Where the voice portal model breaks
If a community was to set up a shared platform the cost of access may be borne by the users or by the community as a whole or some combination thereof, e.g. the community may pool resources to ensure a common minimum access to the system with additional access being charged per user, with the accumulated revenue being used as a corpus to ensure the common minimum
However, in all these cases, what is common is that the cost of access is being paid to a third party, i.e. the provider, who is not a direct stakeholder in the goals of the portal/platform
This is not an optimal situation either from the standpoint of risk or of sustainability.
From the point of view of risk, it represents a single point of failure i.e. should the provider choose to withdraw services for whatever reason, the platform would no longer be able to function
From the point of view of sustainability it represents a drain on the system i.e. resources are constantly draining from the system in order to sustain the system.
In order to remedy this the community can take one of two routes
Increase the stake of the provider in the community
This would potentially be possible for large affluent communities who can significantly influence the revenue stream of the provider. This approach can typically be taken by urban systems. The centralized toll free number model of voice portals follows this approach
By providing a channel for commercial communication, i.e. advertising to a large population with some purchasing power, a service provider can create a niche in the marketplace
Reduce the dependence on the provider
In the case of populations that do not have significant purchasing power, influencing the provider is not a feasible option
Just as classified information that loses its relevance over time is eventually declassified, licensed technology that has lived out its core earning potential is typically delicensed
While such technology may not be able to provide the richest experience to the user, with intelligent design it can provide very usable means of connecting to each other and to the information superhighway
We call this the “plenty of room at the bottom” phenomenon
- Use of wireless equipment in the band 26.957 – 27.283 MHz.- Notwithstanding anything contained in any law for the time being in force, no licence shall be required by any person to establish, maintain, work, possess or deal in any wireless equipment intended to be used while in motion or during halts, on non-interference, non-protection and shared (non-exclusive) basis, in the frequency band 26.957 – 27.283 MHz with 5 Watt Effective Radiated Power and built-in antenna
WPC Remarks in the National Frequency Allocation Table
| Frequency (kHz) | Type of Purpose |
| 26964, 26972, 27036, 27124 | Personal Communication Relating to Hobbies |
| 27250, 27260 | Radio Controlled Toys/low power electric gadgets |
| 27004, 27116, 27148, 27156, 27228 | Aeromodelling |
| 27140, 27204 ,26968, 26976 | Mountaineering |
| 27220, 27244 | Radio Communication Relating To Sports Events |
| 27012, 27028, 27172, 27212 | Communication Requirement In Rural Areas |
| 27044 27052 |
Communication Relating To Road Accident/Emergencies: Contacting Police Contacting Hospitals/Ambulance |
| 26980, 27236 | Communication Needs On Highways |
| 27092, 27100 | Communication Requirements Of Wild Life/Forest Conservation |
| 27060, 27068 | Life Saving Communication In Coastal Water/Rivers/Lakes |
| 27076, 27084 | Natural Disaster Relief |
| 27020, 27108 | For Special Radio Controlled Devices (Garage Door Openers, Safety Alarm Etc.) |
| 27155, 27225 | Radio control of models |
| 26988, 26996, 27132 27164, 27180, 27188,27196, 27252, 27268,27276 | Spare Channels For Future Requirements |
We use a standard manufactured transciever from President Electronics as the transmitter station. This ensures that we conform to the WPC regulations on radiating power etc.
For the receivers, we are currently working on perfecting a modification for cheaply available AM/FM radio sets, that can be implemented by local electronics tinkerers such as mobile shop owners etc
There is no transmitter on the reception end, so the power regulations do not need to be managed on a per receiver basis.
The incoming content could still be received over the mobile channel, but since it would be relatively less volumnious it would pose less of a drain on the system.
The cost of access for listeners would be a one time investment in a low cost modified receiver, which would typically cost about $3 with the modifications we are working on.
Amortized over the life of the server, the cost of access would be comparitively much lower than a pure mobile based approach.
Also with the expanded free listener base, there is a stronger chance of localized revenue generation becoming possible through the platform, helping contribute to sustainability
At the moment we are able to broadcast to a ~4-5 kilometer radius. The goal is to fine tune the circuit and the antenna we are using to be able to receive at as long a range as possible
Watch this space for more updates