Earthlink Invests In Broadband Over Power Lines

← Back to Stories (view on slashdot.org)

Earthlink Invests In Broadband Over Power Lines

Posted by timothy on Saturday February 21, 2004 @09:12AM from the keep-your-jacks-straight-please dept.

prostoalex writes "Earthlink dedicated $500,000 to delivering broadband connections over power lines by launching a test drive of the technology with Progress Energy in North Carolina. 500 homes involved in the projects can sign up for promotional pricing of $20/month, which after 3 months will be changed to $50/month. No word on bandwidth provided, but Ambient Corp., which provides technology for the project and accpeted EarthLink investment, claims data rates exceeding 10 Mpbs."

197 of 308 comments (clear)

Interference problems... by detritus` · 2004-02-21 09:13 · Score: 5, Informative

Once again the interference point has to be brought up, the company uses 5 - 70 Mhz, which dumps inteference out on the following bands:

Several Amateur Radio bands (1.8, 3.5, 7.0, 10.0, 14.0, 18.068, 21.0, 24.9, 28.0, 50.0 Mhz)
shortwave radio (7-14 Mhz)
older cordless devices, such as phones (49 Mhz)
CB Radio (29Mhz)
Military communications (several)

And there's probably more, but i'm too lazy to dig them up...

--
drunk chemists
1. Re:Interference problems... by Rosco+P.+Coltrane · 2004-02-21 09:19 · Score: 3, Informative
  
  CB Radio (29Mhz)
  
  Small correction: CB Radio is on 27Mhz (11m)
  
  --
  "A door is what a dog is perpetually on the wrong side of" - Ogden Nash
2. Re:Interference problems... by the_2nd_coming · 2004-02-21 09:19 · Score: 4, Insightful
  
  the FCC will have to mandate retrofiting the powerlines with some sort of sheilding.
  
  by the time this gets to most people, it will cost 70 bucks a month I bet.
  
  --
  
  I am the Alpha and the Omega-3
3. Re:Interference problems... by Goldfinger7400 · 2004-02-21 09:21 · Score: 1, Troll
  
  Really though, if we're gonna have to make a choice between easy, high-speed data access and amateur radio, I think it might be time to retire the morse keyer. Sure, you might not be able to radio some guy in a basement in Hong Kong, but nowadays couldn't you just send him an e-mail?
4. Re:Interference problems... by Anonymous Coward · 2004-02-21 09:29 · Score: 5, Insightful
  
  Well here we go again, the same old argument : ham is old, Innurnet is shiny and better, so screw the hams. I'll sum up the arguments why hams should have their bands untouched by BPL (or any other interference for that matter):
  
  - Hams are useful to the community : they do aviation security radio watches, can relay messages from people at sea, and are often the last communication medium when all else fail. You don't believe me and that's normal, because it's never happened to you (or me, I'm too young). But I bet resistant fighters during WW2 really did appreciate, for example.
  
  - There are a lot of great technical advances that were made by hams, playing and experimenting on their allocated bands. To deny them the bands just so you can d/l pr0n in the middle of Alabama means to deprive the entire scientific and technical community of these discoveries.
  
  - Hams have been using their slices of the spectrum for decades, and had to work and pay for the privilege. In short, if nothing else, I'll say we were here first, and so we do have some rights in the matter.
  
  There are many other reasons why ham bands should be left alone, but this is /. and I don't want to bore you all.
  
  73 de F8EJF
5. Re:Interference problems... by 36526542DD · 2004-02-21 09:30 · Score: 3, Insightful
  
  With one exception I have no problem with this post. In the past other hobbies and entire industries have fallen to "progress", and it will happen in the future.
  
  However, in the case of hurricanes, earthquakes, etc a major form of communication is amateur radio. If those airwaves are messed up by interference, we lose that blessing.
  
  I'd say the responsibility belongs with those bringing about Internet over powerlines to come up with a solution to stepping on so many frequencies.
  
  A solution may not be cheap or easy, but it is absolutely necessary if they want to continue.
6. Re:Interference problems... by abcxyz · 2004-02-21 09:31 · Score: 4, Informative
  
  That only implies direct interference, if you were to look at the even/odd harmonics for those frequencies then the "potential" for interference could be greater. I'm a geek and broadband kinda person, and enjoy my DSL. This might turn out to be a wonderful last mile solution, but the concern from a ham radio perspective is that if it does cause wide spread interference then there's the possiblity of impact to the emergency services provided by amateur radio. Just a thought from a "Ham"
  
  -- w1rww
7. Re:Interference problems... by ev1lcanuck · 2004-02-21 09:31 · Score: 1, Flamebait
  
  The only one of those I would have any sympathy for is Military Communications and maybe CB Radio. The military has advanced equipment (they'd better with these tax rates) and they can change to a different frequency. I'm sure CB can be worked around.
  Where I live we get no form of broadband and I'm getting 18KBPS connetions on average through EarthLink. I'm very happy that they've chosen to pursue this service and can't wait to sign up.
  Something tells me I'm going to get my first flaimbait post :-D
8. Re:Interference problems... by brain1 · 2004-02-21 09:31 · Score: 5, Interesting
  
  At least one thing will come of this. When the equipment begins blacking out HF spectrum, the furor should put this half-baked technology out to pasture once and for all. Imagine overseas flights using 10MHz HF SSB communications not able to get clearance to enter US airspace because their comms are blacked out by this garbage?
  
  If this gets to the point that it's deployed in my area, I plan to become *extremely* active on the HF Amateur Radio bands with *full* legal power. If it means fighting fire with fire, then by all means I'm prepared. They operate under the part 15 "non interference" rules. I operate under full FCC license to transmit. IOTW, I win. Hmm... when is the next DX contest???
  
  To quote Part 15: "must not interfere" means that they legally cannot interfere with my operation, and "must accept any interference" means that if I kill an entire neighborhood's internet feed, that's just the breaks. They cant stop my transmissions as long as I am complying with the rules and regs.
  
  But, being a realist, I suppose that once "big business" gets involved, then all they have to do is throw money, and they have plenty, at lobbyists and get congress to pressure the FCC to toss us hams off the air. Sadly, amateur radio does not have the status it once had.
  
  Comments?
  
  de N5DH
9. Re:Interference problems... by theRiallatar · 2004-02-21 09:32 · Score: 1, Insightful
  
  If there's an earthquake or hurricane, the power lines will probably not be conducting electricity, so amateur radio would still work.
10. Re:Interference problems... by Bombcar · 2004-02-21 09:37 · Score: 1
  
  Could that explain the Las Vegas key issue? Maybe the military is gearing up to retaliate....
  
  eheheheheheh
  
  --
  Fellowship 9/11
11. Re:Interference problems... by buford_tannen · 2004-02-21 09:41 · Score: 1
  
  I'm not a Ham, but I WANT MY SHORTWAVE!
  
  I sometimes listen to Hams on HF with my Grundig YB-400, though.
  
  I wonder if this is going to interfere with MW (AM radio for all of you who don't do SW). It's going to be very nasty if it does.
  
  --
  Buford "Mad Dog" Tannen
12. Re:Interference problems... by silentbozo · 2004-02-21 09:43 · Score: 2, Insightful
  
  But as other have pointed out in the past, if those frequencies don't work NORMALLY, there won't be a population of hams, in the area, trained up and ready to go, in the event of an emergencies. Ham radio isn't somthing you can put away for a number of years, pull out of the closet, and dust off. If nothing else, as older hams pass on, there won't be any new operators, because there won't be any reason to pursue ham radio as a hobby.
13. Re:Interference problems... by mduell · 2004-02-21 09:44 · Score: 3, Insightful
  
  Before they get to US airspace (12 miles) they'll be able to communicate via VHF (which has a range of 134 miles from 40k feet up).
14. Re:Interference problems... by buford_tannen · 2004-02-21 09:44 · Score: 1
  
  But what is the point in investing $1000s and making the time and effort to get licensed for something that only works during disasters because some corporations want to make it useless the rest of the time?
  
  We might as well just have spurious signals all over the spectrum and do away with the FCC entirely. With the fine job of regulation they did in this case, it wouldn't be much worse.
  
  I'm not even a Ham.. but I want to be able to listen to AM radio and shortwave without interference from what is in essence intentionally dirty power lines.
  
  --
  Buford "Mad Dog" Tannen
15. Re:Interference problems... by clarinetforhire · 2004-02-21 09:46 · Score: 1
  
  But if it has been a generation or two since anybody in that area has been able to use ham radio due to interference, when that natural disaster does come along, nobody will have the equipment or the knowledge to use ham radio, and there won't be any to hear what they're transmitting anyway.
  
  --
  
  The definition of a liberal: I may disagree with what you have to say, but I'll fight for your right to say it
16. Re:Interference problems... by Rosco+P.+Coltrane · 2004-02-21 09:47 · Score: 1
  
  Who cares about the military pigs' channels?
  Good riddance.
  
  10-4 good buddy...
  
  --
  "A door is what a dog is perpetually on the wrong side of" - Ogden Nash
17. Re:Interference problems... by Anonymous Coward · 2004-02-21 09:47 · Score: 2, Troll
  
  But I bet resistance fighters during WW2 really did appreciate it, for example.
  
  yeah, that was then. This is now.
  
  There are a lot of great technical advances that were made by hams, playing and experimenting on their allocated bands.
  
  There were alot of scientific discoveries using lots of things. But How many of these ham discoveries were in the past 10 years? Not to say that their couldnt be some new discovery, but this is just selfish coveting, not scientific necessity.
  
  Hams have been using their slices of the spectrum for decades, and had to work and pay for the privilege. In short, if nothing else, I'll say we were here first, and so we do have some rights in the matter.
  
  Thats why the FCC was created in the first place, so that the spectrum could be used as it best served our society as a whole. Not first come, first serve.
18. Re:Interference problems... by Rosco+P.+Coltrane · 2004-02-21 10:05 · Score: 1
  
  so you are saying people should be restricted from using a technology (broadband internet) just because it conflicts with someone's hobby?
  
  If the "hobby" was there before you, you bet!
  
  i say majority rules. do a vote on it in nc, i am pretty sure that people would pick broadband internet over ham radio.
  
  The majority of people would like to not pay taxes, drive Ferraris for the price of a Yugo, or rape women legally. It doesn't mean because they want it, they should get it.
  
  --
  "A door is what a dog is perpetually on the wrong side of" - Ogden Nash
19. Re:Interference problems... by Sleeper · 2004-02-21 10:13 · Score: 4, Informative
  
  For those who think HAM operators have no foundation behind their objections to BPL please visit this site and see results of actual studies on interference.
  
  There is a lot of additional issues surrounding BPL. Such as the fact that power market is regulated and comunications market is not. Utility companies are going to finance their excursion into broadband internet access out of your pocket even if you are not going to use it.
  
  --
  - Back off man. I am a scientist
20. Re:Interference problems... by Skuld-Chan · 2004-02-21 10:18 · Score: 1, Interesting
  
  The only one of those I would have any sympathy for is Military Communications and maybe CB Radio. The military has advanced equipment (they'd better with these tax rates) and they can change to a different frequency. I'm sure CB can be worked around.
  
  This is somewhat sad that you'd be willing to throw away a natural irreplacable treasure to the bane of corperate profits.
21. Re:Interference problems... by DAldredge · 2004-02-21 10:22 · Score: 1
  
  And what treasure would that be?
22. Re:Interference problems... by DAldredge · 2004-02-21 10:28 · Score: 1
  
  Are these studies as 'well done' as the studies that NAB uses to prove that lowpower FM would destroy FM radio?
23. Re:Interference problems... by Anonymous Coward · 2004-02-21 10:30 · Score: 2, Interesting
  
  ARINC is a private company that provides radio communications for all overseas airline flights using radio frequencies impacted by BPL systems. ARINC has voiced strong opposition to the BPL, since based on their analysis, it will cause interference. Even weak radio signals can, by forming large antenna arrays over a power line grid, transmit signals over hundreds or thousands of miles. The US Federal Emergency Management agency also strong opposes BPL because FEMA also uses HF radio frequencies for disaster and emergency communications. The American Red Cross uses frequencies near 47 Mhz for coordinating disaster relief, and also has use of certain FEMA HF frequencies during disaster operations. The BPL industry itself has filed comments with the FCC acknowledging the problems with radio interference. However, the FCC is suffering from clouded thinking due to the Commissions desire to wish that their is a fairy tale solution to magically delivery broadband to more U.S. residences. And that by adding an additional technology to the mix of solutions, we will see greater competition and lower prices. The FCC, though, is itself very much aware of the interference problem but continues to hope for some magic technology solution. Numerous countries throughout the world have tested - and shutdown - BPL systems because of the widespread radio interference. BPL in the U.S. will - eventually - suffer the same fate. For now, the power line enthusiasts say they will merely not use radio spectrum shared with, for example, Amateur Radio. But that solution works for only one of the parties - by the time they fence off all of frequencies used by numerous bona fide HF spectrum users, there will be little left to provide useful BPL services.
24. Re:Interference problems... by cr@ckwhore · 2004-02-21 10:42 · Score: 2, Funny
  
  Yeah, I feel like stringing up a dipole antenna between two telephone poles and working CW DX @ 1500 watts. Sounds like fun!
  
  -- de N1ZPP
  
  --
  Skiers and Riders -- http://www.snowjournal.com
25. Re:Interference problems... by nerw · 2004-02-21 10:49 · Score: 1
  
  No...they're about as well done as the studies Congress ordered up (and the FCC just approved) that prove that it won't.
26. Re:Interference problems... by Kaboom13 · 2004-02-21 11:05 · Score: 3, Insightful
  
  -The internet is useful to the community, and with widespread broadband, could be even more useful.
  
  -There are lots of great technical advances made by internet users. To deprive people the bands so a tiny minority can putz around on it deprives the entire scientific and technical community of these discoveries.
  
  -We, the people, own the spectrum, and let you use it. Your rights in the matter end at your right to vote.
  
  There are many other reasons why ham bands should be given to more useful purposes.
27. Re:Interference problems... by dveditz · 2004-02-21 11:19 · Score: 1
  
  ... often the last communication medium when all else fail. You don't believe me and that's normal, because it's never happened to you (or me, I'm too young).
  I've seen emergency ham use in California with our once-a-decade-or-so widespread disasters (earthquakes, fires). I imagine the same is true in hurricane country.
28. Re:Interference problems... by buford_tannen · 2004-02-21 11:27 · Score: 1
  
  so you are saying people should be restricted from using a technology (broadband internet) just because it conflicts with someone's hobby?
  
  This technology does not have to use the same frequencies as Ham radio. It is simply doing so out of arrogance on the part of the corporations involved.
  
  The frequencies chosen will also mean that throughput and capacity of these lines will be much lower than true "broadband" services.
  
  --
  Buford "Mad Dog" Tannen
29. Re:Interference problems... by DAldredge · 2004-02-21 11:36 · Score: 1
  
  Why did it take so long for a no-code license? Because the old-school hams didn't want new 'lesser' people using 'thier' radio waves. It's their own damn fault the hobby is in decline in the US. If it wasn't in decline, more people would complain about BBoP.
30. Re:Interference problems... by Anonymous Coward · 2004-02-21 11:42 · Score: 1, Funny
  
  You must feel lonely going "10-4 good buddy" on 29Mhz...
31. Re:Interference problems... by n6mod · 2004-02-21 12:03 · Score: 1
  
  What you fail to understand is that there is no other frequency to change to.
  
  BPL wipes out all of HF, and a little bit of the bottom of VHF. These frequencies have unique propagation characteristics that are not present on any other bands. (The ability to talk half-way around the world, for starters)
  
  So, if you're willing to kiss-off an entire class of communications in the name of your broadband (which either telco or cable could provide better under the same conditions), there's a whole bunch of us who are willing to kiss you off. ...sympathy for CB? sigh...
  
  de N6MOD
  
  --
  You have violated Robot's Rules of Order and will be asked to leave the future immediately.
32. Re:Interference problems... by jelle · 2004-02-21 12:31 · Score: 2, Insightful
  
  "impact to the emergency services provided by amateur radio."
  
  Very businesslike, this is a way to look at that:
  
  Basically, the interference should not be so high that a lot of Hams quit. It doesn't really matter how much interference there is, as long as the Hams still actively pursue their hobby, because when there is a need for those emergency services, the power lines and their interference will likely be down. Otherwise, the internet-over-power would still be working....
  
  So, for example, if the interference reduces the range of useful communications, then the amateur radio emergency services will not be impacted as long as the range is still enough for the Hams to get please out of their hobbies. When the power lines go dead, the interference goes with it, and the range is back to normal.
  
  --
  --- Hindsight is 20/20, but walking backwards is not the answer.
33. Re:Interference problems... by Skuld-Chan · 2004-02-21 12:31 · Score: 1
  
  The electro magnetic spectrum. duh. If you had any idea how much of it is usuable by radio devices and how we cannot just go out and buy/mine/generate more then you'd realize what a waste bpl is.
34. Re:Interference problems... by DAldredge · 2004-02-21 12:33 · Score: 1
  
  Why is your use of the EM more benificial thein their use?
35. Re:Interference problems... by jelle · 2004-02-21 12:34 · Score: 2, Insightful
  
  "Such as the fact that power market is regulated and comunications market is not."
  
  Whaddyamean, the communications market is not regulated? What does the FCC do then? And what are those taxes on my phone bills for?
  
  --
  --- Hindsight is 20/20, but walking backwards is not the answer.
36. Re:Interference problems... by lommer · 2004-02-21 12:35 · Score: 1
  
  Yea, but this is a retarded argument since letting hams on the net doesn't kick everyone else off, whereas letting others into hams' airspace effectively kicks the hams off...
37. Re:Interference problems... by Skuld-Chan · 2004-02-21 12:38 · Score: 3, Interesting
  
  The electro magnetic spectrum is a natural treasure. A) its the only one we have and B) its finite - we cannot go out and get more.
  
  the portion of the electro magnetic spectrum bpl wants to destroy is also very important because its the only section of the spectrum that bounces off the inosphere (allowing for long distance communications) and its also the part of the spectrum with the least amount of bandwidth.
38. Re:Interference problems... by Endive4Ever · 2004-02-21 12:41 · Score: 1
  
  If power failures and natural disaster periods are the only time the hams can operate their gear in those bands, do you seriously think they will be maintained and the network of ham operators will continue to exist?
  
  This is a step backward to the days of spark gap broadcasting. It's crude and it's a horrendously unintelligent approach to carrying bandwidth. It's the equivalent of deciding that we can recover the sewer lines and instead use them to deliver fresh milk to people's homes, just by running it through the existing pipes the other way.
  
  --
  ---
39. Re:Interference problems... by jelle · 2004-02-21 12:42 · Score: 1
  
  Reading all these postings, I just see a large oncoming shift. I predict airplanes are going switch towards relying on satellites for communications.
  
  If jetblue can get incoming satellite TV to every coach chair, then why shouldn't bidirectional voice be possible from the cockpit? Shouldn't it be possible to make a satellite communications system that is at least as reliable as VHF?
  
  --
  --- Hindsight is 20/20, but walking backwards is not the answer.
40. Re:Interference problems... by loucura! · 2004-02-21 12:56 · Score: 1
  
  You mean the same cellular phones that don't work in natural disasters? The same wind-up radios that won't get anything in a natural disaster? The back-up generators that won't do you any good when no one else can hear you in a natural disaster?
  
  You're making the mistake of assuming that your modern day conveniences will work when the power is gone. It won't. This was shown in that massive Blackout that affected the Northeast of the US a year or so ago, remember that?
  
  Well people who had that archaic hobby were the only communication method around when the lights were gone. You're arguing that we should interfere or do away with their spectrum because of some yokels in the backwoods who don't want broadband anyway?
  
  Don't argue against the reliability of a guy with a morse code transmitter, it'll beat your fancy-pants cell-phone anyday.
  
  --
  Black and grey are both shades of white.
41. Re:Interference problems... by Skuld-Chan · 2004-02-21 13:06 · Score: 1
  
  It isn't just my use of hf spectrum that is important. Military, civilian (commercial ops), and amatuer radio operators use hf to communicate long distances - often in times of need without the use of wires, cell phone repeaters or internet.
42. Re:Interference problems... by Avakado · 2004-02-21 13:10 · Score: 1
  
  Can't you tunnel ham over IP? Other types of meat are tunneled over the net in vast amounts every day...
  
  --
  The world will end in 5 minutes. Please log out.
43. Re:Interference problems... by SWTP_OS9 · 2004-02-21 13:48 · Score: 3, Funny
  
  The only shilding that will work on this is to encase the power lines in a heavy braded material.... Oops! Thats the defition for coax!
44. Re:Interference problems... by the_2nd_coming · 2004-02-21 14:38 · Score: 1
  
  except that these are high voltage wires so the signal can travel hundres of miles.
  
  --
  
  I am the Alpha and the Omega-3
45. Re:Interference problems... by bradly.mcconnell · 2004-02-21 14:54 · Score: 1
  
  There already is a satellite network that does what you say, but not for the civilian sector. The military/government actually have quite a few.
46. Re:Interference problems... by I(rispee_I(reme · 2004-02-21 14:58 · Score: 1
  
  While I'm sure no one would mind driving Ferraris for the price of a Yugo, I take issue with the rape statement, since most sources estimate women to hold a slight majority on this planet. As far as taxes, how do you know that most people don't pay them? ;)
47. Re:Interference problems... by lewp · 2004-02-21 15:45 · Score: 1
  
  But it's great that you will be getting better bandwith. I'm certain that the communications for orgs like FEMA aren't really that important.
  
  Damn right!
  
  --
  Game... blouses.
48. Re:Interference problems... by macman552 · 2004-02-21 15:50 · Score: 1
  
  Hey, just thought I'd jump in and weigh in...
  Do you really want this service? It isn't all that much of an improvement over existing broadband services. The only advantage I can see is service to otherwise non-serviceable areas... and you could do that with 802.11b/g if you set up repeaters (or for you hams, run it under Part 97 hihi). Is it really acceptable to wipe out our public service and worldwide broadcast bands for a slight advantage? Please do not support this technology... Even if you don't listen to AM, or SW, or whatever else. We need these bands, if for no other reason simpler than the unique propagation they provide. Please do visit The American Radio Relay League and read what they have to say.
  73 de KC2KVY
  
  --
  Hi! I'm a signature virus! Copy me into your signature to help me spread!
49. Re:Interference problems... by twostar · 2004-02-21 16:15 · Score: 1
  
  I'm tempted to pick up my general licence now. Just got to go learn the CW. Then we can have a fun /. CW DX contest.
  
  We just strung a 10m line up at the lab, might as well use it.
50. Re:Interference problems... by Dun+Malg · 2004-02-21 16:51 · Score: 1
  
  The internet is useful to the community, and with widespread broadband, could be even more useful.
  Network connectivity can be delivered over any number of mediums (satellite, fiber, cable, etc) whereas ham radio is limited to RADIO. Your argument is stupid.
  We, the people, own the spectrum, and let you use it. Your rights in the matter end at your right to vote.
  hams are part of "we, the people" as well, jackass. "Voting" isn't how rights work. Your right to trample the RF spectrum to the detriment of other users of said spectrum must be weighed against others' rights to the spectrum. The necessity for you to have access to yet another network delivery medium doesn't outweigh the incidental damage it does to huge swathes of the RF spectrum. Your second argument is double-stupid.
  There are many other reasons why ham bands should be given to more useful purposes.
  They aren't reassigning ham bands, they're just letting them be jammed. Clobbering several RF frequencies with noise is a ridiculous price to pay just so power companies can get in on the ISP business.
  
  --
  If a job's not worth doing, it's not worth doing right.
51. Re:Interference problems... by loucura! · 2004-02-21 16:58 · Score: 1
  
  So, in the interim when there isn't a national emergency, the hardware that amateur radio operators pay for sits idle unusable? Also, if there isn't available frequency due to interference, how do you propose that you maintain interest in Amateur Radio to maintain emergency communication?
  
  The communication isn't usually between private citizens and emergency workers but between emergency workers and other emergency workers and emergency workers and outside agencies.
  
  You've obviously got no clue what you're talking about troll.
  
  --
  Black and grey are both shades of white.
52. Re:Interference problems... by Dun+Malg · 2004-02-21 17:07 · Score: 2, Insightful
  
  Why is your use of the EM more benificial thein their use?
  They're not using the spectrum, they're trampling it. Those frequencies they're blasting are still officially designated for other uses. Look at it this way: What if the water company came up with a way to transmit data using pressure waves in the water mains, but the side effect was that water would leak out of the joints in the mains under the street and create hundreds of sinkholes in the road, rendering the road useless. Is their right to deliver internet-over-watermain so important that they should be permitted to ruin road transportation anywhere they put this in service?
  
  --
  If a job's not worth doing, it's not worth doing right.
53. Re:Interference problems... by scan2006 · 2004-02-21 18:00 · Score: 2, Insightful
  
  When (not if) your local nuke plant is the target of some terrorist group and your computer is only good for a paper weight I bet you wish that you had a local radio operator still interested in the hf band to see if your mom, brother, son, or daughter was still alive.
54. Re:Interference problems... by ComputarMastar · 2004-02-21 19:46 · Score: 1
  
  If they were going shield all of their lines, why not just run fiber or some other made-for-data connection? Isn't the whole point of Broadband Over Power Lines to avoid running all new ?
55. Re:Interference problems... by Loconut1389 · 2004-02-21 20:01 · Score: 1
  
  Remember 9/11? Guess who got communication through first? Guess who helped police and fire get new antennas and communications going? While morse is what people think of when they think ham radio, but in reality that is a tiny tiny subset of ham radio. Most of being a ham is about communications in general, over all kinds of bands, all kinds of formats, data, voice, video, etc. and trying to do it with the lowest power, or just plain old electronics experimentation. But you show your ignorance of the ham band in blazing colors. Granted, most of america probably thinks this and that ultimately is why BPL wil make it and youll find yourselves mute next time the lights go out.
56. Re:Interference problems... by Loconut1389 · 2004-02-21 20:04 · Score: 1
  
  I should add, hams get communication in/out of third world countries, countries currently embattled in warfare, and other places where communication in any form would otherwise not get to.
57. Re:Interference problems... by Loconut1389 · 2004-02-21 20:07 · Score: 3, Interesting
  
  Good god, statements like this make me want to scream at someone. Ham is not and cannot be outdated. Get the pictures of morse code keyers out of your head, ham is about communications, the forefront of communcations. Picture satellites, rovers, talking from one continent to another around the world, talking from one part of a natural disaster to another. Until communications is outdated, ham will not be outdated.
58. Re:Interference problems... by Loconut1389 · 2004-02-21 20:09 · Score: 1
  
  In addition, with the recent slashdot article on magnetic fields rotting our brains, youd think they would not want to introduce unnecessary fields.
  
  Granted it was just a movie, but I swear we're all going to get NAS (ala Johnny Mnemonic) if BPL goes through.
59. Re:Interference problems... by Loconut1389 · 2004-02-21 20:12 · Score: 1
  
  You tell your wife and kids that as you're bleeding to death under a cement beam that fell on your legs and your wife is about to catch fire and your kid has to watch both of you die because you couldnt get help from anyone. Granted its a bleak picture, but you know what, its happened.
60. Re:Interference problems... by unitron · 2004-02-21 20:14 · Score: 1
  
  Didn't CB go from 23 channels to 40 back in the '70s with the additional ones on 49 MHz?
  
  --
  I see even classic Slashdot is now pretty much unusable on dial up anymore.
61. Re:Interference problems... by Loconut1389 · 2004-02-21 20:27 · Score: 2, Insightful
  
  Taking this a step further to explain, since it -is- the only part of spectrum that bounces off the ionosphere, why in the heck should it be used for something that doesnt need distance propagation? If we're going to make the argument that the spectrum should be used in some other fashion (which i wholeheartedly DISAGREE with), then by god make long distance broadband 802.11ZZZ or some junk, why waste it on a technology that it is unnecessary for. Tons of communication methods depend on ionospheric propagation, BPL could use some other frequency range, or BPL could just never come to fruition and use some other means. This is about waste, about options, about ignorance, and about forgetting a community that donates millions of dollars and man hours to hopefully saving your life someday. Just because ham spectrum is free to use, and people have fun using it doesnt mean it is necessarily a hobby though some people use it as that. Is open source coding a hobby? Ham is the open source of the communications world. All of you who realize that truely innovative and novel software can come from open source should see that ham radio is the same thing for communications technology. The radio waves are the medium to test the new technology. While yes some old codgers collect old radios and such, ham is on the frontlines of innovation. To forget the past is to not understand the future. Those who keep track of old gear are honoring tradition, as well as the evolution of technology and understanding where it came from to better understand how to get to the next level. And hey, while I'm at it, when has open source saved your life? At least ham radio will get you to safety.
62. Re:Interference problems... by Loconut1389 · 2004-02-21 20:33 · Score: 1
  
  Well technically you should only be using whats needed to get over the top of BPL. Though, 1500w probably wont be enough by the time it gets to the receiving end since we'll hear all the data instead of the ham.
63. Re:Interference problems... by Tokerat · 2004-02-22 00:54 · Score: 1
  
  Exactly. I always used to read about the miles of dark fiber laying around the country...is that all used up now, or is it still lying dormant?
  
  Sounds like a selfish business move to me.
  
  --
  CAn'T CompreHend SARcaSm?
64. Re:Interference problems... by technogeek_slapper · 2004-02-22 01:03 · Score: 1
  
  International trans-Atlantic radio air traffic is conducted in the HF spectrum, with Gander (Newfoundland) being one of the largest operations in use. VHF doesn't work for Gander, and it won't serve as a "dodge" for US airspace.
65. Re:Interference problems... by Mr.+No+Skills · 2004-02-22 07:15 · Score: 1
  
  I don't know why this comment is particularly "insightful", as it's mostly the argument put forth by the lobbyists for the powerline industry. Their desire to see this move forward is obvious, since they stand to profit substantially from the rollout.
  
  As pointed out by others, the particulr RF noise thrown out by BPL Internet far exceeds the specific ham bands. It will impact many bands used by emergency civilian response, military, aviation, as well as ham radio operators. Hams are just an organized, well informed community that is raising a flag at this issue. Most of the others impacted by this are other government entities that do not publically lobby their positions on technical matters such as this.
  
  No one is depriving Internet users of access -- there are many existing technologies that allow Internet connectivity. Power lines also seem to be the least reliable method for Internet, given how infrequently they can transmit power, let alone Internet (at least in the Washington DC area). But for all of us, including hams, there is a finite amount of bandwidth for RF communication, which the FCC is commissioned to manage and protect. And, the amount of spectrum set aside for ham radio is a slim fraction of the whole (a little piece of each band in the spectrum).
  
  While "we the people" may own the spectrum, the FCC has made this decision against evidence to their mission, with attention from powerful business interests. I would think that anyone that desires fair, unbiased government would be nervous about how this decision came about. And, most people paying attention to this decision are losing faith in the FCC's ability to manage their business in the public interest.
  
  Disclosure: I do not have a ham radio license.
  
  --
  Sleep is for the Weak
66. Re:Interference problems... by SEWilco · 2004-02-23 02:21 · Score: 1
  
  If they're starting in North Carolina, the radio astronomy observatory PARI probably isn't going to be too happy. We've discussed PARI before -- it's a former satellite surveillance base, with a happy face painted on one small dish for the benefit of USSR spy satellites.
  Coordinates: -82.87198 W, 35.19989 N
  Updated TerraServer link. Switch to Topo Map view, zoom to 16 meter resolution, pan right twice, zoom on Towers to east of Glassmine Mountain.
67. Re:Interference problems... by SEWilco · 2004-02-23 02:47 · Score: 1
  
  Oh, that's interesting. Zooming in to a 1 meter aerial photo view, the southernmost dish (the offset shadow shows it is a dish on a short pedestal) is next to a cleared swath through the trees to the ESE. That's in the general direction of Kennedy Space Center. I wonder if they're using that dish to follow launches in progress.
ouch by Anonymous Coward · 2004-02-21 09:13 · Score: 3, Funny

electrical internet is too dangerous for kids
Error in summary by Mieckowski · 2004-02-21 09:14 · Score: 5, Informative

The article says that after the first 3 months the price will be $39.95, which is about $40/month rather than $50/month.
In the projects? by Larry+David · 2004-02-21 09:15 · Score: 4, Funny

500 homes involved in the projects can sign up for promotional pricing of $20/month, which after 3 months will be changed to $50/month.

Yo man, here in the projects we can't even afford $10 for groceries, and yo want us to shell out $50 a month on broadband? I don think this is gunna fly, man!
1. Re:In the projects? by blugu64 · 2004-02-21 10:38 · Score: 1
  
  heh Funny=Flamebait+Intresting......duh
  
  --
  "Personal ownership is a hallmark of conservative capitalism. And I don't believe I am entitled to anything that I did n
2. Re:In the projects? by psymastr · 2004-02-21 21:19 · Score: 1
  
  What do you mean? Here in Greece ADSL 256 is 75 euros a month, this is like $100.
  
  --
  Improve at backgammon rapidly through addictive quickfire position quizzes: www.bgtrain.com
Didn't we just hear about how dangerous this is? by paroneayea · 2004-02-21 09:15 · Score: 5, Funny

Like how the combination of power lines and ethernet was supposed to grow cancerous tumors out of your eye sockets that develop into tentacles that molest japanese schoolgirls? I'm pretty sure there was just a story about that on slashdot just a bit ago.

--
http://mediagoblin.org/
Bandwidth Capping by Mork29 · 2004-02-21 09:15 · Score: 5, Interesting

claims data rates exceeding 10 Mpbs

You know that you won't actually get 10Mbps for this, because the ISP's end bill and equipment needs would be to much. That's why all of the DSL/Cable companies have started sending acceptable usage warnings to their customers because they used up all of their unlimited bandwidth (God I love irony) (God I love being an agnostic who says God alot). Any who, as far as I know, this tech was meant more for giving broadband to them crazy country foke who ain't got them thar new digitized lines.... Right? Anyway, what is the range of these lines? How far away can you live from a "hub" or how exactly does that work....
1. Re:Bandwidth Capping by the_2nd_coming · 2004-02-21 09:22 · Score: 2, Insightful
  
  actualy, they send the warnings because the cost of supporting 1% of the users who use 70% of the bandwidth is to much and interfears with the other 99% of users.
  
  --
  
  I am the Alpha and the Omega-3
2. Re:Bandwidth Capping by Anonymous Coward · 2004-02-21 09:35 · Score: 1, Funny
  
  Not to mention that the only alternative would be to admit they falsely advertised "unlimited bandwidth." Doesn't it just rot your socks when someone demands what was actually advertised? It's like going to an "all you can eat" place and actually eating all you can eat! Sheesh! The noive of some people!
3. Re:Bandwidth Capping by BrookHarty · 2004-02-21 09:55 · Score: 1, Insightful
  
  DSL doesnt have to cap like cable modems, Its not as much of a shared resource. My friend in Japan is already getting 40Mbps DSL. After market saturation, ISP's will offer more speeds and services. Also with 10Mbps you can offer video on demand, another way for small towns to make a profit.
  
  Bandwidth is the greatest overpriced product besides soda pop and breakfast cereal.
  
  BTW, I won't use a cable modem for an un-aceptable usage policy. Don't see why people would save 5 bux for a high ping, limited service that cable service offers. If its your only choice then yes. Of course, I'm a sys-admin, and expect a little more out of my IP service provider, upload speed, real unlimited service, non-blocked ports, allowed to run servers. Speakeasy offers a sys-admin package just for that reason.
4. Re:Bandwidth Capping by Ironica · 2004-02-21 10:56 · Score: 1
  
  That's why all of the DSL/Cable companies have started sending acceptable usage warnings to their customers because they used up all of their unlimited bandwidth
  actualy, they send the warnings because the cost of supporting 1% of the users who use 70% of the bandwidth is to much and interfears with the other 99% of users.
  
  I don't understand this... you're simply clarifying why they did it, but it doesn't mean they didn't do what the grandparent post said they did. It simply means they had an economic incentive to do it (and when was the last time a major company did something without having an economic incentive?)
  
  --
  Don't you wish your girlfriend was a geek like me?
5. Re:Bandwidth Capping by Unregistered · 2004-02-21 16:15 · Score: 1
  
  For the record, i download a lot form earthlink and they have never complained.
6. Re:Bandwidth Capping by Steel+Shepherd · 2004-02-21 16:58 · Score: 1
  
  I grew up in the burbs and also used to think of rural farmer types as something like crazy country folk. Then I got a job working for Honda in Ohio - out in the country. Those supposedly low tech country folk sure know how to make some GREAT cars and those tractor mechanics they hired to maintain some of the most automated factories in the world sure can program a robot. They would do just fine with their digitized lines, if only they could get them. Some of them spend alot more than you likely do so they can download via sattelite.
7. Re:Bandwidth Capping by barneyfoo · 2004-02-21 23:20 · Score: 1
  
  agnosticism is dumb. Join the intellectual elite and become an athiest!!
doesn't matter how by Anonymous Coward · 2004-02-21 09:16 · Score: 1, Funny

just get my packets-o-porn here fast!
Mpbs? by Anonymous Coward · 2004-02-21 09:16 · Score: 5, Funny

Mega promotional bull shit?
Won't the internet just go *down* more? by Rockenreno · 2004-02-21 09:19 · Score: 5, Interesting

Pun intended. High winds or storms can knock out power lines, causing people to lose power, but if the ethernet connection is hooked up to said poles, we'll lose internet as well. Oh, whoa is me. Then again, I suppose that unless you keep a generator to run your computers in case of a power outage, it wouldn't really matter if the internet is not working while you're power is out. It's the principle that matters though!

--

Forecast for tomorrow: A few sprinklings of genius with a chance of DOOM!
1. Re:Won't the internet just go *down* more? by the_2nd_coming · 2004-02-21 09:28 · Score: 2
  
  High winds and stores already knock out cable and telephone lines in suburbs and rural areas...what is the diffrence?
  
  --
  
  I am the Alpha and the Omega-3
2. Re:Won't the internet just go *down* more? by TheLittleJetson · 2004-02-21 09:29 · Score: 1
  
  Good thing cable and telephone lines are never knocked out by wind, earthquakes, or clumbsy construction crews.
3. Re:Won't the internet just go *down* more? by gricholson75 · 2004-02-21 09:29 · Score: 5, Funny
  
  Oh, whoa is me.
  
  Keanu is that you?
4. Re:Won't the internet just go *down* more? by mcryptic · 2004-02-21 10:48 · Score: 2, Insightful
  
  Well if the power lines go down you won't have power to run your computer.
  
  I'll be busy looting while the geeks sit in their basements waiting for the internet to come on.
5. Re:Won't the internet just go *down* more? by WoTG · 2004-02-21 10:58 · Score: 1
  
  No one is going to be forced to use internet over power line. You can stick with dialup/dsl/cable ... if you really think it'll be more reliable.
6. Re:Won't the internet just go *down* more? by timeOday · 2004-02-21 11:28 · Score: 1
  
  Then again, I suppose that unless you keep a generator to run your computers in case of a power outage, it wouldn't really matter if the internet is not working while you're power is out.
  Exactly! This is where you realize all that typing was for nothing, hit the back button, and start thinking of some other comment to make.
  It's the principle that matters though!
  Or you can drum up some sort of wacky conclusion and submit it anyways.
Tinfoil Hat^WSteel Helmet Time by sirReal.83. · 2004-02-21 09:20 · Score: 4, Funny

Maybe I'm paranoid, or maybe I just read an article about certain magnetic fields damaging brain cell DNA. I don't remember though, because I just shaved with an electric razor. Damnit. Seriously, can we just get over this and invest in some Fiber to the Curb (FFTC) or Fiber to the Home (FTTH)?
1. Re:Tinfoil Hat^WSteel Helmet Time by dnaboy · 2004-02-21 09:27 · Score: 1
  
  It's entirely possible, but the odds of your wired broadband connection being the death nail, given all of the other sources of electromagnetic fields out there are pretty slim...he says with a cell phone in his front pocket, and a WIFI enabled laptop on his lap. I guess I don't need to worry about accidently becoming a daddy anytime soon!
Not as cool as AOL by Anonymous Coward · 2004-02-21 09:20 · Score: 5, Funny

They've been advertising some new broadband over automobile solution that looked pretty fast.
1. Re:Not as cool as AOL by user32.ExitWindowsEx · 2004-02-21 10:28 · Score: 1
  
  So you mean history has come full circle...the station wagon full of backup tapes has become the fastest connection again?
  
  =P
  
  --
  "Evil will always triumph because good is dumb." -- Dark Helmet
Oops by prostoalex · 2004-02-21 09:20 · Score: 1

My mistake, need to brush up on my rounding skills.
How long will it last? by cubic6 · 2004-02-21 09:21 · Score: 3, Interesting

Like most regular slashdotters, I've seen this come up a few times, and every time it's mentioned that Broadband over Power Lines (BPL) interferes with all kinds of radios and devices, including ham radios and military communications. My question is this: does anybody think that the military will actually let this happen? Especially given our current state of paranoia, I just can't see the FCC overruling the armed forces and saying, "Nah! Change all of your communication gear so we can speed up Billy Bob Hick's internet!"

--
Karma: Contrapositive
1. Re:How long will it last? by Curien · 2004-02-21 09:36 · Score: 1
  
  Do you really think the military would depend on a technology that can be disabled so easily? We're switching to TADIL-J (and TADIL-A where necessary), which is supposedly jam-resistant.
  
  --
  It's always a long day... 86400 doesn't fit into a short.
2. Re:How long will it last? by Bellhead · 2004-02-21 14:15 · Score: 2, Interesting
  
  Neither the FCC nor the Armed Forces make telecommunications policy in the way you infer. Both get their marching orders (pun intended) from Washington, and BPL has a lot of lobbying behind it.
  
  Please don't assume that the military will be able (or even inclined) to shout "Halt!" before the BPL onslaught: if they have to buy brand new radios to replace the single-channel paradigm they've been using for most non-critical traffic, then that's just another line item in a multi-billion dollar budget. That's what an industrialist would call a "Win, Win Situation", and any General officer would call a "battle not worth fighting".
  
  BTW, although the Armed Forces make heavy use of the spectrum between 30 and 70 MHz, their assignments are limited in the U.S. so as not to interfere with other users of that band: notably, TV channels 2, 3, and 4, and the public safety services others have mentioned.
  
  The 3 to 30 MHz (i.e., shortwave) bands haven't been used for primary communicaitons for years: satellite is prefered for over-the-horizon traffic, and even the lowliest dogface has access to email when in barracks, so the MARS system that used to carry phone calls in the shortwave spectrum isn't a big factor now.
  
  In other words, 3-70MHz is not the primary band used by the military in the U.S., so I don't think they've got a cock in this fight.
Completely naive question... by dnaboy · 2004-02-21 09:21 · Score: 5, Interesting

Not knowing much about how broadband really works, can someone explain to me why this wouldn't have the same limitations as DSL? So, with DSL there's a restriction on how far someone can be from a main telco box. Intuitively it would seem that broadband over power lines would hve the same issues, thus making it no more appealing to deliver broadband to the boonies than DSL, which the telcos have balked at due to cost. Thanks
1. Re:Completely naive question... by Mork29 · 2004-02-21 09:43 · Score: 2, Informative
  
  Old copper can't always handle newer techs like DSL. I suppose that installing a "repeater" (if that applies to this tech) would be much easier than replacing miles of copper that still performs it's old job. Some phones are even done with metals other than copper which certainly couldn't handle DSL. I personally think that the wireless solutions are a better "bonnie solution". Examples have been on slashdot before but I'm much to lazy to search slashdot and google for all of you people.
2. Re:Completely naive question... by the_2nd_coming · 2004-02-21 09:49 · Score: 1
  
  because powerlines have High voltages so they can carry signals much much much much farther than the low voltage lines that phone signals travel on.
  
  --
  
  I am the Alpha and the Omega-3
3. Re:Completely naive question... by SWTP_OS9 · 2004-02-21 14:15 · Score: 1
  
  Sorry. Thats not true. They are trying to piggy back a signal on a line that is not shielded by either a sheath of metal enclosing the conductor or twisted as in cat5 or cat3 cable. Its one big long wire which makes for a good antenna.
  
  You will need a few "repeaters" to get the signal as far as a DSL signal with no "repeater". IE it going to cost big time for this mess.
  
  The whole thing is its been tried around the world and has failed so badly and cost so much that a string and two tin cans work better than this poor idea. Non of the benifits hold true after it up and running when they test it.
  
  Instead of this mess, lay fiber alongside of the power wires. Will be cheeper in the long run and is the future not this poor concept.
4. Re:Completely naive question... by Reziac · 2004-02-21 17:50 · Score: 1
  
  Earthlink was testing fixed wireless (using the cellphone network) in Atlanta a couple years ago, and was supposed to start testing it in Los Angeles after that, but that's the last I heard of it. Does anyone know what became of this? (Yes, I've asked the people I know who work[ed] for ELN; no one has a clue.)
  
  Another question: does anyone know how you'd shield against powerline spikes?
  
  Considering the fry job I've seen a downed power line a mile away do on the honkin' big fuses out on my transformer (which also cooked two 100A fuses in my local switchbox, almost burned through one of the overhead wires, and left the new electronic meter in a defective state), I'm not terribly impressed with the concept of connecting my precious computer's NIC to a power line...
  
  --
  ~REZ~ #43301. Who'd fake being me anyway?
5. Re:Completely naive question... by racas · 2004-02-22 08:15 · Score: 1
  
  If I remember correctly from my time as a peon at ELN's DSL Pre-Install technical support, any kind of electronics on the line (and I believe repeaters fall into this category) completely negated the consumer's option of having DSL over that line. I believe it caused an echo that essentially extended the consumer's distance to the CO.
  
  Additionally, The reason DSL required one to be so close to the CO ( just under three miles, line length, not crow flying, though some telcos/ISPs made it shorter [ELN included] to avoid potential problems in the greater distances) was because telephone lines are low-power. Lines that carry electrical power, on the other hand, should extend this significantly.
Whenever I read 10 mbps by SharpFang · 2004-02-21 09:23 · Score: 4, Insightful

I add "...to Provider's nearest host".

In my town great most providers advertise like this. They just install ethernet lines between people's houses. And then say, 500 customers, each on 10 mbit line are all plugged into one 1mbit line connecting with the rest of the world.
Yeah, transfers like 1KB/s are quite common.

--
45 5F E1 04 22 CA 29 C4 93 3F 95 05 2B 79 2A B2
1. Re:Whenever I read 10 mbps by r00tdenied · 2004-02-21 12:22 · Score: 1
  
  OC stands for Optical Connection. All OC lines are fiber.
  
  --
  Platinum Networks Hosting www.platinum-networks.com
2. Re:Whenever I read 10 mbps by SharpFang · 2004-02-22 08:15 · Score: 1
  
  Because Ethernet was never meant for outdoor use.
  One mild storm and you need to replace 20+% network cards, hubs, switches etc. And while it pays in terms of cost of hardware (i.e. they are inexpensive enough for such "single use") it doesn't pay in terms of manpower - a small ISP can afford sending a team over 20 houses to replace broken hardware. A big ISP would need an army of workers for such a work.
  
  Downtime is about 5%.
  
  --
  45 5F E1 04 22 CA 29 C4 93 3F 95 05 2B 79 2A B2
Re:If there is one thing worse than Gates... by MaxPower2263 · 2004-02-21 09:25 · Score: 3, Informative

I agree 100%. When I first moved to Houston, I tried to get Earthlink DSL. I apply for the service online and confirmed my order with a person through their customer service number. I waited ... waited ... still waited. Three weeks later, when I had received no service, no modem, no nothing, I called them back and asked what the problem was. "I'm sorry, since you live in an apartment complex, you are not eligible for Earthlink DSL service." It certainly would have been nice to get that tidbit of information three weeks ago!!
And don't get me started about those commercials!! "An Earthlink address makes a good impression." My ass it does.

--
-~-~-~-~-~-~-~-~-~-~-~-~-~-~-~-
MaxPower (2263)
"I got it from a hair dryer."
Re:If there is one thing worse than Gates... by the_2nd_coming · 2004-02-21 09:25 · Score: 3, Interesting

if you say so. I like their service, and I have no bandwidth caps...I leave them alone and they leave me alone ;-)

--

I am the Alpha and the Omega-3
Jamming-proof by SharpFang · 2004-02-21 09:28 · Score: 1

Most of modern military communication devices dynamically change frequencies and use various techniques to prevent jamming - just in case the enemy does so. They are pretty effective at that too.
But civilian service class radios, like the police, emergency rescue etc all are vulnerable...

--
45 5F E1 04 22 CA 29 C4 93 3F 95 05 2B 79 2A B2
1. Re:Jamming-proof by AmigaAvenger · 2004-02-21 09:36 · Score: 1
  
  umm, that has nothing to do with it. this jams ALL frequencies in the band, it just sends out massive amounts of spurious energy. also, basically every police department in the country uses trunked systems. (in case you didn't know, trunked means it hops around on different frequencies, sometimes as often as once a second or quicker.
2. Re:Jamming-proof by Endive4Ever · 2004-02-21 12:52 · Score: 1
  
  Gee, I thought it meant the cops kept the radio in the trunk of their vehicle.
  
  *rimshot*
  
  --
  ---
3. Re:Jamming-proof by Bellhead · 2004-02-21 13:55 · Score: 1
  
  "Trunked systems are different than Spread Spectrum systems.
  
  Trunked systems share a group of frequencies amoung a pool of users: each transmission can be on any one of the frequencies, but once started, the transmission stays on the trunked frequency it started with. It doesn't change so long as the speaker holds the mike button down.
  
  Spread Spectrum, OTOH, does hop around during the transmission, and it's a different technology.
  
  It is almost as easy to jam a trunked system as a single-frequency radio: only spread spectrum radios offer greater immunity from interference, and the trunked systems used by police, fire, ambulance, transportation, Civil Defense, and many other services will receive interference from BPL.
And of course.... by LowTolerance · 2004-02-21 09:32 · Score: 2, Insightful

I just moved from the very area they are test-marketing this in. Maybe it's not too late to move back...

/me calls his old boss
1. Re:And of course.... by Anonymous Coward · 2004-02-21 14:48 · Score: 1, Funny
  
  I moved there (here) 6 years ago.
  
  Get the fuck out of my town. I was here first!
Power Supply NIC by seyden · 2004-02-21 09:33 · Score: 2, Funny

So when am I going to be able to power my comptuer and get an internet connection with the same cable?
Audiophile rant by billcopc · 2004-02-21 09:34 · Score: 3, Interesting

I know this is anal, but considering the lack of clear information about IP-over-powerlines, I will pose the following problem.

I am a sound freak. I replace components in store-bought devices, I spend hours adjusting proper placement of speakers and matching cable lengths to millimeter precision. Now if some big ignorant comms corporation starts pumping multi-mhz modulation on my power lines, that will most likely affect my hi-fi components due to high frequency aliasing componded by cheap cabling and long distances. Wouldn't that be VERY BAD for these multi-thousand-dollar amplifiers that rely on crystal-clean power to do their thing ? Conventional power conditioners are designed for filtering minor surges and dips in power, as well as light induced noise (interference). Now if the company injects 'noise' on purpose, with higher amplitude and reflections accumulated over hundreds of miles.. methinks it will seriously hinder the transient performance of my gear and that of many other, more wealthy and lawsuit-happy people.

--
-Billco, Fnarg.com
1. Re:Audiophile rant by AmigaAvenger · 2004-02-21 09:38 · Score: 2
  
  if you have a multi thousand dollar sound system, i would hope you have a line interactive UPS hooked up to that, not a cheap standard UPS...
2. Re:Audiophile rant by lurker412 · 2004-02-21 10:29 · Score: 4, Funny
  
  Well, I'm sure that the folks who sell cables for $500 a foot will come to the rescue with $15000 power filters. Nothing but the best, right?
3. Re:Audiophile rant by Jeff+DeMaagd · 2004-02-21 10:34 · Score: 2, Insightful
  
  I'd love to see how 5+ MHz signals in power lines translates to changes in the audio frequency bands.
4. Re:Audiophile rant by rebelcool · 2004-02-21 10:46 · Score: 1
  
  Wouldn't that be VERY BAD for these multi-thousand-dollar amplifiers that rely on crystal-clean power to do their thing ?
  
  As though the power is "crystal-clean" to begin with. Most power coming across the lines is very poor. If you're that obsessed with good power, shouldnt you have a fantastic line conditioner anyway?
  
  --
  -
5. Re:Audiophile rant by ColaMan · 2004-02-21 14:13 · Score: 1
  
  Hot water systems and other off-peak switching devices are already controlled by tones of a few hundred Hz injected over the 'top of' standard 50/60Hz.
  
  These would be far more audible than the MHz-scale interference, although they only happen briefly.
  
  --
  
  You are in a twisty maze of processor lines, all alike.
  There is a lot of hype here.
6. Re:Audiophile rant by Wooky_linuxer · 2004-02-21 15:06 · Score: 1
  
  They will sell a specially engineered filter together with you broadband-over-power subscrption at a discount. Fear not.
  
  --
  Where is that guy who'd die defending what I had to say when I need him?
7. Re:Audiophile rant by throwaway18 · 2004-02-22 00:35 · Score: 1
  
  Well, I'm sure that the folks who sell cables for $500 a foot will come to the rescue with $15000 power filters.
  If you actually know a bit about physics, electronics and audio browising audiofool forums is hilarious. There are already people selling 50 pound isolating transformers and huge chokes to the golden-eared brigade. Suggesting they do a double blind test to see if they can hear a diference will not endear you to them.
8. Re:Audiophile rant by benjamindees · 2004-02-22 01:03 · Score: 2, Insightful
  
  A buddy of mine (who's a cameraman) gave me the "your speaker cables aren't the same length" line the other day when my bargain-basement DVD-ROM drive and mplayer decided to garble the audio playing a DVD. I almost looked-up the speed of electrical propagation in copper and gave him a lecture but decided to say "you may be right" instead.
  
  --
  "I assumed blithely that there were no elves out there in the darkness"
9. Re:Audiophile rant by billcopc · 2004-02-22 19:07 · Score: 1
  
  Of course they will, and just like the 500$/ft cables, the 15000$ filters will never enter my living quarters lest their carrier be pummelled by my skeptical fists of enlightenment.
  
  But seriously, just my stupid 2.0ghz notebook pumps back enough HF noise into the power system to induce loud buzzing in any audio component on the same circuit. And that's with only the power adapter cord.. hell to pay if I dare plug the 1394 across to my desktop.
  
  Another poster mentioned that mhz and ghz frequencies are way beyond the audible range. True, but those super high frequencies are generated by super-cheap components that spill harmonic distortion all over the spectrum. Just sit near a kilowatt radio station with a spectrum analyzer and you'll see not only your 96.1 FM signal but lots and lots of lesser-powered yet undesirable side bands, often squashing or at least impeding other radio stations within a short radius.
  
  If I have mhz/ghz signal running through the miles of electrical wiring in the average home, then my audio receiver is literally bathed in radio noise waves, bouncing off each other, interacting to form nodes and antinodes of varying octaves.
  
  What now ? miniature tinfoil hats on my headphones ?
  
  --
  -Billco, Fnarg.com
Where is the Advanced Technology? by severoon · 2004-02-21 09:35 · Score: 2, Funny

I'm tired of people competing for frequency bands. Where are all the super-antennae that allow you to focus in a signal that's only 0.00001 Hz different than another, different signal next to it?

Come on, technology! Figure it out! It's the 20-somethingth century for crying out loud. We should be able to have high-speed Internet connections and Morse code wonks. Why do we have to choose?

sev

--
but have you considered the following argument: shut up.
1. Re:Where is the Advanced Technology? by Endive4Ever · 2004-02-21 12:58 · Score: 1
  
  Because the ignorant mother-f's who propose this broadband over powerline want to do the equivalent of early 20th century 'spark gap' transmission. 'Spark Gap' transmission was where an electromechanical device, similar to your vacuum cleaner motor, was attached to an antenna and the 'interference' it creates by sparking was switched in intermittantly to 'broadcast' morse code. Effective, but dirty, just like if you broadcast your vacuum cleaner motor's noise today.
  
  These knobs want to use untuned, unoptimized, and unshielded power lines as a big inefficient cable to carry internet traffic. It's boneheaded, it's technically an abomination, and it'll make a few people a bunch of money while wiping out all kinds of services that are far superior technically.
  
  --
  ---
2. Re:Where is the Advanced Technology? by Bellhead · 2004-02-21 14:37 · Score: 1
  
  In a word: MONEY
  BPL is an attractive technology for the only reason that the MBA's understand: it solves the nasty, "last mile" problem, i.e., it relieves them of the need to pay all those expensive, well paid, well covered, and well trained technicians to visit their customers' homes. It's the next best thing to the "virtual corporation" that has been the MBA's wet dream for years.
  
  Cable and the Baby Bells are the only other outfits with connections already in the home, and BPL competes solely on the basis of low installation costs: they'll send you a modem in the mail, shunt your tech support calls to India, and do everything possible to avoid providing any customer service. Since most power providers made very bad investment choices in the dot-com boom, they're looking at BPL to keep them out of receivership. In other words, they think of BPL as "free money" that doesn't require them to pay their (unionized) workers any overtime, and which relieves them of the oh-so-unpleasant task of admitting the corner that their greed painted them into.
  
  As for the vendors of this equipment, they're fully aware of the problems BPL will create, the costs that their customers will incur after installation, and probably of the lives it will cost. They don't care: this travesty can't go forward unless the government is for sale, and the coming elections will cure that problem, so they're in a hurry and they're desperate to cash in now.
  As for the future: that's not their concern - it's ours. When it breaks, they intend to be rich and gone.
Re:If there is one thing worse than Gates... by gmahla · 2004-02-21 09:37 · Score: 1

An Earthlink address makes a better impression than an AOL or MSN address.

--
Don't cast your pearls before swine.
I don't buy this article at all. by maeltor · 2004-02-21 09:40 · Score: 5, Informative

I work for IDACOMM. We are CURRENTLY doing testing with both Ambient (to the plug) and Amperion (wifi) and let me just say....Ambient doesn't work. The technology is just way to infant. We were lied to by their sales, president, and engineering departments about how far along their "techology trials" in New York were. We currently have about 50 people deployed on Amperion, and it works a lot better. We are working towards "to the plug" techology, but we know that it is going to be for a lot harder than these articles claim.
1. Re:I don't buy this article at all. by tommck · 2004-02-21 13:48 · Score: 1
  
  Ambient doesn't work. The technology is just way to infant.
  
  "way to infant"? I thought the only way to an infant was sex...
  
  Are you saying that Ambient is sex??
  
  Well, since everyone knows that sex sells, I've just got to get me some Ambient stock right NOW!
  
  --
  ---- It puts the lotion on its skin or else it gets the hose again. It does this whenever it's told.
2. Re:I don't buy this article at all. by arunmehta · 2004-02-22 07:01 · Score: 1
  
  besides all the interference problems with unshielded lines, power lines have terrible characteristics for the carriage of data. The line impedance keeps changing, depending on what you switch on and off, and some of these loads are quite massive: a motor, for instance, takes 5-6 times its rated current during startup. Then again, there is lots of thyristor-switched equipment on the line (basically most of your speed-controlled drives) that inject high-frequency noise onto the line. Low-bandwidth apps, such as reading power meters, should be ok. But broadband on a noisy, variable-impedance line? No wonder you only hear about pilot projects here and there: how come none of these projects ever get ramped up into a service delivering broadband to tens of thousands of people in a town? Then again, when it comes to price, I don't see how anything can compete with WiFi community networks. Arun
3. Re:I don't buy this article at all. by maeltor · 2004-02-22 09:06 · Score: 1
  
  The data is carried via RF over the shielding on the outside of the line...not through the line itself (at least for the Wifi BPL). There are interference problems from transformer to transformer, which is why you place repeaters to change the "line" you are on. Basically, you keep finding the cleanest line and place the signal on top of that.
Also they fail to mention... by Anonymous Coward · 2004-02-21 09:42 · Score: 3, Insightful

About how it has already caused 2 machines to become molten bricks of plastic. I know because I had to talk to one of the 2 customers.

Replacement list:
1. Wooden desk (burned)
2. Computer/Monitor (charred)
3. Everything that was in their office. (toasted)

The project will be beta for a long time. They just did all this because they wanted to get people talking and maybe buying stocks (which I have too much of). Why am I posting this...because when people from india show up around my cube all of a sudden, I know I am on the endangered outsource to do list.
1. Re:Also they fail to mention... by dporowski · 2004-02-21 10:52 · Score: 1
  
  And this, folks, is why I don't miss working in a particular building in Seattle that a certain ISP closed.
  
  I'm never ever EVER going to have to deal with a technology that could catch your shit on fire or kill you as you try to dl yet more porn.
  
  I can't help but imagine the fun you get when you combine that, the satellite, and the "software" they spam out... Then I giggle relievedly.
2. Re:Also they fail to mention... by che.kai-jei · 2004-02-21 10:56 · Score: 1
  
  erm and i was going to post "hey cool! so they managed to fix the disco strobe effect that was reported on street lamps supplied by bpl enabled grid sections!" now i realise they had bigger fish to fry!
  yeah but anyway they had streetlight flicker on and off in loose sequences in some streets when they trialed it in england according to some new scientist article i read or dreamed years ago
3. Re:Also they fail to mention... by Reziac · 2004-02-21 17:58 · Score: 1
  
  As I asked above... how do you shield your computer against line surges?
  
  --
  ~REZ~ #43301. Who'd fake being me anyway?
Mpbs? by mr_jim83 · 2004-02-21 09:44 · Score: 5, Funny

exceeding 10 Mpbs.

For when you need 10 Million PBS stations.
Re:just one pipe by taped2thedesk · 2004-02-21 09:46 · Score: 4, Funny

I'm hoping for power over cable line. The cable company isn't screwing me enough as it is.
unfortunately Earthlink by frovingslosh · 2004-02-21 09:46 · Score: 3, Insightful

It's a shame that this is being done with Earthlink, the company that cranks DSL and cable "inlimited users" news feed connection down to next to nothing if you dare use more that 1 gigabyte in a month.

--
I'm an American. I love this country and the freedoms that we used to have.
1. Re:unfortunately Earthlink by wssddc · 2004-02-21 10:56 · Score: 1
  
  Earthlink's news servers did have a 1.5 GB per 30 days limit before throttling the down to modem-speed, but they recently raised the limit to 5 GB. In each case, the limit is per email address, and typical accounts get 8 email addresses. They outsourced the throttling to India and the usage recording was broken for a couple weeks this month.
2. Re:unfortunately Earthlink by evilviper · 2004-02-22 01:35 · Score: 1
  
  the company that cranks DSL and cable "inlimited users" news feed connection down to next to nothing if you dare use more that 1 gigabyte in a month.
  
  They limit your NEWS GROUP feeds to 1 gigabyte per month? THE EVIL BASTARDS!
  
  Frankly, I don't see the problem... Most ISPs are providing few, if any, newsgroups, so you should be damn happy you are able to get a whole gigabye each month (and they don't cut you off, just slow you down significantly).
  
  Earthlink seems to be one of the last good (big) ISPs. Out of the dozen or so DSL ISPs I looked at that provide service in this area, they are the ONLY ONE that give unlimited bandwidth, yet they are the same mothly price as all the rest, who are capping users at 256/320/512k.
  
  Is limiting your newsgroup usage to a gigabyte/month really that much of a hardship?
  
  --
  Slashdot gets worse every day... Pipedot: News for nerds, without the corporate slant
3. Re:unfortunately Earthlink by elemental23 · 2004-02-22 07:23 · Score: 1
  
  If you knew anything about the effort and expense (in time as well as hardware and bandwidth) it takes to keep a reliable news server running for a miniscule percentage of an ISPs user base, you'd understand why this was done.
  
  --
  I like my women like my coffee... pale and bitter.
Will 220 give me 20Mbps? by chamilto0516 · 2004-02-21 09:47 · Score: 4, Interesting

I think this came from a Scott Adams (he was the telco industry and not yet the famous comic strip writer that we know and love) book, or maybe I heard it from somewhere else but it made sense: The challenge for telco's doing HighSpeed (DSL) was that they had mastered two-way personal communication but only at very low speeds. The phone system was designed for calls averaging only 3 minutes long. The cable companies knew how to deliver media, but only in one direction.
My power company only delivers 3 things: high bills (like I will want to give them extra money), power and, my favorite, power spikes (I've gone through two coffee pots, 3 baby monitors and a dozen AC adapters for various things). Yes, the equipment is built by someone else but it will be installed and managed by people that are delivering the first and third things above. This does not have warm and fuzzy written all over it.
We'll for some, a 3rd choice will be welcomed to drive rates down. For other's at least a single choice will be welcomed. More power to them.

--
Magic Eight Ball: Outlook not so good., Hmmm, how about Excel and Word?
1. Re:Will 220 give me 20Mbps? by Luyseyal · 2004-02-23 02:57 · Score: 1
  
  I'd contact your PUC and see if you can get a refund on all your damaged equipment. You could use the refund to purchase some regulators (or spare coffee makers...)
  
  -l
  
  --
  Help cure AIDS, cancer, and more. Donate your unused computer time to worldcommunitygrid.org. Join Team Slashdot!
interference both ways by Anonymous Coward · 2004-02-21 09:47 · Score: 2, Funny

like someone else pointed out, the interference from the radiated signal will play havoc with radios, lets not forget it also goes both ways.. so being a Ham Radio operator I can only imagine that when I get on and key up with a kilowatt of SSB large sections of my neighborhood will suffer some serious packet loss :-), plus I have to wonder what my arc welder will do hehe
Security by brainnolo · 2004-02-21 09:50 · Score: 2, Insightful

Mhh how many informations will fly through the city on radio frequences? Isnt too easy to catch them? I mean the amount of credit card numbers flying isnt a problem as long as they are encrypted but there are still plain-text user/pass combinations, and especially e-mails are mostly sent plain-text (how many of you actually uses SSL for mails?) Maybe i didnt get exactly how it works but it looks to me pretty unsafe, i remember when i had one those little "walkie talkie", a very old one and i could catch many communications this way.
1. Re:Security by cbreaker · 2004-02-21 14:00 · Score: 1
  
  Not sure where you're coming from here, because nobody has ever claimed e-mail to be secure at all.
  
  If you think that this power-line delivered data communications is unsafe, then you must also think that all wireless and cablemodem communications is unsafe as well..
  
  Don't blame the transport layer for your "plain text" and "non-ssl e-mail" concerns.
  
  --
  - It's not the Macs I hate. It's Digg users. -
2. Re:Security by brainnolo · 2004-02-21 22:06 · Score: 1
  
  i DO use SSL for my mails and so on, and yes all unencrypted wiress communication are pretty unsafe. In a cable you just cant "catch" data without estabilishing any connection, with radio frequences you can cause they just float in the air and even an SSL key could infact being caught. Now wireless connection inside your house arent a problem is pretty unlikely that your grandpa will sniff your connection, but in an entire city thats pretty unsafe for me
3. Re:Security by cbreaker · 2004-02-22 05:42 · Score: 1
  
  Tell me something, exactly *how* do you send e-mail using SSL to people on the internet? You do know how SMTP works and how SSL works right?
  
  BTW Cablemodems are broadcast, with the right equipment you can 'catch' the data.
  
  Of course you should use encryption for wireless connections.
  
  --
  - It's not the Macs I hate. It's Digg users. -
4. Re:Security by brainnolo · 2004-02-25 09:07 · Score: 1
  
  actually i do RECIVE emails using SSL (pop3d supports it), where did i say i use it to send? :P
5. Re:Security by cbreaker · 2004-02-25 11:39 · Score: 1
  
  And how do you suppose that e-mail gets to your pop3 server?
  
  You guessed it. Unencrypted clear text. Woo.
  
  --
  - It's not the Macs I hate. It's Digg users. -
6. Re:Security by brainnolo · 2004-02-26 07:42 · Score: 1
  
  Yes, but anyway, i stay in the hope the servers are well administrated, and hey catch waves in hair is easier than stay in the middle of a connection with a cable
Hey! by psyconaut · 2004-02-21 09:51 · Score: 3, Funny

Why does my o'scope show that all my AC power is now 10 million cycles second rather than 60?! ;-)

-psy
And another problem. by chamilto0516 · 2004-02-21 09:55 · Score: 2, Funny

...and I'm sure this will screw up all that X10 stuff I purchased from thos pop-up ads.
Screw the traffic LED on the router, my lamps-a-blink'n.

--
Magic Eight Ball: Outlook not so good., Hmmm, how about Excel and Word?
1. Re:And another problem. by jamesh · 2004-02-21 12:21 · Score: 1
  
  so you're the person who bought one!
What they're not telling about BPL by T_O_M · 2004-02-21 09:57 · Score: 3, Insightful

There are several factors that the BPL industry isn't mentioning:
- Even low-power, in-band transmissions can completely shut down BPL for a mile radius or more. Wonder what happens when I fire up my (FCC licensed) KW on 20 meters for a weekend-long contest?
- BPL is for overhead transmission lines. Burried lines don't have near the capacity but ARE better on interference.
- The bandwidth mentioned for BPL is STDM shared in the same way as cable modem service. YMWV
- Last, BPL operates as an unlicensed part 15 service. All part 15 users are liable to accept ANY and ALL interference from licensed services and must cease use of a part 15 device that causes interference to a licensed service. This passes ALL interference problems off to the end-user.
Turn it off NOW or go to jail...
WB1GOT
1. Re:What they're not telling about BPL by DAldredge · 2004-02-21 12:00 · Score: 1
  
  Easy, you pissoff enough people and those people complain and they get laws passed that make what you are doing illegal.
  
  It may not be right, but that is what will happen. Always has.
Gratuitous Technical Link by T_O_M · 2004-02-21 10:01 · Score: 2, Interesting

Many (international) BPL interference studies can be found on the ARRL Web site: http://www.arrl.org/tis/info/HTML/plc/
This is a Bad Thing (tm) by sheapshearer · 2004-02-21 10:14 · Score: 4, Interesting
Great... Now when a thunderstorm makes a tree fall on a powerline, I will loose:
- Electricity
- Phone (VOIP)
- Cable TV
- Internet.
How is broadband over powerlines going to be affected by redundant power systems? My understanding is that unless you live in the sticks, there is supposed to be more than one path for electricity to reach your area...
1. Re:This is a Bad Thing (tm) by betelgeuse-4 · 2004-02-21 10:28 · Score: 2, Interesting
  
  During a power cut you can't use the internet or TV anyway. Unless you have a generator or other backup source or surf on a laptop/palmtop (I have none of these).
  
  --
  Decode these
Amperion not Ambient by downbeat · 2004-02-21 10:17 · Score: 2, Insightful

I think the original post got it wrong. The Progress/Earthlink test is using Amperion not Ambient.
http://www.progress-energy.com/aboutus/n ews/articl e.asp?id=8362
All things considered. by bstadil · 2004-02-21 10:27 · Score: 1

When they say All the do mean All. Hence the need for 10M stations.

--
Help fight continental drift.
1. Re:All things considered. by Ironica · 2004-02-21 11:03 · Score: 1
  
  Sigh... when will people learn the difference between NPR (radio, does "All Things Considered") and PBS (TV, responsible for "Sesame Street")?
  
  10 million NPR stations, sure (especially with the $200 M donation from Judy Kroc, McDonald's heiress). 10 million Oscars the Grouch I think we might not need.
  
  --
  Don't you wish your girlfriend was a geek like me?
2. Re:All things considered. by Endive4Ever · 2004-02-21 13:01 · Score: 1
  
  When do the fat people get in on the class action suit against Judy Kroc's estate? Will they get vouchers from PBS? Will there suddenly be new quietness on PBS station about the 'civil rights' of these fat people?
  
  Either way, National Public Radio now is involved in the obesity industry.
  
  --
  ---
3. Re:All things considered. by Ironica · 2004-02-21 16:14 · Score: 1
  
  When do the fat people get in on the class action suit against Judy Kroc's estate? Will they get vouchers from PBS? Will there suddenly be new quietness on PBS station about the 'civil rights' of these fat people?
  
  Either way, National Public Radio now is involved in the obesity industry.
  
  Oh, now you're just confusing PBS and NPR on purpose to bug me, aren't you? ;-)
  
  Besides which, NPR isn't entangled in McDonald's business at all. If Judy Kroc had to pay out a huge bunch of money, the money she already gave away to NPR and the Salvation Army wouldn't matter... though it might make it harder for her to pony up (hey, maybe that's why she gave it away!)
  
  --
  Don't you wish your girlfriend was a geek like me?
4. Re:All things considered. by chris07763 · 2004-02-21 22:17 · Score: 1
  
  Not only hams will be affected. The comments about the military probably not being TOO affected are basically correct however, and as such they cannot be seen as much of an anti-BPL ally.
  
  The majority of police do NOT use UHF trunking systems. Yes, plenty do, but not most. Still enough of them use VHF low band - that is to say the range of 30-50 MHz. And in rural areas, that spectrum is heavily used by volunteer fire and first aid units. Many volunteer units in suburban areas use it too. And this spectrum is right in the path of BPL.
  
  Folks, a good many of us live in areas covered by such volunteer emergency response folks. Do we really want THEM to have unusable radios? Keep in mind also, most of those volunteer units cannot afford to replace radio systems en masse, and as such, suggesting a move in frequency is not practical.
  
  Yes, as a ham for 29 years, I'm concerned. But as someone who might need an ambulance or fire company one day, I'm MORE concerned. And in the face of the facts about BPL and interference, several FCC commissioners blather on about BPL as the holy grail while the stars shine in their glossed over blinded eyes. THAT is scary.
  
  Chris WA2ZDY
5. Re:All things considered. by evilviper · 2004-02-22 01:51 · Score: 1
  
  10 million Oscars the Grouch I think we might not need.
  
  I don't know how PBS got such a bad reputation... I guess everyone just turns it on in the daytime when nothing else (but soap operas) is on and see all the kid's stuff.
  
  PBS is also the channel that brings you Nature, Scientific American Frontiers, NOVA, BBC World News, NOW, Frontline, etc.
  
  --
  Slashdot gets worse every day... Pipedot: News for nerds, without the corporate slant
Just spend more money. by DAldredge · 2004-02-21 10:33 · Score: 1

Just spend more moeny because being an 'audophile' isn't about the music, it is about who can spend the most money.

What the hell difference does having one AUDIO cable off by 1 mm have? I mean, wtf?
Re:NC?? Why not MA!!! by nerw · 2004-02-21 10:45 · Score: 1

Because just like DSL or cable modems, BPL requires some form of repeater every x000 feet or so along the line. So despite all the friendly talk by Big Power about how BPL will allow them to bring broadband net access to rural areas, the truth of the matter is that it won't be any more economical to roll out BPL in sparsely populated areas than it is to roll out cable or DSL. There's always satellite...
Lamp-posts as antennae... by DoctorRad · 2004-02-21 10:48 · Score: 3, Interesting

I believe this technology was first tried out right here in Manchester. Unfortunately, it was found that lamp-posts acted as very nice broadcast antennae. Now you could put RF filters on all their power connections, but how much else are you going to need to filter?
Matt...

--

Save the Bottom Line
sniffing by austad · 2004-02-21 11:48 · Score: 1

So, if this supposedly causes that much interference, wouldn't it be rather simple to sniff the traffic going across the wire with nothing more than an antenna, an amplifier, and whatever device they are sticking in people's homes? It's like wardriving, but with the ability to sniff a LOT more traffic.

--
Need Free Juniper/NetScreen Support? JuniperForum
Hmmmm by mrshowtime · 2004-02-21 11:59 · Score: 1

Better get a good surge protector :)

--
"Jeremy, you need to get to an internet cafe and cut and paste some appropriate sentiments about me from the world wide
Introduced in Germany in 2001. Dead by now. by nonothing · 2004-02-21 12:29 · Score: 2, Interesting

RWE, one of the big utility companies in Germany, introduced powerline internet in 2001. Read the announcement on Wired.
From the article:

"RWE hopes to have 20,000 subscribers by July and grow that to 100,000 by the end of 2002. Beyond that, the growth potential is enormous."

Right. The last numbers were 15,000 subscribers early 2004 (compared to more than 2 million people using DSL, which by now is offered with 3Mbps).
Powerline internet had technical problems from the start on and came too late.
In the sticks? by Anonymous Coward · 2004-02-21 12:44 · Score: 1, Funny

Laawwdy mercy, betty mae, I cain't see tur fixin' up muh blacks TEETHS so's hows cain't I afferd some 'em innurnet? I cain't do hit!
BPL too easy to sniff and DoS by Nonillion · 2004-02-21 12:52 · Score: 3, Informative

The overwhelming problem with BPL is that not only does is radiate RF hash, but I could take a transmitter that puts out as little as 4 watts and completely disrupt a BPL signal. Other countries have tried BPL but have banned it (japan for one) because of the interference problems it produces on the HF bands.

But instead of accepting the facts, the power company is going to try it anyway because the people in charge are even more clueless than the most brain dead computer user. How long do you think the power company is going to put up with "My Internet service keeps going away!" complaints from their user base before they do the right thing and run fiber to the households.

Sure it may be fast and cheap, but it's suseptable to nearby radio transmitters and will be the most unreliable Internet connection out there. With the right radio equipment, packets could be sniffed, you could DoS the entire neighborhood with a CB radio or other low band or amateur HF transceiver. Not to mention all the RF hash that will be delivered to your house on a otherwise clean power line.

--
"I bow to no man" - Riddick
Not to worry... by fluxrad · 2004-02-21 12:57 · Score: 2, Funny

They're already working on Broadband Over Candle.

--
"It is seldom that liberty of any kind is lost all at once." -David Hume
Hams: vote with your feet by lophophore · 2004-02-21 12:59 · Score: 1

If you are an amateur radio operatorand an earthlink customer, please consider switching providers to protest Earthlink's action here. Make sure they know why you are switching to a new provider.

--
there are 3 kinds of people:
* those who can count
* those who can't
Support L Ron Hubbard! by aminorex · 2004-02-21 13:03 · Score: 1

Earthlink is owned by Scientology.

--
-I like my women like I like my tea: green-
1. Re:Support L Ron Hubbard! by elemental23 · 2004-02-22 07:25 · Score: 1
  
  1997 called, they want their rumors back. Earthlink is owned by its shareholders, and has never been owned by the CoS.
  
  --
  I like my women like my coffee... pale and bitter.
No Luke Stewart by sciop101 · 2004-02-21 13:51 · Score: 1

As long as Earthlink does not get involved with Luke Stewart and anybody else from Media Fusion of Dallas TX, this might work.

--
The only thing new in this world is the history that you don't know.[Harry Truman]
Write your congressman/woman: by leighklotz · 2004-02-21 13:56 · Score: 1

QRZ reports:

FCC CHAIRMAN ASSURES CONGRESSMAN ON BPL STUDIES
FCC Chairman Michael Powell has assured US Representative Greg Walden, WB7OCE, that the Commission will give "thorough consideration" to all Broadband over Power Line (BPL) studies before it takes final action on BPL. Powell responded February 3 to Walden's January 15 letter requesting that the FCC defer any further action in its BPL proceeding until the National Telecommunications and Information Administration (NTIA) releases the results of its BPL study and the public has had a chance to comment. On February 12 the FCC took the proceeding to the next level, unanimously approving the issuance of a Notice of Proposed Rule Making (NPRM). Among other provisions, the NPRM would require BPL providers to employ "adaptive interference-mitigation techniques."
This is a scam for god's sake! by Pan+T.+Hose · 2004-02-21 14:43 · Score: 1

Dear Earthlink,

YHBT. YHL. HAND.

I just cannot believe this thing is still around. The only reason people started trying to use power lines for broadband in the first place was not because of the actual properties of power grid as we know it (most of the comments here talk about the obvious inefficiencies, so I won't talk about it), but a completely new theory invented by Luke Stewart who promised more than billion gigabits per second (sic) with his Media Fusion scam. I suppose Earthlink investors don't know how to use Google, so please let me quote a Wired article from 2001, by Evan Ratliff:

Luke Stewart boldly sold politicians, businesspeople, and financiers on his trillion-dollar idea: Use the electrical grid to carry data at speeds faster than we've ever seen. Never mind how.

Inventor William "Luke" Stewart is a genuine national treasure, the kind of person who comes along once, maybe twice, in a century. How do I know? Well, I heard it from business executives, congressmembers, academics, military leaders, journalists. These people met Luke Stewart, sized him up, and concluded that his scientific intellect was virtually unparalleled. His ideas, they said, could alter not only the future of the Internet but the fate of humanity itself.

But sometimes you have to go straight to the source. The real reason I know that Luke Stewart is a national treasure - and, I suspect, the reason that all those other people did, too - is that he told me so himself.

[...] The idea of sending information via the electrical grid, rather than over telephone copper or fiber-optic cable, has been around for decades. The field, known as power line communications, or PLC, is pockmarked with wasted investments and technical failures. Only within the past few months have several companies begun to deploy limited PLC ventures.

[...] Stewart, however, had a much grander vision, based on what he considered to be a dramatic discovery: Data could hitch a ride on the magnetic field created by electric currents running through power line wires. By piggybacking on this magnetic field, instead of on the electricity itself, he could obtain almost limitless speeds of transmission.

[...] Media Fusion promised to deliver, within two years, bandwidth at speeds thousands of times faster than what's possible with fiber. Stewart was company chair, while the board of directors included government heavyweights such as former Speaker of the House Robert Livingston; Terry McAullife, a leading Democratic fund-raiser and close friend of then-President Clinton; and Admiral James Carey, former chair of the Federal Maritime Commission. The firm's Web site declared that the ASCM technology would "impact every facet of our life," and the computing power of the network would be "exponentially more powerful than any supercomputer to date." [emphasis added]

[...] So Luke Stewart - self-proclaimed national treasure - carries on. Chances are, we haven't heard the last of him, [how true...] because Stewart sold his vision best to the one person who will never pull the plug: himself.

Read the whole article and Google around for more informations. It is a very interesting scam and quite a successful one at that. Maybe that's not homeopathy but it is impressive nonetheless.

Investors, repeat after me: Google is your friend.

--
Sincerely,
Pan Tarhei Hosé, PhD.
"Homo sum et cogito ergo odi profanum vulgus et libido."
I forgot the link by Pan+T.+Hose · 2004-02-21 14:48 · Score: 1

Sorry, I forgot the link. It's The Electric Kool-Aid Bandwidth Test by Evan Ratliff, Wired, November 2001. Everyone who is interested in this story should read the whole article. I quoted only few short fragments.

--
Sincerely,
Pan Tarhei Hosé, PhD.
"Homo sum et cogito ergo odi profanum vulgus et libido."
Some solution is REALLY needed by Starfury_2260 · 2004-02-21 15:19 · Score: 1

If BPL is going to cause too many problems then how are people who cant get dsl or cable supposed to get broadband? I'm extremely tired of 26.4kbps dialup! And no satellite is not an option it's way too expensive (and supposedly no good for mp gaming). There wouldn't be a need to try such controversial internet service techniques if someone would make something to provide rural broadband.
There are several ways to deliver Internet.. by the_rajah · 2004-02-21 16:44 · Score: 1

and only one way to deliver ham radio. Piping through the Internet doesn't count since in a disaster the Internet is likely to be down.

I'm like the other fellow ham above in that if this comes to my neighborhood, I'll be doing a LOT of HF operation during prime time and I'll probably get an amplifier instead of my normal QRP (low power) modes.

--

"Do the Right Thing. It will gratify some people and astound the rest." - Mark Twain
ok NC area hams... by slasher999 · 2004-02-21 17:56 · Score: 1

Have at it! Let's find out now if there really are interference issues due to BPL. We've been bitching about BPL hosing up the airwaves for a year or so, and now it is time to put up or shut up. The FCC counts on us to be a self policing organization, and that means tracking down sources of interference. This is an excellent opportunity to do just that. In addition, if there are some issues with BPL now is the time to find them. That's what testing is all about.

--de kc2kth, 73
This may not be for real by Animats · 2004-02-21 19:55 · Score: 2, Interesting

Ambient Corporation seems to be more about hype than products. Their main product is a "coupler" that allows passing RF around transformers. Those have been around for years, although the Ambient one is easier to install than the usual capacitors.
Their new ideas revolve around ways to transmit data through underground power cables with multiple neutral wires. Big underground power cables are surrounded by multiple neutral wires, which has some shielding effect. The idea is to differentially drive those multiple neutral wires with RF. This is claimed to emit less external RF than driving the high voltage side of the line.
In cities with underground cable vaults, it's easier to wire fibre or coax. Either provides more bandwidth. Ambient only claims 10Mb/s, and that's per cable segment, not per end user.
This looks more like a specialized technology being overhyped than a major breakthrough.
Re:Didn't we just hear about how dangerous this is by Stray7Xi · 2004-02-21 23:19 · Score: 1

I'm pretty sure I saw that documentary. But if I recall both the tentacle monster and schoolgirl enjoyed it. Therefore BPL is a good thing.
Troublesome implementation by billwashere · 2004-02-22 00:00 · Score: 1

The way this is implemented bothers me a little bit. I could be wrong but it looks like they are just creating hot spots and using some 802.11 variant to get into the home.

I live in Raleigh and thought about getting more information until I saw this. Since they are doing it this way they can really limit how you can use the service. Most other broadband ISP's have an ethernet solution which allows you to use any of these routers that are on the market (linksys, netgear, linux using iptables, etc) but with this method you can really be screwed. First of all the can hide the WEP so that only machines that they approve of can even connect to the hot spot in the first place. So they could very easily support only Windows clients (or maybe Mac too). But Linux users would be screwed. And I have never heard of a wifi to wifi router or wifi to ethernet router so sharing inside you home without them knowing about it could be problematic. I just see all kinds of problems that this might cause.

I am all for choice but this really smells fishy to me.

--
Billwashere
Re:If there is one thing worse than Gates... by benjamindees · 2004-02-22 01:22 · Score: 1

I'd take his word for it. I used to think that Cox was the cat's pajamas, despite what my friends told me, until I actually had to *communicate* with the people in their customer service department.

Suffice it to say that there were a lot of unsubstantiated charges that appeared on my bill and every time I called to try to get them removed they issued a $10 "collections fee". The icing is that, after I told them to cancel my service and sent them the exact amount they told me, two weeks later they sent me another $10 invoice.

--
"I assumed blithely that there were no elves out there in the darkness"
Re:Yeah by falconfighter · 2004-02-22 01:49 · Score: 1

Let me just point out... in over 80 years, we havn't found a solution to harmonics... KC8***, Tech

--
"Give a man a fire, he's warm for a day, set a man on fire, he's warm for life."
miniscule percentage of an ISPs user base by frovingslosh · 2004-02-22 08:23 · Score: 1

....miniscule percentage of an ISPs user base....
If it is only a miniscule percentage then it would have little impact on this big ISP, so there would be no reason to go to the extra effort to add extra complexity do this to people. No, the very action of doing it shows they know they are affecting a significant percentage of users. And what is acomplished by offering unlimited service and then choking it off this way? At least the news servers use only bandwidth that is local to Earthlink; that is, once the article is on the Earthlink server, any number of Earthlink users can download it without adding to the bandwidth to the rest of the Internet (the bandwidth that Earthlink should be more concerned about).
Why should the news group user have his bandwidth limited to dial up speeds, when the p2p user can use full bandwidth that extends outside of just Earthlink all month, or the FTP user, or someone who uses their unlimited always-on connection to listen to Internet radio 24/7, or any other application that uses large amounts of bandwidth, but doesn't use it as efficently as news groups do?

--
I'm an American. I love this country and the freedoms that we used to have.
Re:If there is one thing worse than Gates... by loco_0wnz · 2004-02-22 08:56 · Score: 1

Sorry to hear of your troubles with Earthlink, I too have heard nightmare stories while trying to deal with them regarding their services. I live in an apartment complex and SBC didn't whine or bicker a single time while connecting my 6000/600 dsl service. If I am not mistaken, they too offer DSL service in Houston.
Here's one for the Tinfoil hat crowd by Shakrai · 2004-02-22 12:18 · Score: 1

I've posted this before when this subject came up. I happen to agree with the paranoid assessment (and I'm not usually part of the Tinfoil hat crew). What other reason is there for killing such a useful and wonderful resource as HAM and investing in a money-losing technology when we already have several other broadband technologies that work and don't interfere with ham?
Copy of my original post follows:
Here was a much more paranoid explanation by Mr. Dvorak of PC Magazine about 10 months ago that I recall. His observation was that the technology has failed and the only reason it's still being pushed is for the big brother (think: very highly targeted advertising + possible Patriot Act/Govt usage) benefits of having TCP/IP to all the outlets in a household. I read this at a friends house in an old edition of PC Magazine months ago and it still sticks in my head every time I hear something about Powerline Networking.
Found the original article (thanks Google) in another comment in a different /. discussion from last month. Reposting it here for easy reference: (apologies if someone else already covered this)
February 18, 2003
Nothing makes me more suspicious than old, recycled news pretending to be new news and released under weird circumstances. In this case, I'm referring to the recent "news" about power-line networking. This, in fact, is a technology I've been hearing about for 20 years. Its strange and sudden promotion by the government is ominous.
Old technology. It began on January 16 with an Associated Press article reporting that federal officials (the FCC) think that power-line networking "may become the next pathway into homes for high-speed Internet access." On what planet?
This piece ran in The Washington Post and on most major news outlets. Five days later, TechTV reported the same story without questioning the source or the rationale for the idea's reemergence.
This non-news is obviously being orchestrated by some of the companies involved in the technology. Who can blame them? But why is the FCC suddenly on the bandwagon?
Phony rationale. The new angle is that power lines can provide an alternative way to connect to the Internet in a national emergency. Has anyone noticed the simple fact that during most disasters, the first things to go off-line are power lines, not phone lines? Something else is going on.
I've always been baffled by the continued development of power-line networking when all network engineers know that power-line noise is not conducive to data flow. Set up a home network over power lines and see how well it operates when Betsy cranks up her 1,500-watt hair dryer or Dad turns on the blender. Filtering all this noise is difficult, which is the main reason that power-line networking has gone nowhere. There are reports of stable 1-Mbps and even 10-Mbps systems, but all the network engineers I talk to are suspicious of any such claims. We have wireless technology, mesh concepts, and Ethernet-to-the-home initiatives. Why does development continue with power-line networking?
The reality. The idea of a personal Internet connection over power lines is preposterous, since other technologies are clearly better and more stable. The real reason to promote power-line networking is so the appliances of the future can be monitored and controlled from remote locations.
Imagine that you own a Maytag washer with an LCD screen. It's got an IP address and is plugged into the electrical system where it communicates with a Maytag server on the Web. One day, the machine's LCD tells you that you can download a new spin cycle by hitting the red button on the washer. Meanwhile, the LCD also tells you that the Safeway down the street (of course, the washer knows where you live) is having a sale

--
I want peace on earth and goodwill toward man.
We are the United States Government! We don't do that sort of thing.