Slashdot Mirror


Senators Aim to Wirelessly Jumpstart Broadband

JimW writes "Article at Practically Networked...A couple of senators actually have a clue about how broadband might be effectively promoted. Not that I have anything against my tax dollars propping up failing telco's by pushing DSL on areas where it isn't financially viable. Methinks the dark fiber will stay dark." Their plan calls for 255 MHz of spectrum to be allocated for wireless broadband - to compare, the band occupied by 802.11b is 83Mhz wide, with each channel being 22MHz (they overlap).

12 of 203 comments (clear)

  1. Re:Why use tax dollars for this? by pknoll · · Score: 5, Interesting
    All they're doing is lobbying the FCC to carve out frequencies so that wireless broadband applications are tenable.

    I'm not seeing evidence of tax dollars being used to build the infrastructure; just making it possible for someone (private corp., maybe) to do so.

  2. Well SOMETHING has to be done!!! by eyegor · · Score: 5, Informative

    It's hard to imagine babs boxer and George Allen getting together on anything, but this seems to be a good first step.

    Last mile is the hardest nut to crack. Around these parts, Verizon hasn't delivered broadband to very many people (I suspect they're waiting for their competitors to die off first) and our cable provider (adelphia) is in chapter 11.

    My only concern is that we need to ensure that nothing will interfere with the wireless data. 802.11 shares spectrum with too many things.

    --

    Don't anthropomorphize computers, they don't like it.
  3. FCC and possibilities by insanecarbonbasedlif · · Score: 5, Interesting

    This article reminded me of a previous slashdot artice that pointed to this Business Week article
    "Sure, Wi-Fi has huge potential. But the spectrum could quickly become overcrowded and unreliable if it grows too quickly. Success will take two things: technological improvements and a helping hand from Washington. The Federal Communications Commission will either have to allocate more spectrum for wireless use or overhaul the way spectrum is divvied up -- an unlikely scenario given that the commission is overwhelmed by scandals in the telecom biz."
    They seem to think that an expended frequency range would have huge economic impacts too.

    --
    Just because I doubt myself does not mean I find your position compelling.
  4. Excellent! by xchino · · Score: 5, Informative

    I work for a local ISP, and the competiton between other local ISP's for spectrum caused so many problems that everyone finally just registered a frequency. Except us, since everyone else switched we took over 2.4, but the interference problems persist, especially in residential areas with high concentrations of 2.4ghz phones. I hope this makes it to fruition, it'll make it much easier to find a good interference free frequency for more reliable wireless connections.

    --
    Everyone is entitled to their own opinion. It's just that yours is stupid.
  5. Clueful senators by MacAndrew · · Score: 5, Insightful

    The senators are probably as technically clueless as average folks (with a couple of exceptions) but many have technically proficient staff members whom they listen to. The gradually declining lameness of Senate member websites is one indication.

    Why Congress? Because in some cases, such as limited bandwidth, the federal gov't is well-suited to setting down the infrastructure to jump-start the industry and to avoid the result of the many competing railroad companes in the 19th century, each with its own proprietary guage of track.

  6. Oh...I can hear it now... by GeneralEmergency · · Score: 5, Funny



    Assistant: "Senator Boxer, Mr. Eisner is on the line."

    Boxer: "Hello Michael, what can I do for you today?"

    Eisner: "Hi Barb, sorry for the interruption, but I saw something in the paper today about one of your new projects that has me concerned."

    Boxer: "Yes Michael, what was that?"

    Eisner: "Oh, its that silly wireless broadband idea. Now I'm sure one of your goofy genX aids tricked you into this so I'm not gonna be mad at you this time, but I do need to remind you about our little, er... training session we held last summer in the Bahamas. You remember it don't you?"

    Boxer: "Wee'llll... I sorta"

    Eisner: "No problem... I'll just help you remember this again. Now repeat after me, Barb...

    DRM, Good!, Broadband, BAD!

    DRM, Good!, Broadband, BAD!

    DRM, Good!, Broadband, BAD!

    DRM, Good!, Broadband, BAD!

    DRM, Good!, Broadband, BAD!

    There. That should holld you for another six months or so Barb. Thanks for taking my call.

    Boxer: "OK, Michael, I'll try harder to remember."

    --
    "A microprocessor... is a terrible thing to waste." --
    GeneralEmergency
  7. Too bad... by Bartab · · Score: 5, Interesting

    I'll be forced to vote against Barbara Boxer for more real reasons than "broadband." You know, her votes on things that jail people, say like DMCA etc...

    --
    Any sufficiently advanced technology is indistinguishable from a rigged demo.
  8. This is a Great idea! by ka9dgx · · Score: 5, Interesting
    Things are starting to pick up with 802.11b, people building community networks, going around the local loop. If we can get 225Mhz of spectrum to play with, the possiblities are almost endless. The idea of being able to ship bits across space at 100Mbps without restrictions is so freaking cool.

    Unlicensed (a commons) but technically regulated (so we don't have bozos with 100 Watt access points) open spectrum is just what we need to help get around the layers of control that are slowly enveloping the internet. It wouldn't hurt to try to do an end run around the IP4 address limit at the same time, and try to get IP6 compatible devices.

    --Mike--

  9. Re:right... by JoeBuck · · Score: 5, Interesting

    Wow. tps12 thinks that Finland and Europe have lower taxes?

    The fact is that government has played a huge role in technology creation, and you're using a lot of that technology right now: the Internet, of course. As you say, it takes time, energy, and a bunch of smart people, and money, but in many cases it's been government programs that provide all that. Government-designed TCP/IP beat all the proprietary network approaches (SNA, DecNet, Novell, etc) because it was technically better, and it got better because of a lot of visionary bureaucrats at DARPA.

    But, of course, the zealots who believe that government is inherently bad, stupid, and inefficient will ignore evidence to the contrary.

  10. Re:Why use tax dollars for this? by dj28 · · Score: 5, Insightful

    If the telcos aren't doing anything about it, then there isn't enough consumer demand to justify the cost. Getting the government involved with this is just wasting more of my hard earned money. I don't want to subsidize the telecommunications industry if they aren't even willing to spend money on it themselves, and if people aren't willing to pay for it.

  11. This is real! 2100MHz +/- or MMDS may be the range by puzzled · · Score: 5, Informative

    I run a WISP that covers five counties and I can assure you that this stuff is real. I am on a 'technical steering committee' that drives Cisco's lobbying efforts along with a handful of other industry insiders and the most of the talk around this issue went down about three months ago.

    I think the easiest method to find 255MHz in the sub 6000MHz range would be to boot the owner/non-operators out of MMDS space, but there was also some talk about 2100MHz +/-

    On the other hand, there is some mil stuff in the 3500MHz range that is pretty darned close to retirement - just take a look at http://www.alvarion.com and see the 3.5 GHz OFDM product :-) :-) :-)

    --
    I am very easy to get along with, but I don't have time to waste being nice to people who are being stupid. -Theo
  12. A better title... by Mustang+Matt · · Score: 5, Funny

    Senators Jump to Aimlessly Wire Broadband

    --
    The man who trades freedom for security does not deserve nor will he ever receive either. - Benjamin Franklin