Slashdot Mirror
Rolling DSL and Wireless Access Out In One Swoop
B1ackFa1c0n writes: "Finally those of us in telecom valley (Petaluma/Santa Rosa, CA)
are getting DSL with a twist... Vista Broadband is beginning to roll out DSL to those of us beyond the SBC limit. Rumours have it that every home that installs gets a wireless router and an antenna on the roof - effectively expanding Vista's wireless network at the same time. If enough people sign up, this would allow seamless wireless coverage for the whole area *at a profit* to Vista."
Wrong. He did not. It's a ridiculous liberal myth.
Everytime I see this fabrication, I want to vomit.
Let me quote Richard Wiggins from the peer-reviewed journal First Monday:
What Gore Said
Although Al Gore never claimed to have invented the Internet, he did discuss his role in Internet development in an interview with Wolf Blitzer of Cable News Network. The interview took place on March 9, 1999 during CNN's "Late Edition" show. Specifically, what Gore said was "I took the initiative in creating the Internet."
A cynic might observe that "creating the Internet" and "inventing the Internet" are tantamount to the same exaggeration. But let's look at the entire quote in the context of the colloquy with Blitzer. Here is Blitzer's entire query to Gore:
BLITZER: I want to get to some of the substance of domestic and international issues in a minute, but let's just wrap up a little bit of the politics right now.
Why should Democrats, looking at the Democratic nomination process, support you instead of Bill Bradley, a friend of yours, a former colleague in the Senate? What do you have to bring to this that he doesn't necessarily bring to this process?
Clearly, Blitzer is asking Gore to offer an explanation of how he differs as a politician from other politicians in general, and his rival at the time, Bill Bradley, in particular. Here is Gore's entire response to Blitzer's question:
GORE: Well, I will be offering - I'll be offering my vision when my campaign begins. And it will be comprehensive and sweeping. And I hope that it will be compelling enough to draw people toward it. I feel that it will be.
But it will emerge from my dialogue with the American people. I've traveled to every part of this country during the last six years. During my service in the United States Congress, I took the initiative in creating the Internet. I took the initiative in moving forward a whole range of initiatives that have proven to be important to our country's economic growth and environmental protection, improvements in our educational system.
During a quarter century of public service, including most of it long before I came into my current job, I have worked to try to improve the quality of life in our country and in our world. And what I've seen during that experience is an emerging future that's very exciting, about which I'm very optimistic, and toward which I want to lead.
Mr. Wiggins observes:
Gore's recent statement that as a member of Congress he had taken the initiative in "creating the Internet" drew hoots of laughter, especially from Republicans. Gore has long been a promoter of the Internet, but he didn't invent it. Trying to keep a straight face, Senate Majority Leader Trent Lott quickly issued a news release claiming that he invented the paper clip. This was not the first time Gore has overreached. A year ago Gore told reporters that he and his wife, Tipper, at the time when they were college sweethearts, were the inspiration for the novel "Love Story." That came as news to the befuddled author, Erich Segal.
The editorialist saw the Internet statement as part of a pattern of hype, of Gore overstating his own accomplishments. Like Lott, other politicians saw Gore's statement as fodder for ridicule. Dan Quayle took up the bait, quoted as saying, "If Gore invented the Internet, then I invented Spell-Check."
So, before you stupid Liberals and Democrats start taking credit for the Internet, just remember, It's not true!
If I weren't nailed to the penis, I'd be pushing up the daisies!
amen for dsl
pf
especially with the problems some areas have experienced getting/keeping dsl.
One of the great things about DSL is that you have your own connection to the ISP, as opposed to cable modems, which share bandwidth within each neighborhood. With this scheme, it looks like they are using each subscriber as a relay, so your bandwitch is shared with anyone upstream from you. This can be good for business, but not so great for consumers.
first post? for me, at least...
Not that telecom isn't one big valley - look at WorldCom and Global Crossing stock.
fp
But do you really want anyone with a Wireless card looking at all your pr0n surfing?
Objects in the blog are closer then they ap
So do they like not let you unsubscribe because you'll be taking out a portion of their network?
or is there a claus that says that once the transmission tower is welded to your house/trailer it cant be taken down. ever.
-
It also kinda puts a sock in the mouth of those that complain about people "reselling" their bandwidth by offering up wireless access points. Now Vista does it themselves, its endorsed and they can maintain some control over it while still providing the same level of advantage to the customers that desire it.
Makes sense to me anyways.
-Restil
Play with my webcams and lights here
I am very glad to hear that the company will actually become profitable. The current state of affairs with the majority of DSL providers isn't that great. A lot of work needs to be done to improve the quality of service/support. I am very pleased to read about more people receiving access. Modems are painful.
So is this wrong because someone is making a profit, or is it cool because everyone gets service?
Also how strong the signal is without an atenna.. be kinda like wirless internet for thoes laptop people, when the infastructure gets big enuff, from soo many residental users. I hope this works out :)
Homer puts Lisa in with bart, and leaves humming, "daDA daDA daDAAAAAAAAA, da daDA da daDAAAA DAAA" (odd couple)
i need to get out more
It is hard. How do I make the firewall? I try typing in "firewall" but I can't get it to work. Help me out and I'll hoooook you up with WinXP corporate that I got from my friend Ray.
Liberate your mind in two clicks or less.
What about security... This seems like it could really be a privacy issue. I would think anyone driving around with a portable could sniff your network (assuming they had the right wireless adapater)! Anyone know more about the technology that is used here?
I may be showing my ignorance here, but does this mean that each subscriber is going to be broadcasting WiFi to the neighborhood?
Doesn't this make the whole network more susceptible to wireless attackes by AirSnort and WEPcrack technologies?
Or am I on crack?
It may be cold, but at least it's clear.
LIBBY HOELER post. I want you Libby!!!!!
Roadkill is yummy.
What happens if the person whose wireless access point I am relying on cancels their service?
Wireless DSL... Hmmmm, I wonder how soon until drive by cracking is a problem.
Wireless access on the roof? That's not DSL, that's probably microwave or something. DSL only works over copper phone lines; any other form of broadband is not DSL. What's the deal here?
$x='S24;r)>63/* h@<5+oZ)32"5cz';$me='phroggy'x$];
$x=~y+ -xz+\0-Tx+;print$_^chop$me for split'',$x;
Who was Wintermute on scoop.geekizoid.com?
If I weren't nailed to the penis, I'd be pushing up the daisies!
Trading files between, if the system gets huge, would be what I would do.
Buy a Nintendo DS Lite
Sounds like a good idea. There's a group over here in Australia that are looking at doing the same thing as these guys. They're called the "commpunity broadband project"...It's not so much a commercial venture as a group of knowledgeable members of the broadband community (read : users) whom are trying to get together a more affordable broadband solution for Australians.
Still, these vista guys seem somewhat further advanced in their endeavor - they've actually launched!
...this is getting out of hand
Interestingly enough, the technique they are using to "expand" their coverage area is remarkably similar to the distributed nature of peer-to-peer sharing networks, such as Gnutella.
I wonder how well it will scale. Will users' bandwidth drop as more and more customers in their area sign on, due to the heavy relaying of traffic?
That's also what it seemed like to me when I read stuff. But I don't think it's that simple. With the cable modem you send your packets thru a neighborhood hub, which then goes to the company and out onto the web. With this system I don't understand how they could coordinate that, and it doesn't seem right to me anyhow. Would the system keep a listing of all people connected and then go thru the fastest route? Would it only use systems that are not sending or recieving data? For some reason I doubt that this setup would fly, especially due to the capacity for security problems. What if you were able to configure your system to catch all queries relayed thru your box? Personally, I can't wait to inform my buddy about this. He's 220 feet outside of the area that he might be able to get DSL to, and Pac Bell sucks. This has the potential to be great for a great many people. - DaftShadow
Does ANAL COX use wireless DSL? I thought he preferred Linus Torvalds' anus.
This is not DSL, it is wireless broadband - probably not unlike the Nokia Rooftop system that Cringely mentioned not too long ago...
Jeff
Stupid editors.
They are calling their fixed wireless service "DSL" to market it. It's no more DSL than a tin can and string.
"Beyond the SBC limit" should have given that away anyway. You simply can't have DSL service past a certain cable run length. Who the hell do you think runs the CO's? SBC! Some copanies sell IDSL in locations where SBC won't, thereby increasing their customer base to "beyond bell," but this is not one of those cases.
Honestly.
-=AnonyMoose=-
It sounds like service will be initially offered in Novato, Santa Rosa, and Rohnert Park. I see no mention of Petaluma, but since we get Pac Ball DSL and AT&T cable modem here, we may not qualify as one of the "Broadband-starved areas" that they appear to be targetting.
Slashdot: come for the pedantry, stay for the condescension.
linking their URL to slashdot. If they can't handle it, then maybe this won't be a good thing :)
Sent from your iPad.
Earlier I mentioned a group of australians getting together a project like this one that Vista is doing. Here is the homepage for those guys :
http://www.bvc.com.au/online/
looks like it's broken at the moment tho...:-(
...this is getting out of hand
This has absolutely nothing to do with DSL. A Tin can and string is closer to DSL than this.
A lot of fixed wireless companies (not just broadband data) call their services the wireless equivalent of the wireline alternative. Ie: Wireless Cable -- what a misnomer!
Some company says "Wireless DSL" and some stupid person posts it to slashdot as some sort of breakthrough idea. It's simply fixed wireless.
You can't sell DSL service "beyond SBC" unless you want to run your own CO's, which is not turning out to be very profitable for small companies to do. DSL only goes over copper wires and it only goes so far.
~GoRK
is the missing link, doncha know...
According to the techs I worked with it's not DSL, it's just an implementation of 802.11 wireless with directional antennae.
We recently had to switch over to DSL because the wireless got too flaky over time.
Under certain circumstances, profanity provides a relief denied even to prayer. -- Mark Twain
If it's wireless, then it's not a Digital Subscriber Line.
Does anyone know what hardware they're using? I would guess Nokia Rooftop because that's the only equipment of this type I've heard of.
reading their web page (which is admittedly very short on detail) I suspect they're rolling out a broadcast broadband service (not a DSL service - a connect to the net via radio service via transmitters on local hills - there have been several abortive attempts to do this elsewhere). This may explain why it sounds like they're giving you 802.11 and DSL - in reality they are probably giving you DSL-like speeds via a wireless medium
And Theodore Roosevelt invented the airplane.
This is residential wireless of the same type that Sprint/Earthlink rolled out to several major cities. Check out their services page.
Residential wireless is neat, but only if you can't get DSL or a cable modem. The latency makes it problematic for fast-paced online games, but the download speed makes it ideal for web surfing. Also, wireless usually has a transfer limit -- in this company's case, it's 3GB-6GB a month (3GB for the lower-priced connections.) You have to watch your downloads.
It's a great idea if your only choice is dialup, and I'm glad to finally see a company recognize that this is a great service to those in flat areas that DSL/cable are not covering.
Simpli - Your source for San Jose dedicated servers and colocation!
Ha-ha-ha-ha-ha. You can't fool me...there ain't no Sanity Clause.
There are non-802.11 wireless systems out there that have different security properties.
Things have been so bad lately...news like this seems rarer than diamonds.
Any news on San Fernando valley? What's happening vis-a-vis DSL here?
I'll see that and raise you: I heard a rumor that every house gets a free Pentium 4 PC with GeForce3 Ti500 and Red Hat Linux 7.2.
Rumors are NOT NEWS.
"One of the great things about DSL is that you have your own connection to the ISP, as opposed to cable modems, which share bandwidth within each neighborhood."
Uh-huh, and does this make your DSL line any faster than a comparable cable modem? Take a look at the results of the DSLReports speed tests -- nearly all of the top speeds belong to cable modem networks.
I had DSL from Speakeasy -- 1.5MBps down/384K up. Great service, but it was $100/month. My $35/month cable modem has the same download speed. I get 1.5MBps down, period. It's not dependent on how far I am from the cable company, either.
You have a point, but the fact that your bandwidth isn't shared doesn't make a difference in your overall speed. This is just something the DSL companies came up with to try to differentiate their more expensive service from the cable modem crowd.
Simpli - Your source for San Jose dedicated servers and colocation!
My complaint about John Ashcroft:
I won't sugarcoat this letter. This is a very bitter letter.
Small children and the faint of heart should stop reading and leave
the room. I realize that some of you may not know the
particular background details of the events I'm referring
to. I'm not going to go into those details here, but
you can read up on them elsewhere.
Aside from the fact that it is better to remain silent
and be thought a fool than to speak and
remove all doubt, if we're to effectively carry out
our responsibilities and make a future for
ourselves, we will first have to prevent the
production of a new crop of the worst classes of
pernicious Philistines there are while remaining
true to those beliefs, ideals, and aspirations
we hold most dear. The primary point of disagreement
between myself and John Ashcroft
is whether or not if he can overawe and befuddle
a sufficient number of prominent
individuals, then it will become virtually
impossible for anyone to lead the way to the future,
not to the past. His grunts have cooperated closely
with self-satisfied ratbags on several
projects, which is another way of
saying that when I was younger, I wanted
to uplift individuals and communities on a global
scale to provide some balance to his one-sided
crusades. I still want to do that, but now I
realize that he thinks it would be a great idea to
nourish pretentious ideologies. Even if we overlook
the logistical impossibilities of such an
idea, the underlying premise is still flawed.
Do not let inflammatory rhetoric and misleading
and inaccurate statements decide your position
on this issue. If Ashcroft continues to
biologically or psychologically engineer gutless
fast-buck artists to make them even more
blockish than they already are, the result can be a
tone-deafness, a cluelessness, on matters
that are at the center of experience for vast
segments of the population.
I'll talk about that another time. I have other,
more important, things to discuss now. For
starters, his claim that he has his moral compass
in tact is factually unsupported and
politically motivated.
If we let him increase society's cycle of hostility
and violence, who's going to protect us?
The government? Our parents? Superman? Probably none
of the above. That's why it's important to stand
as a witness in the divine court of the eternal judge and
proclaim that it is a figment of Ashcroft's imagination
that all minorities are poor, stupid ghetto trash.
Ashcroft's trucklers' thinking is fenced in by
many constraints. Their minds are not free
because they dare not be.
I believe that Ashcroft is talking out of his posterior.
Deal with it. Although he wants to perpetuate inaccurate
and dangerous beliefs about male-female relationships,
if we fail to discuss the advantages of two-parent families,
the essential role of individual and family
responsibility, the need for uniform standards of
civil behavior, and the primacy of the work
ethic, then we have no one to blame but ourselves.
I cannot compromise with him; he is
without principles. I cannot reason with him; he is without
reason. But I can warn him, and with a warning he
must certainly take to heart: We must ratchet up our level
of understanding. Our children depend on that.
Is it not positively the distinguishing feature of
Ashcroft's analects to instill a general
ennui? Ashcroft, do you feel no shame for what
you've done? Take it from me: I find that
some of his choices of words in his prognoses would
not have been mine. For example, I would have substituted
"malignant" for "scientificogeographical" and
"self-serving" for "anthropomorphotheist." He controls a secret
underground empire. To top that off, this is not Nazi
Germany or Soviet Russia, where the state
would be eager to subordinate all spheres of society
to an ideological vision of organic community.
Not yet, at least. But he contends that he is a
paragon of morality and wisdom. Excuse me, but where
exactly did this little factoid come from? I was, however,
going to forget about the whole thing when it
suddenly occurred to me that I am now in a position to
define what I mean when I say that Ashcroft lectures
us about solecism so often that he may soon
become a major source of hearing loss. What I mean is
that I have avoided engaging in open debate with the most
boisterous brigands I've ever seen -- or even
acknowledging their existence -- for fear of
lending them any form of legitimacy. Sadly, lack of
space prevents me from elaborating further.
There is no place in this country where we are safe from
his accomplices, no place where we are not targeted
for hatred and attack. Creating needed
understanding is best achieved in a calm, rational environment
for a variety of reasons. For instance, ruthless know-nothings
like Ashcroft often think they have the right to open the
floodgates of pharisaism. No joke. Last I checked, if he would
abandon his name-calling and false dichotomies, it would be
much easier for me to pronounce the truth and renounce the lies.
(Yes, Ashcroft seems to have a bitter ideological conflict with
my statement that his grievances are exemplary of the forces minorities
must fight in their struggle to achieve equal footing with the rest of
the community, but that's a different story.) His diatribes have
kept us separated for too long from the love, contributions, and
challenges of our brothers and sisters in this wonderful
adventure we share together -- life! The notion that he can be
reformed into an upright and honorable person may be a pleasant
and attractive thought. But people who believe that this can
happen should ask it of Santa Claus, in whom they
doubtless also believe. For future reference, there is
something grievously wrong with those beer-guzzling prigs who
promote mediocrity over merit. Shame on the lot of them!
Please remember that Ashcroft says that the Earth is flat.
Yet he also wants to influence the attitudes of dominant
culture towards any environment or activity that is predominantly
fatuitous. Am I the only one who sees the irony there? I ask,
because we are at a crossroads. One road leads into the light
of a bright, shining future in which stubborn peddlers of
snake-oil remedies like Ashcroft are utterly absent. The other
road leads into the darkness of favoritism. The question,
therefore, is: Who's driving the bus? A complete answer to that
question would take more space than I can afford, so I'll have
to give you a simplified answer. For starters, Ashcroft maintains
that either he answers to no one or that he has been robbed of all
he does not possess. Ashcroft denies any other possibility. Does Ashcroft
really know anything about the tactics he claims to support? No, he doesn't.
It should come as no shock to anyone that I, for one, have a problem with
his use of the phrase, "We all know that...". With this phrase,
Ashcroft doesn't need to prove his claim that people don't
mind having their communities turned into war zones; he merely
accepts it as fact. To put it another way, anyone who believes that
children should get into cars with strangers who wave lots of yummy
candy at them is kidding himself. For proof of this fact, I must
point out that he has stated that the ideas of "freedom" and
"nativism" are Siamese twins. That's just pure interdenominationalism.
Well, in Ashcroft's case, it might be pure ignorance, seeing that we
can all have daydreams about Happy Fuzzy Purple Bunny Land, where
everyone is caring, loving, and nice. Not only will those daydreams
not come true, but one of Ashcroft's bedfellows once said, "The
boogeyman is going to get us if we don't agree to Ashcroft's demands."
Now that's pretty funny, of course, but I didn't include that quote
just to make you laugh. I included it to convince you that it's easy
enough to hate Ashcroft any day of the week on general principles.
But now I'll tell you about some very specific things that
Ashcroft is up to, things that ought to make a real Ashcroft-hater
out of you. First off, there are two related questions in this matter.
The first is to what extent he has tried to call for a return to that
which wasn't particularly good in the first place. The other is whether
or not one of the great mysteries of modern life is, Why doesn't Ashcroft
point a critical finger at himself for a change? On the surface, it would
seem to have something to do with the way that Ashcroft has an almost
mystical faith in careerism. But upon further investigation, one
will find that the next time he decides to instill a subconscious
feeling of guilt in those of us who disagree with his epigrams, he
should think to himself, cui bono? -- who benefits? If the mass news
media were actually in the business of covering news rather than molding
public attitudes to canonize illaudable ignoramuses as nomological
emblems of propriety, they would doubtlessly report that I am shocked
and angered by Ashcroft's shameless, lethargic improprieties. Such
shameful conduct should never be repeated.
Even though there is blood on Ashcroft's hands, this does not negate
the fact that Ashcroft likes solutions that feed us ever-larger doses
of his lies and crackpot assumptions. Could there be a conflict of
interest there? If you were to ask me, I'd say that his sentiments
are not our only concern. To state the matter in a
few words, he has never satisfactorily proved his
assertion that his vices are the only true virtues. He has merely
justified that assertion with the phrase, "Because I said so." Need
I point out that I find much to disagree with in
Ashcroft's mottos? If I recall correctly, if you spot a bumper
sticker that reads, "Ashcroft's lapdogs are hardly strangers to
conformism," you're probably looking at my car. And that's
why I'm writing this letter; this is my manifesto, if you will,
on how to subject his deeds to the rigorous scrutiny they warrant.
There's no way I can do that alone, and there's no way I
can do it without first stating that every concert that he
attends rapidly degenerates into a free-for-all of slam dancing
and scattered fistfights. Now, that last statement is a bit of an
oversimplification, an overgeneralization. But it is nevertheless
substantially true. I don't have time to go into this in as much
detail as I should, but if one dares to criticize even a
single tenet of Ashcroft's imprecations, one is promptly condemned
as cynical, frightful, ribald, or whatever epithet Ashcroft deems
most appropriate, usually without much explanation. Let me close
by reminding you that John Ashcroft's writings are worthy of a
good flush down the toilet.
WTF?!
This is simply a wireless ISP using the Nokia Rooftop system that was created by Rooftop Networks three years ago (and acquired by Nokia). It's a mesh 802.11b network on steriods with a routing protocol. If your only way back to the ISP's POP is through your neighbor's unit, and he deactivates his service or trips over the power cord, your service is down.
Nothing to see here, people. Move along...
Tired of being "punished" by the Slashdot $rtbl since 2002. I'm now over at http://soylentnews.org/ .
My complaint about John Ashcroft:
I won't sugarcoat this letter. This is a very bitter letter.
Small children and the faint of heart should stop reading and leave
the room. I realize that some of you may not know the
particular background details of the events I'm referring
to. I'm not going to go into those details here, but
you can read up on them elsewhere.
Aside from the fact that it is better to remain silent
and be thought a fool than to speak and
remove all doubt, if we're to effectively carry out
our responsibilities and make a future for
ourselves, we will first have to prevent the
production of a new crop of the worst classes of
pernicious Philistines there are while remaining
true to those beliefs, ideals, and aspirations
we hold most dear. The primary point of disagreement
between myself and John Ashcroft
is whether or not if he can overawe and befuddle
a sufficient number of prominent
individuals, then it will become virtually
impossible for anyone to lead the way to the future,
not to the past. His grunts have cooperated closely
with self-satisfied ratbags on several
projects, which is another way of
saying that when I was younger, I wanted
to uplift individuals and communities on a global
scale to provide some balance to his one-sided
crusades. I still want to do that, but now I
realize that he thinks it would be a great idea to
nourish pretentious ideologies. Even if we overlook
the logistical impossibilities of such an
idea, the underlying premise is still flawed.
Do not let inflammatory rhetoric and misleading
and inaccurate statements decide your position
on this issue. If Ashcroft continues to
biologically or psychologically engineer gutless
fast-buck artists to make them even more
blockish than they already are, the result can be a
tone-deafness, a cluelessness, on matters
that are at the center of experience for vast
segments of the population.
I'll talk about that another time. I have other,
more important, things to discuss now. For
starters, his claim that he has his moral compass
in tact is factually unsupported and
politically motivated.
If we let him increase society's cycle of hostility
and violence, who's going to protect us?
The government? Our parents? Superman? Probably none
of the above. That's why it's important to stand
as a witness in the divine court of the eternal judge and
proclaim that it is a figment of Ashcroft's imagination
that all minorities are poor, stupid ghetto trash.
Ashcroft's trucklers' thinking is fenced in by
many constraints. Their minds are not free
because they dare not be.
I believe that Ashcroft is talking out of his posterior.
Deal with it. Although he wants to perpetuate inaccurate
and dangerous beliefs about male-female relationships,
if we fail to discuss the advantages of two-parent families,
the essential role of individual and family
responsibility, the need for uniform standards of
civil behavior, and the primacy of the work
ethic, then we have no one to blame but ourselves.
I cannot compromise with him; he is
without principles. I cannot reason with him; he is without
reason. But I can warn him, and with a warning he
must certainly take to heart: We must ratchet up our level
of understanding. Our children depend on that.
Is it not positively the distinguishing feature of
Ashcroft's analects to instill a general
ennui? Ashcroft, do you feel no shame for what
you've done? Take it from me: I find that
some of his choices of words in his prognoses would
not have been mine. For example, I would have substituted
"malignant" for "scientificogeographical" and
"self-serving" for "anthropomorphotheist." He controls a secret
underground empire. To top that off, this is not Nazi
Germany or Soviet Russia, where the state
would be eager to subordinate all spheres of society
to an ideological vision of organic community.
Not yet, at least. But he contends that he is a
paragon of morality and wisdom. Excuse me, but where
exactly did this little factoid come from? I was, however,
going to forget about the whole thing when it
suddenly occurred to me that I am now in a position to
define what I mean when I say that Ashcroft lectures
us about solecism so often that he may soon
become a major source of hearing loss. What I mean is
that I have avoided engaging in open debate with the most
boisterous brigands I've ever seen -- or even
acknowledging their existence -- for fear of
lending them any form of legitimacy. Sadly, lack of
space prevents me from elaborating further.
There is no place in this country where we are safe from
his accomplices, no place where we are not targeted
for hatred and attack. Creating needed
understanding is best achieved in a calm, rational environment
for a variety of reasons. For instance, ruthless know-nothings
like Ashcroft often think they have the right to open the
floodgates of pharisaism. No joke. Last I checked, if he would
abandon his name-calling and false dichotomies, it would be
much easier for me to pronounce the truth and renounce the lies.
(Yes, Ashcroft seems to have a bitter ideological conflict with
my statement that his grievances are exemplary of the forces minorities
must fight in their struggle to achieve equal footing with the rest of
the community, but that's a different story.) His diatribes have
kept us separated for too long from the love, contributions, and
challenges of our brothers and sisters in this wonderful
adventure we share together -- life! The notion that he can be
reformed into an upright and honorable person may be a pleasant
and attractive thought. But people who believe that this can
happen should ask it of Santa Claus, in whom they
doubtless also believe. For future reference, there is
something grievously wrong with those beer-guzzling prigs who
promote mediocrity over merit. Shame on the lot of them!
Please remember that Ashcroft says that the Earth is flat.
Yet he also wants to influence the attitudes of dominant
culture towards any environment or activity that is predominantly
fatuitous. Am I the only one who sees the irony there? I ask,
because we are at a crossroads. One road leads into the light
of a bright, shining future in which stubborn peddlers of
snake-oil remedies like Ashcroft are utterly absent. The other
road leads into the darkness of favoritism. The question,
therefore, is: Who's driving the bus? A complete answer to that
question would take more space than I can afford, so I'll have
to give you a simplified answer. For starters, Ashcroft maintains
that either he answers to no one or that he has been robbed of all
he does not possess. Ashcroft denies any other possibility. Does Ashcroft
really know anything about the tactics he claims to support? No, he doesn't.
It should come as no shock to anyone that I, for one, have a problem with
his use of the phrase, "We all know that...". With this phrase,
Ashcroft doesn't need to prove his claim that people don't
mind having their communities turned into war zones; he merely
accepts it as fact. To put it another way, anyone who believes that
children should get into cars with strangers who wave lots of yummy
candy at them is kidding himself. For proof of this fact, I must
point out that he has stated that the ideas of "freedom" and
"nativism" are Siamese twins. That's just pure interdenominationalism.
Well, in Ashcroft's case, it might be pure ignorance, seeing that we
can all have daydreams about Happy Fuzzy Purple Bunny Land, where
everyone is caring, loving, and nice. Not only will those daydreams
not come true, but one of Ashcroft's bedfellows once said, "The
boogeyman is going to get us if we don't agree to Ashcroft's demands."
Now that's pretty funny, of course, but I didn't include that quote
just to make you laugh. I included it to convince you that it's easy
enough to hate Ashcroft any day of the week on general principles.
But now I'll tell you about some very specific things that
Ashcroft is up to, things that ought to make a real Ashcroft-hater
out of you. First off, there are two related questions in this matter.
The first is to what extent he has tried to call for a return to that
which wasn't particularly good in the first place. The other is whether
or not one of the great mysteries of modern life is, Why doesn't Ashcroft
point a critical finger at himself for a change? On the surface, it would
seem to have something to do with the way that Ashcroft has an almost
mystical faith in careerism. But upon further investigation, one
will find that the next time he decides to instill a subconscious
feeling of guilt in those of us who disagree with his epigrams, he
should think to himself, cui bono? -- who benefits? If the mass news
media were actually in the business of covering news rather than molding
public attitudes to canonize illaudable ignoramuses as nomological
emblems of propriety, they would doubtlessly report that I am shocked
and angered by Ashcroft's shameless, lethargic improprieties. Such
shameful conduct should never be repeated.
Even though there is blood on Ashcroft's hands, this does not negate
the fact that Ashcroft likes solutions that feed us ever-larger doses
of his lies and crackpot assumptions. Could there be a conflict of
interest there? If you were to ask me, I'd say that his sentiments
are not our only concern. To state the matter in a
few words, he has never satisfactorily proved his
assertion that his vices are the only true virtues. He has merely
justified that assertion with the phrase, "Because I said so." Need
I point out that I find much to disagree with in
Ashcroft's mottos? If I recall correctly, if you spot a bumper
sticker that reads, "Ashcroft's lapdogs are hardly strangers to
conformism," you're probably looking at my car. And that's
why I'm writing this letter; this is my manifesto, if you will,
on how to subject his deeds to the rigorous scrutiny they warrant.
There's no way I can do that alone, and there's no way I
can do it without first stating that every concert that he
attends rapidly degenerates into a free-for-all of slam dancing
and scattered fistfights. Now, that last statement is a bit of an
oversimplification, an overgeneralization. But it is nevertheless
substantially true. I don't have time to go into this in as much
detail as I should, but if one dares to criticize even a
single tenet of Ashcroft's imprecations, one is promptly condemned
as cynical, frightful, ribald, or whatever epithet Ashcroft deems
most appropriate, usually without much explanation. Let me close
by reminding you that John Ashcroft's writings are worthy of a
good flush down the toilet.
If you're really concerned about sharing your new DSL line's bandwidth with a roof-top antenna, or you worry about security, but you don't want to (or cannot) cut the power cord, a coffee can over the antenna, or some tinfoil, would probably block enough of the signal to prevent any useful connections to YOUR rooftop, and divert those connections to a neighbor.
--Brandon / Split Infinity Music
I don't really see why they are doing both at once...
Why not just cut out the dsl and give everyone wireless
Digital Subscriber Line. Line. Line. LINE!
This is fixed point wireless.
Hmm.. that's great to hear, but I wonder when those of us living in the ever-primative Silicon Valley will be able to get broadband. I live in Campbell (which basically borders Santa Clara to the south and San Jose to the west), and I still can't get DSL or cable modem service here. In fact, a friend of mine who lives in central Santa Clara was able to get DSL only a year ago or so. When I first arrived a couple years ago, Pac Bell babbled something about "Project Pronto" which was supposed to be finished by Summer 2000 (of course, it wasn't). Has anyone heard any information about this?
I'm having a race with my parents in rural Ohio to see who will get broadband first..
Josh Woodward
Very nice, typically Petaluma/Rohnert Park/Cotati/Santa Rosa are considered tier 3 markets. IMO, having been one of the engineers for NorthPoint and now AT&T, it is refreshing to see a company address these markets with a topology that has the potential to turn a profit for them, as opposed to the standard approach of rolling out services at a loss to satisfy availability claims.
./bot
Does anybody have an definitive answer as to how these wireless devices stand on the FCC's "totem pole". I was under the impression that us ham radio operators (at least for the part of the spectrum we share with 802.11b, about 1/2 - 2/3 of the channels) were given a higher priority than the ISM unlicensed users. In fact my license gives me the ability to jam out 1500 watts with no limitation of ERP. So my spread spectrum 5 watt signal at 2.406 mhz sent through a 15db vertical is going to cause them at least a hiccup if they ever make it down to Florida. (my signal is audible enough to digipeat at 23 miles from my house. (yikes, too bad I can't make money off of it...)) What would happen if say a company wanted to use the same frequency my station is set to? In the past hams have usually been trod upon, as the primary users have priority. Does this actually mean they have to work around me for once?!
Lousy facepalm.
http://www.radiantnetworks.com/
Feb 7, 2003 -- In other news, the mean air temperature around Petaluma/Santa Rosa has risen 2 degrees in the past year, scientists say. This has absolutely nothing to do with the widespread deployment of microwave towers throughout the area, according to a Vista Broadband spokesman. He added, "It's also completely unrelated to the purely coincidental increased cancer rate in many of our subscribers houses."
:)
According to Nokia's site, the Nokia Rooftop is NOT 802.11b.
FYI
www.clarke.ca
Do you have any idea how fat a pipe cable is? And how fat a pipe they can run to each neighborhood??? DSL is still limited insofar as how much they can send down your pair from the DSLAM at the CO.
Cable is faster, and will be faster for a long time, and anyone who is still on the DSL bus has had thier brains sucked out by the telco propaganda.
I live in a sub division that has, untill recently, been way to far out of reach of broadband. Even if it would be shared bandwidth, as has been pointed out, it would be VASTLY better than the 24.6kbps modem speeds we get here. Plus my subdivision is full of multi million dollar homes: ie people with MONEY TO BURN. They would make a perfect test market. In a place like this, most everyone has a computer, and so you could test the system very well. It is a market like this where they will be able to make REAL money. But for us it's too late. We got cable modems about 10 months ago, and we should have DLS within about 6.
Comment forecast: Bits of genius surrounded by a sea of mediocrity.
Although this is a nice post, this is not news. So called "wireless DSL" which only shares the bandwidth numbers with DSL, has been available IN "TELECOM VALLEY" as the sumitter puts it for well over a year through Sonic.net. It includes the exact same hardware as the poster mentions, and their coverage is gigantic. Wireless box and rooftop mounted antenna. Sonic is also a top rate ISP (no i dont work for them, but I am a customer with 3 DSL lines from them).
Also, being from 10 miles south of there, I would say that the roaming cattle in the Petaluma to Santa Rosa strip do not evoke the word "Telecom Valley" for Sonoma, even tho there are a lot of tech companies that fled Sillycone Valley to setup shop there. Stick with the name "Wine Country."
Check the site again. The limit that is imposed is on the web space that they provide you. There is no limit on regular transfer amount.
Why does wireless have more latency than wired?
I haven't ever heard an explanation for that. Obviously, RF radiation travels faster in air than in a cable, but other than that I don't see why there should be ANY difference in latency between wired and wireless point-to-point links. (Which these appear to be.)
Either there is something I don't know (entirely possible) or this whole wireless latency thing is B.S.
MM
--
By including this sig, the copyright holders of this work or collection unreservedly place it in the public domain.
Check out this press release:
http://www.vistabroadband.com/news2.htm
They are using Nokia's 2.4GHz wireless technology, which uses a mesh topology to get over line-of-sight and distance limitations...
Evidently they have a new strategy to track down "abuses" of their "service". So be warned.
On the plus side: it took my buddy a day to figure out how to get around it by putting a server on a cable connection which runs a Perl script that reflects the domains to a "non-Web" port on his ADSL server. He just needs to do a little more work to support directories as well as the base domains. Plus, the cable server caches static content... bonus! I have always had a gut feeling that cable + dsl was the best option.
So fuck you, Telus. We can use Cable against thee.
I've got a bad attitude and karma to burn. Go ahead. Mod me down.
There is nothing stopping them from making each subscriber install some VPN software on their computer to block out the casual sniffer.
The Metricom Ricochet network had occasionally significant latency issues, because some radio poletops were directly connected to frame relay data feeds, while other poletops relayed data to each other until they reached a wired poletop, which incurred latency for queuing and copying and CPU processing at each poletop. So not only did you get affected by how many users were sharing a wired poletop directly or indirectly, but also by how far away you were from a wired poletop. Especially in their initial deployment in the Silicon Valley area, the real bandwidth was down near San Jose / Santa Clara, and the farther you went up Route 101, away from the core area, the more relay hops you had to suffer through. But it was still cool to be able to get email on your laptop from where you were, even if it wasn't always good enough for telnet.
Bill Stewart
New Fast-Compression-only CPR http://preview.tinyurl.com/dy575ks
Of course I can't be entirely sure, but given this recent press release from Nokia I would think that this system really is based on Nokia Rooftop wireless routers.
I would love to have an antenna on my roof that gives access to others on the network. "Hi, I've been on hold for 4 hours, and I swear to God that the 5th hour is when a baseball bat accidentally beats the binary out my antenna."
tongue
Hmmm. I didn't see anything on the web page about what the service
is, so this is all conjecture, but...
If each installation also expands coverage, that means that each
base-station relays packets for your neighbours. Which means that if
you decide at some point to cancel your service, you could also be
cutting off other folks. Besides, you have to share your bandwidth
with them.
So, the only fair way to compensate folks for this is to pay them for
every downstream customer they have to route. This way, they remain
motivated to let Vista keep a tranceiver in their house, even if they
don't want the Internet connection. So, the more neighbours you
recruit, the more money you make.
In other words, it's a pyramid scheme.
So that's what Dave Rhodes' been doing lately.
I actually have DSL through a big telco ISP, and I love it. I have gotten great customer service, they are about $10/month cheaper than the idependant ISP's DSL offering, I have an extremely fast connection, and I can't tell a difference between peak and offpeak times. However, I DO live (almost) close enough to the switching office to spit on it. And there aren't many people on DSL in my area yet. I guess time will tell if they keep up the good work.
"Da ist ein Technölüst in mein Unterpanten!"