtailed.
which may have been a contributor to why: “I haven’t been to a library in years”
“but I’ve been meaning to look for one on the UWS.” – Good Luck with that!
There is a beautiful library on Amsterdam in the low 80s that has many computers right inside the front door available for your use. And I believe they have restored some of their hours.
The public library on Amsterdam between 65th and 66th recently posted signs saying people can’t bring rolling carts of stuff into the library. Walk by M-S 10-7 and tell me by the looks of what is left outside the library if the homeless are inside.
I would never use it to charge my phone.
why on earth would I stand still with my phone exposed so some thug (yeah, I said it) or thugette could saunter by and bash me in the head and take my phone.
funnily,
i have lived in NYC my whole life, and my parents theirs, and my grandparents……… and I have never been “bash[ed]in the head”.
maybe it’s just me?
I know what you’re saying dannyboy but I personally know 9 people who have been bashed in the head, but that’s been over 20 years so it may be statistically low, and with one exception it was all about stealing wallets and cell phones. The last one was a friend who was doing stretches up against a wall in the park and a homeless person decided to slam her head into the wall for the fun of it. I understand that the homeless need assistance but those that are on meds or drinking in public need to be removed from the sidewalks just as the police would do if any of us were out there causing a disturbance. If a white 30-something mom who forgot to take her Lexapro was standing on the corner of 72nd and B’way ranting and cursing and throwing things at people I’m sure the police would be taking her away in a squad car pronto.
To defend one group, why is it necessary to disparage another, i.e., “white mothers in their 30s on Lexapro”?
I’m not aware that I was defending anyone.
Valid point…however, these units have an entirely different agenda then simply the obvious. Eventually people will figure it out.
The theatre district is an endless block after block view just like the photo. It’s a complete mess!
Well according to my very not scientific survey (walking around Manhattan this weekend and Monday), usage at these kiosks seems to have dropped off.
Have not used before so cannot say if this is normal but the screens one saw displayed a “call 311” message in white with an orange background.
Over the weekend read other media coverage on this subject and a consensus is building that the reaction was perhaps a bit extreme to solve a limited problem.
Many of the homeless and others said they do *NOT* use these kiosks to view porn or other questionable material, but rather for Internet access to find everything from housing to services.
B.B.
Is this the first time that you have noticed the “agreements”made by Corporations?
The agree to provide internet and wi-fi, in exchange for allowing corporate advertising.
Then they remove the internet access.
Works every time
Have not read the entire contract between NYC and LinkNYC (or whoever is providing these kiosks),so cannot say what was agreed to in advance. If you have access to such information please let the rest of us know.
Do know a good amount about contract law; thus if Internet access was agreed upon as part of the deal, then cannot see how just because the mayor and or CC had complaints a service could be withdrawn literally overnight. That is unless said contract stated such action was possible.
Everyone keeps going on about the advertising, however unless or until LinkNYC opens their books and shows advertising dollars in surplus to operating budget I shouldn’t be that worried.
When you get down to it Citi Bike is one big advertising for Citibank, right down to the colors, graphics and so forth, but that venture was losing money badly until the city stepped in.
Internet access was included likely as part of the mayor’s and CC’s “equality” binge; that is to bring access to those that did not have or whatever. Sadly things got out of hand and people (including the media)hopped on it, so that was that.
Truthfully certain persons aren’t happy with these kiosks period. The Internet “abuse” was just something they could latch onto in hopes of having the scheme shut down, or at least the things removed from *their* area.
“Truthfully certain persons aren’t happy with these kiosks period. The Internet “abuse” was just something they could latch onto in hopes of having the scheme shut down, or at least the things removed from *their* area.” – B.B.
Truthfully, i don’t believe that the consortium that operates the kiosks is dealing fairly. The kiosks were promoted as offering internet access and wi-fi, in exchange for billboard advertising in public spaces. AFTER support was gained, the Internet Access was removed.
Think about this: in this fair deal, can you even conceive of the internet access and wi-fi remaining, and the advertising removed?
You still have Internet access through the Kiosks. It is called “wifi”. It’s free. What has been removed is the browser on the Kiosk. You have to use the browser on your own device if you want to surf. It is that rare person today who does not have some kind of device.