Slashdot Mirror
NYT on Cell Phone Tower Controversy
prostoalex writes "The New York Times discusses the controversy of placing cell phone towers on top of hills, a practice to which many people object. According to the article, people frequently complain about the visual impediment and are afraid that property values will decline or some health damage will be done with radio waves. At the same time, people get quite irritated when proper phone service is not provided by the operators, and the calls keep dropping or coverage is poor outside of densely populated areas. Phone companies also lease the land to place the cell phone tower for $30,000-$50,000, which is attractive to many landowners, but some, like Sammy Barsa from NYT article, find themselves persona non grata in the community."
'Standards' in computing only impress those who are impressed by things like 'standards'.
I bet these people would bitch up a storm if their radios stopped working. You can't have your cake and eat it too.
Le français vous intéresse?
By the time they retire, even in a few short years from now, good cell phone coverage in the home will be a *boost* to property value.
And just think, you can then use the GPRS coverage to connect to the Internet and learn to spell.
Or research minor cellular telephone concepts like how AT&T and Verizon signal quality has no (positive) effect on Sprint signal quality.
Terrorists can attack freedom, but only Congress can destroy it.