Slashdot Mirror

← Back to Stories (view on slashdot.org)

DEFCON WiFi Shootout Winners Set A Land Record

Posted by timothy on from the congratulations-all-'round dept.

bscience writes "While attending the DEFCON 12 convention this past weekend I had the chance to see the standing ovation a group of 19 year olds received for establishing a 55.1 mile unamplified WiFi connection!" A snippet from the Wired story linked there: "Mobile warriors having trouble making a wireless connection across the hall might want to give some Ohio teens a call. This weekend they were able to make a 55-mile Wi-Fi connection. ... They might have achieved an even greater distance, Justin Rigling said, "but there was no road left."" (Here's the post from a few weeks back about the competition.)

161 comments

  1. GNAA first post by SPUI · · Score: -1, Troll
    GNAA Launches successful attack on AIMGIRL.COM Community
    GNAA Launches successful attack on AIMGIRL.COM Community
    Reuters August 2, 2004

    During the night, specials ops forces from GNAA (Gay Nigger Association of America) launched a full frontal trolling attack on AIMGirl, a known AOL recruitment site.

    "Their (AIMGirl) corruption of our youth with their anti Gaynigger and pro-Zionist propaganda had gone on for far too long," said an obviously impassioned rolloffle as he started up another round of flooding with Goatse images while furiously masturbating.

    This attack was another enormous success for the GNAA, which had been plagued by rumors (attributed to Slashdot creators and Linux fanboys Rob Malda and CowboyNeal) of *BSD like demise after a brief period of inactivity on their shitty, OpenSores propaganda spewing site.

    "omg leik we wer just trying to spred r luv 4 aol/aim and thes nigaz came to teh site and troled uz untill r 12 yr old pusys culdn't handle it no more," said a tearful AIMGirl spokespreteen whose anus was ruined by GNAA soldier incog.

    Now, however, all agree that GNAA is at the top of its game. It has reported increasing profits and was able to utterly destroy the child raping, tea bagging cocksmokers of 4CHAN. This raid showcased the devastating effectiveness of it's new, Enterprise Edition e-business final solutions FloodMT (released in Beta as phpbbflood) and AGrapist (named for its first customer), which were coded by a crack (smoking) team composed of x_over_ln_x and Popeye. There is incredible demand for these products and GNAA has recently raised advisories for its third quarter earnings based on the success of these products. Keep your eye open for more great products from this fine trolling powerhouse.

    About GNAA:
    GNAA (GAY NIGGER ASSOCIATION OF AMERICA) is the first organization which gathers GAY NIGGERS from all over America and abroad for one common goal - being GAY NIGGERS.

    Are you GAY ?
    Are you a NIGGER ?
    Are you a GAY NIGGER ?

    If you answered "Yes" to all of the above questions, then GNAA (GAY NIGGER ASSOCIATION OF AMERICA) might be exactly what you've been looking for!
    Join GNAA (GAY NIGGER ASSOCIATION OF AMERICA) today, and enjoy all the benefits of being a full-time GNAA member.
    GNAA (GAY NIGGER ASSOCIATION OF AMERICA) is the fastest-growing GAY NIGGER community with THOUSANDS of members all over United States of America and the World! You, too, can be a part of GNAA if you join today!

    Why not? It's quick and easy - only 3 simple steps!

    Talk to one of the ops or any of the other members in the channel to sign up today! Upon submitting your application, you will be required to submit links to your successful First Post, and you will be tested on your knowledge of GAYNIGGERS FROM OUTER SPACE.

    If you are having trouble locating #GNAA, the official GAY NIGGER ASSOCIATION OF AMERICA irc cha

    --
    http://www.google.com/search?hl=en&q=%E5%8D%8D&btn G=Google+Search
  2. GNAA 9/11 Commission reaches conclusions by Anonymous Coward · · Score: -1, Troll
    GNAA 9/11 COMISSION REACHES STARTLING CONCLUSION

    On Monday, August 2nd 2004, the GNAA (Gay Nigger Association of America) 9/11 commission will release its report on the events of September 11th, 2001 and the utter, Rucas-esque failure of the government and GNAA's military to prevent, handle, or cover up the attack. In a press conference this morning, GNAA president timecop released the shocking conclusion of the report.

    "lol, jews did wtc," said GNAA president timecop before spraying his viral Gaynigger seed all over a crowd of reporters."

    This conclusion is in direct contradiction to the US Senate report that "lol sandniggers did wtc" that was released just a short time ago.

    GNAA spokesnigger Penisbird held a press conference this morning where he was quoted as saying "It is obvious why the Senate 9/11 Commission failed it so badly: the presence of known Juden Joe Lieberman on the panel." This obvious conflict of interests went unreported by most major news sources because of the open anti-GNAA slant of almost every major organization.

    Although the GNAA Commission still has more work to do, the apparent ringleader was Federal Reserve Chairjew Alan Greenspan. Greenspan has been quoted as saying that he supports a smaller economy in which he is the ultimate master. Destroying the WTC was just the first step in what appears to be a grand scheme to shrink the US economy to the size of his shriveled circumcised penis.

    President timecop stated that he supports a strong dollar to keep gold jewelry (a staple of niggers) prices low.

    Another conclusion of the panel was that the ops of #Politics played a pivotal role in the success of the attack. The usually miserly organization gave $2,000,000 to help fund the effort. They then continued with their unwavering aid to Jews by spreading false evidence that led others to believe that a bunch of sand niggers committed the attack. GNAA has promised a strong retaliation against #Politics.

    John Rockecenter was unavailable for comment at this time.

    About GNAA:
    GNAA (GAY NIGGER ASSOCIATION OF AMERICA) is the first organization which gathers GAY NIGGERS from all over America and abroad for one common goal - being GAY NIGGERS.

    Are you GAY ?
    Are you a NIGGER ?
    Are you a GAY NIGGER ?

    If you answered "Yes" to all of the above questions, then GNAA (GAY NIGGER ASSOCIATION OF AMERICA) might be exactly what you've been looking for!
    Join GNAA (GAY NIGGER ASSOCIATION OF AMERICA) today, and enjoy all the benefits of being a full-time GNAA member.
    GNAA (GAY NIGGER ASSOCIATION OF AMERICA) is the fastest-growing GAY NIGGER community with THOUSANDS of members all over United States of America and the World! You, too, can be a part of GNAA if you join today!

    Why not? It's quick and easy - only 3 simple steps!

    Talk to one of the ops or any of the other members in the channel to sign up today! Upon submitting your application, you will be required to submit links to your successful First Post, and you will be tested on your knowledg

  3. i have a dream by Anonymous Coward · · Score: -1, Offtopic

    i dream of a world of dongs

  4. Boring. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: -1, Offtopic

    nt.

    1. Re:Boring. by Veamon · · Score: 0

      i agree. this was an ok story when it was on WIRED YESTERDAY...good god, is slashdot just wired with comments?

      --

      Slashdot News: As serious as a busted rubber
  5. A snippet by Tomahawk · · Score: -1, Redundant

    Ben Corrado, Andy Meng, Justin Rigling and a fourth friend, Brandon Schamer (who didn't accompany them from Ohio), won the greatest distance achieved for an 802.11b network. The teens, two of them 18 years old and the other 19 years old, achieved 55.1 miles using homebrewed antennas on both ends along with amplification, exceeding last year's winner by 20 miles. Then, when they established that record, they turned off their amplifiers and broke the record for an unamplified connection at the same distance. At the announcement on Sunday, the crowd rose to its feet.

    Very impressive

    T.

    1. Re:A snippet by agentforsythe · · Score: 5, Interesting

      "Then, when they established that record, they turned off their amplifiers and broke the record for an unamplified connection at the same distance."

      does that mean that the connection wasn't actually established unamplified... merely maintained?

    2. Re:A snippet by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      yeah they used the amplifiers to set it all up. they turned off the amplifiers. the little WinXP taskbar connection icon didn't disappear immediately. they all shouted "we r0x0r".

    3. Re:A snippet by ack154 · · Score: 1

      Or, if it was established at that distance, why wasn't the amplified distance longer than the non?

    4. Re:A snippet by Alsee · · Score: 4, Informative

      Because they didn't even max out the non-amplified distance. If you read the Slashdot blurb again it says They might have achieved an even greater distance, Justin Rigling said, "but there was no road left."

      -

      --
      - - You can't take something off the Internet! That's like trying to take pee out of a swimming pool.
    5. Re:A snippet by djcapelis · · Score: 2, Insightful

      > Or, if it was established at that distance, why
      > wasn't the amplified distance longer than the non?

      As the article and summary pointed out, they ran out of road.

      And yes, the unamplified distance was merely to maintain the connection and not establish it.

      Either way, impressive.. especially as they would have likely gone farther if they had a good place to go to.

      --
      I touch computers in naughty places
    6. Re:A snippet by MBAFK · · Score: -1, Redundant

      From the article:
      They might have achieved an even greater distance, Justin Rigling said, "but there was no road left."

    7. Re:A snippet by ack154 · · Score: 1

      Guess I have a shorter attention span than I thought... Either that or I just don't read the end of stories...

    8. Re:A snippet by 0x0d0a · · Score: 2, Interesting

      They didn't try to do so. My guess is that it's extremely difficult to align the dish with an extremely weak signal. The point of having the boosted signal was probably to help them initially align the dish. While it might be a real pain in the ass to set up such a connection without such assistance, once the dishes are aligned, apparently it's possible to run without amplification.

      --
      May we never see th
    9. Re:A snippet by ASLRulz · · Score: 2, Interesting

      The connection was (re)established unamplified. The team had to shutdown the connection, tilt the antenna down, and climb a latter to remove the amp. Then of course, re-aim the antenna and try again.

    10. Re:A snippet by PAD-WiFi-Team · · Score: 1

      The connection was first established with amplifiers in. We couldn't believe the signal strength (not sure if the Orinoco link client was reading right) - so we decided to test it unamplified as well. This involved a great deal more than just turning off a switch or pulling a power cord. We had to physically take apart each feed and this involved un-aiming the dish on the mountain just to get access to the feed. We (I was on the base camp side) then approximated the previous dish position and set it back. We pinged the remote computer and verified that we had a connection (1Mbps). We then did a remote desktop connect (both machines running XP) and took some screenshots and stuff after we passed the official test text between the two locations. We actually didn't even peak the signal (aim) on either dish after we had connected in either amplified or unamplified configurations. We figure we had about 34dBi antenna gain on each end, and other sources we found indicate the beamwidth should be about 4 degrees. We actually found the aiming to be much more tolerant than we had expected. On the final link we were so short on time that we didn't want to risk losing the connection to aim. Afterwards it was getting dark and we were already tearing down as the remote team drove back. -Andy

  6. No really. by ItsIllak · · Score: 4, Interesting

    I don't get this. I've got a smallish house, but need two APs to cover it. I guess I'm considerably less directional, but still?!

    Maybe these competitions could open up a second record of the largest diameter of coverage achieved. Maybe measured at four opposite points.

    1. Re:No really. by 5m477m4n · · Score: 5, Interesting

      Some brands of APs have better range than others. I get pretty good range from Linksys. Also, APs generally get batter range than wireless routers. But sometimes it's nice having a smaller range, that way the guy down the street can't hack your connection or hijack your cable internet.

      --

      ---
      Those who can, do
      Those who can't, teach
      Those who don't know how, supervise
    2. Re:No really. by DaHat · · Score: 3, Interesting

      Might I suggest bring in a demo man to remove all of your walls and anything else that may, depending on your location in the house be anywhere near the line of sight of the signal that could conceivably interfere with it?

      I have not RTFA, however if I remember last years competition right, the competing antennas were on the side of a large hill or mountain pointing down at a vehicle that was driving away. In such a case they have far fewer obstacles then you do in your home.

      --
      Help Brendan pay off his student loans
    3. Re:No really. by gizmik · · Score: 2, Insightful

      ou should check your WiFi cards too. My Intel Centrino laptop's wifi just sucks. First I too thought that I have a poor AP, but after buying a cheap USB dongle, I had much better signal and no disconnects.

    4. Re:No really. by v1 · · Score: 4, Informative

      Omnidirectional coverage is a bit harder to expand. You can't really beat a 5/8 wavelength groundplane, and they're easy to make. (at lower frequencies anyway, not sure about ghz)

      Not counting the ability to use amplifiers, you could think of wifi coverage as light... put a 100w lightbulb in a field at night and how far away can you be and stil read a book? Not very far probably... 30 feet maybe. Now, take that bulb and put it in a parabolic lens. Now you've got a 100w flashlight. If the flashlight is pointed your way, you'll get hundreds of feet. The better the lens and the sharper the focus, the greater your range. Come up with a more fundamental improvement (like a 100w laser?) and your range increases to a radical distance that could easily be miles. But it still doesn't help the guy standing 5 feet off to the side of the light though, he's in the dark.

      Directional and omnidirectional coverage are for totally different purposes, and really can't be compared or mixed. There's no use in complaining about your omni coverage when people are making improvements in directional coverage - it's apples and oranges.

      --
      I work for the Department of Redundancy Department.
    5. Re:No really. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: -1

      mmmmmmmm......Batterrrrrrr Range.....[slurp]

    6. Re:No really. by tiger99 · · Score: 1
      The diameter of coverage would be very poor. A directional antenna only covers one direction!

      At least approximately so, of course.

      The only way you can boost the range of a radio system (assuming the receiver to be limited by thermal noise rather than things which can be fixed) is to boost either the transmitter power, or the antenna gain at one or both ends of the link. That you do by making them directional.

      Now this is an excellent achievement, and has obvious and immedate application for those who live in sparsely populated regions, but in many countries the authorities regulate the transmitter power in terms of field strength, which in this case would be quite high, rather than actual total power, which obviously was low, so we might not be allowed to try this.

      I think it is time for some serious efforts at standardisation, and legislation, worldwide so techniques like this can be used, after all lots of people who live in the countryside rather than urban areas could benefit. Even in the UK, using things like this between individual villages would be viable, rather than running cables, but it would probably not be legal.

      But, as is usually the case, note that this was a small group of fairly inexperienced individuals, not a mega-monopoly, who did something truly innovative..... Monopolies such as the one in Redmond have the capability to bulldoze their way through laws and regulations, but they can't achieve any technical innovation, but sadly private individuals stand negligible chance of influencing regulatory bodies worldwide.

      But if these things do spring up everywhere, they will need to be coordinated to avoid mutual interference, which could likely be planned at local rather than national level. Confining the transmissions to a narrow beam helps enormously of course.

      Clearly this was workable at a safe, harmless and economic power level, which makes it all the more interesting.

      I can see a new (but probably not very large) industry springing up, making suitable inexpensive dishes and other bits.

    7. Re:No really. by Mr+Guy · · Score: 4, Insightful

      All this is true and valid, but it still doesn't fix the problem that it's only marginally usefull, while people would pay big money for a good way to repeat passed walls more cheaply than sticking another AP wired to the LAN on the other side of it.

      --
      Never confuse volume with power.
    8. Re:No really. by TheSync · · Score: 1

      I don't get this. I've got a smallish house, but need two APs to cover it. I guess I'm considerably less directional, but still?!

      You need to think of radio like light (albeit light that can go through non-metallic objects a bit). Your APs put out under 1 watt, like a candle.

      These guys who went 50 miles were using the equivalent of a large telescope, viewing a star that is too dim to be seen by the naked eye.

    9. Re:No really. by Lumpy · · Score: 5, Insightful

      Nahh, it's easy to significantly increse the coverage in a home without much work. In many of the high-brow homes I help a friend of mine install home automation and whole house multimedia I do the networking on the side. One AP can easily cover most fo a 2000Sq foot home. but you need to place the AP in regards to where it will be used most.

      rule 1 - make it central to the house. If you use it mostly in your den at the south end of the house then the AP will be in the celing, about 6 feet from the office in the hallway. if your home is larger, buying a pair of low end aftermarket antennas and spreading out the antennas makes a bigger difference. In one home i had the AP in the kitchen, 1 antenna 6 feet from that location and th eother 3 feet in the opposite direction. Adding a 1 foot square piece of sheet metal about 1 wavelength away from the antenna in the direction of the outside wall will also help in two ways. 1 to limit the external radiation to the neighbors. (the best wireless security is to be sure they cant get a signal) and 2 to reflect the signal back to the working area.

      I have covered houses of 4000 sq feet with 1 AP and 2 comp-usa grade add-on antennas. no you will not get 100% in all areas of the home, but you will not drop below 40% and some places like the bottom of the closet in the basement guest bedroom do not need woreless coverage.

      being realistic about wireless coverage is the first step. the second step is to use the 802.11 repeaters when you only absolutely have to.

      but in a home for rich people... multiple AP'
      s are not a viable option as it doesn't hand off seamlessly.

      --
      Do not look at laser with remaining good eye.
    10. Re:No really. by Trigun · · Score: 5, Interesting

      I have an Averatec laptop with built in Wi-fi and a D-link 514 Router on the 2nd floor of my house. I get 100% coverage inside my house, and can even go four or so houses in any direction. My SMC 802.11a/b card doesn't get me off my front porch.

    11. Re:No really. by Gordonjcp · · Score: 1

      I live in a biggish flat on the 14th floor of a tower block. If I put my AP outside on the balcony, I can get a signal just outside my front door. But, if I take a walk across the park, I can hear my AP at least half a mile away. That is with a plain ordinary RG-1000, and a plain ordinary orinoco silver in my lappy. An external aerial gives me a stronger signal, but isn't really necessary unless there's a lot of foliage in the way.

    12. Re:No really. by selderrr · · Score: 1

      I have a standard Apple airport (not extreme) basestation and a tiBook 667MHz. Reception is awfull, and I'm only 15m away from the basestation which is hanging out of the window, so NO walls between us. It is really frustrating, especially since this mac can't upgrade to airport extreme (wrong antenna they told me at the apple shop).

      Anyone any advice on increasing my radius ?

      --
      When will I end this grieving ? When will my future begin ?
    13. Re:No really. by Jeff+DeMaagd · · Score: 2, Informative


      but in a home for rich people... multiple AP'
      s are not a viable option as it doesn't hand off seamlessly.

      There are some that do, model numbers escape me. Or it might be the card and software that automatically switches APs to the best one.

      Not that I think it is necessary. I was able to get a pretty good 11Mbps (i.e. plenty good for internet) link where the AP is in the far corner of the basement and I was on the second floor. I think it would take a pretty huge house, or maybe one with concrete/stone/metal floors and walls to need multiple APs.

    14. Re:No really. by jhesse · · Score: 1

      You need to have someone check if the antenna cable is properly plugged in, and that the antennas are in their proper positions (some of the tiBooks had problems with them getting loose).

      That's if the problem is with the powerbook. How well do other notebooks see the basestation?

      --

      --
      "I have also mastered pomposity, even if I do say so myself." -Kryten
    15. Re:No really. by SlamMan · · Score: 1

      Its might also be the case. Your USB dongle is outside your case, but the centrio is internal. The may no have designed the antenna well enough to work in the case.

      --
      Mod point free since 2001
    16. Re:No really. by selderrr · · Score: 1

      i haven't checked other machines.. I'vegot only one portable:-)

      --
      When will I end this grieving ? When will my future begin ?
    17. Re:No really. by ckd · · Score: 2, Interesting

      The gray base station has a Lucent PC card inside, so it's using a fairly lame antenna. You can put an external antenna on with a little Dremel work to make a hole in the base station case.

      As for Airport Extreme, the Broadcom PC cards will work under OS X using the Apple driver; you'll wind up with a card sticking out of your TiBook, but you'll get 802.11g and probably better range as well. Worth a try.

      The cheap thing to try (er, free :-) is to pop the battery out of the TiBook and make sure the antenna on that side is pressed firmly into the slot in the case. That may help your range a little bit.

    18. Re:No really. by SEWilco · · Score: 1
      Maybe you have metal mesh in your plaster, or a lot of metal in cinder blocks.

      You might gain a greater radius of coverage if you put an AP high in the house. And hang some metal around the edges of the attic so the signal can be reflected down into the rooms.

      Or hang your AP under a balloon, in the center of a parabolic antenna aimed down at your house.

    19. Re:No really. by Zondar · · Score: 1

      It has to do with the radiation pattern from the antenna. It's not like sound or light - it doesn't go equally in all directions (like you would think it would) from a seemingly omnidirectional antenna.

      Even an omni dipole has "lobes". And they're different depending on the axis you're viewing.

      Reference: http://www.rfcafe.com/references/electrical/antenn a_patterns.htm

    20. Re:No really. by carn1fex · · Score: 2, Funny

      I vote netgear as the superior AP as i can get an excellent connection on my unsuspecting neighbors network. And I live in a very old apartment building with concrete walls a foot thick and theres a stairwell between me and the closest neighbor:)

      --

      ---------

      No matter how thin you slice it, its still baloney.

    21. Re:No really. by cojsl · · Score: 1

      Look into a mid range AP w/ more output power. I've had great luck w/ the Smart Bridge Air Point (Google: smartbridge+sb2400), and the Proxim AP600 (model depends on the wireless card installed) Both are around $300 US and have dramatically better range. You get what you pay for

    22. Re:No really. by Black+Perl · · Score: 2, Insightful

      I have an Averatec laptop with built in Wi-fi... I get 100% coverage inside my house, and can even go four or so houses in any direction

      I'm seeing similar results with my new Averatec 3220. It's even better than my D-Link DWL-650+ card, which was previously the best I'd found. Having it on depletes battery life quite a bit faster though.

      Now if I can just get Linux working on the damn Averatec...

      --
      bp
    23. Re:No really. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1, Interesting

      There are, in fact, multiple APs that hand off seamlessly. See WDS, or the Apple Airport Extreme.

    24. Re:No really. by MixmastaKooz · · Score: 1

      some places like the bottom of the closet in the basement guest bedroom do not need woreless coverage.

      What? If anyplace needs woreless coverage, it's the guest bedroom closet...where else would I hide her? ;)

    25. Re:No really. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Heh

      I did this years ago with Aironet equipment before most people know what 802.11 was... shows how fast or in this case slow things move along.

      full 100mw power with a reverse TNC, lots of LOW LOSS cable and a bouple 24db dishes with a lot of trig for setting the angles juuuuuust right... Ahh the good old days when there wasnt so much band crowding your bandwidth goes to hell now

    26. Re:No really. by rspress · · Score: 1

      It is easy to send most of the energy from the radio signal the 802.11b device puts out in one direction but when you spread that signal out over 360 degrees then less energy will reach the other station. You could use a gain omni directional antenna but it will never beat a yagi or parabolic antenna pointed in direction.

      I live in a place in Northern California where I could easily beat their record. With a mountain that rises 3000 ft. off of the valley floor and the shape of the main valley of California and the fact that on each side of the valley are large mountain ranges such as the sierra nevadas we have talked on Amateur radios at 440Mhz for over 400 Miles with no problem. Ham operators in Southern California have made contact with Hawaii on 1.2Ghz which is half the frequency of 802.11b. With the proper antennas an unamplified 802.11b signal could easily travel 200 miles or more with no problems.

      Of course I still have problems with a connection less than 30 ft. away through several walls. There are a few things you can do to improve your signal. Wrap 5 to 15 loops of wire around your router. Use insulated wire please! and then run one end toward your problematic computer. This is a passive antenna the takes some of the omni direction signal and moves it toward your receiving station. You can also get one of the many antenna design programs and build your own 802.11b antenna for a song. Just remember the more wire between the router and antenna the more signal you will lose.

    27. Re:No really. by Creepy · · Score: 3, Interesting

      well, if you're going with Linksys, you may have to use 3rd party firmware to boost the signals (info on third party firmware for Linksys info here). The very common WRT-54G wireless router runs at 19mw and at that power, barely penetrates a hollow 2 foot wooden wall with no insulation (and drops the signal periodically), at least from my personal experience.

      Installing Sveasoft, OpenWRT, or WiFi box firmware allows you to boost the signal to 84mw. I've read to avoid the full 84mw, as it can damage hardware in extended use, but I've also read that this is still in the legal range for the device... even wireless A indoor/outdoor is 250mW. (and I think g is up to 4W).

    28. Re:No really. by russotto · · Score: 1

      The TiBook has the antennas in the bottom part, so it's real easy to block it with your body. Cheapest solution is an 802.11g PCMCIA card.

    29. Re:No really. by ttyp0 · · Score: 1

      I have a 6,200 sq/ft house which I can barely cover with 2 APs. Any suggestions on brands or commercial attennas?

    30. Re:No really. by tcgroat · · Score: 1

      Security is a good reason for using the minimum connection range, but there's another that's just as important. The available spectrum is limited, prospects for increased spectrum are long range at best (not to mention that your existing system can't use it), and the user base is growing. For broadband wireless to remain useful, all users must copperate so channels can be re-used a short distance away, just as cell phones do. The alternative is a chaotic war zone where productive activity is impossible: observe what happened to the 27MHz CB radio spectrum. Making a long distance link is an impressive achievement, but comes at the expense of many others who also need to use the channel. Make your range sufficient for the job, no more. Don't hog shared resources!

    31. Re:No really. by simontek2 · · Score: 1

      cute, but sooo true. Our routers got bout a mile of distance diameter. we supported the G8 summit here in Savannah, wanna see our linux routers? www.simontek.net/pic/G8

      --
      SimonTek
  7. Metrics is a Milestone away by Barryke · · Score: -1, Offtopic

    I cant see why miles are used. Is it to make the achieved distance look longer?

    --
    Hivemind harvest in progress..
    1. Re:Metrics is a Milestone away by millahtime · · Score: 1

      I cant see why miles are used. Is it to make the achieved distance look longer?

      I would guess it's because it's a competition held in the US. If you told someone there how many feet, yards, or meters it was then most people wouldn't really get how far that distance really it.

      --
      Evolution or ID?
    2. Re:Metrics is a Milestone away by kevmo · · Score: 1

      It was in the United States. Miles were used for the same reason they are used on road signs and in cars - it is standard here right now, even if metrics is "better".

    3. Re:Metrics is a Milestone away by lachlan76 · · Score: 0, Offtopic

      Ummm....perhaps because in the US, it seems like alot of you don't know how far a kilometer is.

      I use metric though (Australia). Don't know how you USAnians do without it.

    4. Re:Metrics is a Milestone away by Anonymous Coward · · Score: -1

      saying 88km seems longer than saying 55miles

    5. Re:Metrics is a Milestone away by Marcus+Green · · Score: 1

      Apart from it being in the US where imperial (miles) is the standard. A mile is slightly longer than a kilometer therefore the number of miles is smaller than the same distance in Km.

    6. Re:Metrics is a Milestone away by Aadomm · · Score: 1, Insightful

      But kilometres are smaller than miles so surely the distance seems shorter when displayed in miles. I think 55 miles is 88km. That said, I agree that it would make more sense to give the result in km. .

      --
      Mention the Lord of the Rings one more time and I'll more than likely kill you.
    7. Re:Metrics is a Milestone away by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      If by "slightly," you mean roughly 1.6, then yes.

    8. Re:Metrics is a Milestone away by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      About "a mile a slightly longer than a kilometer": last time I checked, 1 mile was 1.609 kilometer. What your kind of maths, you could also have said "a mile is slightly shorter than two kilometers". (Before the Dutch get confused: that dot is the seperator between 1 unit and 1/10th of a unit... not between thousands :-)

    9. Re:Metrics is a Milestone away by SpaceLifeForm · · Score: 1
      Actually, that would be worse than kilometers.

      1 mile = 1.609344 kilometers per Google.
      They really should have reported it as 440.8 furlongs.

      --
      You are being MICROattacked, from various angles, in a SOFT manner.
    10. Re:Metrics is a Milestone away by Barryke · · Score: 0, Redundant
      I see. Sorry!

      For the (alike me, myself and I) imperial challanged:
      mile <> kilometer
      1 = 1.61
      0.62 = 1
      55.1 = 88.67
      Conclusion; achieved distance was 88.67km.
      --
      Hivemind harvest in progress..
    11. Re:Metrics is a Milestone away by nebulus4 · · Score: 1, Funny

      1 mile = 1.609344 kilometers or for those of you who are into microelectronics it's 1609344000000 nanometers.

      --
      "It would be wrong to refuse to face the fact that everything is fundamentally sick and sad."
    12. Re:Metrics is a Milestone away by BorgDrone · · Score: 2, Informative
      Apart from it being in the US where imperial (miles) is the standard.
      Actually, Metric is the standard in the US since President Gerald R. Ford signed the Metric Conversion Act of 1975. However, conversion to metric was/is entirely voluntary (there used to be a 10 year deadline but it got dropped) so no-one actually switched.
    13. Re:Metrics is a Milestone away by wellard1981 · · Score: 1

      And if you were performing this type of achivement underwater, you'd get..

      55.1 miles = 48488 fathom

      1 fathom = 6 feet

      Google is great for mathmatical conversions! ;)

    14. Re:Metrics is a Milestone away by Anonymous Coward · · Score: -1, Troll

      i'm a USAian, and I know roughly how far a kilometer is... 3/5 of a mile. It's mind boggling that you outside the US don't understand that if you grow up in a society that uses one type of units, you get used to having a feel for what they mean, so other types have to be converted to grasp what they mean. Just like to you a mile is 1.6 kilometers. So get over it already and STFU.

    15. Re:Metrics is a Milestone away by Anonymous Coward · · Score: -1, Flamebait

      are you on drugs? or just stupid.

      there is 1.8KM per mile. slightly longer?

      is that what you tell your GF? mine is only 3 inches long other guys weenies are only slightly longer.

    16. Re:Metrics is a Milestone away by markov_chain · · Score: 5, Interesting

      I grew up in a metric society. I used to think metric units were superior until I lived in the US for a while, and found myself doing plenty of carpentry and DIY stuff where the most common units are inches and feet. I think the subdivision of a foot into 12 inches is fantastic; it allows one to easily divide dimensions into thirds, something that's a PITA in the metric world. In addition, the canonical subdivision of the inch into powers of 2 (1/2, 1/4, 1/8...) is convenient as well.

      Regarding your point about doing without metric, note that virtually all building materials come in imperial sizes. There is no need to know metric units in that environment.

      --
      Tsunami -- You can't bring a good wave down!
    17. Re:Metrics is a Milestone away by Anonymous Coward · · Score: -1, Troll

      Don't forget that the metric system was developed by the french.

      America is one of the nations standing up against faulty measurement systems developed by alcoholic liars!

    18. Re:Metrics is a Milestone away by spoonyfork · · Score: 1

      Actually, Metric is the standard in the US since President Gerald R. Ford signed the Metric Conversion Act of 1975. However, conversion to metric was/is entirely voluntary (there used to be a 10 year deadline but it got dropped) so no-one actually switched.

      The Metric Conversion Act of 1975 established the U.S. Metric Board to coordinate and plan the increasing use and voluntary conversion to the metric system. However, the Act was devoid of any target dates for metric conversion. In 1982 President Ronald Reagan disbanded the U.S. Metric Board and canceled its funding.

      If there are any doubts about the sluggish pace of adopting the metric system in the US, the major US stock exchanges switched from fractions to decimals a scant 3 years ago.

      --
      Speak truth to power.
    19. Re:Metrics is a Milestone away by davisshaver · · Score: 0, Troll

      Just like Windows is standard, and Apple is "better."

      --
      "What we have here is a failure to communicate"
      The Warden, Cool Hand Luke
    20. Re:Metrics is a Milestone away by elgatozorbas · · Score: 1

      I used to think metric units were superior until I lived in the US for a while, and found myself doing plenty of carpentry and DIY stuff where the most common units are inches and feet. I think the subdivision of a foot into 12 inches is fantastic; [cut] Regarding your point about doing without metric, note that virtually all building materials come in imperial sizes. There is no need to know metric units in that environment.

      That building materials come in imperial sizes is just a convention. In Europe they come in metrics, and where they don't, they should. Maybe imperial units are more conventient for building/DIY/whatever, but I fail to see their advantage for any kind of (scientific) calculation. Also, when converting dimensions, you never have to take into account strange factors like when going from inches to miles, just move the floating point (no bash intended).
      Z

    21. Re:Metrics is a Milestone away by mr_mischief · · Score: 1
      "If there are any doubts about the sluggish pace of adopting the metric system in the US, the major US stock exchanges switched from fractions to decimals a scant 3 years ago."

      ...which has nothing to do with metric. More precision was desired than the 1/8 dollar. Instead of going to 1/16 in a nation which already had decimal prices on everything else, tenths and hundredths made more sense. There's no such thing as a "metric dollar".

      I suppose you'd say that in Europe someone needs to cut a pie into ten equal slices? Get real.

    22. Re:Metrics is a Milestone away by markov_chain · · Score: 1

      I should've said "building materials in the US," since the parent comment was asking about Americans. Obviously, if they come in metric, knowing it will be much more useful. Still, having grown up in Europe, I found the decimal subdivision annoying.

      I agree that it is a superior system for scientific applications, and I believe it a standard system in use by scientists, even in the US. However, we have a case of optimizing the most common case here; I think it makes sense to use whatever system of measures is most convenient for the majority of uses out there. Given that the scientific uses are probably miniscule compared to personal ones, I just don't see a good reason to switch.

      --
      Tsunami -- You can't bring a good wave down!
    23. Re:Metrics is a Milestone away by dukeisgod · · Score: 1

      I cant see why miles are used. Is it to make the achieved distance look longer? What "looks longer" 55 miles or 88 kilometers?

    24. Re:Metrics is a Milestone away by spoonyfork · · Score: 1

      .. which has nothing to do with metric

      I never said the US stock exchanges going to decimal had anything to do with metric. It is just an example of how long it takes for the US institutions (government or otherwise) to switch from an old arcaic standard to a more modern one that is in line with the rest of the planet. Pieces of Eight are so pirate... and we all know zombies are the new pirate.

      I suppose you'd say that in Europe someone needs to cut a pie into ten equal slices? Get real.

      The real has already been gotten! I never said metric == decimal, it was a standard adoption comparison. No metric pies here, just real ones.

      Cheers!
      --
      Speak truth to power.
    25. Re:Metrics is a Milestone away by mcdade · · Score: 0, Flamebait

      You must be quite the rocket scientist, doing subdivision's of the 12 inches into a foot into fractions. Wow, no one would ever think that it would be easier then dividing something like that.. oh wait, you know it's even easier when it's power of 10's, unless you have a problem breaking a hundred dollar bill. While we are at it we should change the $10 bill to be $12 denominations, cause you can figure out the fractions of that really easily. Bring on the $6, $3 and the $1.50 bils too...

      It just seems easier when you are doing carpentry work because everything is measured to imperial, since bright guys like you can't figure out metric and the 'power of 10', it seems that this will be the last place that any sort of change can take place.

      Glad we have smart guys like you to sort us out.

    26. Re:Metrics is a Milestone away by cellocgw · · Score: 1

      I used to think metric units were superior until I lived in the US for a while, and found myself doing plenty of carpentry and DIY stuff where the most common units are inches and feet.
      Except that a carpentry inch isn't an inch.
      Unless "true dimensions" are called out, a 2x4, for example, is 1.5x3.5 inches. Strictly speaking,at least back when I was in Jr High shop, lumber measurements were +0,-0.5 inch to account for shrinkage as the wood dried after being cut.
      Anyway, the point is that you may think you have the same unit (inches) but you don't -- sort of like troy vs avdp or US vs imperial.

      --
      https://app.box.com/WitthoftResume Code: https://github.com/cellocgw
    27. Re:Metrics is a Milestone away by braindead · · Score: 1

      Scientific uses such as splitting your plank into five equal parts, for example?

    28. Re:Metrics is a Milestone away by jc42 · · Score: 1

      I think the subdivision of a foot into 12 inches is fantastic; it allows one to easily divide dimensions into thirds, ...

      Various mathematicians have explained why it would be so much better if we would switch to duodecimal (base 12) for all calculations. Somehow, I doubt if it will ever happen.

      Another funny thing is that some linguists and historians have argued that there was a competition between bases 10 and 12 in Europe around 2000 years ago. It seems that there are a lot of Roman writings in which the numbers make more sense if you assume they were base 12. This starts with some docs where, for example, both iiii and iv are used, as well as viiii and ix. Why would they do this unless they thought that these were different numbers? And there are some historic dates that don't seem to be consistent in base 10, but make more sense in base 12.

      The main linguistic evidence is that the Europoean languages all seem to have morphemes for the numbers from 1 to 12, and then the words become compound. It's not much, but it's one more item.

      It must have created a bit of confusion, since some Romans apparently did count in base 10, while others probably used base 12.

      But then the Arabs taught them a better way to write numbers, and it was all over for base 12.

      It may not have actually mattered all that much anyway, since Roman trade and engineering was mostly carried out in Greek, and they had their own number notation that was a base-10 system, much like the notation used in Hebrew. It was a bit clumsy, but a lot better than Roman notation (and not as good as Arabic).

      --
      Those who do study history are doomed to stand helplessly by while everyone else repeats it.
    29. Re:Metrics is a Milestone away by droleary · · Score: 1

      I think the subdivision of a foot into 12 inches is fantastic; it allows one to easily divide dimensions into thirds, something that's a PITA in the metric world.

      Yeah, because if I have a 25.4 cm board and I want thirds, it works out to a messy 8.46666... cm

      But with imperial, that's a 10 inch board that so easily splits into pieces that are 3.3333... inches!

      Fantastic! No, wait, the other thing. Moronic.

    30. Re:Metrics is a Milestone away by lachlan76 · · Score: 1

      The unit conversions aren't as easy though, and how quickly can you tell me how many feet are in 3.8 miles? That's where metric comes out ahead.

      I'd be fine with it if all imperial measurements were base-12, but it's the inconsistency between units that is why I don't like it.

      it allows one to easily divide dimensions into thirds, something that's a PITA in the metric world

      To be more accurate, you can't divide powers of ten by three. A third of 12cm is 4cm. A third of 10in is 3.333333 recurring inches.

    31. Re:Metrics is a Milestone away by elgatozorbas · · Score: 1

      Given that the scientific uses are probably miniscule compared to personal ones, I just don't see a good reason to switch.

      While I still do not agree completely, I can see your point. For me (as an engineer) the advantages of the metric system are obvious, but I am aware that this vision may be (IS) biased. It is a bit difficult (for me) to guess how much more inconvenient the metric system would be in American daily (non-scientific) life. Personally I have never regretted it [the metric system], even when building stuff, or making cookbook recipes.

      Something completely different: in the MS, there are some interesting relations, e.g. 1 liter of water equals about 1kg, which is very convenient for estimations of size and weight of most liquids. Are there similar relationships in the US?

      Z

  8. Customers freaking out... by mikael · · Score: 4, Funny

    Well, if someone parked outside my building, pointed a six foot dish at my office, and told me my wireless data needed encrypting, I'd probably freak out too.

    --
    Vintage computer adverts: http://www.vintageadbrowser.com/computers-and-software-ads
    1. Re:Customers freaking out... by aardwolf204 · · Score: 2, Funny

      Ahem, not to be a spelling nazi, but its

      I'd probably phreak out too.

      --
      Im dreaming ofa big bndwdth, That can resist the /.crowd.May ur days b merry & bright & may al
    2. Re:Customers freaking out... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Apparently the correct spelling is phreak in your world. He was talking to business people in the real world.

    3. Re:Customers freaking out... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      ha ha, laugh

    4. Re:Customers freaking out... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      There are business people in the real world?

    5. Re:Customers freaking out... by JamieF · · Score: 1

      >He was talking to business people in the real world.
      They don't read slashdot.

      They also don't care about security. Their IT people keep telling them not to install wide-open access points, and not to let random visitors plug in laptops, but they do it anyway.

    6. Re:Customers freaking out... by magarity · · Score: 1

      and told me my wireless data needed encrypting

      Oy, with a dish like that I'm suprised they don't pick up EM leakage from wired networking...

  9. Hawking their equipment? by djcapelis · · Score: 4, Funny

    Am I the only one who find it amusing that these guys roll in on a whim, break the record, win some stuff and immediately go hawk their equipment?

    Some good old hacking spirit right there...

    --
    I touch computers in naughty places
    1. Re:Hawking their equipment? by Xshare · · Score: 0

      I'll get modded down for this, but just as a tip, the word is "hock".

    2. Re:Hawking their equipment? by salm · · Score: 2, Informative

      Not where I am, nor, after a little Google:
      [google] define:hawk

      The verb "hawk" has 3 senses in WordNet.

      1. peddle, monger, huckster, hawk, vend, pitch -- (sell or offer for sale from place to place) ...

      whereas "hock" though I would have given you it, appears to have a different meaning

      The verb "hock" has 2 senses in WordNet.

      1. pawn, soak, hock -- (leave as a guarantee in return for money; "pawn your grandfather's gold watch") ...

      However, this mistake is as nothing to those who type "loose" when they mean "lose".
      http://www.wsu.edu/~brians/errors/lose.html

      --
      no time, no sig
    3. Re:Hawking their equipment? by dave420 · · Score: 1

      What mistake? They guy said hawk, which they did. They sold their equipment before coming back :)

    4. Re:Hawking their equipment? by MrWarMage · · Score: 1

      it's just a phonetic corruption. Most folks think "to hock" is to expectorate (q.v. "* a loogie"), or is a chunk of a pig, and "to hawk" is to sell your wares without the benefit of a retail front. Everyone at a booth or table in the dealer's room at your local sci-fi con is a hawker, by this collquial definition.

    5. Re:Hawking their equipment? by instarx · · Score: 1

      What the Cheney are you talking about? What you say makes no sense on many levels, but here is an easy one: do you think the kids were not telling their potential customers why they should buy this antenna? Wasn't that pitching it, a word that you used to define hawk?

  10. walls make difference by mihal · · Score: 0

    I live in an old-style "Stalin" house, some walls being more than 60cm (2ft) brick. standard OEM 802.11b "frog" won't shoot through 2 such walls. and that's a big pity :)

    --
    Sig. No Sig.
    1. Re:walls make difference by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Try placing pieces of metal near doors/windows/etc. and "bouncing" the signal off them, like a light beam.

      This also works well outdoors by bouncing signals off water towers or billboards.

  11. This FP for G@MNAA by Anonymous Coward · · Score: -1, Troll

    of business and was are allOwed to play are a pathetic large - kkep your some of you have later seen in visions going and sling or table

  12. Transfer speed by barcodez · · Score: 4, Interesting

    I would be interested to know what kind of transfer speed they got at that distance.

    --

    ----
    1. Re:Transfer speed by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0, Funny

      0.1 bit/s. They were actually doing smoke signals. (Don't grumble, it counts as unamplified wireless)

  13. Help for rural areas? by grunt107 · · Score: 4, Interesting

    Althought the article does not mention it, it does not seem like the hardware used to accomplish this was all that advanced.

    If that is the case, their technology could be implemented in limited population density areas, tying back to the somewhat larger urban areas.

    Take for example Iowa. There are many areas over 30 miles from any town larger than 15-30k.
    Surprisingly enough, these 'large' towns have cable/phone (DSL) access.

    So now the remote areas can be wifi attached to the bigger towns/cities and get the faster access (although 11b is not screaming it is better than modem).

    1. Re:Help for rural areas? by jdmetz · · Score: 2, Interesting

      although 11b is not screaming it is better than modem

      Assuming you could actually get 11mbps over that distance, that would be screaming compared to most cable or DSL access. The fastest DSL available in the city of 100k I live in is 6mbps downstream and 1.5mbps upstream.

    2. Re:Help for rural areas? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      I think they used an Orinoco Gold Card

      http://www.wired.com/news/culture/0,1284,64440,00. html

    3. Re:Help for rural areas? by Sporkinum · · Score: 1

      I live in Iowa, and most of the small towns have fiber as part of the Iowa communications network. Iowa has a ton of indepenent phone coops who supply internet service.

      I live in a small town in Iowa of 1300 people and I have 1Mb x 128k ADSL for $40 month.

      Good idea for areas not wired though.

      --
      "He's lost in a 'floyd hole"
    4. Re:Help for rural areas? by Sporkinum · · Score: 1

      Forgot to add that there is a company in Marshaltown called Dynamic Broadband that sells wireless broadband for pretty reasonable rates to rural communities.

      --
      "He's lost in a 'floyd hole"
    5. Re:Help for rural areas? by boiscout · · Score: 1

      There's already a company doing this in rural Iowa towns. I can't seem to find the website right off hand, but they basically run a link out to some farmers silo and then put a wireless link on top of the silo so that people from miles around have wireless internet.

      Infact, the entire city of Ames, Iowa is covered with wireless access through this type of setup.

      --
      "Shut up about my driving. You're still alive."
    6. Re:Help for rural areas? by TheScorpion420 · · Score: 0

      I live in Iowa, in a small town of about 1000(Runnells for Iowa folk) and I have nothing but satellite internet. The aforementioned wireless internet company doesn't serve here, btw they're called Prairie Inet. Mediacom cable doesn't come out here, actually their service ends about a mile outside of town, and Qwest DSL, hah! There are teleco boxes out here that the line technicians won't even open because they are afraid they will fall apart. I would kill for 11b access to some sort of high speed internet. I live about 15 miles southeast of Des Moines(Capital city) and as stated before there is nothing faster than 53 kbps.

      --
      If you pay your taxes you support terrorism!
    7. Re:Help for rural areas? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Hmm... "limited population density areas". They failed to mention they were in the DESERT where there are no obstructions other than sage brush and maybe a few rolling hills...and the casinos of Vegas.

    8. Re:Help for rural areas? by xgamer04 · · Score: 1

      I live in a town of 1000 people in Minnesota, about 80 miles away from any town bigger than 20k, and I have ADSL service. It might seem like the boonies wouldn't have access to these types of services, but you'd be surprised.

      --
      When you look at the state of the world, how can you not become a radical, liberal anarchist?
  14. Reception enhancing device by tezza · · Score: 1
    They must have been wind assisted.

    Seriously, at what stage does Planetary alignment, Solar Flares or wind direction start to have a bigger effect than technology??

    I did quite a few Elec Eng subjects as part of my degree, and this stuff seems mind boggling.

    --
    [% slash_sig_val.text %]
    1. Re:Reception enhancing device by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1, Informative

      Wind doesn't really affect radio waves that I am aware. Solar Flares, on the other hand do, but their impact on this portion of the spectrum (GHz) is minimal. Get up into the 10meter or 20meter bands and a good solar storm can knock out the ability to transmit for hours or longer.

  15. the horror! by caino59 · · Score: 1, Funny

    This year they faced only the heat and the absence of bathrooms and fresh beer for miles around.

    that's just a tragedy.

    1. Re:the horror! by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      This year they faced only the heat and the absence of bathrooms and fresh beer for miles around.

      that's just a tragedy.

      That explains why the winners were only 18-19 years old - all the other contestants got smashed drinking warm Michelob.

  16. Congrats to these kids by vbrookslv · · Score: 5, Insightful

    I was there in the front row at the awards ceremony at DC12. These kids remind me of myself just a few years ago when I just picked up and moved to Vegas. Wasn't even sure if I had enough money for gas (good thing I was driving a Festiva @~45mpg). I guess this is a good case for those who say that all kids today are slackers.

    For those who do not know, this contest was held in (and around) Vegas, when it was 110+ outside. These guys were dragging equipment up the side of a mountain to get this link. For those who would give these kids sh**, try dragging a 10ft dish(3.048 meters for you metric weenies) several hundred feet up a mountain, and then getting them aligned 55 miles apart, all in 110+f(43c) weather. There was no big 4x4's, they drove dads busted-a** minivan from Ohio for this. Sure, NASA could probably do better, but come'on, this was an amateur thing, and just something cool to do. No big prizes (they won like a couple-hundred bucks in Best Buy gift certs, and some gear).

    If I had a had on, it would be off to these kids for some ingenuity and determination.

    1. Re:Congrats to these kids by vbrookslv · · Score: 1

      DOH!!

      If I had a haT on, it would be off to these kids for some ingenuity and determination.

    2. Re:Congrats to these kids by Your_Mom · · Score: 2, Informative

      I believe it was $1500 in Gift Certs for the three of them. $500 for 3 catagories (Longest unamped, Longest homebrew antenna, Longest overall)

      The also got oodles of wireless goodies.

      --
      Objects in the blog are closer then they ap
    3. Re:Congrats to these kids by Anonymous Coward · · Score: -1

      I think we all know what you meant to say. You just need to lose that Boston accent...you're not even doing it right. it should be "haahd on". As in "wicked haahd".

    4. Re:Congrats to these kids by Anonymous Coward · · Score: -1

      Oh okay... I thought you were trying to say you had a "hard on" for these kids.

    5. Re:Congrats to these kids by Render_Man · · Score: 2, Interesting

      I was in the second row, middle block 3rd seat in from speakers left. I probobly have a picture of the back of your head there vbrookslv.

      I was blown away by these guys too. It was most impressive because they had the stuff lying around, made a decision to enter and did it. Despite parents objections they made the trip and got a standing ovation and a heap of well earned praise.

      They did'nt brute force it by just adding more power (they said they were only at about 600mw), they just sat down and did the math to build the dish right. Far more design thought than several people I still see claiming pringles cans are the greatest.

      I just love the fact they also build some targeting equipment and were using linear actuators to align the dishes. Just brilliant. I wish them the best, and a safe drive home.

      --
      Where are we going, and why are we in this hand cart?
    6. Re:Congrats to these kids by carbolic · · Score: 1
      Don't forget that they tried it with the 600mw amp, got a signal and won, then DISCONNECTED THE AMP to use the plain old 30mw Lucent Orinoco card!

      Lucent Orinoco - the original wardriver's card.

      And another tidbit: The Lucent card was installed in the Lucent PCMCIA to USB converter connected to the laptop. And I think the laptop was running a software access point.

      These guys did all the right things.

    7. Re:Congrats to these kids by vbrookslv · · Score: 1

      I was in the second row, middle block 3rd seat in from speakers left.

      If your handle is accurate, I seem to recall you spent alot of time onstage yourself..?

    8. Re:Congrats to these kids by Render_Man · · Score: 1

      Yeah that was me. Won the Fox&Hound Minigame. Not wanting to toot my horn at all, These kids did alot more than I did and deserve the attention and I hope to compete against them next year.

      --
      Where are we going, and why are we in this hand cart?
  17. classic by Anonymous Coward · · Score: -1

    now that's a /. thread actually worth reading for the entertainment value. just goes to show a little bit of skill, a lot of desire and time can result in innovative things.

  18. I'm in Ohio, and Miles are it... by 192939495969798999 · · Score: 2, Funny

    Miles on the speedometer, miles on the road signs, and 55 mph is a common speed limit, so that 55 mile record means I could drive about an hour away and still get the signal, which in Ohio would be the complete middle of nowhere! Of course, in Ohio it doesn't even matter where you start from, if you drive for exactly one hour in the same direction at 55 mph you will be in the middle of nowhere.

    --
    stuff |
    1. Re:I'm in Ohio, and Miles are it... by AJYeary · · Score: 1

      Amen to that from another Ohio dweller. Then again, I live in the middle of nowhere, so if I drive an hour in almost any direction, I actually end up somewhere! (If I head northeast, I end up in Columbus. If I head south, I end up in Cincinatti.)

      ~aj~

    2. Re:I'm in Ohio, and Miles are it... by Mattwolf7 · · Score: 1
      "When the end of the world comes, I want to be in Cincinnati. Everything happens ten years later there." -- Mark Twain

      Yep... I'm a Cincinnati native...

  19. I'll do it better than them. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    55 mile? Huh! I can make 25000 mile (=40000Km) WiFi-connection.

  20. Dumb and dumber quote: by AgentPhunk · · Score: 0

    "I expected the Rocky Mountains to be a little rockier than this."
    "I was thinkin' the same thing. That John Denver's fulla shit, man."

  21. 200mW Engenius cards by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1, Interesting

    They must have been using this card
    http://keenansystems.com/store/engenius_senao_200m w_pcmcia_card_with_mmcx_connectors_2511-cd-plus-ex t2.htm

    1. Re:200mW Engenius cards by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      They were using 2 32 mW orinoco cards and aiming equipment. Also, one of their dads is an RF Engineer.

    2. Re:200mW Engenius cards by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      They were standard Orinoco cards

    3. Re:200mW Engenius cards by bscience · · Score: 2, Informative

      Actually, they were 30mw Lucent Orinoco cards. Impressed yet?

  22. Wifi IS GHz by elgatozorbas · · Score: 1

    You can't really beat a 5/8 wavelength groundplane, and they're easy to make. (at lower frequencies anyway, not sure about ghz)
    What do you mean exactly, as you probably know Wifi IS GHz (2.4)? This is rather at the end of the range where it is interesting to build non-dish based antennas. At low frequencies, the structures tend to get very big (~wavelength, of course), and at higher freqs, construction tolerances kill you...
    Z

    1. Re:Wifi IS GHz by v1 · · Score: 2, Informative

      Ya I know, a 5/8 groundplane is not a very practical idea in the ghz range, though it's certainly possible. Critical tolerances at that point are well down to the 1mm and below range though, that would not be a fun project to undertake.

      I want to play with http://www.rangeextender.com/224pagransy.html if I get the time someday. 24 DBI gain. I've recommended it to some of our customers, several of whom have bought one, and so far, everybody is quite pleased with them. One of these on one end (and a regular omni on the other end) will blast through building after building to get to the other base station. It's also fully weather-proof and built sturdy, unlike those pringles can jokes.

      --
      I work for the Department of Redundancy Department.
  23. It's a fraud... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: -1, Troll

    The curvature of the earth prevents you from doing connections nearly that long unless you use towers, and these guys didn't. Due to the fresnel zone, the curvature is even more of a limitation than you would expect.

    This brings the next question, why does /. keep posting stories with these fake claims. Let's use some common sense. When 802.11 wireless doesn't work reliably at 200 yards even with nice directional antennas, why in the world would someone believe 55 miles!

    1. Re:It's a fraud... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1, Funny

      not a fraud, just that you are stupid.

      Read thre article instead of sounding like a turets victim spouting stupidity from your face.

      Fresnel means nothing in directed DISH communications.. they had approximately 200db of gain at BOTH ENDS plus there was a tiny issue of BEING ON A FRICKING MOUNTIAN for the Z end.

      wow, your immense stupidity is blinding... The stupidness field you are generating is destorying the minds that are around you.

    2. Re:It's a fraud... by ASLRulz · · Score: 4, Informative

      As one of the judges, I can provide the GPS coordinates and you can use your favorite topo maps to determine if it is indeed possible. We will be putting up images and data on the contest page as well as www.adversarialsciencelab.net website sometime today.

    3. Re:It's a fraud... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      > Fresnel means nothing in directed DISH communications

      Wrong. Why would you think the shape of the antenna would change physical laws? It doesn't.

    4. Re:It's a fraud... by bill_mcgonigle · · Score: 1

      You probably know more about this that most - a comment in the previous Slashdot on the subject argued that at 200ft the horizon was at about 34 miles and that 2.4ghz waves don't follow the curvature of the earth, making that a top limit.

      Did the team come up with different numbers? Perhaps the terrain has a significant elevation change?

      --
      My God, it's Full of Source!
      OUTSIDE_IP=$(dig +short my.ip @outsideip.net)
  24. mo3 u4 by Anonymous Coward · · Score: -1

    to fight what has codeu sharing r3al problems that

  25. Tropospheric ducting by Dan+East · · Score: 3, Informative

    When we start talking about setting and breaking distance records using any type of RF, atmospheric conditions will undoubtedly play a factor. A phenomenon known as Tropospheric Ducting can redirect a short wavelength signal back down to earth, allowing further than line of sight communication.

    While this would be great for setting communication record, it would not allow for long-term reliable communication.

    Dan East

    --
    Better known as 318230.
    1. Re:Tropospheric ducting by n9mdh · · Score: 1

      Altitude, time of day and weather information would have been helpful. While I doubt tropospheric ducting (TrD) was in play, tropospheric enhancement (TrE) is certainly a possibility. The large scale, generally persistent and often highly directional nature of TrD would have benefitted all the contestants. (TrD turns a chunk of sky into a pipe-- a fairly efficient waveguide, all things considered.) TrE on the other hand is sporadic, more likely at certain times of the day, and more likely in certain weather patterns. TrE can benefit one particular path at one particular moment, and then not affect other seemingly identical attempts. It's similar to a distant station that's normally a little scratchy coming in well on your FM car radio once in a while. That's TrE. TrD is happening when you're getting tons of FM stations that you normally never hear. Of course, since they used 3m dishes (what, about 40 dB at 2.4GHz?) this can only mean someone will bring 4m or bigger dishes next year. I'm afraid it's going to turn into a dish moving contest. A more fair standard of excellence would be based on total ERP (effective radiated power) and distance. We're talking about efficiency, not gun power. Any idiot can get turn up the power. I want to know who can use their transmitter power most efficiently-- and over the same course.

    2. Re:Tropospheric ducting by shiftless · · Score: 1

      55 miles is well within line of sight (LOS) range. There is no way they were using tropo scatter as it takes a lot more power than 600 mW to do a tropo shot (try 300-400 watts instead). Ducting, as you mentioned, only really comes into play in a tropo shot, not LOS. The reason I know all this is because my job in the U.S. Air Force involves working with TRC-170 tropo equipment.

      For those not in the know, tropospheric scatter, or tropo, is the technique of bouncing a signal (typically UHF) off the troposphere and back down to Earth at some remote location (up to around 150 miles), beyond the normal radio horizon (maximum distance you can do a line of sight shot).

      For what it's worth, these guys did pretty good, though their equipment wasn't too efficient. One of the pieces of equipment we use in the Air Force is the Tropospheric Satellite Support Radio, or TSSR, which is a small radio equipped with either a 1 foot or 2 foot dish. The 1 foot version can transmit up to 10 miles, the 2 foot version 25 miles. So I would hazard a guess that this same radio, equipped with a 3 or 4 foot dish, could hit the 55 mile distance if not more. In addition it will support four full T1s of data at any distance in its range.

      But these guys did a great job working with the limited equipment they had. Especially being untrained. They deserve all the praise they've gotten.

  26. Partial sponsor by Lawbeefaroni · · Score: 5, Funny

    From the article:
    Wired magazine helped sponsor the contest.

    What's the word? Irony? Misnomer?

    --
    "When it rains, it pours." --Morton's Salt
    1. Re:Partial sponsor by value_added · · Score: 0, Flamebait

      Very observant, but your word choices are a bit off.

      By "off" I mean the opposite of appropriate, suitable, befitting or apt.

  27. Interesting Guys by HoldenCaulfield · · Score: 4, Informative

    Being a former Cinci resident, I was a bit curious about these guys, and google-stalked them . . .

    Looks like they all went to St. Xavier, a pretty well respected (in both athletics and academics) prep school.

    Here's a picture of Ben when he was a junior, winning a theater award for sound production.

    Meng's got a website here that's a bit outdated, but considering the projects were from his junior year in high school, rather impressive. Seems he was a HAM radio guy.

    Running out of time, the first link I found for Justin Rigling was this link. One more connection to the guy, since I use to work for AK Steel. The little blurb about the scholarship does make him sound like a stereotypical geek (JETS, Science Olympiad, Robotics, Math, and Photography clubs, etc etc). A bit of a contrast to his sister. Not exactly what you'd expect from the son of a steelmaker . . .

    Okay, enough being a stalker . . .

  28. Next time... by chamcham · · Score: 0
    I'd like to see the Wi-Fi shootout goal to be coverage area. This could also benefit MeshNets as well.

    Although, I would be interested to know the antenna gain and RF power they were using this years 55mi link. For most of us, unamplified is about 35mW give or take, but you can also get 200mW cards which will get you a whole lot more distance 'unamplified' than with the 35mW cards.

    Then to get Effective Radiated Power (ERP) you need to know the antenna gain. Every 3 db of gain will double your power. 100mw from your transmitter into a 3db antenna will give you 200mw output, assuming you have 0db cable loss.

    So if they were feeding 200mW into a 23db (example figure) dish they would have a focused beam putting out 200mW*2^(23/3) which is 40W. And if you're feeding it with a 35mW card, its still 7W.

    Neat.

  29. rarefied air? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    anyone know how the atmospheric conditions played into this? seems to me that at 110 degrees of hot dry air, there's probably a lot less 'stuff' to push the signal through than say a hot steamy Wisconsin/Iowa/Minnesota/etc summer day. I know there's a point where they don't land planes because the air isn't thick enough to hold them up at landing speeds... so maybe with less air it dramatically increases the distance the signal can travel. They should put a cheap AP and dish on the ISS, we may not be able to war drive it from down here, but could, say, the Mars rover with a good dish?

  30. Satellite Dishes and FCC Rules by wayward · · Score: 1

    Here's an article about using a surplus Primestar Dish to make an IEEE 802.11 wireless antenna http://www.wwc.edu/~frohro/Airport/Primestar/Prime star.html
    Here's another one. http://www5.cs.cornell.edu/~eckstrom/802.11a/prime star/

    As the first article notes, there are some FCC rules about antenna use within the US. Would the Defcon product be within these limits? The Wired article didn't seem to say.

    1. Re:Satellite Dishes and FCC Rules by russotto · · Score: 1

      They used 9.5" satellite dishes. Gain on those things is somewhere around 40dBi, a quick google seems to reveal. Power output on the cards is 15dBm, for an EIRP of 65dBm. FCC limit is 4 watts, or 36dBm. However, on directional links for every 1dB you drop below 1W on the transmitter, you are allowed 3 more dBi in antenna power. They are 15dBm below 1 watt, which allows them 30dBm over the 4W limit -- so at 65dBm, they are barely legal!

  31. Ummm Come on Timothy read the article. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    The link was AMPLIFIED and used parabolic/enhanced antenna designs. A well designed directional antenna will amplify the directed signal in the form of gain. However it is hardly unaided.

    -AC

    1. Re:Ummm Come on Timothy read the article. by carbolic · · Score: 1
      The link was amplified (600 mw) at that distance first, then they switched to unamplified (30 mw) and still maintained a connection.

      Also, antennas do not amplify signals, the can only increase gain by shaping the beam pattern. The effect can be the same, though.

  32. Anybody hacking lasers? by WillWare · · Score: 2, Informative
    The only reason to go for wifi distance records is to build an indie Ashcroft-proof internet. It should be possible to route IP packets over inexpensive laser pointers for pretty large distances. I'm not aware that much is being done with this. I found several instances of people doing RS-232 over laser, but very little about IP over laser.
    --
    WWJD for a Klondike Bar?
    1. Re:Anybody hacking lasers? by cr0sh · · Score: 1
      Not laser, but if you look up the RONJA system, it uses large bright arrays of LEDs - I am pretty sure it is IP based.

      I know that commercially, there are systems like AirFiber that use lasers...

      The biggest problems with lasers is that they really don't shoot very far, unless you can get them into watt range (not milliwatt) - and those aren't cheap. I think with a standard red laser pointer, and some good optics and alignment, you might be able to get a few km distance - but not much more (and alignment will be a real pain). Of course, I would love somebody to prove me wrong, and I support the idea of P2P wireless freenets...

      --
      Reason is the Path to God - Anon
    2. Re:Anybody hacking lasers? by lachlan76 · · Score: 1

      A tree is a lot more of an obstacle to a 1mW red laser pointer than it is to 2.4GHz microwaves.

  33. Re: extend tiBook airport range by cellocgw · · Score: 1

    IIRC someone like Dr Bott or Kensington or thelike sells an antenna enhancer kit that fits on or into the tiBook cover. See if you can track one of those down.

    --
    https://app.box.com/WitthoftResume Code: https://github.com/cellocgw
  34. Ham record is 82 mi by wsanders · · Score: 2, Informative

    From QST magazine (http://www.arrl.org/news/stories/2003/12/10/3/):

    "Amateurs complete 82-mile two-way DSSS link on 2.4 GHz: ARRL High Speed Multimedia (HSMM) Working Group member Ken Cuddeback, NT7K, reports that his students at Weber State University in Ogden, Utah, recently completed two-way direct-sequence spread spectrum (DSSS) communication on 2.4 GHz over a distance of 82 miles. The WSU students--which include one ham, Brandon Checketts, KG4NZV, and several prospective licensees--broke the current world record of establishing a wireless link on 2.4 GHz with DSSS (using IEEE 802.11b "Wi-Fi" protocol). "Please join me in congratulating Ken and his students on this fantastic accomplishment!" said ARRL HSMM Working Group Chairman John Champa, K8OCL. Cuddeback says his students used PrimeStar dishes with unamplified Cisco Aironet 350 cards in each laptop. "We set up a NetMeeting session and transferred a 2.5 MB mp3 file successfully," he said. The Cisco Wi-Fi cards run about 100 mW."

    --
    Give a man a fish and you have fed him for today. Teach a man to fish, and he'll say "WHERE'S MY FISH, YOU IDIOT?"
  35. After reading the article by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    I'm a little more and less impressed their Trig is topnotch that's forsure. With WiFi it's all about the diamiter of your braudcasting dish, so yeah if you can get a 100M dish bruadcasting at ~2.4ghtz you'll get 60+ miles in a average city. The challenge is getting that saturation to be in circles not in just ONE fucking direction

  36. Actually, the US is a "metric" country by jc42 · · Score: 1

    Actually, Metric is the standard in the US since President Gerald R. Ford signed the Metric Conversion Act of 1975.

    There was a funny NRP article back in the 1980s about the non-celebration of the 100th anniversary of the US going metric.

    They had to explain, of course. It seems that the US, like most countries, has never actually had a legally-enforced standard system of measurements. Rather, there is a government bureau (whose name has changed several times) that defines official meanings to units of measurements. They basically just say "If you are to use units like ounces or grams or inches or meters, you must use our definitions of those units, else you'll be liable to charges of consumer fraud."

    The official definitions of the units have changed occasionally, as newer and more precise means of measuring were developed. What happened in the 1880's is that the standards bureau decided that the most precise system at that time was the one in Paris. So they redefined all the Imperial units in terms of the metric units. At that time, the metric system became the basic legal units in the US, but all the other units were also legally defined. This situation has continued to this day.

    So when you read that an inch is 2.54 cm, that's not an approximation. It is exact, because in the US, that has been the legal definition of an inch for about 125 years.

    Some people have characterized the US system as an "extended metric system". They probably say or write this with an evil grin on their faces. We all know what "extended" means in such phrases.

    (So "embrace and extend" wasn't invented by Microsoft; the US government has used it for over a century. ;-)

    The closest that the US government has come to establishing SI units as a legal requirement has been in decreeing that certain products must be labelled in SI units. Most kinds of food and medicine are covered by this now, though they may also be labelled in Imperial units. Some manufacturers have gone to SI units only, for simplicity, but not very many. Usually the conversion has happened when there was an influx of imported goods. Thus, around half the cars sold in the US now come from other countries. It's a bother to have half your parts metric and half Imperial, so there has been a slow move to all-metric car parts. But the change has been slow.

    We'll probably never change over completely.

    --
    Those who do study history are doomed to stand helplessly by while everyone else repeats it.
    1. Re:Actually, the US is a "metric" country by russotto · · Score: 1

      The original metric inch was 1/39.37 meter (now called a "US survey inch". The current 2.54 cm inch came later (1959). This is important(?) when figuring speeds in furlongs per fortnight, because US furlongs are defined in terms of survey feet, not the later, international feet.

    2. Re:Actually, the US is a "metric" country by jc42 · · Score: 1

      Hmmm ... I've seen the term "survey inch", but I'd never seen it defined, or realized that it wasn't quite the same as an "inch". Ya learn something new here every day.

      (In this case, I learned that the US system of measurements is even more demented than I'd thought. ;-)

      There are also those "fishermen's rulers" that you see in sporting-good stores. I wonder if NIST has officially defined any of them ...

      --
      Those who do study history are doomed to stand helplessly by while everyone else repeats it.
  37. Experience from N+I by blackrobe28 · · Score: 1

    I was on the N+I InteropNet Team in Las Vegas this year and one of the projects that I was able to play with was the Arruba/Airmagnet wireless rollout. It absolutely amazed me the number of vendors who didn't bother to contact the InteropNet admin ahead of time because they thought they could drag in their equipment, setup a 802.11b bridge and feed all their network needs wirelessly.

    Even worse was that some of the vendors came in days before everybody else and, since their wireless bridge was working, refused to accept our FREE help in connecting directly to the network backbone. The day before the show floor opened all the newly arrived vendors flipped on their own wireless equipment and flooded the Las Vegas Convention Center with over 1200 distinct SSIDs across all channels. We scrambled to setup enough APs and track down problem spots for reconfiguration. While troubleshooting the chaos, I even heard one vendor say "well... why don't we just jack up our power and burn through all the interference!"

    I absolutely applaud Defcon's wireless shootout, but I'm wondering if another segment of the test would be to subject the teams to the kind of interference that is common in a major metropolitan area. I would also love to see these guys switch over to 802.11a equipment which is vastly superior in dealing with interference.

    --
    Blackrobe "The Original TechnoWeenie!"
  38. Contest Info by ASLRulz · · Score: 1

    All, check out http://www.wifi-shootout.com/home.html for the winning contest info (including GPS readings). We will be posting pictures soon.