Slashdot Mirror
New Lighting Technology To Wipe Out Wi-Fi Access?
Richard Evans writes "Focus on Broadband Wireless Internet Access has an article
[cached by google ]
on the potentially catastrophic interference to Communications Users Of The 2.4 GHz Band e.g. Wi-Fi, DECT and Bluetooth by a new lighting technology called RF Lighting."
Six of the seven slashdot editors are sitting around the flat one day when Katz rushes in and says, "Guess what guys, I've won a trip to see the Pope!" Everyone gets all excited and chants, "We finally get to ask him, we finally get to ask him."
The next day, they are standing in front of the Pope, Katz out in front of the other six. All the other six start pushing Katz and
saying, "Go ahead, Katz, ask him, ask him!"
The Pope looks at Katz and asks, "Do you have a question to ask me, young man?"
Katz looks up shyly and says, "Well, yes."
The Pope tells him to go ahead and ask. Katz asks, "Well, do....do they have nuns in Alaska?"
The Pope replies, "Well, yes, I'm sure we have nuns in Alaska."
The others all keep nudging Katz and chanting, "Ask him the rest, Jon, ask him the rest!"
The Pope asks Katz if there's more to his question, and Jon continues, "Well, uh, do they have, uh, black nuns in Alaska?"
To which the Pope replies, "Well, my son, I think there must be a few black nuns in Alaska, yes."
Still not satisfied, the others keep saying, "Ask him the last part, Katz, ask him the last part!"
The Pope asks Katz, "Is there still more to your question?"
To which Katz replies, "Well, uh, yeah.....are there, uh, are there any midget black nuns in Alaska?"
The startled Pope replies, "Well, no, my son, I really don't think there are any midget black nuns in Alaska."
At this, John Katz turns all kinds of colors, and the others start laughing, and yelling, "Katz screwed a penguin, Katz screwed a penguin!"
Is cool.
FP
I guess no one will be bringing these to the lan party =P
They finally learn, and put a link to the Google Cache, IN THE FUCKING ARTICLE???? I'm so impressed.
I thought regular fluorescent lighting already fucked shit up, since its not really a steady light (like incandescent) but really flickers on and off REALLY fast. Some guy thought a cool way to basicly broadcast info from these lights was by slightyly altering the timing to transmit data....
Who needs RF lighting anyway? I'd rather have a wireless laptop/pda.
...How this will impact the use of fluorescent lighting as a data carrier. Remember This story?
So RF lighting is just normal lighting at a different frequency. A frequency that humans can't even see! Trying to listen to the radio or use wireless networking in the presence of RF lighting would be like trying to watch TV with a spotlight in your face.
Karma: Good (despite my invention of the Karma: sig)
Why not make these play nice and use the lights as repeater stations? Install a recepter on each one, wire'em up to the LAN and have even more ubiquitous access.
Any spoon would be too big.
Steve Stroh
Independent Technology Writer
Specializing in Broadband Wireless Internet Access
P.O. Box 84
Redmond, WA 98073-0084
425-481-0600
www.strohpub.com
steve@strohpub.com
Presented in the Spirit of Sharing that was the most important part of the original Internet. It takes a certain minimum generosity of spirit to play the online communications game. Without it, you fail in the long run. - Jack Rickard
Focus
on Broadband Wireless Internet Access
Steve Stroh, Editor
This article is excerpted from the July/August, 2001 issue of Focus On Broadband Wireless Internet Access - www.strohpub.com/focus.htm and is offered as an example article.
Part 18 RF Lighting
A Potential "Extinction Level Event" For Communications Users Of The 2.4 GHz Band
The phrase "ELE - Extinction Level Event" entered the popular consciousness several years ago as a result of the popular movie "Deep Impact". In the movie, an enormous asteroid is observed to be on a collision course with Earth. The asteroid is sufficiently large that an impact on Earth will cause catastrophic effects, mostly a dust cloud that will block sunlight for many months if not years, triggering the death of plant life, and soon after most animal life.
The term ELE came to mind as I read about a new lighting technology from Fusion Lighting, Inc. (www.fusionlighting.com) that uses microwave energy in a new, very high-efficiency lighting system, dubbed "RF [Radio Frequency] Lighting".
An August 6, 2001 article in the Wall Street Journal titled "Energy-Saving Light-Bulb Maker Battles With Satellite-Radio Firms For Bandwidth describes a battle-in-the-making between Fusion Lighting, Inc. and two companies that plan to offer satellite-based broadcast radio - Sirius Satellite Radio, Inc. and XM Satellite Radio. At issue is the amount of interference that Fusion's new devices would cause to the satellite radio broadcasts at 2.32 - 2.345 GHz, which are considerably removed from the spectrum where Fusion's devices operate - 2.4 - 2.4835 GHz. The satellite radio broadcasters have concluded that Fusion's devices, as proposed, will cause substantial interference to their transmissions.
Left unmentioned in the WSJ article, and only now beginning to be noted by many users of the 2.4 GHz band is that if the Fusion devices are capable of causing such trouble for satellite radio broadcasting... what would the effect be to communications users of the 2.4 GHz band, where the Fusion devices will be operating?
2.4 - 2.485 GHz in the US is used by two very different types of equipment. The older, more well established use of the band is for Industrial, Scientific, and Medical equipment (ISM) such as household and industrial microwave ovens. Operations of such devices are governed under the FCC's Part 18 rules. Basically, Part 18 devices are expected to radiate only - not receive and thus, are not communications devices.
The second major use of the 2.4 GHz band is for license-exempt communications equipment governed under the FCC's Part 15 (15.247) rules.
Because the Part 15 rules specify "robust" modulation techniques such as Frequency Hopping Spread Spectrum (FHSS), Part 15 and Part 18 devices can generally co-exist, for example microwave ovens in a household rarely operate for more than a few minutes at a time, so cordless phones and wireless networks operating in the 2.4 GHz band can continue to operate. Conflicts were anticipated when the Part 15 operation was first envisioned, and the following requirement was levied on Part 15 devices:
(1) [Each Part 15] device may not cause harmful interference, and (2) [Each Part 15] device must accept any interference received, including interference that may cause undesirable operation.
Basically, buyer beware / use at your own risk.
Fusion's RF lighting system is a good example of a Part 18 device. RF technology is useful for any number of purposes other than communications, and the FCC and industry recognized this and set aside various chunks of spectrum for industrial use.
The problem comes that the 2.4 GHz band is now used by an incredible number of number of communications devices - cordless telephones, wireless Internet access networks, wireless Local Area Networks, and soon all manner of simple devices with Bluetooth embedded in them- with an accumulated investment of (at minimum) billions of dollars.
How we got to this situation is that there was steadily increasing demand by various companies for spectrum for wireless networking and related applications, but there were no large swaths of spectrum that were suitable. There were demonstrable needs for wireless LANs in warehouses and hospitals. There were demonstrable needs for temporary wireless links.
Eventually the FCC decided to offer a Faustian bargain: Industry could use the existing ISM spectrum if they adhered to certain technical limitations with no expectation of protection. It was clearly in the FCC's mind that there would relatively few Part 15 devices, and that for the most part they had heard the last from Industry. The Part 15 rules were tough, and it would be extremely challenging to make radios work under such conditions... and, they'd have to develop newfangled spread spectrum technologies that were previously used only by the military and developed at great cost.
But, Industry found the Part 15 "deal" to be perfectly acceptable. Industry understood the Part 15 deal better than the FCC did. Industry's major goal was to be able to offer wireless devices that did not require a license from the FCC, so that such wireless devices could be sold over the counter - to anyone, everywhere. Industry foresaw that there was a market for millions of such devices (I doubt that Industry, at that point, projected that such devices would rapidly number in the billions...)
That there were technical obstacles to overcome... well, that was just a barrier to entry for potential competitors. As we've come to expect, where there is a demonstrated demand, technology can overcome, and that's exactly what happened. The biggest factor that made the difference is the rapid increase in capability of application-specific integrated circuits, and digital signal processors. Taken together, spread spectrum radios could be built, at affordable prices, that met the FCC's Part 15 rules. Gradually, an entire Part 15 industry evolved... far beyond the wildest imaginings of the FCC.
What Will Happen? There are a number of factors at play, and very high stakes, so there are a number of possible scenarios. The first scenario is that, quite apart from its effects within the 2.4 GHz band, the effects of the new Fusion Lighting devices outside of the 2.4 GHz band must adhere to existing regulations. It's difficult to ascertain from what has been published to date (particularly when Fusion Lighting is being very circumspect with potentially damaging details of its proposed product), but it appears that Fusion Lighting claims to meet the "out of band emissions limits" for Part 18 devices.
The counter-argument from the satellite radio broadcasting companies is that even if Fusion Lighting's proposed products are within out-of-band emissions limits, their transmissions are still being impacted.
To which Fusion might be expected to reply (to the effect of) "If a satellite radio broadcasting system is too precarious to deal with other signals that should have been expected, then you didn't do your homework."
The satellite radio broadcast companies' position is that this kind of interference has never been previously been an issue. Etc. You can understand why this is such a hot issue at the FCC.
But, within the 2.4 GHz band... if a Fusion Lighting device is activated, it will severely impact the use of all manner of Part 15 devices in the area around it. For example, 802.11b is becoming very popular in both large and small companies, and becoming even more popular for home use (because to hook the kid's computer up to the cable modem doesn't require any new wires). Cordless phones are also increasingly using 2.4 GHz. What happens when a nearby gas station installs RF lighting... and all 802.11b devices and 2.4 GHz cordless phones for a mile in diameter stop working?
The RF Lighting issue is quite the dilemma for the FCC, which was hoping that Fusion Lighting would be willing and able to modify their device so that it wouldn't cause interference to communications equipment. But that appears unlikely, and Fusion Lighting appears to be within its "rights" to apply for an FCC Part 18 certification to begin manufacturing. But if Part 18 certification is granted and RF Lighting devices become widespread (and it appears very likely that they will, given their inherent energy efficiencies), is the FCC willing to "sacrifice" much of the utility of the 2.4 GHz band in exchange for one company's (at the moment...) product?
The group likely to be most severely impacted by Fusion Lighting devices are Internet Service Providers that are using wireless equipment to connect to their customers. The vast majority of Wireless ISPs (WISPs) use equipment that operates in the 2.4 GHz band. Some equipment is purpose-built for ISP use, and many others use modified Wireless Local Area Network (Wireless LAN) equipment. What all WISPs have in common is that their signals are relatively "fragile". The FCC's Part 15 rules apply equally to equipment used by Wireless ISPs, so the ISPs compensate for low transmitted power with high-gain, directional antennas. This approach allows them to have enough "signal margin" to achieve a reliable link... but if a source of interference appears nearby, the link will likely be disrupted.
It may well be possible to overcome interference in the 2.4 GHz band from RF lighting devices... but doing so won't be inexpensive or easy. For example, link margins can be improved by building multiple hub sites with short paths instead of just a few hub sites with relatively long paths. Another approach is to buy better 2.4 GHz band equipment that is more robust, such as that offered by WIMAN Systems (www.wiman.net).
A long term solution to interference issues in the 2.4 GHz band is to begin using equipment that operates in the 5 GHz band. In the US, there is a total of 300 MHz of spectrum available for license-exempt wireless devices at 5 GHz. 100 MHz of this spectrum is also ISM spectrum, with the potential of industrial devices being operated there also. But the other 200 MHz is "virgin" spectrum and reserved exclusively for communications.
A number of companies now offer equipment for the 5 GHz band, and as the price of RF components for 5 GHz continues to fall, more and more equipment will become available. The emergence of equipment compliant with the 802.11a Wireless LAN standard is expected to play a major role in increasing the popularity of equipment for the 5 GHz band. Where 802.11b offers (theoretical) speeds up to 11 Mbps and operates in the 2.4 GHz band, 802.11a offers (again, theoretical) speeds up to 54 Mbps and operates in the 5 GHz band.
If RF Lighting is an "ELE" to communications users of the 2.4 GHz band, at least there is time to begin "planning for survival" - planning for migration to 5 GHz, study of new equipment, lining up additional financing, etc.
Filename: 0701feat.htm This page is one of a series of pages from www.strohpub.com. This page, and all subsidiary pages associated with it (not including links to other World Wide Web pages) are Copyright © 1997-2001 by Steven K. Stroh. To contact the author, send e-mail to steve@strohpub.com. This page was last updated September 5, 2001.
.
Assuming such lighting causes severe interference tothe 2.4 GHz band, would some government organizationg (FCC or whatever) not regulate this? I would think that I could not produce a product that causes interference to these devices without registration/approval from the right regulation boards.
The website it cites: Link is *still* blank at least a year after it was cited.
The article also goes into very little detail as to *why* this new lighting technology will be either popular nor necessary. It's vaguely referred to as "very high efficiency."
Summary: Call us when you have real news.
This article says that Sirius and XM Radio will be effected. That's really bad. Part of the reason it's worth paying for is because of the sound quality...having this happen in it's relative infancy could be realllly bad. I wonder if there's a way to shield these lights...like some sort of compound mixed into/spread on the glass that reduces the RFI. Either that or, as a geek community, we should just hope that this idea doesn't take off!
g to the oatse
c to the izzex
fo shizzle my nizzle...aw, you know how the rest of this troll goes.
Courtesy of About 420
Connotative Use/Meaning
420 is a phreak's (and not just a hippie's) favorite number for a
variety of reasons, or maybe for no reason at all, but colloquially
the number says pot -- let's smoke pot, or someone's smoking
pot, or gee, i really like pot, or time to smoke pot, either by
time (4:20 a.m. or p.m.), date (April 20th), or otherwise (e.g. State
Route 420). April 20th at 4:20 is marked by annual events in
Mount Tamalpais, CA (an informal gathering); Marin Conty, CA
(the 420 Hemp Fest); Ann Arbor, MI (the Hash Bash); and
Washington, D.C. (buildup towards the July 4th Smoke-In).
Original Source(s)
Conventional wisdom: The most common tale is that 420 is the
police radio code or criminal code (and therefore the police call)
in certain part(s) of California (e.g. in Los Angeles or San
Francisco) for having spotted someone consuming cannabis
publicly, i.e. pot smoking in progress; that local cannabis users
picked up on the code and began celebrating the number temporally
(esp. 4:20 a.m., 4:20 p.m., and April 20); that the number became
nationally popularized in the late 1980s and, more ferverently, in
the early- to mid-1990s; and is colloquially applied to a variety of
relaxed and/or inspired contexts, including not only pot
consumption but also a good time more generally (in contrast to
the drug war surrounding).
Conventions are legends: 420 is not police radio code for
anything, anywhere. Checks of criminal codes (including those of
the City of San Francisco, the City of Los Angeles, Los Angeles
County, the State of California, and the federal penal code) suggest
that the origin is neither Californian nor federal (the two best
guesses). For instance, California Penal Code 420 defines as a
misdemeanor the hindrance of use (obstructing entry) of public
lands, and California Family Code 420 defines what constitutes a
wedding ceremony (Marco). One state does come close: The
Illinois Department of Revenue classifies the Alcoholic Liquor Act
under Part 420, and the Cannabis and Controlled Substances Tax
Act are next, under Part 428. (RB 5/19/99)
True story?: According to Steven Hager, editor of High Times,
the term 420 originated at San Rafael High School, in 1971,
among a group of about a dozen pot-smoking wiseacres who
called themselves the Waldos. The term 420 was shorthand for the
time of day the group would meet, at the campus statue of Louis
Pasteur, to smoke pot. ``Waldo Steve,'' a member of the group who
now owns a business in San Francisco, says the Waldos would
salute each other in the school hallway and say ``420 Louis!'' The
term was one of many invented by the group, but it was the one
that caught on. ``It was just a joke, but it came to mean all kinds of
things, like `Do you have any?' or `Do I look stoned?' '' he said.
``Parents and teachers wouldn't know what we were talking about.''
The term took root, and flourished, and spread beyond San Rafael
with the assistance of the Grateful Dead and their dedicated cohort
of pot-smoking fans. The Waldos decided to assert their claim to
the history of the term after decades of watching it spread, mutate
and be appropriated by commercial interests. The Waldos contacted
Hager, and presented him with evidence of 420's history, primarily
a collection of postmarked letters from the early '70s with lots of
mention of 420. They also started a Web site, waldo420.com. ``We
have proof, we were the first,'' Waldo Steve said. ``I mean, it's not
like we wrote a book or invented anything. We just came up with a
phrase. But it's kind of an honor that this emanated from San
Rafael.'' Maria Alicia Gaura for the San Francisco Chronicle,
4/20/00 p. A19; and thanks to Noah Cole for the submission
Alternate explanations
There are a variety of other explanations, all much more interesting
than police code, and many plausible. Some are more likely uses
of the 420/hemp connection rather than sources of it, such as the
score for the football game in Fast Times at Ridgement High,
42-0.
Known Myths: It isn't police code (see above). There are 315
chemicals in marijuana, not 420. And although tea time in
Amsterdam is rumored to be 4:20, it is actually 5:30 (Gerhard
den Hollander).
Sixties Songs: For instance, Bob Dylan's famous Rainy Day
Women #12 and 35 is a possible reference, or source --
12x35=420. And Stephen Stills wrote (and Crosby Stills Nash
& Young performed) a song 4+20 (first recorded 7/16/69,
released on Deja Vu 3/11/70) about an 84-year-old
poverty-stricken man who started and finished with nothing.
(Thanks to Sherry Keel 12/6/98.) Dylan aslo mentions 4 and
20 windows in The Balland of Frankie Lee and Judas Priest
(on John Wesley Harding).
Older Verse: But 420 in poetry is older than that - Greg
Keller notes the old nursery rhyme line, four and twenty
black birds baked in a pie. Revelation 5:14 (in the King
James Version of the Christian Bible) reads, And the four
beasts said 'A-Men.' And the four and twenty elders fell down
and worshipped him that liveth for ever and ever. (Travis
Spurley 2/15/99) And in Midnight's_Children, Salman
Rushdie wrote, Inevitably, a number of these children failed
to survive. Malnutrition, disease and the misfortunes of
everyday life had accounted for no less than four hundred and
twenty of them by the time I became conscious of their
existence; although it is possible to hypothesize that these
deaths, too, had their purpose, since 420 has been, since time
immemorial, the number associated with fraud, deception and
trickery. (Comet 2/14/98) Comet's best guess is that this
refers to something in Indian mythology or numerology, since
the book is set in India and frequently involves Indian history,
culture, and religion. Given the high interest in Eastern
religion among the phish/dead community, this seems a likely
origin of 420's current significance.
Temporal Significance: Hands on analog clock at 4:20 look
like position of doobie dangling from mouth Larry in
Tuscan and Alex Mack 5/19/99). Disruptive students are out
of detention and safetly away from school by 4:20, also
rumored to be the time that you should dose to be peaking
when the Dead went on stage Hart. The Waldos were a
group of teens back in the 70's that lived in San Rafael, CA.
420 was the way they talked about pot in front of teachers,
non-smoking family members etc. Also it was the time of day
they could just go relax, and get baked. (PhunkCellar)
Jamaicans purportedly worked till 4 then walked home then
lit up. They would talk 420 like our parents talked about after
5. That's when partying began Larry in Tuscan). Albert (not
Abbie) Hofmann supposedly first encountered LSD at 4:20
p.m. on 4/19/1943 (Bart Coleman citing Storming Heaven by
Jay Stevens, recommended by Mickey Hart in Planet Drum).
Surrealist painter Miro was born April 20, 1893. And
www.filmspeed.com says the propoganda film Reefer
Madness has a copyright date of April 20, 1936 (i.e. 4/20).
(Patrick Woolford)
Misc: Could be that it comes from hydroponics, the practice
of cultivating plants in water often used by indoor marijuana
cultivators, since 4 is used for H on a calculator (420/H20).
(Nick Lowe 3/30/00) The number 80 (eight) is quatre vingt
(pronounced cah-truh vahn), meaning four (times} twenty.
Dan Nijjar 1/27/00 (No connection yet between the number
80 and pot. A quarter pound is roughly 120 grams, rounding
quarter-ounces to 7.5.) The titanic was supposed to arrive
4/20/1912. (Thanks to RB.) Perhaps the heavy use of vt420
terminals in the Berkeley area is to blame? (BTW, 420 in
binary code is 110100100.)
Ubiquitous?
Now there's a 420 Pale Ale. One of the late-97/early-98 Got
Milk ads featured a character eating cookies without milk and
then passing a sign that reads Next Rest Area 420 miles (as Ross
Bruning). Reportedly, all of the clocks in the movie Pulp Fiction
are stuck on 4:20. Shirts with the number 420 on the red-and-blue
interstate highway shield (Interstate 420?) have show up on the
sitcom Will and Grace (Paul Risenhoover 5/14/99) and in several
videos. UPS' labelling software has a 420 postal code legend for
next-day/2-day deliveries (which is how Phish tickets are sent).
(Jack Lebowitz 10/3/98) MTV's 1997 Viewer's Choice Award (for
the MTV Video Awards) was decided by calls to
1-800-420-4MTV. And by May of 1998, the number was
appearing in so many ads (eg Copenhagen 5/14/98 Rolling Stone
p54, Corvette p55 5/98 Car & Driver) that its presence is
presumed to be intentional. Many songs are around 4 minutes 20
seconds long (since many songs fall between 2:30 and 5:30),
including for example Pink Floyd's A Great Day for Freedom (on
The Division Bell, 1994), the Foo Fighters' My Hero, and
Smokin' from Boston's first album. There have also been some
420 references on The Simpsons. In the re-run episode aired on
April 20th, 1999 at a special time (probably in honor of those
college students staying in the holiday spirit
Flanders that Barney's birthday is April 20th. Also, the jackpot sign
in one part of the casino says $420,000. There are a couple less
concrete ones, but these two have to be legit, especially since they
decided to air THAT particular episode on 4/20/99. (Submitted by
Matt Meehan 4/21/99) And (as of Fall '99) the 60 free minutes that
Working Assets Long Distance offers, at the 7 cents per minute
rate, is $4.20 free. There's even a band named 420, and another
names . In the first fifteen pages of Karel Capek's novel War with
the Newts, a man diving under wonder stayed down for four
minutes and twenty seconds. Grant Garstka 1/6/00 At the
suggested retail price ($3.96) and Michigan (6%) sales tax, a deck
of Uno cards costs $4.20. Nic Boris 4:20 marks the first downbeat
of the drums in Led Zeppelin's epic Stairway to Heaven. (Dan
Harris) The bill authorizing force after the World Trade Center
attacks of 9/11/01 passed 420 to 1, and news reports in following
months noted many times that there are (or were then, anyway) 420
airports in the U.S. Allan Morris And don't forget that Adolf Hitler
was born on April 20, macabely celebrated (or at least
referenced) via the Columbine High School shootings.
Phish-related Occurances
Whatever the origin, the number appears frequently... For the
summer 1997 tour, TicketMaster service charges were $4.20. In
the Fall 1997 Doniac Schvice Dry Goods section, a limited edition
Pollack poster printed on 100% hemp is order number 420P. The
Great Went was 420 miles from Boston (former home of Phish).
The official logo includes 4 gills and 20 bubbles (Gringo
11/12/98). As of 6/15/97, including covers and originals, Phish
had performed a total of 420 songs (thought its 486 by 4/24/98).
(David Steinberg). Lawnboy is 420megs of memory. Patrick
Walker Phish's The Vibration of Life underlies a whirling loop
with Seven Beats per second (which makes 420 beats per minute.)
Trey has used the altered line woke up at 4:20 in Makisupa
Policeman, which also often indirectly celebrates 420ing, e.g. by
mention of goo balls. One of the funniest shirts around takes light
jabs at both the 4:20 phenomenon and the rumored evolution
(collapse?) of the Phish.Net (especially rec.music.phish) from
being Gamehendge to Flamehendge, and beyond. The first day of
the Great Went started at 4:20 (with Makisupa Policeman. (The
second day started late, at 4:37.) Noah Cole The first single from
Slip Stitch and Pass was played on WBCN 10/14/97 at 4:20 pm.
An uproar at 12/31/96 can be heard on tape during the 2001, in
response to an enormous digital clock (which was counting down
to midnight) reaching 11:55:40 and reading -4:20. (Yoda)
During the 9-12-00 2001, Trey hits the first riff right at 4:20 into
the intro jam. (Cal 2/25/01) Some mail order tickets for the 1997
New Year's run were in section 420. The first Mass Pike toll
leaving Oswego was $4.20. (Camille Heath ) And the standard
shipping for The Phish Companion through Amazon was
originally $4.20.
420 Shows: Phish performed on April 20 in 1989, 1990, 1991,
1993, and 1994. The first day of the Great Went started at 4:20,
although that was called a soundcheck by Trey after three songs.
The Jazzfest Harry Hood 4-26-96 started at about 4:20 reported by
Trevor. At Big Cypress, David Bowie was playing at 4:20 a.m.
And the one event during the hiatus (10/8/00 - ?) featuring all
four members - for Jason Colton's wedding - was 12/1/01, 420
from: http://www.phish.net/faq/n420.html:
Man with those lights I can grow weed, light my pit of an appartment, completely screw the wireless network the guy next door who has to play mp3's at the highest possible bass level at 3 in the AM!
Pro's:
Heat, grows good herb, and kills the wireless network.
Con's:
ahhh, shit I forgot...pass that would ya!
Neck_of_the_Woods
#/usr/local/surf/glassy/overhead
If all this should have a reason, we would be the last to know.
I don't know what this lighting is, although I suspect it may be "sulfur" lighting.
However if it's going to trash your wireless network then the chances are good that you won't even install it in the first place. That takes care of homes and _probably_ office buildings.
The problem is going to be "public areas" where the lighting is installed to save on electricity costs, and then interferes with ISP's as the article stated. This of course assumes that the lighting is so much more efficient than sodium or mercury vapor that it's worth the expense of installing it in the first place.
And it's going to take years.
Far from an ELE.
Absolute statements are never true
It's the law. If you want to have the unalienable right to 802.11b transmitters and cordless phones, sponsor a constitutional amendment.
does this mean that I have to re-wire all of my "wi-fi" devices?
worse, does this mean that I'll have to start referring to them as "wi-wi"?
To prevent interference, RF lights should simply practice exponential backoff for colision avoidance like everyone else in the 2.4GHz range. What's more, the lights would then become an effective network load monitor.
--Ben
Couldn't the RF Light manufacturer just shield the light fixtures e.g. a Microwave Oven?
In fact, I would think the FCC would make them, if they had an output over a certain threshold.
'He was a dreamer, a thinker, a speculative philosopher... or, as his wife would have it, an idiot.' - Douglas Adams
I finally made a post!
Whoever has the most powerful transmitter wins. I'm sure Powell Jr. at the FCC loves it that way.
try { do() || do_not(); } catch (JediException err) { yoda(err); }
Yeah, I would imagine that a broad spectrum broadcast at 500 watts would wipe out any nearby... anything. Fortunately, I don't think the lights are going to get very wide acceptance.
--Bennett Prescott
Former Lord Of Packets
To observe that we live in a society that is suffering greatly from sexual confusion or, if you will, sexual misconduct, is not a novel insight. There is little need to provide a full set of statistics to demonstrate the consequences of the sexual revolution, for who is not familiar with the epidemic in teenage pregnancies, venereal diseases, divorces, and AIDS? Our society has undergone a rapid transformation in terms of sexual behavior, and few would argue that it is for the better. Today, one out of two marriages end in divorce. Six out of ten teenagers are sexually active. The millions of abortions over the last decade and the phenomenal spread of AIDS indicate that our society has serious problems with sexuality. In the last generation, the incidence of sexual activity outside of marriage ? with all of its attendant problems ? has double and tripled ? or worse. We have no particular reason to believe that we have seen the peak of the growth in sexually related problems.
Statistics do not really capture the pervasive ills attendant upon sexual immorality. Premature and promiscuous sexuality prevent many from establishing good marriages and family life. Few deny that a healthy sexuality and a strong family life are among the most necessary elements for human happiness and well-being. While many single parents do a worthy and valiant job of raising their children, it remains sadly true that children from broken homes grow up to be adults with a greater propensity for crime, a greater tendency to engage in alcohol and drug abuse, and a greater susceptibility to psychological disorders.
These realities touch every realm of life. They affect people's ability to relate to friends and family; they affect people's ability to do well at their studies and their jobs; and they affect the whole of society, which needs stable and secure individuals to lead us out of our troubles. Those who do not experience love from family and friends tend to seek any semblance of love they can find ? and thus become involved in illicit sexual relationships ? and the cycle starts again. The multiple varieties of abuse of sexuality and the grievous consequences of such abuse are not only damaging the current generation, they are threatening to ruin the chances of future generations to live happy and fulfilled lives.
Twenty years ago, when the sexual revolution was in full swing, many argued that it would liberate men and women from the repressive view of sexuality pervasive in society; people would be free to make love without the strictures of marriage. Many pointed to Christianity as the source of sexual repression. But the Christian view of sex is looking a lot more like wisdom. Christians no longer need to offer apologies for their insistence upon sexual morality, for their insistence upon reserving sex for marriage. Some in high public places are now beginning to counsel abstinence before marriage and to extol faithful monogamous marriages. They have begun to see these as practices of great practical wisdom.
In a certain sense, Christian morality ? especially sexual morality ? is quite similar to natural or commonsense morality. One does not need to be a Christian to understand why certain sexual practices are wrong. Christians differ from unbelievers not so much in the understanding of what is moral as in their commitment to trying to live morally. A Christian understands that when he is doing wrong, he is not only violating good sense, he is violating God's law; he is failing to be the loving and responsible person, God made him to be. Thus, Christian apologetics about sex may not seem much different from commonsense apologetics about sex, but the Christian tradition has most faithfully preserved the common wisdom about sex. Clearly it is easy to ?forget? or become confused about the common wisdom about sex; Christians are blessed with the powerful aid of revelation and tradition to counsel them regarding sexual morality.
Yet, despite the fact that most Christian denominations have remained steadfast in their allegiance to traditional Christian wisdom in sexual issues, few Christians have not been deeply affected by the saturation of modem culture with a view of sexuality radically opposed to the Christian view. Ten minutes of watching MTV or of a soap opera; ten minutes of listening to any rock, pop, or country music station; one visit to the corner-store magazine rack; or two minutes at the beach should serve to convince anyone that our society has very little respect for Christian moral norms regarding sexual relations. Christians, too, have begun to lose sight of the understanding of sexuality advanced by their tradition. Thus, now is the time for Christians to offer apologetics for their understanding of the role of sexual relations within human relationships. ?Apologetics? is a term used to refer to the energetic attempt to explain one's position to others. But Christians, I think, need to be as concerned with providing apologetics to themselves and to fellow Christians about sex as with bringing their message to others. Both internal and external evangelization are necessary, for few, if any, can escape being adversely affected by the distortions of our times. Christians need to strengthen themselves as well as their compatriots.
Christians have to learn about their own tradition before they can become effective witnesses to those in the larger society who desperately need to encounter individuals who are in control of their sexuality and happy because of it. There are a multitude of Christian truths which can assist us in escaping the ravages of a disordered sexuality. The time seems to be ripe for making the most persuasive case we can for Christian morality. Certainly, many are ceasing promiscuous behavior because of their fear of contracting AIDS. But that is not the only reason for the growing disenchantment with the sexual revolution. Many find that their sexual encounters leave them lonely and looking for something more. There are increasing reports of sexual indifference, with many claiming to have lost an interest in sex, even with those whom they love. There seems to be an increasing weariness with premarital sex and abortion, and a growing interest in reducing both. Many are beginning to see that the call for more and better sex education or more and better access to contraceptives is not the solution. Rather, we need a better understanding of the relations between sex, love, marriage, and children. And it is this understanding that Christianity can provide.
THREE TRUTHS OF SEXUALITY
Let us focus on three fundamental truths about sexuality stressed throughout the Christian tradition: that marriage is the only proper arena for sexual activity; that marriages must be faithful for the love of spouses to thrive; and that children are a great gift to parents.
Why should sexual union only take place within a marriage? It can hardly be denied that sexual relations create powerful bonds between individuals, even between those who do not desire such bonds. Those who have sexual intercourse are engaging in an action which bespeaks a deep commitment to another. Pope John Paul II uses an interesting phrase in his teachings on sex: ?language of the body.? He claims that, like words, bodily actions have meanings, and that unless we intend those meanings with our actions, we should not perform them any more than we should speak words we do not mean. In both cases, lies are ?spoken.? Sexual union means `I find you attractive?; ?I care for you?; ?I will try to work for your happiness?; ?I wish to have a deep bond with you.? Some who engage in sexual intercourse do not mean these things with their actions; they wish simply to use another for their own sexual pleasure. They have lied with their bodies in the same way as someone lies who says ?I love you? to another simply for the purposes of obtaining some desired favor.
But some who engage in sexual intercourse outside of marriage claim that they do mean all that sexual union implies and that, therefore, they are not lying with their bodies. They are, though, making false promises, for those engaging in sexual intercourse outside of marriage cannot fulfill the promises which their bodily actions make. They have not prepared themselves to fulfill the promise of working for another's happiness, or of achieving a deep bond with another. Such achievements take a lifetime to complete; they cannot be accomplished in brief encounters.
The Christian insistence on reserving sexual union for marriage, then, has as one of its chief justifications a concern that sexual relations are meant to express the desire for a deep and committed relationship with another. That relationship can only be built within marriage, because marriage is built upon a vow of faithfulness to one's beloved. The Bible, especially the Old Testament, regularly condemns the sin of adultery. Faithful marriage is used as the paradigm for the kind of relationship which God's people should have with God. Those who are not faithful to God are likened to adulterers. Proverbs and the whole of wisdom literature harshly condemn the adulterous spouse. Most spouses are devastated at the mere thought that their beloved desires another, let alone that their spouse may have actually been unfaithful. Faithfulness is essential to create the relationship of trust which is the bedrock of all the other goods that flow from marriage.
We take vows in marriage because we realize that we are all too ready to give up when the going gets tough; we realize that our loves wax and wane. Indeed, society at large seems to have a fondness for marriage. After all, in an age where there is little moral pressure against living together outside of marriage, most still choose to take marriage vows. Couples realize that marriage vows help them express and effect their commitment to each other. But as the divorce rate indicates, modern society ultimately does not take these vows very seriously ? or at least modern couples do not prepare for marriage in such a way that they are prepared to keep their vows.
PREPARING FOR MARRIAGE
A talk with a pastor, an ?Engaged Encounter? weekend, or a ?Pre Cana? conference does not prepare one for marriage. Real marriage preparation must occur for many years before we enter marriage. Young people enjoy the exercise of drawing up a list of characteristics that they would like their future spouse to have. But their time might be better spent drawing up a list of characteristics which they themselves should have in order to be a worthy spouse. They need to reflect upon their expectations of marriage; many may find that their expectations are largely selfish. Most of us dream much more about how happy our spouses are going to make us than about how much we are going to do for our spouses.
Since marriage requires loving, faithful, kind, patient, forgiving, humble, courageous, wise, unselfish individuals ? and the list could go on ? young people should strive to gain these characteristics. Marriages cannot survive unless the spouses acquire these characteristics. Certainly it would be foolish to require that individuals have all of these characteristics before they marry, for none of us do. Indeed, the experience of marriage itself undoubtedly helps foster these characteristics. But if we do not work at acquiring them before marriage, we will be acquiring their opposites ? selfishness, haughtiness, impatience: characteristics that are death to a marriage.
Although faithfulness is one of the cornerstones of marriage, it may seem odd to speak of the need to be faithful to one's spouse before marriage. But in a sense, one should love one's spouse before one even meets him or her. This means reserving the giving of oneself sexually until one is married ? for in a sense, one's sexuality belongs to one's future spouse as much as it does to oneself. A few generations ago, it was not uncommon for young people to speak of ?saving themselves? for marriage. While scoffed at today, this phrase is nonetheless indicative of a proper understanding of love, sexuality, and marriage. One should prepare oneself for marriage, and one should save oneself for marriage.
How does one do so? Obviously, by remaining chaste ? and that is not an easy prescription. For instance, it means being attentive to what provokes sexual thoughts and desires and avoiding these provocations. It means, most likely, dissociating oneself from many of the forms of entertainment popular today. Those who view sexuality as a gift which one offers one's spouse at the time of marriage cannot fall victim to the constant sexual stimulation that Americans face daily. We need to be careful what music we listen to, what movies and TV shows we watch, and what clothes we wear. We need to try to save sexual thoughts and sexual stimulation for the time when they will not be frustrations, but welcome preludes to loving union with our spouses. Sexual temptations are, of course, impossible to avoid, especially since our society provides temptations around the clock. Christ's teaching that lust in one's heart is wrong tells us that we must guard our inner purity as well as govern our actions.
Few people, Christian or not, think it sensible for those who are engaged to wait until their wedding night to enjoy sexual union. Many think waiting until marriage would make sexual intimacy too awkward. Most think that, since one is soon going to take vows, it makes little difference whether sexual intimacy begins before or after a ceremony which simply ratifies a commitment already felt.
What difference does waiting make? Well, certainly a vow is not a vow until it is spoken; unspoken, unratified commitments are all too easy to break. There are practical reasons as well. Father James Burtchaell at Notre Dame has written a marvelous book, For Better or Worse, explaining why it is best for couples to wait until marriage before they begin their sexual intimacy. He speaks eloquently of the period before marriage as an irreplaceable opportunity for lovers to get to know one another. Engaging in sexual intercourse creates a false sense of closeness; it creates a bond that may obscure elements in a relationship which need work. Courtship is a time for getting to know each other, for sketching out dreams and plans; for expressing worries and hesitations. The delight of sexual union can easily distract couples from preparation for marriage.
There is also a deeper reason, and that is the question of honesty and trust. Few of those who have sexual relations before marriage, especially Christians, can be fully open about their actions. This means that people engaging in such relationships inevitably are deceiving someone ? their parents, their teachers, and perhaps their friends as well. The ability to practice such deception does not bode well for one's integrity. A woman observes that her lover is good at deception and will file away this information. She will have reason to wonder in the future if her spouse is being honest with her ? after all, he had no trouble deceiving others whom he or she respected. Many Christians feel terrible guilt at violating their deeply held moral principles; after they are married, they may continue to have guilty feelings about sex. In a sense, they have programmed themselves to think of sexual intercourse as a furtive and naughty activity.
On the other hand, couples who do wait until marriage have a special kind of euphoria about their sexual union. Because they waited, they see sexual pleasure as a privileged good of marriage. They have an easier time developing a deep and abiding trust and consideration for each other. Their willingness to wait, to endure the strains of sexual continence out of love and respect for one another, is a great testimony to their strength of character. They have shown that sexual attraction is not the most important part of the relationship, and they can enjoy each other's company even when the delights of sexual union are not available to them. Such faithfulness and chastity before marriage ensure greater faithfulness and chastity during marriage. Because of pregnancy or illness or separation, all couples must abstain at some time in marriage; the acquisition of the virtue of self-mastery before marriage facilitates such abstention.
THE CONTRACEPTIVE MENTALITY
Chastity before marriage ? and, consequently, chastity during marriage ? has been undermined by the widespread availability of contraception. Indeed, contraception seems to be one of the chief facilitators of much of the sexual misconduct of our time. There were fewer teenage pregnancies, fewer abortions, and a lesser incidence of sexually transmitted diseases before contraception became widely available. Contraception has made people feel secure that they can engage in sexual union apart from the obligations of marriage and child rearing. Yet contraceptives do not remove the responsibilities that come with the child-making possibilities of sexual intercourse, since contraceptives do not always achieve their purpose. We must help our young people to understand that they are not ready for sexual intercourse until they are ready to be parents, for sexual intercourse always brings with it the possibility of being a parent.
Getting young people to associate sex with child bearing is not easy, but it is necessary; in fact, it is important for adults to encourage young people to try to think like parents. It is good to get them thinking about what they would like to do with their children; to get them thinking about what they want to be able to provide for their children. Parents must convey to their children that they are not a burden to them, that they consider their children to be great gifts from God. Our society tends to look upon children as a burden; they are expensive, noisy, troublesome; they stand in the way of careers and adventuresome travel. This view, of course, has not stopped people from having babies, but one senses that many children are just another possession of their parents, or just another experience that adults wish to have. Many couples seem to want a few ?designer children? as adornments to their lives not as reasons for their lives.
God, it seems, has a preference for children; after all, one of His first commands was to ?be fruitful and multiply.? Throughout the Old Testament, having many children is listed among the signs of prosperity that indicate God's favor. Psalm 127 states ?Behold, sons are a gift from the Lord; the fruit of the womb is a reward. Like arrows in the hand of a warrior are the sons of one's youth. Happy the man whose quiver is filled with them.? Psalm 128 is one of my favorites; it states:
Happy the man who fears the Lord, who walks in his ways! You shall eat of your hand's labor; blessed are you, and it shall be well with you. Your wife shall be like a fruitful vine in the recesses of your house; Your sons, like olive shoots around your table. Behold, in this way shall be blessed the man who fears the Lord.
God has arranged matters such that parents and children need each other. The experience of child rearing, like the experience of marriage, both requires and fosters many virtues. Having children generally does adults a lot of good; most find they become more selfless, patient, kind, loving, and tender when they have children. Learning to live with children has many of the same advantages of living with a spouse: it forces one to accommodate oneself to others, to acknowledge that one has constant tendencies to be selfish. Staying awake at night with children, dealing with their daily joys and sorrows, and learning to be a good example for them contributes greatly to the maturity of adults.
Recently, a relative of mine mentioned that he wanted to have a large family, but he didn't know how it would be possible to manage financially. He had noticed that I had a large number of friends who started their childbearing early and had lots of children. Few of the women are employed outside their homes. He wanted to know how they did it. I think I know the answer: they trust in God. They regularly live on the edge of things ? for the first few years, they experience occasional anxiety that another child will be an undue strain on the budget, or that they will not be able to afford a car or house large enough for the growing brood, or that they may not be able to meet food and medical costs. But after a few years, they find that their needs are fulfilled. To be sure, they learn to budget and scrimp and save, they are not ashamed to take hand-me-downs, and they often learn to live a life that is a little tacky around the edges. But they lack none of their true needs and often enjoy luxuries of which they never would have dreamed. So they come to trust God and live without a lot of obvious security. Trust in God replaces the standard American understanding of perfect security: accumulating enough money and material goods to serve as a buffer against the world. With trusting and light hearts, they proceed to enjoy their growing families and to soak up the love that flows in big families. Those with large families seem to have a special generosity and hospitality about them. Guests are always welcome and interruptions seem not to be an annoyance; members of large families seem quite ready to drop everything to help someone else. Slowly but steadily, they become better Christians.
Discussions of the Christian preference for large families always seem to broach a topic which is sensitive and controversial, namely, contraception. Although the belief that contraception is not in accord with God's will has, since Humanae Vitae, been identified almost exclusively with the Catholic Church, the fact is that all Protestant denominations were opposed to contraception up until 1930. Early in this century, the Anglican Church twice condemned contraception, before passing a resolution in 1930 that its use was morally permissible for married couples. Thus, acceptance of contraception is a relatively new phenomenon. Catholics have, perhaps, preserved the teaching against contraception more faithfully, but it is not a teaching exclusive to them.
In much the same way, Protestants have more faithfully preached the necessity of tithing, a doctrine not exclusive to Protestants. Many Catholics are now rediscovering the practice of tithing at the prompting of their Protestant brethren. They have found great spiritual growth through this practice and now regularly urge their fellow Catholics to embrace this time-honored way of expressing gratitude to God and of trusting in Him. Indeed, I think the doctrine on tithing has some similarities with the teaching that in one's childbearing, one must be generous with God. Some refuse to tithe since they believe it is foolish to give away money that they think they need for their own well-being. Yet those who are committed to tithing know that, on occasion, one must give to God what one believes one needs oneself. They give to God and His causes because they know He wants them to, and they trust Him to provide. Being generous in childbearing is not very different. Many a married couple will testify that they thought having another child would be an undue hardship, only to find that having another child was a source of wonderful blessings and splendid joy to them.
Oddly enough, NFP, or natural family planning, is one of the most effective means, if not the most effective means, of planning one's family. NFP, of course, is not the outmoded rhythm method, which was based simply on the calendar. Rather, NFP is a highly scientific way of determining when a woman is fertile, based on observing various bodily signs. The statistics of its reliability rival the most effective forms of the Pill. Moreover, NFP is without the health risks and dubious moral status of contraceptives. The IUD is an abortifacient: that is, it works by causing an early-term abortion. Ovulation still occurs, and, therefore, conception may occur; the IUD then prohibits the fertilized egg, the tiny new human being, from implanting in the wall of the uterus. Most currently popular forms of the Pill work the same way. Furthermore, the Pill and the IUD have proven to be dangerous to women in many ways ? and no one yet knows what the long term effects may be. So those who are opposed to abortion and those interested in protecting the well-being of women would certainly not want to use or promote these forms of contraception. The other forms, known as barrier methods, have aesthetic drawbacks or are low on reliability.
NFP no longer means ?not for Protestants.? Many non-Catholics are turning to NFP as a means of family planning precisely because they do not want to use abortifacients, and they fear the physical risks of contraception. They are finding that the use of NFP has positive results for their marital relationships, for their relationship with their children, and for their relationship with God.
Many find it odd that periodic abstinence should be beneficial to a marriage. Certainly, most who begin to use NFP, especially those who were not chaste before marriage and who have used contraception, find the abstinence required to be a source of strain and a cause of considerable irritability. Abstinence, like dieting or any form of self-restraint, has its hardships; but it also has its benefits. As spouses learn to communicate better with one another, as they learn to communicate their affection in nongenital ways, and as they learn to master their sexual desires, they find a new liberation in the ability to abstain from sexual intercourse. Many find that an element of romance reenters the relationship during the times of abstinence, and an element of excitement accompanies the reuniting. Spouses using NFP find that they come to understand and respect one another more.
Spouses using NFP become very good examples to their children, especially their teenagers who may be wrestling with new and powerful sexual feelings. One man told me that his practice of NFP assisted him in being a good witness for chastity among the young men at his place of work. They would tease him about being able, as a married man, to have sex on demand, but he responded that through the use of NFP, he was required to abstain. He argued that if, night after night, he was able to sleep beside the woman he loved and not have sexual intercourse with her, they could learn to refrain from sexual intercourse with their girlfriends. He believed that parents who practice NFP could much more persuasively urge their children to be chaste before marriage.
Another reason for the enthusiasm for NFP is that couples who use it experience a greater bonding than those who use contraception. There is a more complete giving of oneself to another in a non-contracepted act of sexual intercourse. This may be why divorce is nearly non-existent among couples who practice NFP
Couples who use NFP also claim that it brings them closer to God. They believe that God made the human body and that respecting the way the human body works is a way of respecting God. They believe that contraceptives are an obstacle not only to union with their spouses but also to union with God. They believe that God is the source of love and life and that He has privileged them with being the transmitters of life through an act of love. They feel that they are leaving God space to perform His act of the creation of a new soul, if He so chooses.
Christian teaching on contraception is indissolubly linked with the Christian understanding of the need for faithful marriages and for the reservation of sexual intimacy to marriage. We should never lose sight of the link between sexual activity and childbearing. If only those who were prepared to care for children engaged in sexual relations, the modern world would experience a radical change in its sexual behavior.
Christians need to explain why faithfulness and responsibility toward children are two of the defining characteristics of marriage. Men and women today are tired of unfaithfulness, tired of shallow and brief relationships. They crave something more meaningful, something on which they can rely. Young people are sick of divorce. There is virtually no one who does not know children who have suffered greatly from divorce. Certainly many of us, because of our own foolishness, weakness, or wickedness, or because of the foolishness, weakness, or wickedness of others, may not be able to form the marriages and families which we want and need. We must trust in the grace of God to provide for all those who turn to Him for aid. Christians, who have the wisdom of the centuries, should strive to live chaste lives and to form loving marriages and families, for such is vital to their eternal salvation and such may well be vital to the temporal well-being of the whole of society.
That's why 2.4 GHz will rapidy become unreliable for wireless LANs.
Luckily, 5 GHz wireless LAN products (802.11a) are now becoming available (called WiFi-5, I believe). Since they
do not use the 2.4 GHz frequency range, they will not be affected by this issue.
the link to fusionlighting.com works fine. Not a lot of details but it does describe the product, what it's good for and that it is supposed to be commercially available this year.
This sig has been temporarily disconnected or is no longer in service
What the hell do they mean by RF lighting? That makes no sense where RF tech comes into lighting, sounds like spittng out light at 2.4GHz which would be useless... Could someone point out a plausible explanation or is this just a hoax?
XML is like violence. If it doesn't solve the problem, use more.
I'm not a big supporter of the FCC (who frequently overstep their bounds), but this is exactly why parts of the radio spectrum need to be regulated. The entire reason that the FCC keeps such tight control is so that companies that invest in radio equipment have some assurance that the guy next door won't simply drown out his signal with more powerful equipment.
But then again, every time my boss walks by with his cell phone, my monitors fuzz out and my speakers make strange noises from whatever signals the cell phone is emitting...
Travis
this is all well and good, but the article never describes where these lights are purported to be useful. If these lights are not going to be marketed to the house, Bluetooth and others will be unaffected in the home. I seriously doubt that any business with any substantial investment in wireless for their offices would use these lights if it involved a replacement of their wireless infrastructure. Yes, there is a danger to wireless communication posed by the use of these lights. But then again, whenever I have my computer with its case off too close to my TV I cant get half of the broadcast channels.
--Kevin
I am a lesbian, deeply involved with a woman of lusty beauty such as most men will never know. Her hair is short and blonde. Her face is bold, with a nice sexy square jaw. She has small breasts, and muscular arms and legs, and even a slight hint of a six-pack. Just the mere thought of her body gets my juices flowing.
She and I have been carpet munching for well over five years now. We love each other deeply, but it seems we've reached an impasse in our relationship. Every night, I lick and I lick and I lick. I finger, finger, finger. I also get the attention back with all sorts of creative ideas from my partner. Everything from dildos, to finger paints (when I am on my period), to meat tenderizer. However, no matter how much sexual gratification we exchange, it seems to be wearing down.
One day, while surfing on Slashdot, I learned about an interesting technique involving a turkey baster. The basic idea is that you fill a turkey baster with semen, then insert that tool into the vagina, and squeeze out its contents. With this in mind, I contemplated the idea of getting pregnant with this method, and having a baby with my partner.
I approached my beautiful mate and asked him if she wanted to have a baby. Her face lit up! She seemed to be excited; imbued with new life! However, the euphoria rapidly dissipated when she came to the realization that she did not possess the proper equipment to get me pregnant. I quickly responded that "indeed you do have the right equipment! It's in the kitchen, I'll show you." Promptly, we waltzed into the kitchen and out of a drawer, I produced the turkey baster that would bring a new life into world.
The next job was to find a source of sperm. Sperm is not hard to come by. Men ejaculate tens of thousands of gallons of it every day. We figured it'd be easy to acquire a nice hot, steaming load of cum from virtually any man. One day, I stood outside the door of our home, close to the sidewalk, top-less, and perking my lively breasts at any man who passed. Most simply gawked, but some actually tried to touch, but quickly walked away before doing so. Pretty soon, a nice young man came along who took such an interest in my tits that he seemed to forget about all else! Before long, I had him in our house and I was giving him a blowjob before he even knew what happened. As soon as he shot a big load into my mouth, I grabbed the baster and spit the load into it. He looked puzzled, but quickly realized the bizarre situation he was in and left immediately. I paid him no mind.
"Quickly," I shouted to my lover, "fuck me with this thing!" My lover grabbed the baster, thrust it into my eager beaver, and began to thrust like she was a man. I rubbed her clit and fingered her and she tweaked my boobs and fondled my own clit. When we were both about to climax, she squeezed the bulb of the turkey baster, squirting the whole load deep into my uterus. The warm, thick feeling of it drove me wild! When we were done, we rubbed oil all over each other's bodies, praying to the Lord Jesus that we would get pregnant.
Over the next few weeks, signs of something unusual began to show. As it turns out, I was not only pregnant, I had herpes too. Fucking Hemos! My life was turned upside down, but that story is for another day...
DECT is not a user of the 2.4Ghz Band. It uses 1.9Ghz.
I should use this sig to advertise my book ISBN-13 : 978-1501515132.
Does this mean that I have to have a wi-fi and a hi-fi? You know some of us need to get with the technology bandwagon :-)
What OS do you want to abuse today?
As far as I know this spectrum was always reserved for Industrial devices. Whoever built a communication device for this band did it knowing the fact very clearly it was not their territory and took a risk that Microwave ovens would not become very popular.
Now the ghosts of that mistake are catching up with them.
And its not only industrial even medical applications use this band.
Does anybody have any idea if 802.11b will work in a hospital?
**Life is too short to be serious**
Yes. The first of these light fixtures marketed will come in a huge steel box with a fake wood veneer.
Or, just weigh the $$$ involved. Which is a bigger industry, IT/Communications, or lighting manufacturers? Seems a no-brainer for the FCC. I fully expect them to re-regulate RF lighting.
Also, more info on RF Lighting can be found here.
--
Repeal me, NOW!!!
Thank you.
You sir are a moron! IShitOnThisPost!
So what's the point of this article? This article makes me ask more questions than it answers. It's essentially two pages worth of "switch to WIMAN or 802.11a" and is out dated...
:wq
From the article...
(1) [Each Part 15] device may not cause harmful interference, and (2) [Each Part 15] device must accept any interference received, including interference that may cause undesirable operation.
http://www.fusionlighting.com/technology.htm
If this poster were logged in, I'd say it was blatant karma whoring that should be modded down. But this was an AC. Why waste the mod points?
The article makes a big point out of the collision between the frequency spectrums, however I personally am interested to find out more about the lighting technology that is "high efficiency and RF based". It seems the article kind of missed that explanation, and I can't find much information on it. The lighting's website is down that is referred to, and as far as I know this could be a "made up" problem (by this dude who wrote the article) primarily because it's only a problem if the lighting technology catches on.
Are the light technology elements mounted in the ceilings like conventional flourescent lights or does it use some kind of a central light-source idea. If it's high-brightness and high-efficiency anyway, the light source could be placed at a central (shielded) location and fiber optics used to distribute the light.
I'm all for new light technologies, although often flourescent lights are pretty good, there is still a lot of room for improvement. (Time delay to full brightness, hazardous materials, cheap ballasts that buzz, bad fluorescent tubes that put off funny-colored lights) But interfering with wireless spectrums (even unlicensed ones) seems like a bad idea in general... the amount of noise in any spectrum is becoming a serious concern for the design of "robust" wireless technologies.
__ No registration required to read this message. They did it in the Matrix.
Let's see an electric use cost comparison between this RF lighting and fluorescents. It's pretty slipshod that the article didn't bother to address the question of whether this lighting offers significant savings.
Until it's clear that there are compelling cost advantages associated with microwave lighting, the issue of whether this technology could endanger communications doesn't merit discussion.
I'm generally "Interesting," "Insightful," and even "Funny" here. What the hell happens to me at parties?
Star Wars Returns for Better or Worse
Star Wars Episode II -- Attack of the Clones finally got its press screening yesterday afternoon. The anticipation level was high, what with Spider-Man breaking box-office records this past weekend.
Star Wars is the franchise of franchises. People are fanatic about it. There's almost no way to live up to the expectations.
So let me tell this right away: Fans love Clones; critics are not so hot for it.
Why do fans like it so much? I think part of it is just seeing George Lucas' latest chapter in the saga up there on the screen. The die-hard cultists are just so pleased that they can live with the enormous faults: hideous dialogue, bad plotting and infomercial-grade acting.
I liked a lot of Clones, especially the second half, and I predict that the big-money climax will bring audiences back for second viewings.
WARNING: There are spoilers from here on out. AND HERE IT COMES: Yoda is the star of this Star Wars.
Ironically, Yoda is no longer even a puppet. He's digitally enhanced. But when the Gandhi of the Star Wars epic engages in a light-saber duel he literally saves Episode II from quicksand. It's remarkable, and I recommend he be nominated for best supporting actor.
One of the reasons Yoda's performance comes off as so strong and human is because the humans in Episode II often seem artificial. The worst offender is Hayden Christensen, playing the teen-aged Anakin Skywalker.
I know Christensen had his fans from Life as a House, but in Clones he is more wooden than a tree. He has no screen presence and his delivery of the dialogue -- granted, it's made up of forgettable, banal lines -- is deadly. Looking scared to death, Christensen makes his way through Clones as if he's on a building ledge and trying to get back inside.
Natalie Portman doesn't do much better. Acceptable in Phantom Menace as Padmé Amidala, Portman kind of sleepwalks through Clones. Like Christensen, she seems to be on some kind of automatic pilot. The part is invested with no wit and little emotion.
Is this a couple capable of such great love that a classic story will spring from their loins? Unlikely. We know as little about these people as we knew in Phantom Menace; even Anakin's visit to see his mother is a waste, and Portman's disinterest in the whole business doesn't help.
There are some actors up to the job of making Clones worthwhile, though. Samuel L. Jackson gives it his best shot as Mace Windu and Christopher Lee is the perfect balance of evil and snarky as Count Dooku. Anthony Daniels and Kenny Baker make our old friends C-3PO and R2-D2 as ingratiating as ever, but again the character development is dependent entirely on knowing the rest of Star Wars.
Nothing new is offered or introduced, no new plot twists or revelations. Clones just pushes along to make way for Episode III, which will eventually lead back to Episode IV and the story we already know.
What's completely missing between this droid and this robot, as well as among the humans, is any jauntiness or sense of fun, camaraderie or purpose. The first installment -- now known as Episode IV -- lived because it echoed the loose, almost improvisational feel of the Saturday morning sci-fi reels of the '40s and '50s.
Han Solo, Luke Skywalker and Princess Leia were descendants of Flash Gordon and friends -- you could feel it. Humanity oozed from them, even in the most preposterous situations.
Flash, Dale Arden and Prince Barin were the models for the original Star Wars characters. Dr. Zarkov, Flash's advisor, and Ming, Flash's nemesis, rounded out the cast and became indelible figures. (Flash Gordon Conquers the Universe is available, by the way, on DVD from Image Entertainment. I highly recommend checking it out.)
George Lucas was smart to pattern his main characters after these people. But this second generation of Star Wars characters all sound like Keanu Reeves delivering a soliloquy from Hamlet. Alas, poor Star Wars, I knew it well.
http://www.fusionlighting.com/sulfur.htm
These lights are really cool. They are even more efficient than high pressure sodium lamps but give a spectrum very similiar to sunlight.
-Zach
Becuase they take up important resources that the rest of us need.
I am a lesbian, deeply involved with a woman of lusty beauty such as most men will never know. Her hair is short and blonde. Her face is bold, with a nice sexy square jaw. She has small breasts, and muscular arms and legs, and even a slight hint of a six-pack. Just the mere thought of her body gets my juices flowing.
She and I have been carpet munching for well over five years now. We love each other deeply, but it seems we've reached an impasse in our relationship. Every night, I lick and I lick and I lick. I finger, finger, finger. I also get the attention back with all sorts of creative ideas from my partner. Everything from dildos, to finger paints (when I am on my period), to meat tenderizer. However, no matter how much sexual gratification we exchange, it seems to be wearing down.
One day, while surfing on Slashdot, I learned about an interesting technique involving a turkey baster. The basic idea is that you fill a turkey baster with semen, then insert that tool into the vagina, and squeeze out its contents. With this in mind, I contemplated the idea of getting pregnant with this method, and having a baby with my partner.
I approached my beautiful mate and asked him if she wanted to have a baby. Her face lit up! She seemed to be excited; imbued with new life! However, the euphoria rapidly dissipated when she came to the realization that she did not possess the proper equipment to get me pregnant. I quickly responded that "indeed you do have the right equipment! It's in the kitchen, I'll show you." Promptly, we waltzed into the kitchen and out of a drawer, I produced the turkey baster that would bring a new life into world.
The next job was to find a source of sperm. Sperm is not hard to come by. Men ejaculate tens of thousands of gallons of it every day. We figured it'd be easy to acquire a nice hot, steaming load of cum from virtually any man. One day, I stood outside the door of our home, close to the sidewalk, top-less, and perking my lively breasts at any man who passed. Most simply gawked, but some actually tried to touch, but quickly walked away before doing so. Pretty soon, a nice young man came along who took such an interest in my tits that he seemed to forget about all else! Before long, I had him in our house and I was giving him a blowjob before he even knew what happened. As soon as he shot a big load into my mouth, I grabbed the baster and spit the load into it. He looked puzzled, but quickly realized the bizarre situation he was in and left immediately. I paid him no mind.
"Quickly," I shouted to my lover, "fuck me with this thing!" My lover grabbed the baster, thrust it into my eager beaver, and began to thrust like she was a man. I rubbed her clit and fingered her and she tweaked my boobs and fondled my own clit. When we were both about to climax, she squeezed the bulb of the turkey baster, squirting the whole load deep into my uterus. The warm, thick feeling of it drove me wild! When we were done, we rubbed oil all over each other's bodies, praying to the Lord Jesus that we would get pregnant.
Over the next few weeks, signs of something unusual began to show. As it turns out, I was not only pregnant, I had herpes too. Fucking Hemos! My life was turned upside down, but that story is for another day...
Why get all in a lather about RF lighting?
If solid state lighting takes off we'll get great efficiency and no 2.4 GHz spectrum pollution.
"Provided by the management for your protection."
Earlier today it was the dual-screen laptop. They seem to publish these stories totally uncritically.
Dudes, if you're that desperate, just regurgitate something from Space.com, Wired News, or the Register.
This is not a troll.
But they are perfect for large warehouses. US Department of Energy headquarters in Washington has had one of these since 1994.
This article is utter garbage!!!
The first link (off-site) from the article referred to, in fact the makor of said "RF-Lightning-Craptacular VC-Money Whoring" company has a "our website is under construction" on it.
C'mon people - stop posting obvious flamebait articles at the highest level. This was a freakin waste of everyone's time.
Seeing as this technology uses tiny microwave emitters to excite sulfur ions what effect would it have on pacemakers? If they have to sheild it for pacemakers and stuff then shouldn't the effect be minimal or seeing as the 2.4 ghz area is open can they just dump as much radiation as they want into that spectrum? I mean I don't see problems when I use my 2.4ghz cordless of WiFi laptop when my microwave oven is running, so shouldn't the lights be sheilded to the same standard?
Also, I believe Bluetooth, at least, uses an unlicesnsed segment of the spectrum. So, unlike me setting up something that jams, e.g., 99.5 FM or channel 5 or something, this would be (currently) unregulated.
If the RF lights get shielding on them then we don't have to worry about them interfering with network devices too much.
Then again, if they DON'T get shielding they'll never sell. Try telling your employees that you are going to replace all the lights in their workspace with lights that spew radiation at the same frequency that their microwave uses, but without the shielding! Sure, the output would be WAY below a microwave, but who wants to sit under a bank of them eight or ten hours a day from now until retirement?
Life is short: void the warranty.
Six of the seven slashdot editors are sitting around the flat one day when Katz rushes in and says, "Guess what guys, I've won a trip to see the Pope!" Everyone gets all excited and chants, "We finally get to ask him, we finally get to ask him."
The next day, they are standing in front of the Pope, Katz out in front of the other six. All the other six start pushing Katz and
saying, "Go ahead, Katz, ask him, ask him!"
The Pope looks at Katz and asks, "Do you have a question to ask me, young man?"
Katz looks up shyly and says, "Well, yes."
The Pope tells him to go ahead and ask. Katz asks, "Well, do....do they have nuns in Alaska?"
The Pope replies, "Well, yes, I'm sure we have nuns in Alaska."
The others all keep nudging Katz and chanting, "Ask him the rest, Jon, ask him the rest!"
The Pope asks Katz if there's more to his question, and Jon continues, "Well, uh, do they have, uh, black nuns in Alaska?"
To which the Pope replies, "Well, my son, I think there must be a few black nuns in Alaska, yes."
Still not satisfied, the others keep saying, "Ask him the last part, Katz, ask him the last part!"
The Pope asks Katz, "Is there still more to your question?"
To which Katz replies, "Well, uh, yeah.....are there, uh, are there any midget black nuns in Alaska?"
The startled Pope replies, "Well, no, my son, I really don't think there are any midget black nuns in Alaska."
At this, John Katz turns all kinds of colors, and the others start laughing, and yelling, "Katz screwed a penguin, Katz screwed a penguin!"
Yes, I would assume you're right.. "legally" we don't have a right for RF technologies to always work. FCC regulated or not, it comes down to your local area when you're using or considering using wireless phones, WiFi, or other wireless devices. When I was in grad school I was in a building where 2.4GHz was kind of noisy, I expect it was due to science research experiments and a steel-frame building. We just bought antennas and didn't worry about "legal" reasons. Seems everybody is too quick to complain about legality these days.
I think the real issue is more practical, who buys the technology not knowing that it will heavily interfere with certain wireless equipment. (I'm thinking office environments are the biggest issue) Doesn't the consumer have a right to know things like interference before purchasing a product? After reading the article I personally got the idea that I need to check out the lighting technology and be cautious of where it is installed. That's all, it's an old technique where you just don't buy something if you don't like the side effects.
__ No registration required to read this message. They did it in the Matrix.
The company I used to work for did the very first large scale (non-test) installation of their lighting products in the US. It sounded like an awesome product. It would provide MORE light for LESS power with LESS maintenance.
:)
We installed a HUGE area with this stuff (took many months to do the install). A year later we ended up yanking every bit of it out. Why? Well, there were SEVERAL technical problems with these things that they hadn't worked out. The short version of how they work is that they irradiate a glove with some sulfur in it with microwaves and turn it into a glowing plasma. Well, that stuff is a bit hot, so you have to continuously rotate the 'bulb' This rotational part breaks, so the light breaks.. the reflectors can't stand the heat, etc.
so don't worry.. they are in bankruptcy...
This looks like a niche product. It's not even clear that Fusion Lighting is still in business. Their web site is essentially defunct. Their web site used to have some nice pictures of glass bulbs and more info, but now, it's just a starter page.
My internet access is more important than my co-workers ability to see, so none of these lights for us.
If you lease an apartment and you find squatters living there, do you (a) ask them nicely to leave since that's your space now, or (b) call your landlord to have the police throw the freeloaders out?
This is no different. Fusion Lighting is playing by the FCC rules, while all the Bluetooth, Wi-fi, and cordless phone manufacturers were getting away with squatting on a frequency that they knew could be a problem down the line, but that no one was using yet. Now that someone has a legitimate claim to the frequency, they're crying foul? BS...you have no basis for that frequency in the first place. Move to the 5GHz band, establish a right to that band, and fsck off on the 2.4GHz band. I do feel sorry for the people who have already invested in devices running on that band, but you need to do your homework folks.
Ignorance is no excuse.
Rule #1 -- Politics always trumps technology.
We put Tux on the table, belly down. That probably wasn't so smart, but we figured if he tried to slide, we could just beat him over the head with the dildo. He was already beaten up pretty badly, but my buddy and I enjoyed the fight he put up. We weren't quite sure where to begin at first; it'd be a shame if the party was over too quick. We figured a bit of fondling was in order, you know, to get us worked up and get Tux's juices flowing. As I "grepped" his buttocks and groin, my friend caressed his face with the long, pink dildo. The penguin let out a few cries of discomfort, wanting obvioulsy to be set free. He knew what was in store for him. But at the moment of one of his bellows, my friend was able to stick the dildo in his beak! Tux was enraged and he began to twist and spasm, trying to get out of our grip. "Seems the little fucker's got his strength back!" To solve the problem, I hit him over the head a few times. Not too hard, of course. We wanted him to be conscious so he could enjoy the eXPerience to the max. Not wanting to risk the same thing with his own cock, my friend thrust and withdrew the dildo from Tux's mouth slowly. "If only we could get rid of that beak," he says. I thought it was an interesting idea, something to consider later.
I however, was about to start my own fun. Working up my penis to a nice, firm erection with some AstroGlide (which I had first learned about on that Linux/cyberterrorism web site "slashdot"), I slowly guided into the penguin's tight ass. Tux, still slightly conscious, let out a few half-hearted screams of pain, and twitched slightly. Once my penis was all the way inserted, I got up on Tux's back and grabbed his chest firmly. Without much ceremony, I began to bang the creature hard, like he was a Salvation Army drum. He appearantly loved it... or hated it. I couldn't tell. All I know is that the more he screamed, the harder I fucked. It didn't take me long to reach climax! I exploded deep in his ass with a gigantic load. The pressure was too much at this point and all around my penis, there was a gushing of cum, blood, and feces that flowed like a waterfall onto the floor. Tux was unconscious by this time, so were free to do whatever we wanted.
And that's when it really got crazy!
It sounds like that rule doesn't apply to the 2.4 GHz band. That band was reserved specifically for use by Microwave ovens, etc., which transmit but don't receive.
Manufacturers started using it for communications equipment because you don't need an FCC license to use this band - you just have to prove that it doesn't create too much interference in other bands. As long as you stay in the 2.4 GHz band, then the FCC, more or less, doesn't care. All you have to do is make your device work well enough for people to buy it.
This also means that if some manufacturer wanted to deliberately create a device to block all 2.4 GHz communications in a local area, they could apply under Section 18 (or whatever it was) to have such a device approved. There's nothing that the cordless phone manufacturers could do about it.
Frankly, they should have known better. However, we tend to support a throw-away society, so you'll just have to go and buy something that works in the 5 GHz band now. At least now there's bandwidth specifically allocated to communications in that frequency range.
"I have never let my schooling interfere with my education." - Mark Twain
wireless is gay
OMG BIG PENIS ATE MY SOUP
http://www.fusionlighting.com/technology.htm
That's an inside like the the RF lighting technology.... The company's main page doesn't have any link (under construction). Pulled that from google.
"Focus on Broadband Wireless Internet Access has an article [cached by google ]
Note to article posters: Do more of that cached by Google stuff, I like that.
Adidas To Bring Back Sneakernet
-1 Redundand would be my suggestion.
Too bad there's no -1 FOAD.
Nobody loves me, it's true.
--
pants ahoy
my wife's law school and my workplace are both wired for WiFi access. and while a law school may not have pull... the place i work probably would not roll over and die and let interference destroy their data networks. maybe WiFi for the home starts to get hurt, but WiFi is here to stay, at least in business. it sure beats running hundreds of meters of Cat-5.
-rp
All this talk about interference between WLAN and Bluetooth is more or less rubbish in my experience. Both at work and at home, I work every day with both Bluetooth and WLAN at the same time and I've never had any problems or slowdowns of either one. On my laptop, I have both and both are enabled at all times - no problems, ever. At work, just two rooms over from mine, people code Bluetooth code every day with several Bluetooth devices, some of which are experimental. The same office space has a WLAN network and nobody ever complains about interference.. *shrug*
Cheese Enchilada's
1 (15 ounce) can tomato sauce
1 (6 ounce) can tomato paste
2 teaspoons Creole-style seasoning
1 (12 ounce) package corn tortillas
1 (8 ounce) package Cheddar cheese, shredded, divided
1 onion, diced
1 (6 ounce) can sliced ripe olives
1 (6 ounce) can sliced mushrooms
Directions
Preheat oven to 350 degrees F (175 degrees C).
In a medium bowl combine tomato sauce, tomato paste and Creole-style seasoning. Warm tortillas in microwave, or in oven; dip them in the tomato sauce mixture and lay them in a 9x13 inch casserole dish. Fill each tortilla with cheese, onion, olives and mushrooms; roll. Repeat until dish is full. Sprinkle a small amount of cheese on top.
Bake in preheated oven for 25 to 30 minutes, or until cheese is melted and bubbly.
Makes 6 Servings
I hope problems like this, prompt the public to pressure the FCC. Between them and the Patent office, we should be screaming to our politicians that lack of forsight in these departments is going to slow progress. The government needs to hire some intelligent people for these departments, and stuff like this won't happen quite so frequently.
Um, this is my sig.
"and save the environment".... I like environment models that understand that there is an environmental impact represented in every dollar spent/received. Can these lights truly save the environmental impact caused by the forced restructuring of billions of dollars worth of equipment and development time? Don't forget that developers consume light and energy. Production of new telephones and other devices to replace those obsoleted also consumes light and energy. The environmental impact of a environment saving technology deployed wrongly can be devastating.
If this could be used correctly with a narrow enought beam this could be the Ultimate Wifi fire wall put these lights all around your building pointing outwrard and no one can send signal into your building to snoop on your network. but they would have to figure out how to limit their effectivness so that you don't block the next buildings network.
madness takes its toll please have exact change
The amount of interference caused is less than the article is making it out to be. Although it would require that procautions be taken (an EXTREMELY high amount could disrupt a transmission). Under normal conditions, RF Lighting hurts the signal a little bit, but nothing as significant as to signal the end of wireless as we know it. Just saying.
Flourescent lights and CRTs have been causing interference in electric guitars for many years. Not to mention the 60hz harmonic from the wall that causes 'pickup hum'.
It seems unlikely to me that these things will be all that catastrophic in their effects. To be power-efficeint light sources, each bulb will have limited power with which to generate interference. To be power-efficient enough to make a difference in this market, this technology should probably consume <10 watts for the equivalent of a 60-watt light bulb. Considering that most of that energy will be going into visible light, it can't be a very strong signal source. Even in large installations like gas stations, where many such small sources would exist, the effect should fall off quickly. Don't use them in your home, and your wireless LAN should be safe.
The reason the satelite radio providers are running scared is that these things are mainly slated for use in street lights. Since cars tend to drive under street lights, and car users are the big market for satelite radio, someone's business model will have to give. Even small intereference feilds can be a big problem if they interupt your line of sight, particularly with high frequencies.
Speaking of images (don't want to get modded Offtopic, after all), I still haven't found a good Gandalf wallpaper image. Thanks to all those who have helped, now let's give it one more go. Remember, stoned is the look I'm going for.
Karma: Good (despite my invention of the Karma: sig)
okay, if their lighting disrupts our communication, is there a (legal) way to make our communication disrupt their lighting? this is our bandwidth, we were here first. if they want to destroy it (i.e., not play nice) then they better be prepared.
-rp
Ugh. Now I'm going to be forced to add rows of copper pennies to my burgeoning tin foil hat.
The page includes the statement that a golf-ball-sized device could have the light output equivalent to 10,000 watts of incandescent bulbs (100 100-watt bulbs). Granted that they are more efficient than incandescent, how hot is such a device likely to get during operation? Even at 90% efficiency, a device that size converting 1,000 watts to heat is going to be damned hot.
Different cultures come up with different ways of describing or categorizing sexual phenomena. When those descriptions or categories are imported by other cultures, interesting tensions arise between indigenous sexual cultures and the newly imported discourses. The term ?homosexual,? for instance, traces its origins as ?Homosexualität? to the activist Karl Maria Kertbeny?s political tract of 1869. This document was written in German against the backdrop of the impending unification of Germany, with the specific purpose of preventing the spread of Prussia?s stringent laws against sodomy to states like Bavaria that did not criminalize consensual sexual activity between members of the same sex. Thus ?homosexuality? and ?heterosexuality,? terms which went on to structure the world?s understanding of sexuality, clearly emerge from mid-nineteenth-century central Europe. In 1968, almost a century after the coinage of the term ?Homosexualität,? the German Democratic Republic began moving in the direction that Kertbeny had desired, decriminalizing consensual sexual acts between members of the same sex. A year later, the Federal Republic of Germany also decriminalized sex between adult men, although the age of consent remained higher for male-male activities than it was for heterosexual acts. (This was finally changed in 1994.) Since this liberalization, the vocabulary of sexuality has undergone considerable change, much of which was fomented in the United States. How has the Federal Republic of Germany, once an exporter of sexual vocabulary, taken to importing conceptualizations of sexuality? Some of the American vocabulary has been deeply foreign to German language and culture, but the word ?queer? will transfer quite well, grafting itself on to German roots.
A plethora of American concepts and words inundates the German sexual realm nowadays, with affects on sexuality that cannot be taken for granted. Among these concepts are: ?gay community,? [1] ?Stonewall,? ?Christopher Street Day,? ?Coming-Out,? ?the closet,? ?outing,? and ?queer.? These terms must have an effect on German conceptualization of sexuality, just as the terms ?homosexual? and ?heterosexual? have influenced the way the rest of the world thinks about sexuality. A concrete example of this cross-pollination can be seen, for example, in the work of Jim Baker, who with Ilona Bubeck has co-founded the ?Querverlag,? which has just published a directory of German gay and lesbian organizations called the Regenbogen Seiten. The vocabulary of ?quer? and the notion of ?Regenbogenseiten? both suggest American interference from the word ?queer? and the ideology of the rainbow flag. The index to this directory shows over a hundred organizations sticking with the indubitably German ?schwul,? plus 19 using the originally German if now international ?homosexuell? (which represents a considerable drop from earlier years), 46 using the word ?gay,? and another 22 using some form of ?queer? or ?quer.? Thus, while German words remain in the majority, there is nonetheless a sense that German inadequately describes contemporary sexuality, which motivates a strong interest in Anglo-American vocabulary.
In academic circles a host of words are considered untranslatable. The collection of essays entitled Grenzen lesbischer Identitäten, edited by Sabine Hark, who has written some of the earliest German publications on queer theory, has a glossary explaining such terms as ?butch/femme,? ?closet,? and ?queer,? all of which appear in English and are not translated in any of the essays. The Humboldt-Universität in Berlin has a quasi-official program in ?Queer-Studien? [2] within the Department of Cultural Studies. [3]
Some institutions resist these foreign loanwords, of course. The department of Neuere Deutsche Literatur at the venerable Albert-Ludwigs-Universität of Freiburg refused to let a visiting American professor use the words ?queer theory? in the title of his course because it wanted to keep the catalog German. The department settled on ?Homosexualität und Literatur,? recognizing the Teutonic nature of homosexuality. In their insistence on the term ?homosexuality,? the Freiburger Germanisten had for many years allies in the German government, which also exclusively used the word ?homosexuell.? The Bundestag only permitted vocabulary of ?schwul? and ?lesbisch? in the 1990s (Schenk 190).
Outside of the academic arena, many aspects of the American gay rights movement have also been imported by Germany. Some of these ?imports? should actually be considered German projections on to America. Since 1979, there have been gay pride parades in Germany called Christopher Street Day Parades, or CSD-Paraden, although relatively few parades in the English-speaking world are so named (Theis 290). Volker Woltersdorff observes that the emphasis on Christopher Street Day is producing a mythic history of the gay movement: ?die 69er Revolte in der New Yorker Christopher Street [wird] als ein Gründungsmythos der Schwulenbewegung inszeniert und alljährlich reinszeniert? (82). Sabine Hark comments upon the importance of the founding myth of Christopher Street for the German movement, bemoaning the fact that the acceptance of ?Stonewall? as the zero hour of gay and lesbian history devalidates any prior queer history indigenous to Germany (?Magisches Zeichen? 109). When Berlin?s Akademie der Künste hosted an exhaustively comprehensive exhibit on gay male history, it chose Christopher Isherwood?s title, ?Good bye to Berlin,? suggesting that even this remarkable demonstration of the significance of gay Germany was looking to the Anglo-American world for confirmation and legitimation. This is all the more ironic, given that it is unlikely that in the United States or England such a major exhibition would have been funded with public monies and with so little public outcry.
Moving from the level of politics and activism to the more personal and psychological level, one of the most fundamental stages of gay identity in the United States is the closet, which is an entirely untranslatable notion in German. One can?t speak of the ?Schrank,? in which sexuality is hidden. Indeed, most European houses don?t have built-in closets. One certainly can?t make verb forms comparable to ?closeted? either. English-language critical texts based on ?closet? as a noun and a verb, with frequent usage of the terms ?closeted? or ?closeting,? disintegrate in the process of translation, which must render these terms with the less metahorical language of ?verstecken,? ?verhüllen,? ?verbergen,? and ?verklemmt.? Certainly, sex between members of the same gender has often been hidden in German history, but the absence of the metaphor of the closet has lent this German hiding of sexuality an undeniably different character.
As Butler points out in the translated essay (originally written in English) that anchors Grenzen lesbischer Identitäten, the metaphor of ?out? is completely dependent upon the metaphor of the closet (19). Thus it is not surprising that German imported the vocabulary of ?coming out,? as well as that of the ?closet.? Not only German has perceived this necessity, if Helga Pankratz is to be believed: ?So häufig und so selbstverständlich wird der Ausdruck gebraucht weltweit! ? Aber in jeder Sprache der Welt außer dem Englischen ist und bleibt ?Coming Out?, wenn wir es recht bedenken: ein Fremdwort!? (177). It is an American export article, she continues, one that has achieved the respectability in Germany of being recognized by the Duden. The ?Coming-out Erzählung? has become a term that is standard enough to receive academic attention by scholars such as Volker Woltersdorff. Even in the German Democratic Republic, it gained acceptance, becoming the title of a major film there on the subject of homosexuality: Heiner Carow?s ?Coming Out? was the last major film produced in the GDR. The film might have made a bigger splash, had the Berlin Wall not come down the very day that it was released.
Despite its success, the term ?Coming Out? is clumsy in German. While German is no stranger to separable verbs like ?coming out,? it has not proven possible to use ?aus kommen? to mean ?to come out? in the sexual sense. Thus Germans have stayed with the foreign term ?Coming Out? as a noun, producing sentences like ?Ich hatte mein Coming-Out 1989.? Fortunately, another Anglo-Americanism appeared on the scene to rescue the Germans out of this awkward linguistic situation: ?Outing.? Outing, which provoked enormous controversy in the Federal Republic, partially because of Rosa von Praunheim?s efforts to expose hypocritical public figures, flowed smoothly into German. It lent itself to an incorporation into German as the verb ?outen,? which could be used gracefully in a number of verb forms, including the reflexive ?sich outen.? Here was a way out of the problems with the ungraceful ?Coming Out.? One could ?out oneself?: ?sich outen? became the more fluent way to talk about openly announcing one?s sexuality. Indeed, in Germany ?outen? soon came to be used to reveal any unusual, surprising, remarkable, hitherto unsuspected aspect of a person?s personality, just as the verb ?to out? is used in the United States. Pankratz lists examples of people in the public eye ?outing themselves? as rollerbladers, sufferers of migraine headaches, lovers of classical music, or natives of the Vorarlberg (189). ?Sich outen? works more easily in German than ?Coming Out,? but it alters the understanding of sexuality, which is no longer the organic growth or development of the subject that one associates with ?coming out,? and instead has a somewhat violent relationship between subject and object that is associated with the controversial practice of ?outing.? [4] Indeed, one of the reasons that Pankratz ultimately likes ?sich outen? is its somewhat harder edge that comes from its connections to ?outing.?
Pankratz points out that the reflexive verb, ?sich outen,? has become confusing for many native speakers of German, including journalists, who now use the word ?Outing,? without the ?sich,? for ?Coming-Out.?As an example, she cites the following sentence from an article about the openly lesbian singer Melissa Etheridge, ?Immer mehr schwule und lesbische Stars riskieren es, durch ihr Outing straightes Publikum zu brüskieren? (192). In addition to the striking use of ?straight? as an adjective, the sentence is remarkable because ?Outing? is no longer something done to a star, but rather something that a star does to herself or to her public.
A number of German cultural critics have made reference to a subtle distinction between ?coming out,? understood as a personal recognition of one?s sexuality, and ?going public,? understood as the public announcement of that sexuality. They point out the associations of the phrase with the stock market as an example of the kind of double meaning that gets lost in the wholesale importation of sexual terminology. While the distinction between ?coming out? and ?going public? makes sense to me, as does the analysis of the latter term?s economic meaning, I have to say that I personally have rarely, if ever, heard or read the phrase ?going public? in this sense.
Once one comes out, what does one become? Immediately after the 1969 liberalization of laws concerning sexuality, German terminology prevailed and one became ?homosexuell? or ?schwul.? The currency of the term ?homosexuell? is perhaps surprising, because it is today frequently rejected as overly clinical, medical, and pathological. But just as it was originally coined and embraced by activists, only to be appropriated by medicine, so too was it also embraced by the post-69 generation of gay activists. A great many student groups included the word ?homosexuell? in their names, including the ?Homosexuelle Aktionsgruppe Bochum? (which appeared as a student group in 1970 and became a city-wide organization in 1971), the ?Homosexuelle Studentengruppe Münster,? the ?Homosexuelle Aktion Westerberlin? (1971). There was also a ?Homosexuelle AktionsGruppe? or HAG in Munich, which had to change its acronym, when a coffee firm of the same name protested. It became HAM for ?Homosexuelle Aktionsgruppe München.? Various organizations came to represent the cause of gay rights on a federal level, including the ?Deutsche Aktionsgruppe Homosexualität,? founded in 1972, and the ?Allgemeine Homosexuelle Arbeitsgemeinschaft? (1974).
Clearly, then, a large majority of the organizations that formed in the early 70s chose vocabulary having to do with ?homosexuality.? Rosa von Praunheim?s film, ?Nicht der Homosexuelle ist pervers, sondern die Situation, in der er lebt,? which appeared at the Berliner Filmfestspiele in 1971, and appeared for the first time on television in 1972, used the vocabulary of ?Homosexuelle,? albeit with a great deal of alienating distance. Homosexuality also showed up in the chants of the street marchers, as in the following example: ?Brüder und Schwestern, ob warm oder nicht, Kapitalismus bekämpfen ist unsere Pflicht!? (Kraushaar 139). [5] As this jingle indicates, the groups using the discourse of homosexuality were on the cutting edge of left-wing radicalism, which is somewhat surprising given the current rejection of the term ?homosexuelle? by many activists.
Indeed, the ?Allgemeine Homosexuelle Arbeitsgemeinschaft? started in Berlin as a replacement for the ?Internationale Homophile Weltorganisation? (IHWO), according to Wolfgang Theis (285). The word ?homosexuell? radically emphasized the sexual, while the term ?homophil,? which had been more popular in the 50s and 60s in the Federal Republic, had diluted the sexual with a vaguer kind of love: ?Die Verwendung des Begriffs ?homosexuell? in den Namen der neuen studentischen Gruppen war als programmatische Abkehr von der Praxis der bürgerlichen Verbände gemeint, die sich schamhaft ?homophil? nannten, weil die Betonung des Sexuellen nach ihrem Verständnis nur Vorurteile bestätigen konnte? (Theis 279-80). Thus, the word ?homosexuell? should receive more credit than it does. The Foucauldian attack on the role of medicine in the construction of sexuality probably led to a widespread discrediting of this term, which had become a medical, as well as a political, concept. But in the critique of the medical establishment, the activists who did promote this terminology have been forgotten.
In the early 70s, ?schwul? seems to have been used alongside ?homosexuell.? Praunheim?s film entitled ?Nicht der Homosexuelle ist pervers, sondern die Situation, in der er lebt? states programatically, ?Schwule wollen nicht schwul sein? (Theis 280). Generally understood as a pejorative, gay groups tended to avoid using it in their official names, although there were some exceptions, for instance Frankfurt?s ?Rote Zelle Schwul? or ?Rotzschwul.? Within the community, however, the pejorative connotations of the word had less weight, meaning that it was used in exclusively gay contexts, rather than in contacts between the gay and straight world. The gay newspaper Schwuchtel appeared in 1975; in the following year, an early gay drama appeared, entitled ?Brühwarm ? ein schwuler Jahrmarkt? (Theis 286-7). Both the newspaper and the drama were intended for a primarily gay audience, which allowed for the use of the word ?schwul.? The tension between the title of Praunheim?s film and its first words underscores this point as well. The title, ?Nicht der Homosexuelle ?,? would serve to mediate between the film?s content, which was by, for, and about the gay male movement, and the general public. The vocabulary of ?Schwule wollen nicht schwul sein? then leads the public directly into an internal gay debate.
?Nicht der Homosexuelle ?? is of course more complicated than that, for the repeated use of the word ?schwul? not only introduces the audience to the film?s insider critique, but also forces the general public to confront its own negative associations with the word ?schwul.? As Volker Bruns notes, ?das Wort ?schwul? war ein so ungeheuerliches Schimpfwort, dass es selbst die ?Normalen? nur in Sekunden der Erregung über die Lippen brachten? (86). In 1975, the East German gay activist Michael Unger expressed the community?s desire to change the connotations of the word: ?Wir verwenden es seit langem als selbstverständliche Bezeichnung auch für uns selbst, weil wir glauben, dass es ursprünglich einmal eine saubere Bedeutung hatte und erst später zum Schimpfwort wurde? (Kraushaar 147-48). [6] In response to Unger, the Zentralinstitut für Sprachwissenschaft an der Akademie der Wissenschaften der DDR confirmed that the word had a negative connotation and presumed that there was little chance that word ?schwul? would experience a positive reevaluation (Kraushaar 147). The magazine Schwuchtel pressed the point, by using an even more pejorative term to discuss practices, such as S/M and pederasty, that were taboo even within the gay community. The use of the word ?schwul? mirrored the appropriation of the term ?nigger? in the United States by rap groups like Niggers With Attitude and anticipated the reversal of meaning that took place when the word ?queer? came into use by academicians and activists in the 1990s.
By the end of the 70s, an increasingly self-confident gay movement in the Federal Republic began to replace ?homosexuell? with the term ?schwul.? In the 1977 the ?Homosexuelle Aktion Westberlin? dissolved and the space it had occupied became the ?SchwulenZentrum? or ?Schwuz? (Theis 288). In the same year, the ?Nationale Arbeitsgruppe Repression gegen Schwule? was established in Hamburg (Theis 290). In 1978, 682 men revealed themselves as gay in the newsmagazine Stern (#41) in the article, ?Wir sind schwul? (Rimmele 138). In 1979 the student government of the Freie Universität in Berlin set up a ?Schwulenreferat? (Theis 287). By 1990, there was a ?Schwulenverband in Deutschland,? which attempted to unite gay political organizations. Shortly thereafter, the Bundestag began to accept the use of the word ?schwul? instead of ?homosexuell.? The term ?schwul? had been objectionable enough in 1988 that a Green Party proposal for a ?Schwulenreferat? had not even reached the floor, because of the word. The Greens refused to accept the word ?Homosexuelle,? killing the proposal for the time being (Kraushaar 204-5). The subtitle of the publically subsidized Berlin exhibit ?Good bye to Berlin,? ?100 Jahre Schwulenbewegung,? was further evidence of the official acceptance of this term.
The demise of the word ?homosexuell? was related, on the academic front, to the general Foucauldian critique of medicine and its role in pathologizing same-sex desire. It also was a corollary of an increasing gap between gay men and lesbians. The word ?schwul? generally refers only to gay men, although this was not always the case. None other than one of the founders of the German gay and lesbian movement, Magnus Hirschfeld, is said to have referred to ?schwule Frauen und Männer.? And the Berlin group, Homosexuelle Aktion West, had in 1972 a ?schwule Frauengruppe? (Winder and Telge 11). But these are rare exceptions; the vast majority of German speakers regard ?schwul? as referring only to men. These exceptions, however, prove that the implicit masculinity of the word ?schwul? is a result of decision-making by German speakers.
This separatism has had some noteworthy consequences. In particular, gay male events have often been much more sexually explicit in Germany than they would be in the States where the sexes have worked together more closely. The catalog for the mammoth exhibit, ?Good Bye to Berlin, 100 Jahre Schwulenbewegung,? which was in fact quite astonishing in its concentration on men to the exclusion of women, was filled with graphic depictions of male sexual organs and acts that would likely not have been present in an exhibit with a strong women?s presence. Indeed, when gay male organizations in Germany have attempted to solicit lesbian participation and contributions, the issues of pornography and the power of images have always quickly arisen as stumbling blocks. [7]
The loss of the inclusive term ?homosexuell? went hand in hand with the development of separate identities around the terms ?schwul? and ?lesbisch.? The lesbian movement intensified its involvement with feminism and the women?s movement, as the gay men went their own way. Any cooperation between the camps was seen as a coalition between precisely defined categories: ?schwul-lesbisch.? The Siegesäule, the gay and lesbian magazine coming out of Berlin, with the largest circulation of any gay/lesbian publication in Germany, has recently taken to styling itself as ?schwul-lesbisch,? in order to be more inclusive, although it had traditionally been ?schwul? and thus primarily male in its orientation, and to some extent remains so. Similarly the ?Schwules Pressearchiv? has called itself since August 1995 the ?Lesbisch-Schwules Pressearchiv? (Rimmele 132).
For those with a residual fear of the offensiveness of ?schwul? or with a hankering for the inclusiveness ?homosexuell,? there was always the prosaic ?gleichgeschlechtlich,? which began to show up, especially in bureacratic contexts, in the late 80s and early 90s. In 1989, Berlin established a ?Referat für gleichgeschlechtliche Lebensweisen.? In 1992, Brandenburg followed suit, with a ?Büro für gleichgeschlechtliche Lebensweisen? (Kokula 173-4). The term ?Lebensweise? is additionally interesting, for it suggests a deemphasis on the sexual aspect that the early proponents of ?homosexuell? had wanted to underscore, as well as a downplaying of the shock tactics that the initial champions of ?schwul? had utilized. In these cases, the speakers wanted the most neutral, least offensive official term possible, with the least taint of colloquialism. In addition, they seem to have wanted to avoid the use of loan words, like the Anglo-Saxon ?gay? or even the Greco-Roman ?homosexual.? The German language was up to providing terminology that adequately covered the needs of its speakers!
How about the Anglo-Saxon word ?gay?? In the Regenbogen Seiten, there are actually more organizations using ?gay? in their names than organizations using some version of ?queer.? This is probably a passing phenomenon, because ?gay? does not lend itself phonetically to appropriation in the German language the way that ?queer? does. In the Romance languages constructions like ?gai pied,? the title of the venerable, although sadly no longer surviving, Parisian gay magazine, can flow smoothly into the native language, but ?gay? is a difficult word to use in German. The ?ay? is not common at the end of a word, and the declension of an adjective ending with a ?y? is uncomfortable.
In English, the word ?gay? has a highly problematic positioning on two axes: the gay-lesbian axis and the gay-straight axis. When it is on the gay-lesbian axis it refers to men, but when it?s on the gay-straight axis, it at least attempts to represent homosexually-inclined men and women together. This uncomfortable double meaning has its reflections in Germany. As seen in the example of ?schwul,? Germans have been more inclined to force vocabulary dealing with sexuality into a specific gender. The effort at inclusiveness in the American word ?gay? has been something of a standing reproach to German groups. Dorothee Winden and Dieter Telge argue that the flood of documentaries out of the United States showing the cooperation between the sexes provided a model for many Germans. The concept of ?gay? as including men and women together eventually shamed German gay groups into opening up to women, as the move by the Allgemeine Homosexuelle Arbeitsgemeinschaft to include women in 1994 indicates.
The other half of the gay-straight dichotomy has fared even less well, if that is possible, in the Germanic realm than the gay-lesbian dichotomy. I?ve already cited the one reference to a ?straightes Publikum? (Pankratz 192). In general, however, there is not a good colloquial expresssion for heterosexuals that would correspond, say, to ?schwul.? Generally, it seems that gays and lesbians refer to ?Heteros? or ?Heteras? in a slangy kind of way, when they wouldn?t necessarily use the term ?Homos.? And while the words ?schwul? and ?lesbisch? have now achieved widespread currency, the terms ?hetero? and ?hetera? have not. This suggests that linguistically, German culture still finds the practitioners of same-sex desire as worthy of special note, while those who are in heterosexual relationships can pass by with relatively little scrutiny.
Some might object to the relentless dichotomization between men and women, gays and straights, going on here, and one of the objectives of the word ?queer? has been to escape such binary thinking. Although in many ways it had a militant edge to it, it blurred some of the boundaries that had existed, both along the gay/lesbian and the gay/straight axes. ?Queer? emerged as a word with a signficant new ideology in the States in the 1990s and arrived in Germany shortly thereafter. In 1989, Burroughs?s book with the English title Queer was translated into German as Homo, indicating that the term was relatively unknown in Germany. In 1992, the group Queer Nation made an appearance at the Berlin lesbian festival called ?Lesbenwoche,? identifying itself as follows: ?Queer Nation ? versteht sich als undogmatisches Aktionsbündnis von Lesben und Schwulen aller Rassen und Klassen, die sich nicht mehr mit der Assimilationspolitik der etablierten Homobewegung identifizieren können und buntere und radikalere Aktionsformen entwickeln wollen? (LW Programm 52; cited in Laps 245). Sabine Hark?s essay ?Queer Interventionen? appeared in 1993 (in Feministische Studien 2), marking the introduction of the term to academic prose; it was reprinted in 1994 in a volume entitled Querfeldein: Beiträge zur Lesbenforschung, which is one of the earliest usages of the highly significant wordplay between ?quer? and ?queer? that I have located.
Since 1994, usage of the term ?queer? has blossomed in the Federal Republic. The symposium entitled ?Queering Demokratie? hosted by the Green Party?s Heinrich Böll Foundation from October 9-11 of 1998 in Berlin sparked an intensive confrontation with the concept of ?queer? in newspapers and weeklies like Freitag and Die Taz. The private television channel RTL reported in 1998 that at the Augsburg Christopher Street Day parade participants were chanting ?queer und hier,? which the news program helpfully translated as ?schwul und hier.? In the ?Querverlag??s Regenbogen Seiten one comes across such organizations as the ?Queer Strikers Frankfurt? (a gay bowling club), the ?QueerFlöten? (a gay and lesbian choir in Freiburg), and ?Queer Klagenfurt,? which seems to be an umbrella organization with various functions in Austria. Berlin has the aforementioned ?Queer-Studien,? Linz has a ?Queery-Box.? There?s ?Queerfilm? in Bremen, a ?Queerfilmreihe? in Freiburg, a ?queer-Filmfest? in Frankfurt, a ?Queer Film Festival? in Vienna, and a cultural festival called ?Queer im Ruhr.? You can tune your radio to a ?Queer Kanal? in Bremen, and a ?Queerfunk? in both Dresden and Kiel.
Many of the organizations that have used the term ?queer? in their names do not have an explicit agenda. When I spoke with founders of Berlin?s ?Queer-Studien? and Freiburg?s ?QueerFlöten,? they were unable to give a concrete explanation for their choice of a name. But nonetheless the term has significance. Part of the appeal of ?queer? seems to be the way it fills the gender gap left by the demise of ?homosexuell? and the rise of ?schwul,? thus authorizing gay and lesbian cooperation. The manifesto in Queer Nation?s 1992 statement at the Lesbenwoche specifically referred to an alliance between ?Lesben und Schwulen? (LW Programm 52; cited in Laps 245). According to Winden and Telge, ?Queer Nation? was the first integrated male-and-female political action group interested in issues of same-sex desire that had appeared in Germany in a long time (12-13). Freiburg?s ?QueerFlöten? was until recently the only integrated lesbian and gay choir in all of Germany, and there are plenty of single-sex choirs there. The ?Queer-Partys? of SO 36, a nightclub in Berlin, brought together men and women; the presence of parties at which both gay men and lesbians could come together was itself political. So threatening to the established gay and lesbian identities were these ?Queer-Partys? that they were accused of turning SO 36 it into a meeting place for hip bis, or ?hippe Bi?s? as they say in German.
While the founders of the Humboldt?s ?Queer-Studien? did not have an expressed ideology backing their name, other academics have thought about their terminology more strenuously. In their introduction to the series ?Querdenken,? which was published in 1996, Sabine Hark and Stefan Etgeten define the name of the series as an ?Experiment lesbisch-schwuler Zusammenarbeit, in der Konflikte und Differenzen nicht verdeckt, sondert fortwährend artikuliert und untersucht werden sollen? (?Zu dieser Reihe? 8). In their volume, Freundschaft unter Vorbehalt. Chancen und Grenzen lesbisch-schwuler Bündnisse, published in 1997, Hark and Etgeten situate the possible coalition between gay men and lesbian women specifically under the aegis of ?queer,? which they hope will be an end to separatism (?Zwischen Geschlechterschranke?).
Perhaps because ?queer? counters the exclusionary force of ?schwul,? it has proven particularly attractive to women theorists. It was in the context of ?Lesbenwoche? and ?Lesbenforschung? that the term was first introduced to the Federal Republic. In general, many more women theorists have published on this matter in Germany than men. In a private conversation, Alice Kuzniar suggested that this may have to do with the impact of Judith Butler on feminist thinking in Germany. Butler is clearly related to the emergence of ?queer?in Germany. Gender studies and queer theory are of course ways of thinking often associated with the writings of Judith Butler, who has been such a success in Germany that one speaks of the ?Butler-Boom.? Her lecture tour in Germany in the summer of 1997 was a triumphal march through a happily vanquished land. It was like the Beatles ? 14-year-old girls fainting when they caught sight of her and so forth. Both of her public appearances in Berlin were completely packed. The public lecture at the Einstein Forum at the Staatsbibliothek filled two rooms to overflowing, whereupon loudspeakers were set up outside on the lawn for the fascinated public. All the serious newspapers carried reviews of her lectures. Butler?s tremendous success there fueled an enthusiastic sense of rebirth among feminist thinkers, which was lost on the gay male scholars who did not pick up on her as quickly.
In addition, ?queer? is seen among German intellectuals and activists, in a way similar to its reception in the United States, as opening up the possibility of talking about non-essentialist identities (Engel 77). It offers possibilities to those who are exhausted with the boundaries of their identities (Etgarton and Hark). In her essay, ?Queer Interventionen,? Hark describes queer theory as ?eine politische und theoretisch-konzeptionelle Idee für eine kategoriale Rekonzeptualisierung von Geschlecht und Sexualität, mit der problematisch gewordene Identitätspolitik überwunden werden sollen? (211). Woltersdorff refers to ?queer? as ?neue Identität beziehungsweise Anti-Identität,? including transsexuals and transgendered people (90-91). Discussing the establishment of the ?queer-Partys? at SO 36, Winden and Telge see ?queer? as appealing to young party-goers because of its inclusivity and its rejection of constricting labels: ?Mit dem Wort queer als Sammelbegriff für alles, was sich jenseits der heterosexuellen Norm bewegt, bieten die queer-Partys eine Identifikationsmöglichkeit, die weniger ideologisch-theoretisch bestimmt war, sondern dem eigenen Lebensstil entsprach? (21). Corinna Genschel see it as potentially including ?alle ?Perverse? als Dissidenten herrschender Politik? (79). Roswitha Hofmann finds that ?queer? is an ?expression of a new way of thinking and living? and ?Queer-Theory? the next step ?in extracting oneself from the categories of identity that many feel are too narrow? (115). Jutta Hartman also sees ?Queer Theory? as a ?confrontation with the constructedness and thus relativity of identities? (270).
Notable throughout the writings on queer is the ambivalence about the possibility that it could water down, depoliticize, and further commercialize sexuality. Engel is concerend that ?queer? often merely serves as a fashionable guarantor of a ?progressive attitude? (77). Genschel worries about the potential commercialization of the word ?queer.? This mistrust, born of the long-standing leftwing tendencies of the gay and lesbian movements in the Federal Republic, is perhaps connected to the American origins of the term ?queer.? The word has clearly been recognized as an American import since Queer Nation?s announcement at the 1992 Lesbenwoche that it was ?eine Bewegung, die seit Frühjahr 1990 in fast allen US-amerikanischen und einigen kanadischen Städten Fus gefasst hat? (LW Programm 52; cited in Laps 245). Ralph Poole wonders if the ?queer-Szene? is ?ein amerikanisches Phänomen? (99). Many of the speakers at the Green Party?s Queering Democracy symposium were Americans and spoke in English. [8] An article from Die Taz asserts, ?unter dem aus den USA importierten Begriff ?Queer? soll nun die heterosexuelle Norm exorziert werden? (Krause and Meisel). The importation of ?queer? from America perhaps the effect of validating West German conceptualizations of sexuality over East German ones, as the Westerners had more contact with the American scene that produced this vocabulary (see Thinius).
While ?queer? has provided a good deal of food for thought for feminist scholars, some are concerned that it will dilute the specificity of women?s issues,once again subordinating women to the economically and socially more powerful men who will almost inevitably take over an organization that consists of both men and women. Lena Laps in any case sees the move from ?schwul? and particularly ?lesbisch? to ?queer? as parallel to the move from ?Frauenforschung? to ?Geschlechterdifferenz,? in that in both cases, there is a loss of particularlity in favor of generality. Women in particular disappear behind the universals that she sees in the terms ?queer? and ?gender.?
In addition to concerns about commercilization and sexism, many of these theorists and commentators are concerned that the use of ?queer? in German disconnects the word from its initial Anglo-American double-meaning of ?homosexual? and ?strange? or ?weird.? By eliding these two meanings, American queer theorists can pivot same-sex desire into a paradoxically paradigmatic marginality. With the fortuitous existence of the verb ?to queer,? one had the possibility for numerous linguistically pre-approved approaches to texts. Much of this is lost in the German appropriation of the word. Some have therefore argued for the use of the word ?pervers? as a translation of ?queer,? in order to emphasize the initial negativity of the term. But I think that, among queers, there have always been those who took pleasure in being queer, and I?m not sure that the same applies to ?pervers.? That is to say, I?m not sure that the issue is exclusively one of reversing the meaning of a word, but rather one of determining whose evaluation of the term is considered binding. In any case, Germans are familiar with the concept of reappropriating negative terminology and giving it a positive twist ? indeed that is what happened to the word ?schwul.? ?Schwul? would have been a model for ?queer? if the only concern were to make positive an initially negative concept.
Despite these concerns, ?queer? seems to be taking root in Germany. Unlike ?gay,? which has remained an entirely foreign word in German, the word ?queer? can fit into another linguistic matrix in German. ?Queer? is perhaps related to ?quer.? Hence the ?Querverlag,? with its series ?querdenken,? and the lecture series in Vienna with the title ?que[e]rdenken? (with the second ?e? in brackets). By mobilizing this linguistic family, queer theorists are able to discuss, as Poole does, ?verquerte Sexualität? (108). Antke Engel entitles her article ?Verqueeres Begehren.? The Humboldt-Universität hosted a conference on sexology entitled ?Verqueere Wissenschaft? in 1997.
This usage has exciting possibilities, not only for the development of German conceptualization of sexuality. The importation of ?queer? will facilitate German thinking on sexuality, but it will do so, not merely by forcing an American concept onto the German playing field, but also by allowing the German linguistic structures to contribute to this conceptualization. As ?queer? anchors itself in German ?quer,? the concepts of queer theory that arise in Germany will emphasize more the sense of crossing boundaries, a kind of reading or cutting against the grain that is inherent in ?quer? rather than the strangeness or making strange that is inherent in ?queer.? This is an exciting form of cultural cross-pollination, for it allows for cultures to affect each other while also recognizing cultural difference.
His post only got a score of "2", and now the slashdot community is going nuts about a post saying just about the same thing... Give that guy some credit..
The article is rather light on details about how exactly the lights are going to interfere.
2.4ghz is special in that its the resonance frequency of the water molecule. That's why microwave ovens operate at that frequency: vibration = heat.
So how exactly are these folks going to sell a product which emits high wattages at that frequency? Sitting under one would be like sticking your head in a microwave.
Answer: They're not stupid enough to sell a product that is like sticking your head in a microwave. Some critical facts are missing here.
The wireless stuff isn't particularly dangerous since its emitting at such a low power: well under 1 watt where the typical microwave emits at up to 1000 watts. And the spread spectrum technology does a good enough job of ignoring noise that the technology works despite the leakage from those ovens. If the wireless stuff does OK in the presence of leakage from 1000 watt Microwave Ovens, it'll do fine in the presence of other safe 2.4ghz devices.
Moderating "-1, Disagree" is simple censorship. Have the guts to post your opinion.
One thing that strikes me about all of this is that places that install high efficiency lighting are probably companies of various kinds. These same places will generally also purchase things like wireless networks (802.11b is all over the place now from gas stations to big companies). If a company finds that their new lighting system will disrupt day to day business, I doubt they'll invest and this will be bad news for Fusion Lighting since 802.11b was there first.
and I can fuck like a wild bear. Soup Number Five - Believed to be an aphrodisiac, soup number five, or goat scrotum cooked in a broth, is an extra-special and much sought-after pulutan of the older beer-binging set. Sometimes, cow testicles are used. People who can cook this dish well enjoy legendary status among their peers. People who can stomach it have the right to brag about it all the time.
I was thinking more like the see through door of the microwave...
'He was a dreamer, a thinker, a speculative philosopher... or, as his wife would have it, an idiot.' - Douglas Adams
Perhaps someone could answer a question for me that I've always wondered about.
Exactly WHY are devices, such as the 2.4 GHz Part 15 devices mentioned in the article, required to accept all interference? What is gained by not allowing products to be [shielded] from unwanted interference/RF signals?
"You know your god is man-made when he hates all the same people you do."
Is that you?
Best Slashdot Co
I've been wondering about this for a while. Why is that people seem to be so unconcerned about frequencies that operate in their microwave to cook food, but are perfectly willing to put handsets that operate at similar frequencies right next to their head, or laptops that use Wi-Fi in their laps? I know it is based off of different power outputs, but still some of these we use for hours at a time. It hardly seems safe.
Now lights with a potential solution being offered of going up to the 5 GHz spectrum for communication devices.
Amateur radio operators I plead with you (since I am one, but am not active enough to remember some of this stuff) to provide info on use of various handsets at high frequencies next to your head.
No it has a "we have been slashdotted... Underconstruction page..."
Try The real start page
Did you bother to read the artical? No, well then just shut up.
The point being made is the desirability of making use of the 5 GHz band, and doing so befor RF Lighting becomes common place.
That works fine for most buildings. There are only perhaps a dozen ovens at most, and they only run for a few minutes at a time. But there could be hundreds of RF lamps, and they could operate 24X7 in a warehouse environment. The lamps could potentially make the RF environment orders of magnitude more hostile to data service, so that's why people are in a lather over it.
-- ;-)
Kuro5hin.org: where the good times never end.
The really stupid part about that is eventually 5 GHz will have the exact same problem. Going to 5 GHz is not a real solution, it's just delaying the impact of the problem.
Anything is possible given time and money.
But then again, every time my boss walks by with his cell phone, my monitors fuzz out and my speakers make strange noises from whatever signals the cell phone is emitting...
Did you remove all the shielding from your gear, or does your boss walk around with a 5 watt analog brickphone strapped to his ass?
:wq
One ring to rule them all. The (_O_) in Goatse.cx
There's a growing concern over WiFi and its health effects since it operates so close to the microwave oven frequencies.
All we need to do is let the soccer moms and paranoids of the world know there'll be microwave light bulbs cooking the brains of our children in our local schools. That'll pretty much take care of the problem. And fsck up Fusion Lighting's chance for a killer IPO.
I tried every decent and legal way I could think of to resolve the issue w/the business before I rented the chicken suit
The really stupid part about that is eventually 5 GHz will have the exact same problem.
Read the article more carefully. It states a section in the 5 GHz range reserved for communication devices only.
-
- - You can't take something off the Internet! That's like trying to take pee out of a swimming pool.
I had a feeling this would happen.
There are far too many devices operating @ 2.4Ghz...
as gee-whiz-cool as Wi-Fi is, you guys should have known better!
What's a little CAT5 gonna hurt anyway...
(faster, cheaper, more secure, less fragile)
FOR SALE : WAP + WIC's...must sell, getting new 5Ghz gear.
(not intended as troll, but mod away)
Innovation will occur where it's allowed to occur.
Or, as has been said, Innovation is a wildflower; you cannot choose where it will blossom, but you can choose where it won't.
The thing about things we don't know is we often don't know we don't know them.
Oh...like the door on our microwave that causes the 2.4Ghz baby monitor to freak whenever it's run?
:)
Hmmm...is the baby awake? No..the neighboor just turned on their new lights
n/t
--- What?
Keep passing the open windows...
So maybe there should be some lobbying of delegates to the next international frequency allocation conference, which I think is next year, to get a recognised allocation for "portable data communications equipment".
While 100% correct, that is not nessecarily the end of the story. The FCC regulates spectrum for the common good. The use of section 15.5 expanded far beyond the FFC's expectations. The FFC has the *option* to alter its rules to take the current reality into consideration.
-
- - You can't take something off the Internet! That's like trying to take pee out of a swimming pool.
has anyone studied the health effects of transmissions in the 5ghz department? Thats double the frequency from 2.4 ghz. I frankly dont like all these tiny microwave transmitters; cellphones, lan, bluetooth, phones, and now lightbulbs... studies in the area are always controversial but some of them are kind of alarming. Maybe my brain is fried already...
Of those to whom much is given, much is required.
What I don't understand is why RF lighting poses a threat when WiFi devices ARE currently able to handle the interferance from other Class 15 devices? Do they bombard the entire spectrum to generate enough energy for the bulbs to convert to visible light? I doubt it, but don't have time to dig for more info as others have tried and failed to find much.
If the spread spectrum nature of 2.4 Gig communications devices has protected them to this point, why worry now, especially since it looks like this company/product is now just an afterthought.
I think it's time to chill out on this one.
Keep passing the open windows...
The sheild on the microwave stops the band that would make your eyeballs go pop. Not 2.4 GHz.
Want to see every step I took to start my company? http://www.rowdylabs.com/blogs/pitchtothegods
When I was a kid, I had a set of encyclopedias of the sort that were parodied in Science Made Stupid a wonderful book if you don't have it.
Anyway, one illustration that stuck with me was a drawing of a man at home at a desk, reading a book. In the background are baseboard radiators with little squiggly lines coming out of them. The caption reads "In the future we will save energy in home heating by using microwave radiation to heat, people but not the furniture." This article on microwave lighting reminds me a little of that picture.
Never mind paintball -- a new technology known as RF lighting has just added a whole new dimension to war driving.
Previously the province of snoops, voyeurs and bandwidth cheapskates, the latest sport for all those unemployed twenty-somethings who still haven't maxed out their Amoco card has just entered the mainstream!
Take out your neighbor's Internet access -- hell, make everyone on the block wish they were wired up again with the new portable, battery operated tight beam "RF Strafer". It even plugs right into your Mini's cigarette lighter!
...just stupid people. So here's a stupid question:
if RF lighting exists at "[a] frequency that humans can't even see" then how the fuck can it illuminate anything?!?
The author's from Redmond, the home of FUD. He probably got infected passing Microsoft oneway.
A quick glance: "yadda yadda to wipe WIPO asses" Needless to say I proceeded to grab a beer.
If you shoot out the globe with a BB gun, does the magnetron continue to emit microwaves?? Just until it burns up from not having a load? Let's find out.
The radiated power that makes it outside the bulb is likely very low. Remember, these devices are designed to save power versus a conventional incandescent lamp, not hose the spectrum with wasted emissions. Has anyone seen any real numbers that could form a basis for estimating the interference potential? Measurements have been made on similar lighting devices, see: http://www.its.bldrdoc.gov/pub/ntia-rpt/99-366/ These measurements were made with the receive antenna ~ 0.5 meters from the device. These bulbs are extremely bright, and are designed to light factory floors, stadiums, and other large areas where the devices likely will be a factor of 20 or more (36 dB) farther away.
DECT uses 1.8GHz in Europe and various parts of the world... not the usual 2.4GHz as used by digital cordless phones in the US, my 802.11b and DECT phones coexist peacefully.
The light from an incandescent bulb varies at 120Hz. It doesn't turn off, but it does vary.
"I'm not impatient. I just hate waiting." - My Dad
Not quite. Heat is the ambient kinetic energy of the particles (atoms/molecules) that make up the thing that it hot. They're effectively shaking back and forth more or less rapidly. Hot objects may radiate energy in the form of photons, but heat, itself, is just kinetic energy.
But the Michelson-Morley experiment showed that there is no ether.
"I'm not impatient. I just hate waiting." - My Dad
"We demand rigidly defined areas of doubt and uncertainty".
"I'm not impatient. I just hate waiting." - My Dad
operations shall accept any interference that may be received, including interference that may adversely affect the operation of the units authorized under the waiver.
This rule has always baffled me. can somebody plese explain the reason for this? What is the advantage of having a cell phone that craps out when you go under power lines, and of having a law that says there is nothing you can do about it?
Sounds to me like just another example of the Man trying to keep us down...
SpyDock: Scientific Python in a Docker container
This company has been working with 3M and a few others since at least the mid-nineties to make a microwave powered commercial lighting solution.
They're finally about ready to deploy a finished product and in the meantime the spectrum they've got every legal right to use has been crowded with the Wireless craze. Fortunately though the 5 GHz spectrum still has some free spectrum for wireless devices.
Also, the article takes a sort of doomsday approach. Basically all the lights will do is generate a lot of static on the 2.4 GHz range, so your 2.4GHz phone will drop calls a lot, and have terrible fits of static, not stop working completely. Wi-fi will run into the same problem, you'll get fewer packets through, and less bandwith (and range) as a result.
Also, the 1 mile radius was exagerated. the only places that the static will be strong enough to cause a blackout is probally 100 meters. However, a busy street with lots of gas stations could cause 2.4Ghz free zones within a city, where not even a blutooth device would work without lead shielding.
I'm sure this will lead to zoning laws about where this light can be placed, at least in tech friendly cities.
https://www.gnu.org/philosophy/free-sw.html
Well, that is true, but the issue at hand isn't really the rule, but rather corporate america's willingness to use loopholes to do business. In effect, an unauthorized RF source is interefering with an unauthorized RF network (or whatever). Since both are unauthorized, they fall in between the cracks of the Section 15 rule, and therefore, could still be subject to legal action. This could also result in a rewrite of the rules by the FCC to account for such issues (which could be good, or very bad, depending).
But most importantly, the courts should (don't read will) be very reticent to kill one company's nifty product in production for anothers. And, I believe that satellite radio is an authorized radio service, so if RF lighting does in fact prove to be a source of interference, then RF lighting is going to have a very tough time. Two established providers v. a new an upcoming technology should be an easy one for any court. If satellite is interferred with, then it is almost a sure bet any WiFi equipment will suffer, and the judge, whose kids may surf the web using the WiFi tech, is most likely going to rule in favor of established products.
Note I'm using the courts in my argument. Due to the FCC's continuing inability to make a decision stand, it is almost inevitible that courts will be involved. Someone will sue someone else in an attempt to force the issue.
Bah
Doing this would imply that the lights are receiving within the allotted spectrum, which capability would necessarily disqualify them for Part 18 status.
But the Michelson-Morley experiment showed that there is no ether.
The Michelson-Morley experiment showed that the ether was not detectable by the Michelson-Morley experiment. Einstein hypothesized that the ether is not detectable at all, and that hypothesis is likely true. Whether or not the ether exists is purely a matter of definition. You can define ether as "the medium through which light propagates", or you can define the speed of light in a vacuum to be c. If you want to keep away from ether, then I'll modify my definition of wave to:
"A force through which energy is transferred from one particle to another."
Which is admittedly an out of my ass working definition, and is subject to change should you present a counter-example.
Cool! Fire some of these near a wireless ISP and you've got an instant (though probably very obvious) denial of service attack! Any bets on when the first one will happen?
;-)
"Remove this spammer from this network or we will TURN ON THE LIGHT!"
Ah Yes! Another loving spoonful of alarmist hype! One company has a technology that conflicts with Wi-Fi and I'm to believe that companies with a vested interest in wireless are going to let this happen!
Wolf! Wolf!
Couldn't the RF Light manufacturer just shield the light fixtures e.g. a Microwave Oven?
No. I saw this thing on Hometime a few years ago.
Imagine a regular light bulb where the glass part is removable from the base and filament inside. Where the filament normally is there's a wire wrap (maybe more to it than that). The glass part is coated on the inside, with a coating that glows when hit by RF. Put the glass part on the base, it glows. Take it off, it doesn't.
To shield this, you'd have to put the shielding outside of the light bulb, which would block the light.
My God, it's Full of Source!
OUTSIDE_IP=$(dig +short my.ip @outsideip.net)
Things that transmit in the 2.4Ghz ISM band have to follow the rules. It may be unlicensed, but it's not without rules.
Power levels would have to be within tolerance, as would stray EMI from the units, as would a lot of other things.
I have every room including the attic, closets and garage in my house equiped with energy efficient RF lighting, and my 802.11b is working fine
Errr you mean 60Hz. I can't think of anywhere that uses 120Hz for power (might exist, but I can't think of it :)
120Hz.
There is a positive and negative alernation of the 60hz cycle. A complete cycle goes from 0 to +max to 0 to -max to 0.
2x 60Hz = 120Hz
Using microwave energy on sulfur gas to provide large scale lighting
Sulfurlamp.com has a picture of the bulb containing the Sulfur
Two sulfur lamp, hollow light guide retrofit lighting systems demonstrated at Portland, Oregon with pictures of the light and the lighting system installed at the premises
Google search on microwave sulfur lamp
Google search on microwave sulfur lamp fusion Lighting
Some Experiments
Fluorescent tube in a Microwave
Microwaving high-pressure sodium vapor lamps
when we go the the local gas station lit by these lamps?
Last I knew, folks with pacemakers were to be cautioned about microwave oven usage (remember that sign on the 7-11 door?). Should we expect traffic signs that indicate you should take the next exit or risk "the big one"?
http://www.osti.gov/html/secretry/tp950429.html
I'd buy the lights.. Look at the cost savings, nearly unlimited lifespan, and as much as 4x as bright
Seemed to me like an advocation of 802.11a more than an argument against this RF lighting thing.
:)
Conspiracies? Sure I have a few.
God is real unless declared integer.
With a florecent light you go from zero back to the full brightness and back down 60 times a second, whereas a incadecent light will from like 100% to 99%... There is a change, but i wouldn't really call it a 'flicker'.
autopr0n is like, down and stuff.
First, the article mentions the Section 15.5 rules and considers the issues carefully.
Second, you are a moron. If you would go visit the company's site you would see them bragging of 80% efficency of transmision. While that's all well and good, 20% of your juice is a lot to throw away and I would not put these bright little bulbs in the environmentaly friendly catagory. Want clean domestic electricty? Start building nuclear power plants.
The crux of the problem is the limited and wasteful alocation of specturm by the federal government. Fusion lighting's boast of 80% efficiency came from a 430 MHz transmitter, not a magnetatron operating at the only frequency left open for people to use as they please. There are 69 channels on my TV reciever but only five broadcasters in my town, how about yours? If the FCC alows the abuse of 2.4 GHz it will be to protect conventional telcos, ISPs and large publishers from the freedom of expresion technology can give us. It will be a vastly stupid thing to do, but that's why comercial radio and TV is devoid of anything entertianing or educational.
There it is, plane as geometry. If you are in favor of wiping out all 2.4GHz comunication instead of allocating more spectrum to the people to use as they please, you have a pin head.
DMCA, Hollings, Palladium. What might have sounded like paranoia is now common sense.
URL for fusion lighting which gets behind their 'under construction link'. Url has links leading to the rest of the site:
http://www.fusionlighting.com/special.htm
I don't really think this is going to take off. We already have tons of diffrent ways to emit light. I doubt the cost diffrential of these lights would really be less then the loss from not being able to use 2.4ghz devices.
I mean it's not like everyone is going to go out and get rid of their old lights.
autopr0n is like, down and stuff.
This reminds me of a Friends episode where Ross goes: "what?!? condoms are effective only 97% of the time?!?" And Raechel points out that it's on the box.
I don't see any evidence of why this would be so catastrophic. I can't imagine why a lighting system would be using anything but a narrowband transmission, whereas all the communication technologies use spread-spectrum techniques to avoid exactly this type of narrowband interference.
:)
Secondly, the RF lighting seems to be targetted at industrial applications (e.g. lighting warehouses and factory floors) without the need to run cables - *exactly* the same market for RF comms technologies and for exactly the same reasons. The RF lighting people are the new entrant, so if *they* don't interoperate then they'll be the one seeking chapter 11
If these lights truly become widespread over the next few years, how will that affect ground based radio astronomy with all the extra interference?
And could the intereference add up enough to affect newer space observatories like CHANDRA?
"I'm about to drop the hammer and dispense some indiscriminate justice!"
I have no vested interest in Wi-Fi. I personally am waiting for Ultra Wide Band devices to become prevalent. These devices supposedly cannot be jammed by something like RF lighting or other current methods.
I say do your homework *before* investing in the latest technology, or face being screwed in the arse later. If you can't afford to switch to technology that actually works, then don't buy into the one that does not. Simple? I think so. Reasonable? Definitely.
A few years ago I did academic research funded by FusionLighting to improve their product. Without violating any confidentiality agreements, here's a quick explanation of the technology
The source of light is a gas plasma induced by pulsed microwave radiation. Fluorescent and neon bulbs also use a gas plasma, but they have two electrodes running at 60 Hz. Sodium-vapor and Mercury-vapor arc lamps use plasmas, but also with exposed electrodes.
These bulbs have no electrodes (so they last _much_ longer) and run at microwave frequencies (2.4 Ghz). Why did they choose this freqency? Just to ruin your wireless connection? No. They needed high power magnetrons (things that generate microwaves) but didn't want to pay military prices. Well there's already a large competitive market for high power magnetrons, it's called the microwave oven.
The FusionLighting light bulb I worked on was a bit larger than a golf ball and filled with a secret sauce of gases and other stuff. When lit, it was VERY BRIGHT (you absolutely couldn't look right at it) and provided a spectrum of light much closer to sunlight than fluorencent and even incandescent bulbs.
The light bulb is mounted inside a metal screen box which is the microwave cavity. Light can get out of the metal screen but almost all of the RF stays inside. Actually, once the bulb is on, almost all the energy goes into the bulb (that's why it's so efficient). Apparently, enough leaks out to disturb Wi-Fi etc.
The downsides of this technology (other than ruining your internet connection) were: [note: it may have evolved since I worked on it a few years ago]
(1) The bulb plus magnetron was pretty big, very bright, and somewhat noisy. Typical applications were warehouses and gymnasiums, not your home. Example: the Smithsonian Air and Space Museum replaced 88 soldium-vapor arc lamps with a handful of the fusion lighting bulbs. And they were THROWING HALF OF THE LIGHT AWAY by using diffuser tubes that spread it out and kept your kids from going blind when they looked up.
(2) The bulbs took a few moments to warm up when turned on. During that time, the light was a dim blue-violet color.
(3) Like sodium-vapor lamps, you couldn't turn them back on as soon as you turned then off. They had to cool down.
(2) + (3) = No fun if you forget the keys and then run back in to find them in the dark.
I was working on (2) and (3), as well as improving the efficiency, which would lead to a smaller size. We made some progress on all counts.
-------
Dr. Hodad
Black's Beach Tanning Supply
La Jolla, California
yes, Nikola Tesla proposed this at the mechanically-interrupted RF rates that top out at 2 MHz in a lecture way the heck back in February, 1892 (yes, that is before the automobile) to the Institute of Electrical Engineers in London. read along and pay particular attention to the "single-terminal electric" effects into our old friend the Ether if you have a copy of the periodically-availiable Barnes and Noble reprint "The Inventions, Researches, and Writings of Nikola Tesla", 2e, Thomas Commerford Martin, dedicated December 1893 and reprinted (c) 1995.
unknown to Tesla at the time, since he was some 4 or 5 years after the Edison Effect and writeups that looked like vacuum-tube powered Marconi aerials in patent papers, and some 8 years before Marconi sent ethereal waves across the Channel, this became known as electrostatic waves that had strong edges and generated an equally strong RF field.
no "one-button electrical" patents allowed, there was one over 100 years ago.
if this is supposed to be a new economy, how come they still want my old fashioned money?
...but what about the effects of the RF lights?
What happens when a nearby gas station installs RF lighting... and all 802.11b devices and 2.4 GHz cordless phones for a mile in diameter stop working?
Is this total FUD or is it grounded in facts about these lights? Personally I don't like the idea of RF lights that would interfere for miles. I woudl think they'd need suficiently more power to make light than a cel phone or 802.11 card ( > 4W?). A previous post mentioned that 2.4GHz is the resonant frequency of water. There is some water in gasoline. Sooooo.....gas stations are going to begin randomly exploding?
If my microwave doesn't kill my cel phone connection, it must be shielded prety damn good (it's a big ass 1500W). How come they can't just shield the lights and eliminate the problem?
CAn'T CompreHend SARcaSm?
Security is now possible as long as your physical infrustructure has a perimiter of these RF lights.
you should study before you make such rude and arrogant posts.
e n.htm
If you would go visit the company's site [fusionlighting.com] you would see them bragging of 80% efficency of transmision.
According to the U.S. gov't, the efficiency of an incandescent electric bulb is 5%. Kinda makes 80% worth bragging over, huh?
http://www.sandia.gov/media/NewsRel/NR2002/tungst
As for the fact that you were modded up for your ignorance and lack of respect for your fellow slashdotter, I'll let your own words speak...
you must have been modded up as a denial of inteligent conversation
They've done it again: "New Lightning Technology to Wipe Out Wi-Fi Access". Well, no shit. Lightning will wipe out pretty much every computer component it touches.
Focus, focus.....oooohhhhh, lighting.
--
"Outlook not so good." That magic 8-ball knows everything! I'll ask about Exchange Server next.
I have been a bit concerned with the issue of rf 'polution' in this area
of spectrum for a while now. I am no expert on the subject, merely an
undergraduate BoC student, but the only solution that I can think of is legislation
that requires homes to be built (including extensions on existing structures) with
some level of faraday shielding. The problems with this are that there are relatively
few people who are actually affected by this and forcing the many to incur costs to
'support' a minority doesn't go down well with most people. And then you have
the law-enforcement issue, such shielding will prevent or diminsh the reception of
TEMPEST radiation and become an obstruction to the course of justice.
As the effect on humans by EMR in regards to carcinogenic factors has not
resolved a conclusive answer, the argument cannot be put forth that such shielding
will reduce the likelyhood of cancer, this in itself would be enough for most people
to willingly install such shielding.
From an environmental issue though, the increased efficiency of RF lighting is
great, but the reduction in the generation of greenhouse gasses is offset by the
generation of RF pollution, as my grandfather would have said, "...wish in one
hand, and shit in the other." The carcinogenic properties of EMR need to be
investigated further in order to make people listen and think about these issues a
bit.
I've heard this before. This was going to put us all out of business when I was at Metricom in '96.
You have violated Robot's Rules of Order and will be asked to leave the future immediately.
I think the coolest thing about this post is that someone actually checked to see if the site was cached on google. Many a time I have clicked on a /. link to see the site unreachable or dropped.
The Subject covers it all.
But the Michelson-Morley experiment showed that there is no ether.
That's good. Ether puts me to sleep.
(Waits for comedic drumroll...)
"Face it, a nation that maintains a 72% approval rating on George W. Bush is a nation with a very loose grip on reality.
Modern electronic ballasts run the fluorescent tubes at around 20kHz. I doubt you can see flicker at that frequency.
Hey kids, there's only 5 days left 'til Yak Shaving Day!
Hz, which is a measure of frequency is the number of times a cycle is completed in a second. A complete cycle consists of one max and one minimum. Therefore, if the are 60 maxes and 60 mins, the frequency is 60 Hz
T Money
World Domination with a plastic spoon since 1984
This technology will never get off the ground, heard about last year, article is typical sensationalism, what I'd expect out of a newspaper or tabloid
Yes, but a resistive load (such as an incandescent filament) does not care about the direction of current flow. In a single cycle, there is a current flow in the positive half cycle, and a current flow in the negative half cycle. In other words, there are two current flows per cycle, or 120 current flows per second. (or more important to our discussion, there are two points of no current flow per second, or 120 hz rate of no current flow.)
"I'm not impatient. I just hate waiting." - My Dad
That's a great line! I'll have to use it somewhere. "The failure of the X-detector to detect X shows that X is not detectable by the X-detector." I love it!
"I'm not impatient. I just hate waiting." - My Dad
This is supposed to be a thread on light bulbs that blot out the growing free wireless internet. Oh well, there's always a legal solution to technology that treatens established interests.
DMCA, Hollings, Palladium. What might have sounded like paranoia is now common sense.