Homeless people as mobile Wi-Fi

asbestos

Prince
Joined
Jun 6, 2010
Messages
502
http://www.nytimes.com/2012/03/13/t...ates-a-stir-in-austin.html?src=me&ref=general

AUSTIN, Tex. — Which product at this year’s South by Southwest technology conference received more attention than perhaps any other?

Homeless people as wireless transmitters.

Regulars at the Austin Resource Center for the homeless waiting for services. BBH Labs employed homeless people at the South by Southwest conference.

A marketing agency touched off a wave of criticism and debate when it hired members of the local homeless population to walk around carrying mobile Wi-Fi devices, offering conferencegoers Internet access in exchange for donations.

BBH Labs, the innovation unit of the international marketing agency BBH, outfitted 13 volunteers from a homeless shelter with the devices, business cards and T-shirts bearing their names: “I’m Clarence, a 4G Hotspot.” They were told to go to the most densely packed areas of the conference, which has become a magnet for those who want to chase the latest in technology trends.

The smartphone-toting, social-networking crowds often overwhelm cellular networks in the area, creating a market that BBH Labs hoped to serve with the “Homeless Hotspots” project, which it called a “charitable experiment.” It paid each participant $20 a day, and they were also able to keep whatever customers donated in exchange for the wireless service.

But as word of the project spread on the ground and online, it hit a nerve among many who said that turning down-and-out people into wireless towers was exploitative and discomfiting.

Tim Carmody, a blogger at Wired, described the project as “completely problematic” and sounding like “something out of a darkly satirical science-fiction dystopia.”

A commenter on the BBH Labs blog offered mock praise for the project, then complained that “my homeless hotspot keeps wandering out of range, and it’s ruining all my day trades!”

On Monday, the project’s scheduled last day, BBH Labs was scrambling to explain itself.

Saneel Radia, the director of innovation at BBH Labs who oversaw the project, said the company was not taking advantage of the homeless volunteers. He said that the company had had success with other such experiments, including one in which it gave homeless people in New York cellphones and Twitter accounts as a way to call attention to their plight.

Mr. Radia said he modeled the hot spot project after the street newspapers that homeless people sell for a dollar.

“We saw it as a means to raise awareness by giving homeless people a way to engage with mainstream society and talk to people,” he said. “The hot spot is a way for them to tell their story.”

Mitchell Gibbs, the director of development at Front Steps, the shelter that houses the project volunteers, said he advised Mr. Radia on how best to set up the program. He said he was surprised by all the criticism of the project, which he said had inspired an “entrepreneurial spirit” among its homeless participants.

“It’s an employment opportunity, regardless of who is offering it,” Mr. Gibbs said.

The human hot spots seemed unconcerned as well. One volunteer, Clarence Jones, 54, said he was originally from New Orleans and became homeless in the aftermath of Hurricane Katrina.

“Everyone thinks I’m getting the rough end of the stick, but I don’t feel that,” Mr. Jones said. “I love talking to people and it’s a job. An honest day of work and pay.”

But the program’s critics zeroed in on the divide between its impoverished vendors and Internet-bubble customers.

Adam Hanft, chief executive of the marketing advisory firm Hanft Projects, said that even if the effort was well intended, it seemed to turn a blind eye to that disconnect. “There is already a sense that the Internet community has become so absurdly self-involved that they don’t think there’s any world outside of theirs,” he said.

Wow, $20 a day isn't enough to afford a home. I wonder how much donations they get.
 
Maybe next they can have homeless people walk around with urinals at busy concerts & outdoor gatherings.
 
They probably get decent donations, 4G hot spots are a valuable commodity

If gratuity gets encouraged, they could make more than enough for food (or in the case of some drugs and booze).

I don't see the problem with this. Jobs for the homeless. The only thing to fix are the wage laws and a few other quirks.
 
Libertarians often argue that minimum wage laws aren't necessary since employees are able to work elsewhere. Thus, I think it's exploitative since they're using a segment of the population that is generally unable to take work somewhere else.
 
Libertarians often argue that minimum wage laws aren't necessary since employees are able to work elsewhere. Thus, I think it's exploitative since they're using a segment of the population that is generally unable to take work somewhere else.
In this case, it could be that they are unable to take work elsewhere because of the minimum wage.
 
I have no real problem with this in principle; they're paying people to provide a service, it's not the most inspiring work ever but I'm not sure it's any more degrading per se than a lot of other low-level jobs, and they happen to be employing exclusively homeless people - great.

But that's the point - it's not just some charity thing, these people are providing a service that is useful to the company, they are doing a job for them and deserve to be treated as such by being paid an appropriate wage for it. Especially when, let's face it, the service provided is as much about letting the company trade on their personal misfortune to generate good PR as it is about actually providing wi-fi access. $20 a day is not an appropriate wage, and making them beg for donations to cover your unwillingness to pay them properly strikes me as particularly mean-spirited, even if they do make a good amount from those donations. It also strikes me as boneheadedly counter-productive when you're trying to portray your company as caring.
 
What's next? Stick a water sprinkler on their heads like hats and have them wander the park?
 
I have no real problem with this in principle; they're paying people to provide a service, it's not the most inspiring work ever but I'm not sure it's any more degrading per se than a lot of other low-level jobs, and they happen to be employing exclusively homeless people - great.

But that's the point - it's not just some charity thing, these people are providing a service that is useful to the company, they are doing a job for them and deserve to be treated as such by being paid an appropriate wage for it. Especially when, let's face it, the service provided is as much about letting the company trade on their personal misfortune to generate good PR as it is about actually providing wi-fi access. $20 a day is not an appropriate wage, and making them beg for donations to cover your unwillingness to pay them properly strikes me as particularly mean-spirited, even if they do make a good amount from those donations. It also strikes me as boneheadedly counter-productive when you're trying to portray your company as caring.

I understand what you're saying, but take a step back and ask yourself one question: "If I wifi from this street corner, then before leaving, you give Mr. Wifi Walker a dollar, did you really give him a donation, or did you give him a tip?

Libertarians often argue that minimum wage laws aren't necessary since employees are able to work elsewhere. Thus, I think it's exploitative since they're using a segment of the population that is generally unable to take work somewhere else.

Spoiler :
 
I understand what you're saying, but take a step back and ask yourself one question: "If I wifi from this street corner, then before leaving, you give Mr. Wifi Walker a dollar, did you really give him a donation, or did you give him a tip?

A donation. To me, a tip is a gratuity on top of a proper wage, for exceptional service. I don't want to sidetrack the discussion, but I find the American concept of making restaurant staff into beggars to avoid paying them properly is pretty bloody awful as well, so I'm perhaps not the best target for your rhetorical. If you employ someone, you pay them a wage (or maybe a commission - which this certainly isn't), you don't just give them a bigger begging bowl.
 
Sorry, didn't mean to come across as angsty about it, my bad...but the whole thing makes me reflexively uncomfortable, and I really think the biggest sticking point is that I think there's a big, not-just-semantic difference between "employment" and this, which I'd say is closer to "sponsored begging".
 
Oh boy...
Are you more likely to donate to them if they provide a service? Probably.

What does it cost them? What does it benefit them?
 
I do believe that's a good way to track them.
 
I totally want to be a hotspot. Then I can use my iPod Touch's Pandora thing anywhere!
 
$20 a day = $600 a month.
Minimum wage in Brazil = R$630 a month = $350 a month.

So they're making 1.7 times more than the Brazilian minimum wage. And living costs are actually higher in Brazil than the USA (if you don't believe me, check out the Brazilian GDP in nominal and PPP terms, and see that PPP is actually smaller).
 
Top Bottom