Slashdot Mirror


BPL: The Internet's Fool's Gold

Joe Barr writes "One of the more fascinating tidbits of information I came across while researching this story on NewsForge about BPL, the fatally flawed wannabe-broadband-provider technology, was that at the very same time the FCC was downplaying the threat of the interference BPL creates, the FCC's very own test results were showing just the opposite."

300 comments

  1. suits. by Catatonic+Dismay · · Score: 0, Offtopic

    There have already been many lawsuits. Expect even more.

    --
    rm -rf ~/.signature
    1. Re:suits. by jd · · Score: 2, Funny

      Law Suit (n): A PHB who thinks they're a lawyer.

      --
      It's a small world and it smells funny; I'd buy another if it wasn't for the money; Take back what I paid (SoM)
  2. Quick Q by thisnow1 · · Score: 1

    BPL? I thought this stuff was all done and over with? Anybody able to clarify? (BTW, I RTFA)

    1. Re:Quick Q by connorbd · · Score: 2, Informative

      It's circling the drain, but not dead yet. Most hams and shortwave listeners would love for it to go away, as would anyone who has to use the HF frequencies.

    2. Re:Quick Q by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Sure. The controvery over BPL is focused around its huge wall murals portraying the evolution of religion, from primative "polythesitic" religions through Judaism to Christianity, which is portrayed as the summit of religious evolution. More controversially, restoration has begun on a mural called "Synagogue", in which an old woman wearing a blindfold and a crown stumbles as the walls fall around her, portraying the demise of the Jewish faith.

  3. So when is BPL available? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    I want 10Mbps down for $10 a month

  4. Thank Slashdot as well by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 5, Informative

    Was Slashdot any better with its breathless stories about "The Myth of Radio Spectrum Interference", "The Illusion of Spectrum Scarcity", and so on?

    1. Re:Thank Slashdot as well by Jeremy+Erwin · · Score: 5, Informative
      It should be pointed out that Ham radios (nor most any other affected device) are not the smart receivers David Reed has in mind.

      From Salon's article:

      The problem isn't with the radio waves. It's with the receivers: "Interference cannot be defined as a meaningful concept until a receiver tries to separate the signal. It's the processing that gets confused, and the confusion is highly specific to the particular detector," Reed says. Interference isn't a fact of nature. It's an artifact of particular technologies. This should be obvious to anyone who has upgraded a radio receiver and discovered that the interference has gone away: The signal hasn't changed, so it has to be the processing of the signal that's improved. The interference was in the eye of the beholder all along. Or, as Reed says, "Interference is what we call the information that a particular receiver is unable to separate."
    2. Re:Thank Slashdot as well by connorbd · · Score: 3, Insightful

      That's kind of a truism. Thing is, he's advising a ground-up solution. There's no room for tearing down the infrastructure to rebuild from scratch -- you have to work within the existing framework. If he was in Marconi's position and had the ability to redefine the radio world in terms of his theories, I'd call him a genius. But what he's looking for is simply undoable, so I call him a kook.

    3. Re:Thank Slashdot as well by tarball · · Score: 4, Interesting

      As an electrical engineer who majored in microprocessor based design and minored in RF design, I would say -

      1) Reed's ideas aren't even decent vaporware yet.
      2) Reed's ideas are going to have problems with the fact that antennas aren't broadbanded enough. And when they are, they are directional (often the wrong ones), and still not very broadbanded. And don't think fractal antennas will work, because they don't work well at all.
      3) Most important - his ideas have nothing to do with the HF section of the spectrum.

      tom
      K0TAR

      --
      I hate sigs, and refuse to have one.
    4. Re:Thank Slashdot as well by tcgroat · · Score: 1

      Reed did not overturn Shannon's theorem. Yes, upgrading an inferior receiver can make a world of difference. But when you start with a receiver that is performing well, close to the channel capacity limit per Shannon's theorem, you encounter diminishing returns (Zeno's paradox). Software Defined Radio and sophisticated analog technology can help you approach a bit closer to the channel limit, but nothing known to man can beat it.

    5. Re:Thank Slashdot as well by mferrier · · Score: 1

      Notice both stories were posted by michael? Good riddance to the worst mod in slashdot history.

  5. Re:BPL == Bastard Public License by thisnow1 · · Score: 1

    That's the wrong BPL. This BPL is about Broadband access through powerlines. In theory a darn clever idea, but a lot of obstacles apparently. Anybody with the know-how able to enlighten?

  6. BPL over quantum wires? by Spy+der+Mann · · Score: 1, Interesting

    Has anyone calculated the interference of BPL over quantum wires?

    1. Re:BPL over quantum wires? by D-Cypell · · Score: 1

      Surprisingly..... no.

    2. Re:BPL over quantum wires? by youknowmewell · · Score: 3, Funny

      No, I've been too busy making artificial diamonds so that I could connect them to my new GPU to squeeze out that extra percentage of performance, so that I could calculate just how many LoC per-second I could transfer using BPL.

    3. Re:BPL over quantum wires? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      No, I've been too busy feather-coating my car in a sure-fire bid to construct a hovercraft.

  7. FCC favors business over public interest ?!? by javaxman · · Score: 5, Interesting
    Say it's not so! I'm shocked !
    Where is the administration looking out for the public interest that I've become so accustomed to?!?

    What's that you say? Someone from the White House told them to get broadband-over-power-lines through no matter what, even if it destroys HAM radio and other public-use frequencies through interference? Why on earth would anyone do that? There isn't any corruption or corporate favoritism in Washington, is there?!?

    What do you mean lawyers outnumber engineers at the FCC by a near-infinite margin!?! How could that be so?!?

    1. Re:FCC favors business over public interest ?!? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Don't be shocked, just remember that the Bush regime values faith, not facts.

    2. Re:FCC favors business over public interest ?!? by arodland · · Score: 1

      My "public interest" would be nicely served by actually being able to get broadband. And I have power lines.

    3. Re:FCC favors business over public interest ?!? by po8 · · Score: 5, Insightful

      Parent wrote " My `public interest' would be nicely served by actually being able to get broadband. And I have power lines."

      Which is why this stupid idea is so seductive. Everybody wants broadband, everybody has power lines. What's the problem?

      (1) It doesn't work, and really can't work. (2) It has bad negative consequences for other systems (forget ham radio, and consider the emergency radio bands it overlaps). (3) Even if it did work, it would be more expensive and less available than current broadband channels.

      I mean, everybody who wants broadband probably has water pipes, too. Why not broadband over tapwater? Pulse-modulate the chlorine and fluorine levels in the pipes, and read the bits right off there... BPL isn't much more sensible than BT when you look at it closely.

    4. Re:FCC favors business over public interest ?!? by quarkscat · · Score: 1

      All sarcasm aside, apparently you have stepped through a rift in the time-space continuum from an alternate universe.

      (And thus proving the "String Theorum"... )

      When yoe do go back to your home universe, please take me with you.

    5. Re:FCC favors business over public interest ?!? by surprise_audit · · Score: 1

      Remember Dr Andrew Tanenbaums's comment: "Never underestimate the bandwidth of a station wagon full of tapes." And then there's IP-over-carrier-pigeon...

    6. Re:FCC favors business over public interest ?!? by dcam · · Score: 2, Funny

      There was a dilbert cartoon a little while ago where the Pointy Haird Boss asked Dilbert to research broadband over sewage, basically on the same principle.

      --
      meh
    7. Re:FCC favors business over public interest ?!? by pklong · · Score: 1

      I remember an article from way back, where they figured out a way to clamp a fibre optic cable to the top of the inside of a drain pipe using a robot. So your suggestion is maybe not so silly...

      --

      Philip

      Signatures are broken

    8. Re:FCC favors business over public interest ?!? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      OK, so you write your address on a golf ball, tie a long fiber-optic cable to it, and flush it.

      Somewhere it has to come out, and now there are fiber-optic cables running from a central point to all the houses that want broadband.

      Of course, you have to install your computer in the bathroom...

    9. Re:FCC favors business over public interest ?!? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      This is a moot point, but what the heck:

      Water in rural homes doesn't have chlorine or fluorine. Furthermore the whole system terminates at the well. You would have to run BGW (Broadband over GroundWater).

    10. Re:FCC favors business over public interest ?!? by Goody · · Score: 1

      My "public interest" would be nicely served by actually being able to get broadband. And I have power lines.

      You're also just as likely to have copper pairs to your home right now. Why don't you have DSL? The BPL business model is much more difficult to accomplish than DSL and the technical limitations with BPL are harder to overcome than DSL's. You're not going to get BPL anytime soon.

      Former FCC Chairman Powell was led to believe BPL could be everywhere because everyone has powerlines. This is just not the case.

      Most people also have a need for cheap disposal of their garbage, more so than a need to visit a national park. While more people need refuse services, the public interest would not be served by converting Yosemite National Park into a landfill. BPL does just than to wireless HF radio spectrum.

      --
      Tired of being "punished" by the Slashdot $rtbl since 2002. I'm now over at http://soylentnews.org/ .
    11. Re:FCC favors business over public interest ?!? by mi · · Score: 1
      Which is why this stupid idea is so seductive
      arodland's point was, that FCC did in fact pursue the interests of the public. However "interesting" javaxman's post was moderated, it was thinly veiled flamebait trying to pitch the HAM enthusiasts (automatically good) and the (heavens!!) emergency workers against "corporations" (automatically bad).

      Again, the idea may or may not be "stupid", but it was perfectly apropriate for the FCC to pursue it to the fullest -- contrary to javaxman's opinion...

      --
      In Soviet Washington the swamp drains you.
  8. So help me out.... by cephyn · · Score: 4, Interesting

    what did the FCC have to gain by pushing a crap technology, one that violates their own rules and interferes with their sphere of influence?

    It wasnt clear to me in the article why the FCC was so high on the tech...

    --
    Moo.
    1. Re:So help me out.... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Remember, the Bush regime values faith, not facts.

    2. Re:So help me out.... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      1) Give FCC $$$
      2) ???
      3) Profit

    3. Re:So help me out.... by jd · · Score: 2, Interesting
      Using E-o-P for broadband use is certainly stupid and (I suspect) was largely motivated by greed. There are potential uses for it, though, which might be more rational.


      Ethernet-over-Power would actually make some sense for the power companies themselves, as they'd be able to have "intelligent" power routing within the grid itself, rather than relying on someone at the power stations to hit the right buttons.


      Typically, blackouts such as the one that struck the northeast US and Canada a while back are caused by a combination of mechanical relays using outdated settings, grossly inadequate and inappropriate responses by the power stations, and devastatingly little information getting to those who need it.


      If you had each node in the grid able to communicate with neighboring nodes to determine how to supply the power without burning anything out - really, just a load-measuring routing protocol - you should be able to keep the grid running under just about any conditions imaginable.


      This kind of setup would be OK, because the bandwidth needed would be relatively low, so interference would be negligable. ALL you are carrying is routing information, changing in the order of seconds or longer, so a bandwidth of a few hundred bytes per second would be perfectly sufficient.

      --
      It's a small world and it smells funny; I'd buy another if it wasn't for the money; Take back what I paid (SoM)
    4. Re:So help me out.... by connorbd · · Score: 1

      Actually, given the way business is about ramming bad technology through regulatory barriers without regard for whether it actually works or not, I think you've got the last two steps backwards. BPL is just another subsidy for the well-connected -- it doesn't work, it has no future, but the utilities can make a metric assload off of government grants before reality catches up with them. It's like National Missile Defense -- it takes about forty seconds of rational thought to realize that such a thing is impossible, but the government keeps funding it anyway.

    5. Re:So help me out.... by daVinci1980 · · Score: 2, Interesting
      Typically, blackouts such as the one that struck the northeast US and Canada a while back are caused by a combination of mechanical relays using outdated settings, grossly inadequate and inappropriate responses by the power stations, and devastatingly little information getting to those who need it.


      Offtopic to be sure, but the cause of the blackout in the northeast was actually a problem that shows up in lots of redundant systems (as shown in this simple basic program):

      10 One grid failed
      20 Another grid tried to take on the additional load caused by the failure of the previous grid
      30 The demands were too great for the additional grid to take on
      40 Additional grid fails
      50 GOTO 20

      Care has to be taken in redundant systems to ensure that a catastrophic failure in one place does not lead to a cascading failure throughout the entire network.

      In this case, it would've been better for the network to realize that a cascade was in progress and it was therefore better to drop power to the offending power stations rather than continue to ask others for help. Had the system passed this information along with the help request, (in programming a simple decrementing counter is sufficient) the power grid could've quickly realized that a cascade was in progress and could've cut its losses.
      --
      I currently have no clever signature witicism to add here.
    6. Re:So help me out.... by swiggidy · · Score: 1

      Ethernet-over-Power would actually make some sense for the power companies themselves, as they'd be able to have "intelligent" power routing within the grid itself, rather than relying on someone at the power stations to hit the right buttons.

      They already do. Substations use it so it knows which branch to cut off in case of a current surge. They even have a nifty bypass (I can't remember and I don't feel like looking it up) to get around the transformers, which act like low pass filters.

      They could probably be a smarter if they could pass data faster, but there is communication going on.

    7. Re:So help me out.... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      This is definitely off-topic...but low-frequency data are already carried over power lines. Remote meter-reading devices, for example, transmit information back to the power company.

      The problem is frequency. High frequency signals that allow more data to be transmitted result in interference.

    8. Re:So help me out.... by jd · · Score: 1
      Well, ANY signal generates interference. That's the nature of the beast. A change in electrical field will generate a corresponding and opposing change in the magnetic field, and vice versa, which is the principle radio works on.


      Part of the problem is that high frequency signals are necessarily powerful signals and swamp anything useful being transmitted wirelessly. The other part of the problem is that the power grid is an untuned circuit, which means you have broadcasts on a very wide range of frequencies.

      --
      It's a small world and it smells funny; I'd buy another if it wasn't for the money; Take back what I paid (SoM)
    9. Re:So help me out.... by isdnip · · Score: 2, Informative

      The FCC was using BPL as a substitute for real competition. Powell's policy -- Martin has not made his positions clear yet -- was that telephone wires belonged to the telephone company, period, and that they were not obligated to let other companies use them. In other words, he was completely flouting the Telecommunications Act of 1996 as well as a century of Common Carrier law.

      Because the law requires some competition to be permitted, Powell chose to emphasize "intermodal" competition. In other words, the cable company was The Competitor. And if you think two isn't enough, there was BPL, the Third Pipe.

      Note that under his model, none of these had to allow ANY independent ISPs to have access to their wires. (Right now, telephone companies are required to, but not cable, BPL, or wireless providers. BellSouth and Verizon have explicitly Petitioned to be relieved of that obligation, and Powell himself had put a docket [02-33] on the table to that effect, though they never got a majority to act on it.) So you'd get your Fox News through three channels, and, ISPs being "information" providers, nobody would be obligated to allow you to access sites they didn't like. Think about what kind of BPL "information" service you're likely to get from an electric utility, given the current regime's close relationship with the energy industry.

      Tinfoil hat time: BPL's interference with radio is a feature, not a bug. It is the super-duper shortwave jamming system that the Soviets dreamed of but never succeeded in building! Take a country like, say, Saudi Arabia. They could buy BPL and provide their filtered, Wahhabi-safe, royalist-safe "broadband" service to the public, and they would lose their ability to get shortwave radio broadcasts, which in some parts of the world are still an important source of information. The ham bands are notched; shortwave broadcast bands are not! So BPL is for export, to countries like China too. Whether the USA gets that censored remains to be seen. Shortwave listening here is extremely obscure, but it does theoretically provide another channel for hearing about the world.

    10. Re:So help me out.... by plover · · Score: 1
      I think the grandparent was trying to say that "local control" in an intelligent grid would be self-limiting. No grid would try to take on more load than its rating would allow. The neighboring grids would see the "blackout" next door, and check their current capacity. If they were running at 85%, they could offer to carry a share of the load. Decentralized, intelligent control.

      Or so the theory goes to a layman such as myself. IANAEE.

      --
      John
  9. Re:BPL? by UberGeekEdward · · Score: 0

    Now, after actually reading the article, instead of being excited about "first post", I can see a major fight coming. Here in Utah we have Utah Power, which is actually PG&E from california and oregon. We already have a problem with their monopoly. They abuse their power and go out of their way to abuse the little guy. Now we are suggesting that we place internet into their hands. I see major fights coming. If the **AA files a complaint about file sharing, do you get your power cut as "punishment"?

    --
    Talking to geeks is like eating jello with a chainsaw, interesting, but painful.
  10. Realistically by Otter · · Score: 1, Insightful
    Amateur radio is a lovably nerdy hobby left over from the 20th century. Unfortunately, to the degree that there's a conflict between 21st century telecommunications and 20th, it will (sooner or later) be settled in favor of the former.

    Highway trafic has a negative effect on horses, you know.

    1. Re:Realistically by Detritus · · Score: 0, Troll

      Then you wont mind if I dump a ton of toxic waste in your yard. Clean air and water is so 20th century.

      --
      Mea navis aericumbens anguillis abundat
    2. Re:Realistically by Man_Holmes · · Score: 5, Insightful

      If you read the article you would have learned that hams aren't the only ones affected by the interference generated by BPL.

      So if the fire department using 20th century radios is unable to communicate and your house burns down is that OK with you?

      BPL is flawed technology trying to be rammed down people's throats. Those nerdy hams were just the first to see the wolf in sheep's clothing thats all.

      Man Holmes

    3. Re:Realistically by tzanger · · Score: 3, Insightful

      You're funny.

      Amateur radio operators (note: I am not one) are the first people to use their "lovably nerdy hobby" in practically every major emergency to coordinate resources and get help to where it's needed most. Amateur radio is far, far more than some little hobby. Making things difficult or impossible for this (small and growing smaller, sadly) portion of the population is not something to be taken lightly. They're not your neighbourhood vintage car restorer.

    4. Re:Realistically by MightyMartian · · Score: 4, Insightful
      Amateur radio is a lovably nerdy hobby left over from the 20th century. Unfortunately, to the degree that there's a conflict between 21st century telecommunications and 20th, it will (sooner or later) be settled in favor of the former.

      Highway trafic has a negative effect on horses, you know.

      HAM operators have proven their worth in emergency situations (like natural disasters), and the local HAM club here has a diesel generator ready to go in case we ever have something nasty like an earthquake or a tsunami. If the choice is between some technology that leaks RF like no tomorrow and keeping a "nerd hobby" that actually can do us good, then I'll pick the "nerd hobby" any day of the week.

      But it ain't just HAM hobbiests. Your radio and emergency channels will be knocked out of the sky as well. Now maybe you can do without Easy Listening AM Gold, but while you've got your lovely broadband-over-power-line, you better hope your house doesn't catch fire or you or one of your loved ones has a heart attack, because guess what, you are, to put it bluntly, fucked.

      --
      The world's burning. Moped Jesus spotted on I50. Details at 11.
    5. Re:Realistically by connorbd · · Score: 3, Insightful

      That's something of a PR illusion perpetuated by the ARRL. Hams do sometimes have a role in well-coordinated emergency scenarios -- in those situations it's a ham's job to make sure information gets to where it needs to go, nothing more. That's important enough in and of itself, but a lot of hams tend to have a rather inflated opinion of themselves. Emergency-trained hams who think they're first responders as opposed to support personnel tend to cause more trouble than good.

    6. Re:Realistically by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Very dumb, Otter.

      Even in the 21st century, disasters happen that take out an area's communications infrastructure. When disasters happen, communication is critical. Hams are highly organized to respond when disasters happen.

      The HF radio spectrum, though not needed for commercial communication the way it once was, remains a valuable national resource. BPL is an ugly technology that pollutes a national resource. BPL also is another blatant attempt by Republicans to turn public property over to private interests for exploitation.

      It is very wrongheaded to think that digital technology has somehow made analog technology obsolete and amusing. At the lowest level, where digital technology touches natural phenomena, it is analog.

      Let's don't forget that, though we may live in a digital society, we live in an analog world.

      Yes I'm a ham. I got my license (even learned Morse code) in 2002 after almost 20 years of doing digital.

    7. Re:Realistically by shaka999 · · Score: 1

      Ahhhhhhhh!

      If I hear one more Ham operator telling me how valuable he is I think I'll scream. Oh wait, I already did that.

      All I know is that the horse is a bloddy pulp right now as far as this argument goes.

      --
      One should not theorize before one has data. -Sherlock Holmes-
    8. Re:Realistically by fire-eyes · · Score: 0

      Ham/Amateur radio is not just a hobby. We just enjoy the quiet periods where our emergency communications and skills are not needed.

      http://www.arrl.org/hamradio.html

      Amateur radio started out as a critical emergency communication system. Next time you hear about a hurricane or earthquake, you will hear about us.

      --
      -- Note: If you don't agree with me, don't bother replying. I won't read it.
    9. Re:Realistically by connorbd · · Score: 1

      Well... I would say any public safety agency that is using HF for communications had better have a damn good reason (I'm thinking forest rangers here, not local police). That said, HF is still used for long-haul communications in numerous applications -- marine, wilderness, etc. -- and you can't always rely on having a satellite available.

    10. Re:Realistically by twostar · · Score: 3, Informative

      What about state police? or county firefighters? They have massive networks of repeaters setup across states so that all of the different emergency services can jump on and immediately ask for help from other agencies without having to go through a third party (dispatch). Many of these are HF and VHF simply because you need the range. These are the ones going to get hit by BPL interference.

    11. Re:Realistically by Detritus · · Score: 2, Informative

      Many state police agencies, and other state-level public agencies, use low-band VHF (30-50 MHz).

      --
      Mea navis aericumbens anguillis abundat
    12. Re:Realistically by baomike · · Score: 2, Informative

      Hope your a cable/satelite user. Channels 2-5 are in the range discussed in the article.

      Maybe you can watch your neighbors porn on channel 2.
      The people who listen to broadcast radio at these freqs might also be a tad hostile towards the interferance also.

      Any navigation and ship to shore services left in this freq range?

    13. Re:Realistically by connorbd · · Score: 1

      Ah, fair enough.

    14. Re:Realistically by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      It amuses me that you refer to 21st century technology, and 20th century technology, but because of how you phrased it, 21st century is "the former." :)

    15. Re:Realistically by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Ahh proof that a low Slashdot UID does not mean anything...

      you sir are one of the stupidest morons I have ever hear spew forth worthless drivel.

      I have heard more enlighening things from the phycopath drunk living in the dumpster behind work than what you just said.

    16. Re:Realistically by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 2, Informative
      I hate it when people bring up ham radio in relation to BPL.

      Look at a frequency allocation chart. The ham bands make up a teeny tiny part of HF and low VHF. The rest is used for marine, aviation, broadcasting and loads of commercial purposes.

      And BPL is not a 21st century technology. It's a misguided attempt to use 19th century technology (AC wires) for something they were never designed for, totally wiping out the HF spectrum in the process so it can't be used for anything else.

      If you want broadband, use telephone wires, coax, or optical fibre. Or microwave dishes. Not random pieces of copper wire designed to carry 60 Hz power.

    17. Re:Realistically by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Unfortunately, to the degree that there's a conflict between 21st century telecommunications and 20th, it will (sooner or later) be settled in favor of the former.

      Its a shame that fiber is shaping up to be the telecommunication technology of the 21st century then.

      Maybe instead of paving the radio spectrum to make room for useless crap like BPL, we should devote that spectrum to "preservation".

      We could even put up a plaque in honor of BPL, like those historic markers you see along roads. Engrave it with "the little technology that couldn't" in honor of the fact that it barely works at all, puts out maybe a few megabits to the end user, and is generally mean and unfriendly to everyone involved.

    18. Re:Realistically by Chanc_Gorkon · · Score: 1

      Hmm....yes, there are always bad apples but check out:

      http://www.arrl.org/news/stories/2003/06/24/2/

      http://www.southgatearc.org/articles/vu2rbi/andama n_nicobar_1.htm

      http://www.qsl.net/trarc/floyd2.html

      http://www.skywarn.org/

      http://www.severe-weather.org/

      GOOD ham groups are great volunteers and eyes and ears for law enforcement, American Red Cross and other agencies. Emergecny Communcations provided by hams is NOT just a PR illusion. It's real.

      --

      Gorkman

    19. Re:Realistically by Chanc_Gorkon · · Score: 1

      Why don't you check out http://www.arrl.org/ and see. We do provide a service that many others asre not willing to do (FRS, CB and and to a lesser extent, GMRS are bands coming to mind here). Emergency Service is actually PART of the rules that give us our priviledges.

      --

      Gorkman

    20. Re:Realistically by connorbd · · Score: 1

      Actually, I'm a ham myself, so I'm very aware of that. All I'm saying is that hams tend to get a bit puffed up when they don't deserve it -- if they want the glory of being a first responder, then they should get EMT training, and then they'd have a legitimate reason to be on the frontlines.

      Ham emergency work is back-of-the-line drudge work with very little glory attached, but it's important drudge work that needs to be done. ARES/RACES, Skywarn, and the CB equivalent REACT are great services (I'm surprised there's no equivalent for FRS), but ultimately a lot of hams get off on the idea of being "emergency personnel" and wind up being pests rather than help.

      Look at it this way -- it's the difference between the pyromaniac who becomes a firefighter for the attention and the search and recovery crews at 9/11 -- the firebug is a gloryhound who might actually wind up setting a fire just to put one out, but the personnel at the WTC were risking their health and sanity not just because it was their jobs but because they felt an obligation to help -- basic human decency. No real glory in that, ultimately.

    21. Re:Realistically by Some+Bitch · · Score: 1
      Ham emergency work is back-of-the-line drudge work with very little glory attached, but it's important drudge work that needs to be done.

      Reminds me of a saying I picked up somewhere, "Not everyone can be the first violinist in the orchestra, some have to push wind through the tuba."

    22. Re:Realistically by Chanc_Gorkon · · Score: 1

      Glory? I know of NO ham who wants this specificaly. Most of the hams I know want to honestly help. Only glory any ham I see is the glory of achieving a WAS award or a DXCC award. Ham radio is a fun hobby, but most hams realize that they are not world changers....they just help pick up the pieces. I have NEVER seen this puffery you speak of.

      --

      Gorkman

  11. Line Noise... What now... by jonharrell · · Score: 4, Insightful

    Filters for your outlets... And I thought DSL was bad. -jh

  12. Never underestimate the power of corruption by wsanders · · Score: 5, Insightful

    Never underestimate the power of corrupt legislatures and utility companies to force adoption of bad technologies:

    http://powermarketers.netcontentinc.net/newsreader .asp?ppa=8knpp%5EZltmlupoXUnj!6%3C%22bfek%5C!

    A few BPL trials have been dropped because the technology just cannot compete. But the threat is still real. Once fixed wireless is available everywhere, BPL
    technology's only hope of success is through open graft and bribery.

    My hope would be that Texans would give their much-abused highway signs a break from using them for target practice and begin utilizing the numerous BPL devices that will be
    available. But old habits die hard.

    --
    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?"
    1. Re:Never underestimate the power of corruption by okto · · Score: 0

      My hope would be that Texans would give their much-abused highway signs a break from using them for target practice and begin utilizing the numerous BPL devices that will be available. But old habits die hard. What do road signs have to do with BPL? I don't see shooting things from a moving vehicle and surfing the internet over RF-noisy power as equal and interchangeable activies. Call me crazy, but I think we can safely assume that no one in the history of firearms and the Internet existing simultaneously has faced that decision.

  13. Re:BPL? by jgaynor · · Score: 4, Informative

    RTFA. It explicitly states that power companies cannot become backbone providers because long-haul data gets killed by interference from transformers/repeaters. They can still drop leased lines to substations and last-mile it from there, but this in turn feeds those very same backbone providers the utilities seek to compete with . . .

    Speaking of which - why arent the power companies themselves pushing for more active enforcement of the telecommunications act of 1996 regarding this issue? This seems like a perfect place to call it out - lines sold to utilities at forced wholesale prices could A) make them some money, B) hurt the telcos and C) make consumers happy.

  14. Re:BPL == Bastard Public License by thisnow1 · · Score: 1

    Self-correction, I didn't RTFAT (last t=thoroughly) Check this: http://www.pserc.org/ecow/get/publicatio/2005publi c/olsen_bpl_paper_feb2005.pdf all the stuff you gotta/would wanna know about BPL

  15. Broadband over Powerlines bad? Shocking! by Mr.+Flibble · · Score: 3, Funny

    Shocking. Simply shocking.

    --
    Try to hack my 31337 firewall!
    1. Re:Broadband over Powerlines bad? Shocking! by jd · · Score: 1

      That has to be the worst pun on Slashdot in a very long time.

      --
      It's a small world and it smells funny; I'd buy another if it wasn't for the money; Take back what I paid (SoM)
    2. Re:Broadband over Powerlines bad? Shocking! by Mr.+Flibble · · Score: 1

      That has to be the worst pun on Slashdot in a very long time.

      Yeah, I know. We are out of coffee here at the office and I just can't think straight.

      --
      Try to hack my 31337 firewall!
    3. Re:Broadband over Powerlines bad? Shocking! by stevew · · Score: 1

      Ah - you just wish you had thought of it! ;-)

      --
      Have you compiled your kernel today??
  16. Ads by Google: Eritrean singles? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1, Interesting

    I have no idea why two of the three "ads by Google" were for meeting/dating Eritrean. Somebody is buying some weird keywords.

    1. Re:Ads by Google: Eritrean singles? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      I've been getting those for a while - particularly on anime sites, for some reason. No idea why, and they can't be getting particularly good clickthrough rates.

    2. Re:Ads by Google: Eritrean singles? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Buy marriage from best Georgian girls. Georgian girls love loud Americans, yay for Georgian girls. Georgian girls never complain, make love often, and like loud American men who drink weak American beer and cavort with ugly American women. Georgian women don't mind loud American men who surf porn on Internet, yay for Georgian girls! Contact Georgian girls at anatolislakov@georgianslavemarket.ru. Loud Canadians and Englishmen also welcomed.

  17. Laugh Test by Detritus · · Score: 5, Interesting

    I've never understood how BPL even made it to the trial stage. Any EE with two brain cells is going to recognize that putting broadband HF/VHF carriers on unshielded power lines is a recipe for interference to many licensed radio services. See that wire going down the road? It's a fscking antenna, you moron!

    --
    Mea navis aericumbens anguillis abundat
    1. Re:Laugh Test by jd · · Score: 5, Informative
      What amazes me is that it made it to the trial stage in the US even after trials in other countries (such as the UK) had verified that the interference was not only present but unacceptable.


      We're not just talking about ignorance - which can be excused in Government, as it's almost mandatory - we are in the realms of willful stupidity, as the results were known in advance.

      --
      It's a small world and it smells funny; I'd buy another if it wasn't for the money; Take back what I paid (SoM)
    2. Re:Laugh Test by G4from128k · · Score: 1

      I've never understood how BPL even made it to the trial stage. Any EE with two brain cells is going to recognize that putting broadband HF/VHF carriers on unshielded power lines is a recipe for interference to many licensed radio services. See that wire going down the road? It's a fscking antenna, you moron!

      Absolutely! We can only assume that the power providers were so desperate to jump on the dot-com bandwagon that the MBAs overpowered the EEs.

      --
      Two wrongs don't make a right, but three lefts do.
    3. Re:Laugh Test by tzanger · · Score: 1, Interesting

      I've never understood how BPL even made it to the trial stage. Any EE with two brain cells is going to recognize that putting broadband HF/VHF carriers on unshielded power lines is a recipe for interference to many licensed radio services. See that wire going down the road? It's a fscking antenna, you moron!

      What a brilliant navel-gazing point of view.

      I personally wouldn't mind seeing the signal combined with a decent spreading code to minimize the peaks in the spectral pattern (at the cost of raising the general noise floor, yes) or even figuring a way to couple the three phases together such that at a distance the radiated power would be next to nil, in much the same way that thousands of Amps of current flow through the lines but there's hardly any net magnetic flux when you're even a dozen feet away from the lines.

      Technical problems are there to be overcome. Simply throwing your hands in the air saying "of course there are going to be problems, what a moron" is a combination of elitism and a defeatist attitude the likes of which I've never seen before. Do you give up on everything because someone said it was going to be hard?

    4. Re:Laugh Test by MightyMartian · · Score: 1

      Well, when you get back from magic pixie land with the solution, you let us know how you're going to stop those transmission lines from becoming vast antennaes. The experts I've heard say that there's just no way to meaningfully minimalize the interference on those power lines. Beyond that, BPL advocates ought to demonstrate that they can get rid of interference before anyone even considers let them rolling out anything but a few isolated test networks.

      --
      The world's burning. Moped Jesus spotted on I50. Details at 11.
    5. Re:Laugh Test by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      What amazes me is that it made it to the trial stage in the US even after trials in other countries (such as the UK) had verified that the interference was not only present but unacceptable.

      This may be a dumb question, but would the fact that the AC delivered over power lines in the UK operates at a different frequency than it does in the US make a difference in the amount/kind/acceptability of the interference produced?

    6. Re:Laugh Test by foorilious · · Score: 2, Interesting

      Putting a signal on an antenna will obviously result in radiation, yes. What's not obvious though, is how much, and how quickly it falls off with distance. It's not clear to me if the entire line radiates and therefore it drops off as 1/R, or if (as some claim), it will instead fall off with 1/R^2 or 1/R^4. Add to the fact that they're notching the public frequencies, and I don't think we can necessarily trust the article's author at his (clearly biased) word that "there will be interference."

      I don't know enough about this to say if anyone is right or wrong, but I do suggest reading the author's disclosure at the end of his article, and considering that the ARRL has an established position on this issue, and one that may be more emotional than rational, in the final analysis. It's also not clear from my quick read of the article if interference has been demonstrated from BPL lines complying with the new FCC rules for BPL

    7. Re:Laugh Test by WolfWithoutAClause · · Score: 4, Interesting
      In the UK though, we bury our power cables, so the cables aren't nearly as leaky.

      However, even in the UK, there's a problem- the street lights are run off the mains too. So you have a whole row of transmitters all neatly lined up. Gah. Presumably it's possible to put a filter on each and every one at ground level, but it's fairly expensive I guess.

      I talked to some of the guys that worked for Nortel on it, they were very enthusiastic, and seemed to think it would work.

      One problem they got around was the streetlights again. At UK lighting up time, all the streetlights turn on, something like: blink, blinkety-blink, blink blink blink, on. Now each blink throws a whole mess of noise on the mains. And you have a whole street full of them. Essentially, the internet connection would go down for a minute or two everyday at lighting up time :-)

      I think they changed their filtering or shortened the packet size or something, and the problem mostly went away... But it was funny.

      Still, I don't see powerline internet really taking off, never did.

      --

      -WolfWithoutAClause

      "Gravity is only a theory, not a fact!"
    8. Re:Laugh Test by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Well, when you get back from magic pixie land with the solution

      Back, the solution is to rip out the 80 year old electric grid (which is in danger of causing massive blackouts this summer in the Us and canada, again!) and while you're busy replacing the whole fsking grid, replace it with shielded power transmission cables. Shielded cables, while they still will leak some RF, and accept some RF, will have no greater difficulty than cable internet already has. The experts you talked to assumed you'd leave the existing unshielded cables in place.

    9. Re:Laugh Test by connorbd · · Score: 1

      The technical problem to be overcome involves a total overhaul of every meter of power line in the country, restringing them with lines capable of preventing signal leakage. Something on the order of millions of kilometers of wide-gauge UTP of a type that hasn't even been invented yet. I don't think that's going to work. At that point you're better off stringing fiber and using WiMax for the last mile.

    10. Re:Laugh Test by Detritus · · Score: 2, Insightful

      The laws of physics are not simply "technical problems" to be overcome. The design of the power distribution system is a given, since BPL is supposed to operate over the existing system, possibly with minor modifications. This isn't a purpose-built RF transmission line. Phasing the RF signals on the transmission lines would alter the radiation pattern, not eliminate it. Even if you came up with a scheme that would reduce radiation from three-phase distribution systems, it wouldn't do anything for the large lengths of tertiary single-phase wiring that is fed from the three-phase distribution system. Spreading codes are not a panacea, they just dilute the interference by dispersing it in the frequency domain.

      --
      Mea navis aericumbens anguillis abundat
    11. Re:Laugh Test by John+Miles · · Score: 2, Interesting

      The only valuable asset that power companies own with respect to broadband Internet service are rights-of-way, not transmission lines. If they had spent half the money running fiber between their existing towers and poles that they've spent pushing the technical idiocy that is BPL, they'd have... well, OK, they'd still need to spend a lot more money.

      It is expensive to provide high-quality, robust Internet service. The physical transmission medium is about the least important/interesting part of it. Wiping out big chunks of HF spectrum with limited-speed BPL infrastructure is just plain dumb by any rational measure, with or without bellyaching and interference from ham operators. (What? Ten years have gone by, and now the power companies need to offer more than a megabit or so of bandwidth to compete with the telcos and cable operators? Gee, I guess you should have run fiber when you had the chance, huh?)

      BPL is one of the dumber ideas from the Powell regime, and I frankly wouldn't expect it to survive much additional scrutiny.

      --
      Dahlmann tightly grips the knife, which he may have no idea how to use, and steps out into the plain.
    12. Re:Laugh Test by baomike · · Score: 2, Insightful

      I doesn't take much power in this part of the spectrum to have a great range. That's why it is so useful. Depending on the propagation, anyplace in the world is reachable.

    13. Re:Laugh Test by tylernt · · Score: 1

      "the AC delivered over power lines in the UK operates at a different frequency"

      Household power is 60 cycles per second in the US, 50 in the UK; so, not much of a difference. Of course, I have no idea if the overhead transmission wires also use those same frequencies.

      For comparison, the radio frequency bands begin a lot higher, about 530,000 cycles per second (530KHz) for the AM broadcast band.

      --
      DRM 'manages access' in the same way that a prison 'manages freedom'
    14. Re:Laugh Test by Dwonis · · Score: 1
      This may be a dumb question, but would the fact that the AC delivered over power lines in the UK operates at a different frequency than it does in the US make a difference in the amount/kind/acceptability of the interference produced?

      Probably not. It isn't the 50-60 Hz frequency range that are the problem, it's the frequencies above that (which are used to carry data) that are the problem. The electrical grid is essentially a big, noisy, broadcast antenna. That's fine when you're only transmitting a narrow 50 or 60 Hz signal, but it's probably terrible for much else.

    15. Re:Laugh Test by Dwonis · · Score: 1

      Not only that, but I'd guess that the grid is so noisy that you'd have to transmit at a fairly high power in order to get a discernable, high-data-rate signal through it.

    16. Re:Laugh Test by jd · · Score: 2, Informative
      Not really. The interference is because you have a change in the electrical field creating an opposing change in the magnetic field. (I think I have that right - A-level physics was a while back.) As such, you generate radio waves whenever you have an alternating current. (Likewise, whenever you have radio waves, you generate an alternating current. It is actually possible to build a radio that uses only the radio waves for power.)


      The wavelength of any broadband is so minute, compared to ehter the 50 Hz of UK mains, or 60 Hz in the US, that there should be no real difference in the nature of the interference or what it interferes with.


      Having said that, the amount of interference is a product of the current squared, IIRC, which DOES mean that you would get a difference there. IIRC, the UK uses a higher voltage but a lower current, so the interference in the UK should be less than that in the US.

      --
      It's a small world and it smells funny; I'd buy another if it wasn't for the money; Take back what I paid (SoM)
    17. Re:Laugh Test by jd · · Score: 1

      It's worse than that. It not only broadcasts, it receives. Which means that power lines in close proximity are going to interfere with each other, if you use wave modulation. The atmosphere is also a pretty noisy place, naturally, which doesn't help - I don't think people would like being disconnected everytime there was a thunderstorm anywhere in the United States.

      --
      It's a small world and it smells funny; I'd buy another if it wasn't for the money; Take back what I paid (SoM)
    18. Re:Laugh Test by Dwonis · · Score: 1

      Wow, do you have any idea how much optical fibre you could run alongside the existing lines for the amount that it would cost to replace every single power line in North America? With shielded cable?

    19. Re:Laugh Test by DF5JT · · Score: 1

      Have you ever heard about the term short wave propagation? Did you take a look at the HF-spectrum used? Did you try to get these two things together?

      With a fraction of the power and a piece of wire an emergency or ham operator can talk to the rest of the world. A pollution of the entire shortwave spectrum will endanger all kinds of communication that relies on it: Military, Emergency, Aviation, Traffic, Navigation.

      Worldwide, since shortwaves do not stop at a nation's border.

    20. Re:Laugh Test by A+coward+on+a+mouse · · Score: 1

      So, if the interference is less in the UK than in the US, why should the FCC have assumed that what was unacceptable in the UK would be acceptable in the US?

      --
      If you mod me down, I will become more powerful than you can possibly imagine.
    21. Re:Laugh Test by jd · · Score: 1

      That is the great mystery. There is absolutely no basis for the FCC's assumption. To the best of my knowledge, Congress hasn't repealed Lenz' Law, so the only conclusion I can reach is that the FCC were not interested in the physics, but only in some political aspect.

      --
      It's a small world and it smells funny; I'd buy another if it wasn't for the money; Take back what I paid (SoM)
    22. Re:Laugh Test by plover · · Score: 1
      The grandparent poster has a valid point. Just because you think you have a solution (a ridiculously expensive one) doesn't mean you have the only solution.

      Sure, the invention of cat-5 was a work of pure genius. But that doesn't mean every unshielded wire carrying a signal needs to be cat-5 to eliminate interference. For example, look at DSL and ADSL. They're running at speeds far faster than cat-3 was ever designed to run. (And while I don't know how much the interference affects either DSL or competing portions of the spectrum, I know it's certainly not as contentious as BPL.)

      Maybe the answer to BPL is a different piece of the spectrum, say something way out there like 7GHz. Buy a few companies a few new satellites to replace the ones suffering from the new interference, and you're golden. Or maybe a lower power signal, with more repeaters. Or maybe some other solution that no genius has come up with yet.

      The only thing we know for sure is: BPL in its current incarnation is crap. How stinky the crap is is still up for debate.

      --
      John
    23. Re:Laugh Test by plover · · Score: 1
      "At UK lighting up time"

      When did you get rid of the lamplighters?

      :-)

      --
      John
    24. Re:Laugh Test by connorbd · · Score: 1

      I don't think our points are mutually exclusive -- BPL in a higher spectrum might work (though you still have the technical issues of trying to get a signal around a transformer). My point is that if the most practical solution to the problem is as radical as redesigning the power grid from the ground up, maybe you're trying to solve the wrong problem.

      It's like teleportation -- just because there's nothing in the physics textbooks that says it's against the rules doesn't mean it's actually worth trying to do. Yes, it's been done, but in a way that indicates it's useless for anything above the quantum level.

    25. Re:Laugh Test by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Money has a larger influence on "acceptable" in the US.

    26. Re:Laugh Test by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      restringing them with lines capable of preventing signal leakage.

      Ah, thanks. You confirmed a suspicion I had: the UK has most of its powerlines buried in the ground, which must help a little with shielding. Even so, tests here came up with way too much interference. And if, as I suspected, and your comment suggests, far more US power lines are strung overhead, they're guaranteed to generate far more interference....

    27. Re:Laugh Test by pklong · · Score: 1

      "In the UK though, we bury our power cables" bzzzt, wrong.

      In new developments and in built up areas maybe, but elsewhere not. My home is supplied by an overhead feed (used to be two uninsulated conductors, but they changed it to an insulated cable a few years ago, made painting the house etc. hair raising) The street is still wired with four uninsulated conductors.

      Out in the country buried cables are a rarity. Don't be confused if it is a single cable on a telegraph pole, the thicker ones are usually power.

      --

      Philip

      Signatures are broken

    28. Re:Laugh Test by Black+Perl · · Score: 1

      Easy. The US Congress simultaneously introduced a bill to repeal Lenz's Law, so it won't be a problem in the US.

      --
      bp
    29. Re:Laugh Test by MightyMartian · · Score: 1

      In that case, why not just lay down fiber? It certainly won't cost any more, very likely will cost less, and will give you a more reliable network.

      --
      The world's burning. Moped Jesus spotted on I50. Details at 11.
  18. What if... by spyder913 · · Score: 4, Funny

    What happens if we combine BPL with power over ethernet? Or is that like crossing the streams...

    1. Re:What if... by Sponge+Bath · · Score: 1
      What happens if we combine BPL with power over ethernet?

      I just got back from an EMC lab where they were testing emissions from a device using POE. The device was failing all over the place and the tech said this was a common problem they were seeing with POE.

    2. Re:What if... by Biogenesis · · Score: 2, Interesting

      It may be suprising, but in Sydney all the new power lines installed (i.e. ones that replace the ones that get torn down by trees in storms) are being replaced by a twisted quad cable. It's just the 4 conductors (3 phases + neutral) twisted together into one chunky black insulated cable. I'm wondering if the twists are close enough to stop RF from leaking out of them...

    3. Re:What if... by Jeff+DeMaagd · · Score: 1

      Most power transmission through commercial areas is three phase, I don't know if it is wired as three phase + neutral though.

      I thought the point of twisting, twisting pairs at least, was to help reject incomming signals, not prevent signal emission.

    4. Re:What if... by thogard · · Score: 2, Insightful

      No they aren't. They are twisted to reduce 50hz losses (unless they get the cable from the wrong place then it will reduce 60hz) but all the high end stuff is going to radiate out. Depending on the twist and frequency, it may leak more than the older style cables.

    5. Re:What if... by Dwonis · · Score: 1

      3 phases + neutral? I doubt it. Maybe 3 phases + strength reinforcement? IIRC, you typically wire the neutral wire (and the safety ground) to a spike in the soil.

    6. Re:What if... by gibson042 · · Score: 0
      I thought the point of twisting, twisting pairs at least, was to help reject incomming signals, not prevent signal emission.
      Any change rejecting incoming signals will also prevent signal emission. Antennas work the same for transmission and reception.
    7. Re:What if... by Biogenesis · · Score: 1

      I Sydney they run the neutral right back to the sub station, we have an earth spike in all the homes to increase safety, but the neutral goes back into the power lines hanging in the street. The older style lines that don't have the quad cable still have 4 wires.

      In the country however they only run one wire out to remote homes and use the earth as a neutral return because of the long distances between customers.

  19. Re:BPL? by HotNeedleOfInquiry · · Score: 1

    And you know what? PG&E has been quietly pulling fibre through their understreet conduits for several years. I wonder why? I wonder if the ratepayers know about it?

    --
    "Eve of Destruction", it's not just for old hippies anymore...
  20. Dropping it left and right by leighklotz · · Score: 4, Informative

    It's a bad idea and has been dropped left and right. Here's a paper from Canada on BPL. And here's a counter proposal for those who feel that energy companies need to be in the network business: Broadband Over gas (apparently not a joke).

    1. Re:Dropping it left and right by jmcharry · · Score: 1

      Let me start by saying I am an amateur radio operator, and have been since the early 60s.

      That said, the objections to BPL would carry more weight if they weren't traceable to amateur radio sources. I have seen next to nothing objecting to it on the basis of interference from other sources.

    2. Re:Dropping it left and right by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      BPL shockingly flawed! BOG's explosion expected! And more to come. Rats over water tubes ( ROWT (tm) - (c) Lord Havelock Vetinari [patent pending] )!

    3. Re:Dropping it left and right by John+Miles · · Score: 1

      That said, the objections to BPL would carry more weight if they weren't traceable to amateur radio sources. I have seen next to nothing objecting to it on the basis of interference from other sources.

      Well, who else uses the HF spectrum these days? Everybody but the hams have moved to satellite.

      Now if we could get Family Radio and a few of the other Christian shortwave broadcasters to petition the White House, I'd expect that would do the trick. BPL would be gone tomorrow, based on the Bush Administration's record of asking the Jesus freaks, "How high?"

      But those broadcasters aren't targeting the US, so they, along with other users of the HF spectrum, don't care much about BPL one way or the other.

      --
      Dahlmann tightly grips the knife, which he may have no idea how to use, and steps out into the plain.
    4. Re:Dropping it left and right by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Shortwave broadcasters aren't allowed to "officially" target US listeners. The FCC's policy since the '50s has been that the shortwave broadcast bands aren't protected in the US.

      There is no official sanction for shortwave listening here. Besides, many, if not most, SW broadcasters no longer beam their signals toward North America or Australia. All of them are available via satellite or online.

    5. Re:Dropping it left and right by plover · · Score: 1
      Broadband in Gas looks pretty damn clever. Except it doesn't solve the BPL problem at all. Very few rural areas that don't already have broadband cable are served by natural gas pipelines. Virtually all the homes and businesses in the outlying areas of Minnesota, for example, are fueled by LP gas, which is typically delivered in trucks, not pipes.

      And that's not counting the far southern states, where even metropolitan customers typically have no need for residential gas service at all. Electricity or LP makes up their supplemental heat energy needs.

      BiG looks like it will be at most a competitor to traditional cable operators. Don't get me wrong, it's a good thing and I'd love to cut my Comcast bill in half due to some serious competition (around here DSL is about a fifth of the speed of residential broadband service for about 75% of the cost.) But it won't solve any BPL problems we don't already face.

      --
      John
    6. Re:Dropping it left and right by crazycracker · · Score: 1

      Have we forgotten about France? It seems the French are quite keen on this technology. As of 22 April 2005, Infosat started offering BPL as a commercial service in La Haye-du-Puits, in Normandy.

      The technology is also being experimented with in Paris.

      According to this very positive Liberation article, the French authority for the regulation of telecommunications recently gave the go-ahead for BPL operators to offer commercial services. Previously, BPL was not considered a proven technology and was only allowed to be offered as an experimental service.

      The article goes on to explain that tests have shown that the technology is able to meet the obligations placed upon public networks and is seen as a way to provide low-cost internet.

      This article says that in La Haye-du-Puits, it's priced at 24 euros a month for a 1mbps connection, including some kind of VOIP service.

      Neither article mentions interference, except to say that it doesn't interfere with the electrical network!

    7. Re:Dropping it left and right by leighklotz · · Score: 1

      Here are reports on BPL from OfCom, which is the British government's equivalent of the FCC in the US: OfCom reports on BPL. The first report (on Amperion) is cited in the ARRL article but was not written by the ARRL, but rather by the British government.

  21. Lies, damned lies. by solios · · Score: 2, Funny

    Just try driving your Lexus through that field you see the horse grazing in. If you don't completely destroy the suspension in the process, you'll probably still bend an axle on a chuchkhole the horse has no problems navigating.

    Oh, and consider the full area of a horse field compared to the itty bitty teeny little slice of processed asphalt bisecting it - you get the tiny piece, the horse gets the remainder.

    Your analogy isn't exactly waterproof. :P

    1. Re:Lies, damned lies. by petermgreen · · Score: 1

      I think he was reffering more to horses on the roads....

      horses may live in fields but when being used for transport they ususally used the roads which have now been taken over by cars.

      finally if you wan't/need to drive accross fields you can buy a land rover or a jeep or similar.

      --
      note: i'm known as plugwash most places but i screwd up registering that here somehow in the past and now can't register
  22. Re:BPL == Bastard Public License by MightyMartian · · Score: 4, Informative

    The major obstacle is that it would blow HAM operators and emergency frequencies out of the water. Emergency services would have to start using smoke signals. It's as bad an idea as I can possibly imagine.

    --
    The world's burning. Moped Jesus spotted on I50. Details at 11.
  23. Re:BPL? by NoMoreNicksLeft · · Score: 2, Interesting

    Maybe we should just put in our own fiber.

  24. Re:BPL? by Feyr · · Score: 1

    i'd be surprised if a power company DIDN'T have fiber. they already have the right-of-ways and the personnel to lay it. that's the two most expensive parts of the bill.

    here in quebec (north, you know, canada) Hydro Quebec have a full fledged fiber network. There's also Hydro One (aka, Hydro Ontario) that actually resells full transit to the public in at least one data center that i know of. and let me tell you, for anything over 5mbit/s they're about half the price of everyone else (80$/mbit/s with a 10mbits commit)

  25. Cincinnati BPL by YrWrstNtmr · · Score: 5, Informative
    It's being tested in the Cincinnati area by Current Communications a division of Cinergy. Currently, about 8,000 homes wired up.

    According to the section chief of the Ohio ARRL, problems are minimal.
    (at the bottom of the article:) "Joe Phillips of Fairfield, the Ohio section chief for the American Radio Relay League, says that so far the Cinergy roll-out hasn't created the radio interference many ham radio operators had feared."

    1. Re:Cincinnati BPL by Chanc_Gorkon · · Score: 1

      8,000 homes do not a proper trial make. While I will agree with the section chief (I am a league member) with the experience with this ONE trial, wait until it's launched to 8,000,000 homes. I can easily find a area where 8,000 people live where there's no hams. Granted, one can always ask ARES or other league memebers to help check it out, but again, this is a VERY small trial for a city as large as Cinncinnati.. I have heard the recordings of BPL interference and it's not good. BPL iis an excuse for the telcos and cable operators to NOT wire the rural. If they would just do that, then we would not need BPL and the FCC would not have been so gung ho about a STUPID idea.

      --

      Gorkman

    2. Re:Cincinnati BPL by Russ+Nelson · · Score: 1

      Stop bringing facts into a perfectly fine flame war!
      -russ

      --
      Don't piss off The Angry Economist
    3. Re:Cincinnati BPL by connorbd · · Score: 2, Interesting

      It could be the 21st century equivalent of Rural Electrification -- that's the Federal New Deal program that worked that nobody ever talks about.

    4. Re:Cincinnati BPL by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      i know people the have BPL in cincy, and it is really cool if they can get it to work. They currently offer capped 2mbps symmetric for 39.99/month. I live in the area in an apartment building, and they couldn't get it to work in my apt. It just didn't work. The plug in adapter was really neat tho. I would have been really convenient to have.

    5. Re:Cincinnati BPL by Goody · · Score: 1

      According to the section chief of the Ohio ARRL, problems are minimal. (at the bottom of the article:) "Joe Phillips of Fairfield, the Ohio section chief for the American Radio Relay League, says that so far the Cinergy roll-out hasn't created the radio interference many ham radio operators had feared."

      It's been rumored that the Cincinnati system is using only frequencies above 30 Mhz. This would preclude interference to most ham radio operators, however could interfere with other services. One system operating without interference doesn't mean the technology can always be made to work interference-free.

      Why don't all BPL systems use spectrum above 30 Mhz? Good question. It's more difficult to get this spectrum to work in a BPL system. Another vendor, Amperion, can use spectrum above 30 Mhz but a recent report from Ofcom (The UK FCC equivalent) found emissions from an Amperion system above 30 Mhz that would violate even the liberal FCC emissions rules.

      These BPL vendors could make a lot of their inteference problems go away if they stayed above 30 Mhz. Whether the systems would be Part 15 compliant, cost effective, and be able to provide enough bandwidth in this configuration is another story.

      --
      Tired of being "punished" by the Slashdot $rtbl since 2002. I'm now over at http://soylentnews.org/ .
    6. Re:Cincinnati BPL by GatorKing · · Score: 1

      I live in Cincinnati and I HAVE BPL. One thing a lot of people seem to forget about this 'stupid' idea is that IT'S TOTALLY COOL. And it works. Really! Having had (bad) experience with Cincinnati Bell's DSL service, I switched to BPL from Current and haven't looked back. - It's inexpensive (pay about $26/mo for 2Mbps service, could pay lkie $32 for 3Mbps) - It's plenty fast, at least for my home use. I easily get the 2Mbps they promise and often more. Plus my upload speed is the same, which is handy when I run an FTP server to get files back and forth from work. - It's reliable. The service hasn't gone out once since I got it (almost a year). Setup the modem it was a plug it in, 'It Just Works' situation. - MY WHOLE HOUSE is wired for it already. I can pick up the PC and put it at any outlet, no routers, no wireless cards. Plus when I got a new computer all it took was an additional modem in another room. Two PCs sharing bandwidth, no extra setup. I'm not an expert or a HAM enthusiast, but I agree that if there are interference problems I agree they need to be addressed. I'd certainly like to know more about the issue. If some one could point me to some inexpensive ways to figure out what kind of noise is coming off my telephone poles that would be cool. But I haven't heard about any problems with local law enforcement, etc. The trial areas here are in pretty densely popultated parts of town, so you might expect they'd surface soon. I just hope that before every /.er tells their friends to write this technology off they realize it has plenty of plusses.

  26. Re:BPL? by LWATCDR · · Score: 1

    Actually I know that my power company already has a fiber network that links all the substations for monitoring.

    --
    See my blog http://ilovecookes.blogspot.com/ for light hearted technical information.
  27. Your wonderful government in action by darjen · · Score: 1

    the FCC was downplaying the threat of the interference BPL creates, the FCC's very own test results were showing just the opposite."

    Wonderful... There you have it, folks! Your government in action.

    Seems like yet another reason to get the government out of technology. I've been seeing a LOT of reasons like this in the news lately. How many more reasons do we need until people get really fed up?

    1. Re:Your wonderful government in action by CrimsonScythe · · Score: 1

      I'd rather say:

      Seems like yet another reason to get the corporations out of the government.

      --
      The view was horrible and the smell was even worse; Julie severely regretted becoming a proctologist.
  28. As far as "last mile" technology goes... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 4, Interesting

    I'm going to go with geosynch satts, and those funky troposphere blimps.

    The satts need dialup, right now. Someone fucking work on that. If your option is no-fucking-intarweb-at-all, 800ms pings don't look all that bad. Especially when you can pull 100k/s downloads, and even 10k/s uploads. Beggars can't be choosers.

    The blimps look pretty decent. I'd like to couple that with a small (18" diameter) enclosed antenna. Probably not optical, because it's more prone to atmospheric disturbance (rain). I'm thinking 20ghz, or something really funky like 100ghz. Something that really cuts through the chop.

    I'm no electrical engineer, but if it was my call to make, that's the shit I'd have them working on...

    1. Re:As far as "last mile" technology goes... by HermanAB · · Score: 1

      VSAT, INMARSAT, GLOBALSTAR, the list goes on and on. It is expensive though it works.

      --
      Oh well, what the hell...
    2. Re:As far as "last mile" technology goes... by FlameSnyper · · Score: 2, Interesting

      Except that 800ms pings is unacceptable for gaming, and 100kbps happens so rarely it might as well not... oh yeah, I'm on teh satellite interNot.

      Also, take a look at their handy Fair Access Policy -- don't let yourself get FAP'd... or your connection slows down to about 2kbps: http://fairaccess.direcway.com/

      A better explanation of the FAP: http://www.copperhead.cc/fap.html -- don't try downloading any Linux CDs!

      All this can be yours for only $100/month _with_ a 15 month contract!!

      Call me stupid^H^H^H^H^H^Hdesperate.

      Maybe by the time my contract is up in Sept, something decent will be in my area.

    3. Re:As far as "last mile" technology goes... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Higher frequencies are more easily absorbed than low ones. Why do you think it's harder to shine a light beam through dense fog than a radio wave?

    4. Re:As far as "last mile" technology goes... by rodac · · Score: 1

      so fog is very efficient at blocking gamma radiation then?

    5. Re:As far as "last mile" technology goes... by Phanatic1a · · Score: 1

      *Air* is very efficient at blocking gamma radiation. Why do you think x-ray and gamma-ray observatories need to be located above the atmosphere for them to work?

  29. Public Interest? by NEOtaku17 · · Score: 0, Troll

    Maybe the public is more interested in having broadband then using HAM radios. Did you ever think of that? Oh that's right you are just looking for more reasons to bash Bush...

    1. Re:Public Interest? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      ...you are just looking for more reasons to bash Bush...

      Honey... you really don't have to look... they just kind of leap out at you anymore.

    2. Re:Public Interest? by javaxman · · Score: 1
      Oh that's right you are just looking for more reasons to bash Bush...

      No, just the FCC this time, really. Bush is just too easy of a target, that gets dull, why do it here? Though fingers do point at the administration backing BPL, now that you mention it.

      Besides, it's not just HAM radio. There are other frequencies used for public safety and science which would likely see problems, too. It's just about what the article is about- the FCC ignoring science to push some business agenda.

      Yes, the public is interested in broadband. But BPL? Please, there are better ways.

    3. Re:Public Interest? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Maybe the public is more interested in having broadband then using HAM radios

      Yes, so lets all kill ham radios to get more shitty-ass crap broadband delivered to our doors. Maybe by the time BPL actually gets 1 megabit to my house, we'll be hearing about koreans with 10 gigabit connections for $50 a month, while nobody's heard from Florida since the last hurricane season.

      This is progress?

    4. Re:Public Interest? by Ohreally_factor · · Score: 1

      If you mention "Power Company" in a sentence without the words "in my stock portfolio", some people are just going to assume you're Bush bashing. You're getting too close for comfort.

      --
      It's not offtopic, dumbass. It's orthogonal.
  30. Lying for Dollars by Doc+Ruby · · Score: 0, Offtopic

    Hey, Bush's EPA, under ex-New Jersey governor Whitman, claimed the air around NYC did not exceed EPA safety thresholds for toxic chemicals. So people stayed around breathing it unprotected, including the heroes toiling in the WTC crater. But they were lying. After lies like that go unpunished, who can blame them for lying about something less explosive like RF interference?

    --

    --
    make install -not war

    1. Re:Lying for Dollars by Doc+Ruby · · Score: 0

      Moderation -1
      100% Offtopic

      TrollMod, the topic is Bush agencies LYING to cover up their favors to big business. What's YOUR excuse for YOUR TrollMod coverup?

      --

      --
      make install -not war

    2. Re:Lying for Dollars by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0
      I hate to ruin your childish little Bush-hating fantasy but this started prior to Bush's administration.

      Moderation -1 Syncophant

    3. Re:Lying for Dollars by Doc+Ruby · · Score: 0

      Fuck you, Anonymous Bushsucking Coward. You can hardly say the FCC lying under Bush for the past 5 years of his bullshit regime isn't his fault. Except when you admit the truth: he's a sockpuppet, good only for worship by asshole fools like you. Or peek out your own asshole for a second to notice that he's totally responsible for Whitman's EPA, which is a lot more serious, right? Why do you hate America? Get a clue, learn to spell, get the fuck out of the way while the adults talk about real life, Anonymous sycophant Coward.

      --

      --
      make install -not war

    4. Re:Lying for Dollars by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Hi. I'm not really responsible for your newfound loss of posting bonus, but I helped to reinforce it by modding down some more of your crap a few minutes ago. Maybe you should start a new ID. Or find a new hobby, or at least a forum where people give a flying fuck about your paranoid lunatic rantings.

      I'm not saying you're stupid.. some of your posts are really intelligent. But they always degrade into this kind of bullshit after one or two replies, and you flame anyone who disagrees with your paranoia.

      Have a day.

    5. Re:Lying for Dollars by Doc+Ruby · · Score: 1

      Oh, yeah, you're not "responsible", though you just did something to cause it, then hid behind an Anonymous Coward apron to brag about it. No wonder you're sympathetic to the Bush EPA denial that poisoned New Yorkers, or the Bush FCC denial that's working to poison everyone near BPL.

      You've got a demented delusion that your opinion matters. Calling my documented exposures of lethal Bush crimes "paranoia" merely shows your committment to denial. Then you brag about all the effort you go to to suppress me, without daring to actually argue with the facts. I flame anyone who doesn't earn some respect, either by showing some, or showing some chance of accepting a documented, reasonable argument, after they get rude with me. You, Anonymous Coward, have so little manners that you can't even recognize them. You're swallowed by your driving denial. Have a life as a fascist denier, corporate Bush apologist liar. That must really suck.

      --

      --
      make install -not war

    6. Re:Lying for Dollars by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Don't be absurd. I'm not going to drop AC, undoing the moderation while simulteneously presenting myself for retaliatory moderating. I was just doing you the favor of explaining why you're so irritating. If you could post with a bit of self respect and/or control, I wouldn't bother modding you down.

      You've got a demented delusion that your opinion matters.

      Talk about the pot and the kettle..

      Calling my documented exposures of lethal Bush crimes "paranoia" merely shows your committment to denial.

      Sorry, I should've specified that I only replied to this topic because it was the top one on your profile, not because of any content therein. Regardless of topic, you maintain a crazed-crackpot demeanor in your rants, undermining the substance of your arguments, working into a frothy fervor as the replies continue. You're an embarassment to the issues you try to present because you just make it easier for the people who disagree with you to dismiss you as a nut.

      Even if I disagreed with you, I wouldn't argue the facts because you can't argue with a fanatic, and that's how you come across -- like the equivelant to a sweaty preacher in a pulpit using fearmongering to drive home his message. "Fascist denier, corporate Bush apologist liar?" Do you even listen to yourself? If I agreed with your assessment of the facts of a particular argument, I still wouldn't want you on my side while you're spewing that kind of crap. THAT is why you get modded down, except for the rare post where you manage not to go from facts to passionate disdain in 30 words or less.

      I don't mod you down for substance, rather for your lack of style.

    7. Re:Lying for Dollars by Doc+Ruby · · Score: 1

      Your style is the system-gaming creep. No wonder you get worked up enough to labor at complex schemes to suppress me and attempt insult, despite Slashdot's structures to prevent that.

      I'm posting now merely to gloat over your revelations of your own irrelevance. The only person to whom my opinions matter to me is myself, though I certainly get a lot of compliments on them. And a lot of unsupportable opposition, like yours - showing they matter to others, especially people whose cozy delusions they threaten. I'm glad that posts like mine irritate you - you don't deserve comfort. Especially when you're going to post so much claptrap, sparked by my post documenting Bush agency "Lying for Dollars", without your even attempting to dispute those facts. You might not like "fascist denier, Bush apologist liar", because it's not as glossy as its equivalent "expressive Republican booster". But your style can't cover the stink of your substance. Stick with your telegenic liars and fascists, who make you more comfortable than the truth. If the outrageous truth scares you, stay out of its way - don't play in traffic you can't understand, shouting at us to "slow down". Dangle the possibility of being "on my side" before someone who cares. You go which way the wind blows - you're valueless, except as a demonstration of the emptiness that lurks beneath your anonymous suppression and posting.

      --

      --
      make install -not war

  31. Interference with Ham and emergency frequencies by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 2, Informative

    A clarification -
    Yes, BPL interferes with Ham frequencies. But the FCC allocated emergency ranges are in fact higher on the RF spectrum, and are *not*, repeat *not* in any danger from BPL interference. Sure, it's not a great thing that Ham could be wiped out, but could the advocates please be honest stop trying to pretend that it'll hindre all emergency service communication in the process?

    1. Re:Interference with Ham and emergency frequencies by Detritus · · Score: 1

      Have you looked at a frequency allocation chart lately? Many federal agencies have HF frequency allocations for emergency communications. Not to mention the maritime and aeronautical bands that are used when VHF/UHF is not available due to distance.

      --
      Mea navis aericumbens anguillis abundat
    2. Re:Interference with Ham and emergency frequencies by elnoble · · Score: 2, Informative

      In fact, amateur radio often IS the major carrier of communications in disaster areas. To communicate beyond the affected area, hams usually have to use HF frequencies. Generally, anything higher than about 50mhz is only good for local (50mi) contacts, unless you're using repeaters. During an emergency situation, you're usually trying to contact someone outside the affected area to exchange data about the situation. Though you might not have power, the person you're trying to contact probably does, and BPL interference becomes a major obstacle in trying to sustain communications in that case.

    3. Re:Interference with Ham and emergency frequencies by tarball · · Score: 1

      What are you talking about? "Emergency ranges"? You do not have a clue about what you speak.

      Almost all emeergency communications, and ALL long range HF emergency communications will be adversely affected by BPL. That includes ham (Amateur Radio), all branches of the military (no matter what country you live in), all US civilian emergency agencies, such as FEMA, across, it is esimated if the whole thing happens, half of the damn world.

      FEMA says it may take billions of dollars to replace/augment the HF systems they have in place. Seems a bit silly.

      tom
      K0TAR

      --
      I hate sigs, and refuse to have one.
    4. Re:Interference with Ham and emergency frequencies by HermanAB · · Score: 2, Informative

      Unfortunately, there is the problem of harmonics. It is explained by the Fourier transform. Signaling at a certain carrier frequency can have substantial impact at frequencies 5 to 7 times higher.

      --
      Oh well, what the hell...
    5. Re:Interference with Ham and emergency frequencies by tarball · · Score: 1

      The arguments are informative by their nature, those who know what's up, and those who don't have a clue.

      tom
      K0TAR

      --
      I hate sigs, and refuse to have one.
    6. Re:Interference with Ham and emergency frequencies by bogusflow · · Score: 1

      You're simply incorrect. BPL will operate into the lower VHF range (30 - 80 Mhz) where there are in fact emergency service allocations. Thousands of municipalities and fire departments use frequencies in the 33 Mhz area for dispatch and general operations. My county uses 33.9 Mhz for fire dispatching. There are also public service allocations in the 40-46 Mhz range. Get your facts straight.

      --
      8 bit computing - It may be 2007 out there, but it's 1983 in here!!
  32. Anything for another broadband provider by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 4, Insightful

    All I have in my area is one monopolistic cable provider, anything for some competition.
    Like many other cable providers, they block off vital TCP/IP ports. No incoming port 80 for my web server - no way do the corporations want us to turn into producers on the internet, the corporations only want us to be consumers of their own content. Blocked outgoing port 25, crippling my mail server - naturally, only corporations should be allowed to send e-mail ... we can't be trusted to communicate, and should place our trust in the corporations to "help" (read: censor) with our e-mail.

    1. Re:Anything for another broadband provider by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0
      Your problem isn't lack of BPL. Your problem is lack of competition on your local cable system.

      I've got DSL, and the number of competing DSL providers is enormous here where I live.

    2. Re:Anything for another broadband provider by syzler · · Score: 2, Informative

      I can not speak for the blocking of TCP port 80. However as a systems administrator at an ISP, I can assure you that the ISP is justified in blocking out bound TCP port 25.

      With the increase of SPAM on the Internet, providers are being more strict with other ISPs that fail to police their IP space for open relays and viruses. A single spammer from one of your netblocks is often enough to get ALL of your net blocks black listed by other ISPs. As a result ISP's are being forced to restrict outbound access to services such as SMTP in order to protect the majority of subscribers that do not host services.

      If you would like to send email from your server, configure it to relay out bound e-mails through your ISP's SMTP servers. This allows the ISP to catch surges before remote ISPs start complaining.

      Some ISPs, even offer special packages at no additional cost that do not have these restrictions, however they may require that you demostrate techincal competency to use a filterless service. Since a large number of people do not properly lock down SMTP relays or actively check for viruses.

      To sum up, at my company it is not about thinking that you should not host services, but that we want to insure that your services will not impact the other 99.99% of our subscriber's access to the Internet.

    3. Re:Anything for another broadband provider by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Spammers would love if every ISP blocked port 25, forcing both legitimate mail and spam to go through the same mail server. No more IP filtering, only content filtering (requires an intelligen computer to really work) and filtering based on headers (which spammers will fake). I.e. no working spam filtering.

    4. Re:Anything for another broadband provider by ScouseMouse · · Score: 1

      Agreed, nor is it particularly difficult to use an email server under these conditions.

      You just need to use something like Fetchmail to get your mail from your ISP's account on a regular basis and set your local sendmailer to forward your email via your ISP's local email relay.

      Once its set up, its pretty transparent. I do it because i prefer IMAP rather than POP3 because i dont like loosing all my emails every time my desktop machine dies a death.

      Its pretty trivial to anyone who knows about these things, and will prevent you from becomming a Spam generator. (for which ISPs get blacklisted rather quickly)

      Blocking Web service is a bit naughty though, and i cant figure out why they would want to do that, other than to force you to buy web space on their servers.

    5. Re:Anything for another broadband provider by jamesborr · · Score: 1

      Actually, if you pay them extra money (typically in the realm of $200 a month in my neck of the woods), they will remove most/all restrictions, use any port you want, no TOS hassles, etc.... As with most things in life, the proper application of certain sums of money will solve most problems.

  33. Who cares about interferance? How about Harmonics? by Dharkfiber · · Score: 1

    Let us start with the basics. 1. A signal is passed across a copper wire by first adding a voltage on it. 2. You then oscilate that electricity which produces a signal when you choose where 0 is on the sine wave. 3. You then decode the 0(s) and 1(s) on the far side. Now, if you were to place different signals on the same wire where the alternating current is already running you can increase the "up-swing" and "down-swing" of those oscillating waves by having any signal were the wave peak and wave trough meet. Can you imagine what would happen if you played with alternating current phases? What is worse for this plan? Even if you can dampen the harmonics on that wire. How many times does the electrical signal split? How many end-points are necessary to repeat signals out to all the people connected to the grid? What happens when someone wants to feed electricity or even a signal back? Telephone networks have enough problems with the number of devices it takes to make sure you get an IP signal .. and that telephone network was originally designed for communication.

  34. Re:BPL == Bastard Public License by UndyingShadow · · Score: 1

    Except that if there was a global emergency, I doubt your broadband would be on anyway, in which case, why are you HAM? It would be easy to kill BPL during an emergency. Emergency freqs are another story tho.

  35. Stupid Idea! by cashcraft · · Score: 2, Insightful

    In other words, we are going to sacrifice our country's emergency communications system so that people can get internet access more easily? I don't think so!

    1. Re:Stupid Idea! by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      You have got to be stupid if you think hamsters have any clue about "emergency communications" left. Here it is 2005 & all they have is 9600 baud digital?

      License free 802.11 whips your asses! Why even have or need a license for such backward technology?

      I threw that out with my Commodore 64!

  36. Re:On behalf of 99.999% of the population... by cashcraft · · Score: 2, Insightful

    Would you still say that if you weren't able to get the medical help you needed in a disaster because your area's backup emergency communications system (which most probably uses ham radio) was wiped out by BPL?

  37. Oh! You mean those guys who pioneered.... by stox · · Score: 2, Informative

    microcomputing? More work on hobby microcomputing was being done by hams than anyone else back in the 1970's. Anyone remember Wayne Green and '73? Which later spun off, directly or indirectly, Byte, Kilobaud and other fine publications. An amazing amount of technology has been pioneeered by the ham community. They are an asset that should not be thrown away carelessly. Given the chance, I am sure there will be many more innovations to come. Real ones, not the Microsoft kind.

    --
    "To those who are overly cautious, everything is impossible. "
  38. About time the BPL got its due. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0
  39. Nice troll. But let me enligthen everyone else... by celerityfm · · Score: 4, Insightful
    How funny. Amateur Radio has left you in the dust and you don't even know it. Amateur Radio is the most technologically advanced "hobby" on the planet. Does YOUR hobby have:

    A mission to Mars

    14 privately owned satellites in orbit

    Experiments and payload aboard the International Space Station (and Space Shuttles when they fly again)

    A worldwide GPS based tracking system

    An independent worldwide wireless data network

    No? Are you even still reading this? If so then ask yourself this, does your "hobby" provide emergency communications during disasters? Does it? DOES IT? Was it THERE during the TSUNAMIS like amateur radio was?

    What about after the hurricanes? After Charlie tore trough Port Charlotte and knocked down all local sheriff and fire radio towers ham radio operators were there cranking up new towers, equipping the sheriff and first responders with new radios so they could save lives. They even used that tracking system I mentioned on all of the vehicles involved in rescue operations so that way the first responders could coordinate their vehicles more efficiently...

    But you've probably stopped reading. Like I could care. All I want to do is enlighten those who read your comment, give them a different point of view. Show them that Amateur Radio DOES matter, is an important part of our lives and will be around a long, long time. BPL or no.

    --
    ...unfortunately no one can be told what The Mat^H^H^HGoatse is...they must experience it for themselves...
  40. Re:BPL? by J.+Random+Luser · · Score: 2, Interesting

    why arent the power companies themselves pushing...

    In this part of the world they are. Many have installed their own fiber on the power poles, for control & metering, and are selling the spare bandwidth. One thought they could do "fiber to transformer" then BPL. They soon found the error of their choice and now are struggling to fit demand into their backup wireless spectrum.

    As for BoG, one mainly electricity utility here inherited some abandoned gas pipes thru the city. They've pulled a lot of fiber thru those...

  41. Interference is indeed fact... by msauve · · Score: 0

    and as Shannon has so clearly told us, the rate at which information may be tranferred is directly related to both bandwidth AND noise. Interference is noise.

    The quote given indicates a naive understanding of radio and communications theory, at best. Sure, some receivers work better than some others. But it's also generally true that any specific receiver will work better in the absence of noise (i.e. interference.)

    --
    "National Security is the chief cause of national insecurity." - Celine's First Law
    1. Re:Interference is indeed fact... by Jeremy+Erwin · · Score: 2, Informative
      Gupta and Kumar (2001) note that Shannon (1948) was concerned with single user channels:


      The last few decades have seen a tremendous growth
      in wireless communication. The most popular examples are
      cellular voice and data networks and satellite communication
      systems. These and other similar applications have moti-
      vated researchers to extend Shannon's information theory for
      a single-user channel to some that involve communication
      among multiple users. A few such examples are the multiple-
      access channel, the broadcast channel, and the interference
      channel. The exact capacity region is, however, known in the
      most general case only for the multiple-access channel, while
      the broadcast capacity region is known only for few specific
      channels, like the additive white Gaussian noise channel and
      the deterministic channel [7], and even fewer results are available for the interference channel [23]. It should be further
      noted that the above applications as well as the channel models
      used for analyzing them involve mainly single-hop wireless
      communication.



      More such papers are available from David Reed's Open Spectrum page.

      But hey, it isn't my field.
  42. It's all easy if you are willfully ignorant. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    I recall that article.

    The basic premise was that if you ignore basic principles of the physics electromagnetic waves and basic communications theory you can eliminate interferance and bandwidth limitations.

    Some of the techniques he proposes can, and are, moving us closer to the theoretical limits of utilization of the available bandwidth. But just as improving engine efficiencies will not get you to perpetual motion, improving recievers abilities to reject interferance cannot give you unlimited reuse of the same frequency without interferance. At some level of simultanious reuse of the same frequency the desired signal is indistinguishable from the interferance. Wishful thinking will not change that.

  43. practice by zogger · · Score: 2, Insightful

    it takes a lot of time and skill and hardware to become a good HAM. If the only outlet someone has is during bona fide emergencies when the grid power is down, well..that just ain't gonna cut it. That's like telling someone who's level of expewrtise is they brought home a computer from the store and plugged it in, then they can become an instant systems administrator the first time they get a virus, *poof* they magically know everything and all the HOWTOs and whatnot. Uh huh, sure....

    It's not possible or probable.

    BPL is technically possible, just a bad idea in general. I live rural and would love broadband, but I don't want BPL. The best solution is to just run fiber everyplace, like back in our history we ran electrical wires, then telco wires to almost everyone. sure initially it might seem expensive, but we have the historical proof how it benefited all the "we the people" and improved the economy. It *paid off* doing that generally speaking. So, the quicker we do it, the quicker it will be done. It's just tech evolution. Fiber works, and economies of scale would drop the price, and certainly we could stand to create a few tens of thousands new tech jobs in this nation, jobs that *can't* be outsourced.

  44. Poorly argued paper by ugmoe · · Score: 3, Informative
    First he states that because rural deployments will cost more than urban that optimal profits will come from operations in the areas with the highest population density, and lower profits -- or losses -- will come from operations outside those areas. Which is true, but so what, nudie bars are more profitable in high population density areas, but they are still present in rural areas - the important question is will it still be profitable?

    Later he agrees that competition would be good for the consumer, but that BPL is not being faster, more reliable, or cheaper than conventional broadband access. But, he leave out the part about it being faster and more reliable than no access at all. Although I'll admit that BPL probably costs more than having no access at all. Finally he begins to selectively quote and reference FCC documents. He talks of notching and quotes a member of the ARRL (association for amateur radio) of which the author is also a member. The FCC data that he claims show that the likelihood of interference is not very low, actually shows the opposite for a properly notched systems. The report showed low to no interference with a an above ground properly notched system simply recommend that the notch be increase by 100kHz in the 10 meter band.

    And for underground powerline systems, there were no caveats at all - the underground systems were always below the limit.

    Why claim that the data proves something that it doesn't?

    http://www.arrl.org/~ehare/bpl/FCC_reports.pdf

    1. Re:Poorly argued paper by Hidyman · · Score: 1

      So the ral solution is to get all of the power lines underground.
      Then you have nice earthen shielding, you don't have to worry about the effects of ULF RF, and you don't have to look at the ugly wires. The BPL would just be a nice side benefit.

      --
      You can't take the sky from me ...
  45. or, you could read TFA. by javaxman · · Score: 4, Informative
    A couple of key points from TFA, just so you don't have to be bothered to inform yourself before having an opinion :

    The HF frequency spectrum -- from 3MHz to 30MHz -- and the VHF spectrum - 30MHz to 80MHz -- are the two that would suffer the most interference from Access BPL. These spectrums are used by thousands of public safety agencies: police departments, fire departments, and emergency medical services. They are also used by the military, by government entities at all levels, by ships and planes, and by many other licensed users. The communications of all of these critical functions would be subjected to the interference generated by Access BPL.
    and
    ... transformers can eat the broadband traffic at points between the power plant and its final destination. Now that we know the signal has to carried by other means in order to get it into the neighborhoods being served, a large chunk of the original cost savings have disappeared...
    In other words, it doesn't work _anywhere_ you have to cross over a transformer ( think about how many places you see those ) and would cause problems for public safety, TV, low-frequency radio, and a host of other wireless spectrum uses. We'd be much better off looking at municipal wireless WiMAX-style systems or other means of encouraging broadband network build-out. I agree that both government and industry need to get behind broadband... just not over unshielded high-voltage lines, thanks. There are other methods, many of which are just as cost-effective without the major downsides.
    1. Re:or, you could read TFA. by Jaysyn · · Score: 1, Interesting

      Fuck it. Let em do it. I hope it becomes law. Let the chaos & finger-pointing ensue.

      Yes I'm serious.

      Jaysyn

      --
      There is a war going on for your mind.
    2. Re:or, you could read TFA. by gmack · · Score: 1

      ... transformers can eat the broadband traffic at points between the power plant and its final destination. Now that we know the signal has to carried by other means in order to get it into the neighborhoods being served, a large chunk of the original cost savings have disappeared...

      I'll say.. I don't know about down there, but up here(I'm in Canada) Rural areas often have 1 transformer for a group of 4 houses and if they are even more remote 1 transformer per house!
      It's not a last mile problem .. it's a last 20 feet problem and those tend to be overhead wires anyways so theres no digging involved. I'm betting just giving up and going fiber to the home wouldn't be much more expensive.

    3. Re:or, you could read TFA. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Hi,

      Completely offtopic, but I saw your sig ... dunno where we could get financial data cheap (news cos. charge for that sorta thing, i think) but it'll be a fun thing to do.

      It might also be hosted on Slashshot, Scare's been looking to do something with it for a while.

      cheers, gaurav

    4. Re:or, you could read TFA. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      One thing that bothers me about BPL is something pointed out on a different website that opposes its use is how the signal gets from one side of the transformer to the other. Since the transformer "eats" the signal as it attempts to go through the coils like the 60Hz power there has to be a device that connects the "high side" to the the "low side" for the signal to go through. What if this device fails? What assurance do I have that the 1000+ volt distribution power isn't suddenly short circuited into my 240/120 volt house circuits? The circuit breakers in the house are no protection since they limit current and not voltage. If the house is suddenly charged to 1000 volts all the light bulbs I have in the house will instantly burn out, and all kinds of sensitive electronics will likely go up in smoke. If I'm lucky either the circuit breakers will finally trip, or that BPL "bridge" device will go up in smoke before my house burns down or someone gets maimed or killed.

      That may be a bit over the top but it is a valid concern. What controls are in place to assure that BPL will not cause problems with my ability to get safe power to my home? I've already had a couple short term power outages this year where I live, will the offering of BPL distract from the power company providing me with power?

  46. Re:Nice troll. But let me enligthen everyone else. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0, Flamebait
    My hobby doesn't have self-important asses who take every opportunity to tell me how special, important and wonderful they are either.

    It's funny, I've yet to see a policeman, a fireman, a paramedic, a doctor, a Red Cross volunteer or even a laborer who clears rubble and rebuilds infrastructure loudly announce to everyone how critical and valuable and he is and how "you'll be sorry!" when you guys take your ball and go home. I guess the people who do the real work in emergencies don't have the time to troll message boards puffing themselves up. They've got work to do.

  47. BPL and Amateur Radio by MonMotha · · Score: 4, Informative

    I see a lot of people badmouthing BPL or Amateur Radio over one-another. I'm an amateur radio operator, and I'd oppose BPL even if it didn't interfere with the amateur service (as some implementations don't: they notch out the amateur bands since the ARRL has been so vocal).

    It really is a silly idea. Let's run MF/HF/VHF signals over this really long, unshielded wire to deliver internet to people's houses. Of course we can't actually get it to the house because of those pesky transformers, so we still need to retrofit our grid and use something else (like wifi) for the last 100 yards. Then there's that pesky issue of power lines being really bad transmission lines at those high frequencies (they're definately not constant impedence), so we'll have to throw a lot of power into those lines (at RF) to get the signal where we want it. What? It radiates? Hum, oh well.

    The obvious solution is to string real transmission lines (like coax, twisted pair, or, obviously, fiber) along those poles (protected in some kind of harder casing) and underground. But that's expensive? Duh, retrofitting something meant to deliver huge amounts of energy at one frequency (50 or 60Hz, depending on your side of the pond) to deliver data at high rates of speed isn't going to be cheap. At least don't be half-assed about it.

    Also, just so people know. The amateur service doesn't really have all the bandspace people make it out to have. Some bands are surprisingly small: the voice section of 17m, for example, is from 18.110MHz to 18.168MHz - only 58kHz of bandwidth, or enough for 20 single-sideband voice conversations if everyone plays *really* nice and lines up perfectly. There are giant posters like this one that show the major service to which each frequency band is allocated to in the US (many of which are also assigned internationally by ITU, at least down in HF). The first 3 rows (3kHz-30MHz) are the bands likely to be given problems by BPL. The amateur service is teal-green colored on that poster. Look for yourself how little is actually given to the service on many bands. 80m (3.5MHz) is about the only one that you're likely to even spot quickly below 30MHz!

    1. Re:BPL and Amateur Radio by terrywc · · Score: 2, Insightful

      "The obvious solution is to string real transmission lines (like coax, twisted pair, or, obviously, fiber) along those poles (protected in some kind of harder casing) and underground. But that's expensive?"

      In NSW, Australia,this is currently happening on the major transmission lines. The lightning protection cables on the top arms of the cross country towers are actually hollow, except for a large fibre optic cable in the centre.

      It wasn't done with the viewpoint of setting up BPL, but from the viewpoint of selling bandwidth between major points on the power grid.

      So, it will not be that expensive for a major company to provide a BPL type service throughout the state.

      And, yes I am ignoring the advisability of it all.

  48. Re:On behalf of 99.999% of the population... by finkployd · · Score: 2, Informative

    Sure, fuck ham. However they are a small population of spectrum users who would be affected (they just happen to be the group who complained publically). Police, coast guard, other emergency services, etc. all regiatered complaints to the FCC regarding BPL.

    Appearently they do not care that you were easily mislead by debunked "cheap broadband" claims that anyone with a freshman level EE knowledge could see through. I'm sorry you were so gullible, fortunatly it seems the rest of the world isn't.

    Finkployd

  49. Cool by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    airsnort with a CB

  50. HAM and tbe ARRL by kg4gyt · · Score: 1
    Led by the ARRL HAMs have been lobbying against the idea of BPL sincs its conception. A full article is available here.

    BPL is being tested in a remote area in Arizona, where there are few HAMs and little of the spectrum is actually in use- when/if BPL is ever put into place in a city or heavily populated area, many more "non-existent" problems will result. BPL will cause destructive interference to many commodities using radio that we use today.

    1. Re:HAM and tbe ARRL by Russ+Nelson · · Score: 1

      Or, in another reality, BPL has been tested in other areas .... where no hams complained .... and nobody noticed because it worked just fine.
      -russ
      p.s. THIS reality.

      --
      Don't piss off The Angry Economist
  51. BPL was a scam to begin with by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 3, Informative

    As someone who has been involved in the BPL to some degree, I can assure you that the BPL is a political scam that was never meant to be deployed on any significant scale.
    In the past, FCC required local owners of cable and phone infrastructure (baby-Bells, Verizons of the world, etc) to share access to their wires in a non-discriminatory fashion to avoid "monopolistic" behaviour. Both local DSL and cable operators lobbied heavily and successfully to strike this "mandatory non-discriminatory sharing" provision from FCC rules. BPL was proclaimed a "third alternative broadband technology" that in theory should prevent monopoly or duopoly in residential broadband. The trick is that BPL is not competitive with cable or DSL and, thus, will unlikely be deployed at all. BPL push in FCC was a smoke-screen to enable baby-Bells to monopolize DSL and existing cable owners to monopolize cable broadband accordingly.

    1. Re:BPL was a scam to begin with by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      BPL was mandated by President Bush. Its deployment was a result of a direct order from the White House to then-FCC chairman Michael Powell.

      And before you Democrats start screaming "Figures! Bush did a favor to his power-company contributors," John Kerry didn't exactly speak out against it either.

      And if ham operators and other licensed spectrum users think that they can legally interfere with it, think again. Just like interference to TV sets can put any amateur station off the air (it's in FCC Part 97), so will this.

      Bet on a bill in Congress to make Part 15 (unlicensed) devices priority on all frequencies other than broadcast, military, cellular, and public safety bands.

  52. Last sentence by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Did anyone catch the last sentence? I can't say this article is unbiased.

    In the interest of full disclosure, I am both a newly licensed amateur radio operator and a member of the ARRL.

  53. weird view of public interest by deft · · Score: 1

    maybe on slashdot someone might thing the few ham radio guys are the majority, but i bet DSL to everyone with power will serve the public interest much more than upsetting a few hobbyists who like to see how far they can talk.

    Someone should get them trillian :)

    --

    There's nothing Intelligent about Intelligent Design.
    1. Re:weird view of public interest by sapgau · · Score: 1

      For the undecided with mod points: set this to Funny.

      Insensitive, maybe. But stil Funny.

  54. Re:On behalf of 99.999% of the population... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Well, if I had power and active broadband to be transmitting interfering how about I just fucking use that to communicate! Guess what dipshit, if there's a disaster, there's no fucking power and hence no BPL to interfere with your fucking radio! Jesus Christ, is there a fucking intelligence test to be a ham, or is it just a primitive AOL?

  55. Re:On behalf of 99.999% of the population... by finkployd · · Score: 2, Insightful

    Yes, you are quite the intelligent one. So you believe in the event of an emergency all the Hams will spring to life and use their radio gear now that BPL is down. You honestly believe people are going to spend money on gear, set it up, and wait for a day when it might be usable. Do you want the first "test" of this gear to be during an emergency?

    Finkployd

  56. Underground cables by HermanAB · · Score: 1

    I would think that this can work in Europe, where most electricity is carried in underground cables.

    When I first visited North America, the third world standard ungodly cable mess strung next to all the roads was quite unexpected to me.

    I find it hard to fathom how the power companies could even have considered using BPL in overhead lines - plain schtoopidttt...

    --
    Oh well, what the hell...
    1. Re:Underground Cables by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      The buildings are underground too?

    2. Re:Underground cables by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      It works in Europe.

      The reason is simple: in the US small transformers are placed quite close to the end-users; in Europe it's bigger transformers, further away, feeding a larger number of end-users.
      The transformers are low-pass filters and stop the BPL signal. As a result, a single BPL head-end can feed many users in Europe, few in the States.

      The reason for putting transformers close to consumers in the US, far away in the EU is because of the differing mains voltage. The EU voltage is about 240V, about twice the US value. For equal power consumed this means mains currents are half. As mains currents are half, resistive loss in the cables in EU is a quarter of the US value. As power losses are smaller it makes sense to put the final transformer further away.

    3. Re:Underground Cables by Arimus · · Score: 1

      How will that effect ground wave transmission for HF and below?

      --
      --- Users are like bacteria -> Each one causing a thousand tiny crises until the host finally gives up and dies.
  57. Re:Nice troll. But let me enligthen everyone else. by celerityfm · · Score: 1

    Ok he won he got me. A troll is a troll.

    But your wrong about that second paragraph. I never said or suggested anything of the sort nor have I personally been involved in any emergency amateur radio activities. I just know some people who do volunteer and have worked emergency communications before and I guess I'm a little too proud of them, a little too defensive of them.

    As a side note I wasn't trying to belittle other hobbies-- I just think it's not a "hobby" is all, that was part of my point really, was that he wasn't looking at it as a hobby.

    But you have to admit the mission to mars is pretty cool.

    --
    ...unfortunately no one can be told what The Mat^H^H^HGoatse is...they must experience it for themselves...
  58. IP over H2O by aaronrp · · Score: 2, Funny

    Mmm, broadband so good you can taste it! Seems to me this would work for downloads, but uploads would have to go through the sewers.

    1. Re:IP over H2O by GaryPatterson · · Score: 2, Funny

      "I'm just going into the bathroom for a bit. I've got a couple of large files to upload."

    2. Re:IP over H2O by ZosX · · Score: 2, Funny

      Uhh, I hope that you would be doing some downloading the in the bathroom instead of uploading. Doesn't sound too healthy to me!

    3. Re:IP over H2O by GaryPatterson · · Score: 1

      Hey - I'm uploading from my local ...uh... drive to the remote server. Something's got to travel from here to there.

    4. Re:IP over H2O by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      If only I had mod points, ... Good stuff!

  59. let me guess: Joe Barr is a ham? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    let me guess: Joe Barr is a ham? Amateur radio operators (hams) are very well organized against BPL.

  60. So BPL can't be rolled out in rural areas? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    I lived in a rural area for a while, and internet service sucked. All we had was dial-up, and even that was horrible because the phone line was so crap. If you wanted high speed, your only option was satellite, which has its own problems, (High costs, metered use, latency). I had hoped that BPL would help get decent, resonable cost high speed internet out to where I lived. Can the technology work in places about 7 miles from the nearest town (with 5K people?)

    1. Re:So BPL can't be rolled out in rural areas? by deadweight · · Score: 1

      NO! Well, technically it might work, but the cost-per-house would be HUGE. The only place this technology might make money is the same populated areas where DSL and Cable make money.

  61. What if BPL is the ONLY choice? Insensitive clods! by Bloody+Peasant · · Score: 3, Interesting

    ... other than a 56k modem?

    I challenge those who've been ranting about the technology to stop for a minute, put yourself in my shoes, and see how you like it. Or how you don't.

    I live in a somewhat rural area in central Virginia near Charlottesville. I'm way, way beyond the 15,000 cable foot requirement for DSL so that's out. There is no cable TV within 5 miles or more. And the only company offering wide area Wifi is a no go; I tried but couldn't get any signal because there are hills all around (10 million tons of granite equates to many hundreds of db in attenuation). (I'm also technically within the National Radio Quiet Zone [google it if you never heard of it] which makes additional wide-area wifi towers problematic).

    My electric provider (a rural co-op) has a trial of BPL going right now and they're promising to roll it out to more customers soon. Initial testing on the trial has apparently been good, though I don't know how much attention has been paid to local hams and the impact on them.

    If you're gonna diss my only broadband option, at least gimme some home for an alternative (other than moving)!!!

    --
    -- This .sig intentionally left meaningless.
  62. BPL over my dead body. by Ice+Station+Zebra · · Score: 0, Troll

    I will never let BPL work anywhere I live. Every see those sneakers thrown across the wires. Imagine them filled with small HF transmitters. Fuck BPL.

    1. Re:BPL over my dead body. by Ice+Station+Zebra · · Score: 1

      This is no troll. I have more knowledge about BPL than you Mr. Moderator. I spent 6 months in close contact with one of the main BPL equipment manufacturers and their complete lack of ethics and outright lying about interference to other HF radio services got me off the band wagon pretty quick. This technology needs to die, fast.

  63. Re:Nice troll. But let me enligthen everyone else. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    It's funny, I've yet to see a policeman, a fireman, a paramedic, a doctor, a Red Cross volunteer or even a laborer who clears rubble and rebuilds infrastructure loudly announce to everyone how critical and valuable and he is

    Thats funny, dumbfuck asswiper idiot. (hey, you started with the name calling shitwad, so its fair game, just like your momma.) After all, I don't see anyone trying to cover up technology that will prevent the police, the fire crews, the doctors, the red cross volunteers, or laborers from doing their job.

    But oh, oh, oh, if BPL destroys radio and the radio operator points out why its important to keep this from happening, suddenly they're a "self-important ass".

    Get a fucking life, quit defending useless stone age technology. Tell me how many megabits I can get on a power line again, and how it'll only be available in urban areas already serviced by DSL and cable because the step up/down transformers on long distance lines kill the BPL signal, and how FIOS and other fiber services will eat BPL for a pre-lunch snack on the way to offering real broadband without radio interference.

  64. Underground Cables by skeptictank · · Score: 1

    All new construction in N Texas is underground cables. It nice not having power-lines and telephones lines all over the place. I don't know if BPL will ever be financially viable, but RF interface won't be a problem in new additions.

  65. Re:On behalf of 99.999% of the population... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0
    No again, dipshit. BPL may interfere with ham. It May. Interfere. Under no circumstances will it completely wipe it out. In fact the crybabies in Arizona wet their pants when they started a field trial but the BPL operators started notching out some frequencies and suddenly you're hearing a lot less fact and a lot more rhetoric from that pack of Chicken Littles. It's been running for over a year now and the world, amazingly, hasn't ended despite a lot of gushing and hand wringing.

    Jesus Christ you're a bunch of fucking crybabies.

    It's ironic, BPL is a shitty, dead end technology and it would die on its own (lack of) merits but you fucking hams had to open your pieholes and make it so much worse. Never have I met such a bunch of uptight, self important fuckwads with so much free time.

  66. Re:Nice troll. But let me enligthen everyone else. by okto · · Score: 0

    Yeah, get a life and quit getting mad at people on the Internet! Wait...oh, oops. ^_^

  67. give this man a prize! by Cryofan · · Score: 1
    --
    eat shiat and bark at the moon
    1. Re:give this man a prize! by Russ+Nelson · · Score: 1

      You're not accusing him of self-interested argumentation, are you?
      -russ

      --
      Don't piss off The Angry Economist
  68. Re:Nice troll. But let me enligthen everyone else. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    policeman

    You have obviously never seen a policeman protesting things like "copkiller" armor piercing bullets or anything else that affects the way their job works.

    In fact, you have no clue at all what the hell you're talking about.

  69. BPL In NY by speedlaw · · Score: 2, Insightful

    BPL is a total killer for any radio in it's path. A trip on Rt. 9 in Briarcliff Manor NY shows that you get "digital hash" on most ham bands and on CB. While CB is uncool on this board, it is in common use. Any shortwave listening is gone. Imagine these noise generators all over..... The internet is tissue paper in tough times. Ham radio requires a radio, a wire, and a power supply. On 9-11, the third thing to fall was the cellular network and you can bet next time it will have a "priority access" limit for public safety persons. YOU won't get to use it. BPL is like allowing me to use your fresh water lines to drain my sewage-it's only a little dirty water, and you probably won't taste it, and if you do, well, we have to share your pipes. K2FIX

    1. Re:BPL In NY by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Anyone with any radio smarts also knows BPL is very vulnerable to interference from outside signals. A 100 watt HF transmitter, from a legal ham op or an illegal CB op (who usually has a horrendous signal from a spectral purity standpoint) will reliably knock out the BPL signals.

      Since ham has the licenced service, BPL as a part 15 service MUST ACCEPT this interference.

      Ok for p0rn, but what about the business world.?? Will they accept the fact the pissed off ham now runs a LEGAL 250 watt propagation beacon now that BPL has knocked him off the air for good ? How about someone a few miles off, using a "properly" aimed beam antenna ? It's going to be tough to make a case stick from the BPL side.

  70. Re:On behalf of 99.999% of the population... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    If your hobby gets in the way of cheap broadband for the masses, collect stamps.

    Move to fucking Korea or shut up. Claiming that BPL will bring "cheap broadband to the masses" is the sign that you're nothing but a drooling idiot.

    Call me when BPL promises me gigabit ethernet for $200 per month. Until then, take your whining and shove it up your ass.

    Or if you think you're smarter than you act, invent something that WILL bring me gigabit ethernet to my door for $200. I'd give up emergency rescue teams and ham radio noise for gigabit ethernet, and all these people could just set up stations online to chat with each other.

  71. Claiming... by msauve · · Score: 0
    that the number of listeners makes a difference is very Zen, but not particularly scientific (except perhaps at the quantum level, which has no practical relevance to this discussion). I see no term in Shannon's equation which accomodates a "type" of channel.

    It's simply Capacity = Bandwidth x log2 (1+ Signal/Noise).

    Your reference is to a paper dealing with multiple "simultaneous" transmitters sharing bandwidth, and is not relevent to the discussion at hand (interference from BPL to traditional radio technologies, such as AM/FM/CW communications). It might however be suited to a discussion of digital cellular technologies (CDMA/TDMA/OFDM).

    --
    "National Security is the chief cause of national insecurity." - Celine's First Law
    1. Re:Claiming... by Jeremy+Erwin · · Score: 1

      I didn't bring up Reed. Someone else did-- without realizing that the kinds of radio networks that Reed likes have no relation to HAM radios, emergency radio services, or any of the other spectrum uses that would be affected by BPL.

      Claiming that the number of listeners makes a difference is very Zen.

      MIMO is Zen?

    2. Re:Claiming... by AndroidCat · · Score: 1
      Claiming that the number of listeners makes a difference is very Zen.

      Shh! Don't tell the broadcast industry. The next time they cancel a <sci-fi> series, they'll claim it's very zen.

      --
      One line blog. I hear that they're called Twitters now.
  72. Re:Nice troll. But let me enligthen everyone else. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    My hobby doesn't have self-important asses who take every opportunity to tell me how special, important and wonderful they are either.

    Hams don't have a choice. They have to promote themselves if they want to retain their allocations in the (increasingly-valuable) RF spectrum. They also have to remind people of their past contributions when a gang of non-technical pinheads at the FCC decides the HF spectrum is a disposable resource.

    All of this horn-blowing is a reaction to BPL. Call it a survival instinct.

  73. Re:On behalf of 99.999% of the population... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    BPL operators started notching out some frequencies

    Slower and slower we go...

    BPL is a shitty, dead end technology and it would die on its own (lack of) merits

    Yeah, well that brings us back to the Bush-administration-run FCC pushing this dead horse as far as it will go for some reason, despite its utter and complete failure in every other country that has tried it. And now we're on Bush bashing again, odd how it goes 'round in circles!

  74. Not just Hams and emergency frequencies. by GomezAdams · · Score: 1

    Also affected would be short wave broadcasting, military frequencies, airline long distant communications, commercial broadcast frequencies for international traffic, etc. In short just about every service that uses frequencies between 3 and 30 MHZ could have been interfered with in some part of the BPL service areas. Hams were just the most vocal and have a great number of highly trained electronic engineers of professional and hobbyist persuasions to provide technical input.

    --
    Too lazy to create a sig...
  75. Re:What if BPL is the ONLY choice? Insensitive clo by evilviper · · Score: 4, Informative
    (I'm also technically within the National Radio Quiet Zone [google it if you never heard of it] which makes additional wide-area wifi towers problematic).

    Haha! I hate to be the one to tell you this, but even if BPL is rolled out to 99% of the world, you will be in the 1% that won't ever get it.

    If you're gonna diss my only broadband option, at least gimme some home for an alternative (other than moving)!!!

    ISDN, T-1, Satellite, dual-line dial-up. You have a lot of options for broadband, they just don't happen to be terribly cheap. If I was in your place, I would probably start up a broadband company, based on microwave transmitters/recievers.

    But the real issue here is that having broadband is nice, but far from necessary. And HAMs aren't just kids playing around with several thousands of dollars worth of radio equipment, they serve an important role. It's BPL that is stomping all over other radio signals, not the other way around, and it should not be rolled out until/unless they can solve that problem.

    "Dear Slashdot, I live on a coral island in the middle of the Pacific ocean, and the only way for me to get broadband is to drain all the water out of the ocean, but those damn environmentalists keep trying to stop me."
    --
    Slashdot gets worse every day... Pipedot: News for nerds, without the corporate slant
  76. Re:On behalf of 99.999% of the population... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Oh God forbid you drag your asses out of your parents' basements and go somewhere to practice your hobby. It's not like countless other people, from shooters to astronomers, can't always engage in their hobby as they choose from the comfort of their homes. Lots of us actually have to travel to another location, sometimes by car and often with a great deal of equipment ,for periods of time often ranging over an hour (that's one Star Trek episode) to engage in our hobbies. I'm sorry it's such a huge fucking inconvenience to engage those torpid flippers and move yourselves to and fro. I thought hams were so fucking important in an emergency. If just leaving the house is so traumatic what will you do "in a disaster"? Curl up into a little ball, blubber and cry and blame your failings on big, bad BPL? Whatever gets you through the day, I guess.

  77. Re:Nice troll. But let me enligthen everyone else. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0
    I don't see anyone trying to cover up technology that will prevent the police, the fire crews, the doctors, the red cross volunteers, or laborers from doing their job.

    You don't? Step out of your little fucking ham world. Politics hinders a great many things in a great many fields. Police officers can't use technologies that save lives (tasers, for example) because of politics, doctors can't use life saving drugs because of politics, volunteers have to be careful to step around local governments to get their jobs done. The list goes on. You're not unique, and you're certainly not fucking special, except maybe in the short bus way.

    Get a fucking life, quit defending useless stone age technology.

    Who's defending BPL? It's ironic, I think it's a stillborn technology that deserves to die. But I'm glad it's hanging around. I love watching puffed up Chicken Littles dance around.

  78. Re:Nice troll. But let me enligthen everyone else. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0
    Nice try. A very good friend of mine is a city cop. And you know what I tell him when I hear him talking about "cop killer" bullets (I assume you mean Black Talons)? I tell him he's getting sucked into cop groupthink and I show him facts.

    And then I hear him talk about why his department has so much trouble getting tasers that work so well and I feel for him.

  79. BPL Wouldn't be an option for you. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    If you are in the quiet zone BPL wouldn't be an option for you anyway. There's no way they'd allow that if additional wide area wifi towers are a problem.

  80. Re:What if BPL is the ONLY choice? Insensitive clo by Vengeance_au · · Score: 1

    ISDN and Satellite are the two technologies of choice for those who are ADSL/Cable/Wifi challenged.

    I use ISDN as I'm a gamer, and the pings are king for me. A few neighbours here have sat, and they get some bitching download speeds. Have a hunt around and see what you can get. Admittedly, often these techs cost more than an ADSL or cable service does (at least in Australia), but for me no neighbours within 150 meters of me, the rural lifestyle and $buttloads of cash saved living out of the city more than cover the additional costs.

  81. Ever hear of a G-Line? by Svartalf · · Score: 1
    --
    I am not merely a "consumer" or a "taxpayer". I am a Citizen of the State of Texas
  82. Re:What if BPL is the ONLY choice? by Animats · · Score: 0, Offtopic

    Somebody has to wire coax or fibre to your pole transformer. BPL is just from the pole transformer to the house. Who's going to do that long cable run?

  83. Re:On behalf of 99.999% of the population... by anubi · · Score: 4, Insightful
    When I see a power line, I am also seeing a big dipole antenna.

    It can transmit as well as receive.

    There have been many attempts and sales of devices in the past which purports to use the entire power grid as an antenna, whose signals is routed through our special little box to your TV set, yours for only $19.95 postpaid, etc.

    Yeh, you get the signal you wanted, as well as more crap you didn't than you can shake your stick at. Its like getting a free restaurant meal, thoroughly mixed with a bucket of garbage.

    So, you put wide spectral content signal back into the power grid, you are gonna radiate our all over. This has been known since the days of Tesla and Marconi. Nothing new here.

    We already have enough problem with accidental corona discharges filling the RF spectrum with unwanted broadband hash. Just one dirty insulator will screw up the RF environment for miles around.

    Technically, yes, power lines could transmit data, but they were not optimized for this. Its old-style 300-ohm TV twin-lead at its best. It was notorious for picking up stray signals.

    I do not think BPL was ever designed to send signals... it's designed like a cat trap, whose purpose is to trap investor dollars. Dollars from people quick to part with their money but slow to pick up the technical acumen to verify their claims.

    One more thing, don't knock amateur radio HAMS. They are the last breed of guys we have who have a personal interest in RF. Most people seem as ignorant of their stuff as they are about their computers, and have no earthly idea how it works - as they just complain and pay someone else to make it work. Most amateur radio operators know exactly how their stuff works - especially if you ever meet one who builds from scratch. Its really unusual these days to talk to anyone who knows this field from its most fundamental levels, and their advice should be taken very seriously. Personally, I fear the passing of these guys who build things from the ground up, as many of the incoming people build things with dollars, and have no idea how it works - and physics, not finance, makes the ultimate decision of whether something will work or not.

    --
    "Prove all things; hold fast that which is good." [KJV: I Thessalonians 5:21]

  84. why bother by dingfelder · · Score: 1

    been there, done that.

    Shrub is too easy of a target.

  85. Re:Who cares about interferance? How about Harmoni by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Start with the basics? Maybe you need to learn a little bit about the basics. The kilohertz or megahertz frequencies that are introduced onto the 60Hz carrier are nothing more than noise on the system.

    Beyond that...well, you're just spouting nonsense that a second year EE student would just laugh at. And as a practicing EE, I'm chuckling, too.

    I'll take a stab at it, though. The high frequency oscillations on the wire have no effect on the 60Hz AC frequency. The peaks and troughs can't meet because there are several orders of magnitude difference between them. Adding a few volts of high frequency noise to the thousands of volts of 60Hz power on the transmission line means nothing. No harmonics to worry about - the transmission lines are long enough for them to dampen out. Want to send a signal back? No sweat, do what DSL does, use two different carriers at two different frequencies, well above 60Hz.

    Telephone networks have problems getting you an IP signal because they were not originally designed to carry high frequency signals - just like the power lines, yet, son of a gun, it works. Apples and oranges - telephone lines aren't power lines.

    As to the effect of BPL on amateur radio? That's something else entirely.

  86. BPL by some+guy+I+know · · Score: 3, Funny
    BPL? I thought this stuff was all done and over with? Anybody able to clarify?
    BPL (the B Programming Language) was a precursor to the C Programming Language.
    It is still used in some legacy industrial applications, such as Jacquard Looms and waterwheel-powered flour mills.
    Developed at Bell Labs, it has the distinction of being the language used to program the first TOIP (Telegraph Over IP) app, which, as everyone knows, is when Samuel F.B. Morse sent the message "WTF has God wrought? OMFG ROFL!".

    Note that BPL itself was preceded by APL (Ancient Programming Language), which was used during the heyday of the Roman Empire, about 2000 years ago.
    That language is easily recognizable because it doesn't resemble any known "living" computer language (including the heiroglyphics of its character set).
    --
    Those who sacrifice security to condemn liberty deserve to repeat history or something. - Benjamin Santayana
  87. Re:What if BPL is the ONLY choice? Insensitive clo by speleo · · Score: 2, Insightful

    I was in this situation when I lived in rural New Hampshire.

    I got a T1 -- you can get these most anyplace a phone line can be ran nowadays.

    Sure, it might not be as cheap as you'd like, but you do have options. And two-way satellite works reasonably well for general surfing and email, too.

  88. alternate title "HAM radio operators spread FUD" by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    There seems to be an awful lot of Fear, Uncertainty, and Doubt coming from the HAM radio crowd. It amazes me how some people hypocritically engage in the same type of behavior they would publicly vilify others for. Personally, I think I would prefer a slightly less biased report on the potential of broadband over power lines.

  89. naive technical question by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    OK, first of all, I'm more of a software person than I am a hardware person. Nevertheless, I have a technical question:

    All the power lines I've seen have always had at least two parallel cables, if not three. So, what is to stop them from making the broadband signal a differential signal? For those who aren't aware, with a differential circuit, you take a signal and transmit it on one wire and the negated version of the same signal on a parallel wire, and then you can subtract the voltages at the ends of the wires. When you do this, a nearly-magical thing happens: the two wires, being parallel, pick up virtually the same interference as each other. But since the interference is the same and the signals are opposites, when you subtract them, you double the signal and cancel out the interference. That phenomenon is called common mode noise rejection. (This kind of circuit is used in pro audio, which is why a microphone cable has 3 pins instead of just 2. And, it is also used in SCSI cabling and other computer stuff.)

    Now, here's the part where I'm going out on a limb: it seems like this could work in reverse, too. If the two wires are carrying the same signal but at opposite voltages (one positive while the other is negative), it seems this would not only allow common mode noise rejection, but it would also cause the transmissions to be cancelled as well. To put it another way, one power line would be acting as a giant transmitting antenna for one signal, causing radio pollution, BUT the power line next to it would be transmitting the exact opposite of the radio pollution, mostly canceling it out.

    So, my question is: are they already doing this? If not, is there a reason why it couldn't work? From my own feeble understanding of things, it seems that the benefits will be reduced the shorter the wavelengths and the further apart the wires (because both these things make it hard for the opposites to line up perfectly), but it still seems like it could make a major difference. If you're talking about transmitting at the low end of the spectrum the article mentioned, at 3 MHz, then since the speed of light is 3*10^8 m/s, the wavelength is still pretty long at 100 m. And, walking outside, it seems that residential power lines look like they're about 1 m apart in my area.

  90. I covered BPL for a couple years as a reporter by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    As a tech reporter in the DC area I started covering BPL (at that time called powerline communications or PLC) in 2002. I'm no longer a reporter (having stepped over to the dark side of "corporate communications"), but still follow the industry from afar.

    Here are three articles:

    CITI Powerline Communications II - August 2002

    UPLC 2002

    CITI Powerline III - April 2003

    Amateur radio operators have been opposed to PLC/BPL since the very beginning, because it operates in their spectrum. The entire culture of ham radio revolves around the limits of performance--how far can you hear, how far can you transmit. As such, ham radio operators are extremely sensitive to interference--far more sensitive than most commercial deployments. What a municipal emergency system can easily tolerate, a ham radio operator would consider a disastrous travesty. This is why the cries of the ham radio lobby need to be taken with a grain of salt.

    On the other hand, PLC/BPL does indeed create interference. No one questions that. The question is--is it sufficient to interfere with essential services? So far the answer appears to be no. While the ARRL and other ham labs and lobbies can demonstrate harmful interference to their operations, I have not seen an independently verifiable report that a BPL commercial trial has caused real harm to essential services such as municipal emergency, military, air traffic control, etc.

    This sort of thing is what field trials are conducted to test. There have been dozens of commercial trials of BPL in the U.S. alone, in addition to numerous trials and some full commercial roll-outs in Europe and South America. I do not know of one report of actually reported harmful interference to essential or commercial services. Compare to the number of verifed emergency communication problems due to Nextel since 2001, for instance.

    The remaining unanswered question is one of cumulative interference. Even supposing that individual field trials have not caused any harmful interference to essential services, can we be sure that wide-spread deployment would not? This is one of the questions that concerns the FCC and others, because it is a question that is not easily answered prior to wide-scale deployment. And the fact is neither the FCC nor other regulatory bodies are legally equipped to regulate industries based on measurements such as average interference level or overall noise floor. They are equipped and accustomed to regulating individual point sources only (such as an antenna or device). It is uncharted territory both legally and technically.

    Finally, I've seen some ignorance about the technology and the potential industry in posts above.

    Yes, BPL can travel over long distance wires but it requires amplification for longer distances. This limits its cost-effectiveness for rural deployments. BPL is probably not a rural magic bullet.

    Yes, power companies have the tech to become telcos because most power companies have fiber pushed out pretty far into their network. It would very easy for them to coopt some of that capacity to push the BPL signal out to the medium voltage lines where it would travel to the home. However there are regulatory limits to what power co.s can do, so any BPL sales would have to be through a subsidiary/separate company, with all the state regulatory and network leasing paperwork that entails.

    Transformers are non-issues because every BPL company has a cheap solution to either bypass it or shape the signal to pass through the transformer. The IP of how to do this is the foundation of the companies and therefore the industry. Transformers don't matter.

    Finally, to address TFA itself. Who cares ab

  91. But it's worth a couple real trials by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    This is politicking from the ham radio community. They are worried because internet over powerline would be far more valuable than ham radio. They worry that if trials are successful the FCC will abandon them for more internet access. This is akin to car companies wanting to ban dangerous unsafe cars for Japan in the 70s. The car's might be unsafe, but that's not why the car companies are against it.

    So some points:

    1. It doesn't have to be better than dsl, cable, or fiber optic to help competition. Many people would be happy to upgrade from their 56k modems. Seen the ads for NetZero? It's crazy but some people are still paying $8 per month for dialup. If you are a slashdot reader you're like "damn dude pay the extra 15 bucks", but other people have lives. By providing a cheaper alternative it also puts pricing pressure on dsl and cable. It really is good for everyone who buys internet access.

    2. If it's slow and crappy people won't by it. Like a, metricom's richocet. So the government doesn't need to strangle the baby here to save people from being suckered in. If this is such an obviously dumb idea why are entrepreneurs and companies funding development of it?

    3. Ham is really cool, both my dad and grandfather use it. But we can survive a little interference with it, while we figure out how to make the two systems work together. In other words, Ham radio is not in fact of a vital communications link for the US. It's a neat hobby that is occasionally life saving (usually when some rural Ham operator has a heart attack). The point of pilot programs is to discover these issues and work them out.

    4. With emergency services, they are starting out with different frequencies based on the city so that there will be no interference. There is a chance (but a very small one) that misconfigured or resonant wires will cause interference with their motorola radios. What the author didn't mention is that this happens a bit already. There are lots of locations where cops know their radios won't always work right now for the same way your cell phone doesn't work everywhere. For example police departments already have problems with interference with cell phones http://mrtmag.com/news/commentary/first_response_c oalition/ Most cops and paramedics carry cellphones and/or pagers already to account for this. It's not like these folks are drones. They are smart folks and the world isn't going to end if there is some crackle on their radio for a couple of minutes. So the very small risk is well worth the possible benefit.

    What the FCC is doing is allowing these trials, by lowering the definition from no interference to "try really really hard" not to interfere. Now it's up to the companies make it work.

    The FCC is being entirely reasonable here and we should note that similar arguments were made by first responders and broadcasters at the introduction of wifi. Without Powell's decision wifi would still be in the lab.

  92. Fatally flawed? by jdog1016 · · Score: 1

    Maybe I'm missing something here. Since when is it universally acknowledged that BPL is a joke technology? I actually happen to be a BPL subscriber (Manassas, Va), switched from Comcast cable service recently. I know that the local ham radio club definitely has been having problems, but as far as I know, these problems are being addressed and now the system is online throughout the city, working. So, what's the problem?

    1. Re:Fatally flawed? by thurlow · · Score: 2, Interesting

      As an aside that may be of interest, we tried recently to use the Homeplug standard powerline system for some extra temporary PC's on an office LAN.

      The concept is great, you connect an adapter to a port on your LAN switch and to your powerline via a normal plug, and then connect each PC to either a network card adpater to powerline, or a USB adapter to powerline. Instant network expansion with no extra wires.

      It worked reasonably well, although a bit slow most of the time.

      This was until a large construction project started next to our office building. From then on the only time that the PC's connected to our office LAN would have any access, was during the lunch-time shutdown of the equipment on the construction site and in the evenings when the work stopped.

      We didnt use the system for very long after the connection was discovered.

      It was quite a disappointment overall.

    2. Re:Fatally flawed? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      I live in Manassas and have considered switching from Comcast.....how is the reliability?

    3. Re:Fatally flawed? by Nonillion · · Score: 1

      The problem is that interference is a two way street. So far, most hams have not gotten so pissed that they just to decide to transmit in a BPL serviced area anyway, completely disrupting YOUR BPL service in the process. If your service had constant disruptions would you still use it? You were better off with Comcast. If I came up with a new Internet service that completely disrupted your cellular service would you still like it? And every time you tried to use your cell phone it disrupted your Internet service? I think not, this is what BPL does to the shortwave bands.

      --
      "I bow to no man" - Riddick
  93. information theory by cahiha · · Score: 1

    David Reed doesn't know what he is talking about. Interference is very real and well defined, independent of the particular receiver, once you have decided on frequency and bandwidth allocations for different users.

    Historically, because of technological limitations, receivers have gotten more bandwidth than they needed for their tasks, which allowed them to be more robust to interference, but the interference was still there.

  94. MIMO by msauve · · Score: 0

    With MIMO, it is the transmitter which changes, not the channel.

    --
    "National Security is the chief cause of national insecurity." - Celine's First Law
  95. Re:On behalf of 99.999% of the population... by finkployd · · Score: 1

    I was responsing to the AC and taking the position against BPL, so I'm not sure I understand who your post is directed at...

    One more thing, don't knock amateur radio HAMS.

    I don't, I'm KB3LYB

    Most amateur radio operators know exactly how their stuff works - especially if you ever meet one who builds from scratch.

    I do, which is pretty much what got me into the hobby in the first place. Talking on the radio is ok, I personally enjoy having the excuse to build stuff more though. I haven't designed anything myself yet, but I have built a lot of Ten Tec kits.

    Finkployd

  96. Re:On behalf of 99.999% of the population... by finkployd · · Score: 1

    Oh God forbid you drag your asses out of your parents' basements and go somewhere to practice your hobby.

    I'm sorry it's such a huge fucking inconvenience to engage those torpid flippers and move yourselves to and fro. I thought hams were so fucking important in an emergency. If just leaving the house is so traumatic what will you do "in a disaster"? Curl up into a little ball, blubber and cry and blame your failings on big, bad BPL? Whatever gets you through the day, I guess.

    I had a great laugh over this post. Thanks, it really made my day :)

    Oh and btw: I'm the commander of my local sheriff's office search and rescue team, and currently the only one on the team certified in high angle ropes rescue. I'll be sure to "get out of my mom's basement more" :)

    Finkployd

  97. Re:What if BPL is the ONLY choice? Insensitive clo by StikyPad · · Score: 2, Informative

    Apparently nobody's explained to you the difference between a rural and an urban existance. You're obviously going to give up the conveniences of living in a city, but the trade off is that you don't live in a sardine-can apartment with noise/air pollution and excessive crime. Also, it's probably physically possible for you to exceed the speed limit due to a lack of bumper-to-bumper traffic.

    But more to the point, BROADBAND OVER POWER LINES DOESN'T WORK. There. Read it once again if you didn't get it the first time. Let's pretend we don't care that it interferes with all forms of RF communication, because surfing pr0n at broadband speeds is obviously more important to you than, say, emergency response services. The more pressing issues are:

    a) It's blocked by transformers. That means it won't go through substations or, more importantly, from the street to your house. See that cylinder on the phone pole out there? That's a transformer. Theoritically, you could put a WIFI from the pole to your house, but you just said you're in the NRQZ. (Which would seem to indicate that RF leakage from BPL would be a federal violation in the first place).

    b) It receives interference. That's right. Antennas work both ways. What does that mean for you? Well, unfortunately it means that the broadband transmissions are highly prone to errors, and, in fact, an RF broadcast could disrupt your broadband completely if it's within 5 miles of the power line that carries your broadband.

    So, what's a viable alternative? Write your representative and ask him to introduce legislation to subsidise fiber to rural locations, just like they did with electricity back in the day. Until then, maybe try satellite, or TCP via avian carrier. Alternatively, you could make a friend at UVA and use their broadband.

    Good day, sir.

  98. Same problem as DSL by Peter+Simpson · · Score: 1

    Power lines aren't efficient carriers of RF, they were never designed to be.

    For the same reason that Verizon is installing their FIOS fiber system, and Comcast is pushing digital cable and installing fiber, the power companies will find that the analog technology upon which BPL is based is limited in its capability for growth.

    Yes, BPL's an interferer, but I suspect that if the maintenance and noise problems don't kill it, its lack of growth potential will. You're competing against two carriers who are installing all the fiber they can. Sooner or later you're going to be uncompetitive. BPL's been tried in the UK and Europe and has been shown not to be competitive there.

  99. Maybe you could be the first! by WillRobinson · · Score: 1

    On the other hand, PLC/BPL does indeed create interference. No one questions that. The question is--is it sufficient to interfere with essential services? So far the answer appears to be no

    Maybe when your in the meat wagon, and they call in to the doctor, and cant understand the medication quanity they will shoot into your heart, you could be the FIRST to say BPL is crap, and it does interfere.

  100. Re:BPL by rwebb · · Score: 1

    Alas, I've lately been overly slack in my meta-mods and moderation and thus have no mod points to award.

    Nevertheless, well done!

    --
    Trusted by cats.
  101. Re:BPL? by djmcdona · · Score: 1

    Of course they are. Every power company does. OPGW (optical ground wire - a 00 cable with fiber in the middle used for the static wire on transmission circuits) is about the same price as solid static wires, so it's essentially free to install fiber on all transmission circuits. Since the life of a transmission circuit is generally less than 10 years before it needs to be reconductored, ubiquitous fiber on the power grid can be accomplished in under a decade. Distribution fiber is a whole different ball of wax...

  102. BPL FAQ by Goody · · Score: 2, Informative

    BPL FAQ for those wanting a primer on the technology, the issues, and the locations where it's operating.

    --
    Tired of being "punished" by the Slashdot $rtbl since 2002. I'm now over at http://soylentnews.org/ .
  103. Re:On behalf of 99.999% of the population... by Hans+Lehmann · · Score: 1
    So you believe in the event of an emergency all the Hams will spring to life and use their radio gear now that BPL is down. You honestly believe people are going to spend money on gear, set it up, and wait for a day when it might be usable. Do you want the first "test" of this gear to be during an emergency?

    Well, actually, that is what they do. A quick google search brings a story about their response during the Nisqually Earthquake in the Pacific Northwest. Living here in the San Fernando Valley, I remember their actions after the Northridge Quake as well. Many HAM operators have annual events at which they practice setting up & operating emergency field stations. Yes, that is exactly what they do.

    --
    09 F9 11 02 9D 74 E3 5B D8 41 56 C5 63 56 88 C0
  104. Re:alternate title "HAM radio operators spread FUD by deadweight · · Score: 1

    FUD= Fear-Uncertainty-Doubt There is NO doubt or uncertainty that BPL trashes HF comms of all kinds. This has been proven over and over and over. To make this comprehensible by the /. crowd, telling people that an enterprise wide rollout of Windows 3.11 would cause support issues is not FUD.

  105. Re:On behalf of 99.999% of the population... by finkployd · · Score: 1

    How is holding regular tests of emergency communications the same as never testing or using equipment until an actual emergency situation?

    Finkployd

  106. BPL operates at legacy speeds by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    If you look at http://www.ieeeusa.org/volunteers/committees/ccip/ docs/Gigabit-WP.pdf
    you will see that BPL operates at legacy speeds. The US needs networks that operate at gigabit speeds to the end user.

  107. We've found the bottleneck by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1, Insightful

    Now someone help get the fist out!

  108. BPL for the country folk by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Don't get me wrong, I understand the fears caused by BPL. I live in a rural area which dosen't even have cable TV. Our local electric co-op is offering BPL to us folk beyond the range of cable and DSL. They are offering if for $29 per month, so it is actually less expensive than the DSL offered in town and the cable offered elseware. Satellite is an option, but almost twice as expensive as BPL. For me BPL is a savior.

    -Elliott
    ps: I'm not really a hick, and I only say folk as a joke!
    maydaycomputers @ GMail dot com

  109. But... by n6kuy · · Score: 1

    ..never underestimate the bandwidth of an LP gas truck loaded with DVD-ROMs....

    Ping times wouldn't be very satisfactory, though...

    --
    If you disagree with me on social issues, then it's pretty clear that you are a narrow-minded bigot.
  110. All Are Analog by dunc78 · · Score: 1

    Digital cable just refers to the modulation scheme, the modulated carriers traveling through a fiber optic or coax cable are still analog signals, just the carrier frequencies are vastly different. What is the limiting factor is the bandwidth available at the low frequencies that can propagate down a power line without tremendous loss.

  111. Re:What if BPL is the ONLY choice? Insensitive clo by petermgreen · · Score: 1

    out of interest how much did you pay for the T1 and what were the details of the setup? (ie full or fractional pure data or voice and data etc)

    --
    note: i'm known as plugwash most places but i screwd up registering that here somehow in the past and now can't register
  112. Interference by markdowling · · Score: 1

    http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Interference

    Total cancellation would happen but so would constructive interference. Also, you're not talking about rigid wires but about catenaries. Noise may vary more given the distance between the catenaries than might be acceptable for differential signalling. However, what little I recall of wave theory is coasting to a halt at this point :)

  113. lolwtfbbq by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Too many abbreviations, acronyms, or whatever in that sentence. (btw, i anal)

  114. Re:What if BPL is the ONLY choice? Insensitive clo by StikyPad · · Score: 1

    "Dear Slashdot, I live on a coral island in the middle of the Pacific ocean, and the only way for me to get broadband is to drain all the water out of the ocean, but those damn environmentalists keep trying to stop me."

    Actually, I do live on a coral island in the middle of the Pacific, and it's the first time I've ever lived somewhere with broadband. I pay $90/mo, and obviously ping times aren't great, so playing games is somewhat out of the question, but it's just fine for most other things.

    As it turns out, you don't really need to drain the ocean, just lay a transpacific fiber, as you're wont to do in order to connect, say, continents. Islands, as it turns out, are good spots to split the trunks to various locations, with the added benefit of providing broadband access for the residents.

  115. Re:On behalf of 99.999% of the population... by anubi · · Score: 1
    After reading the AC post, I was steaming. I didn't have any modpoints. I now see I wasn't the only one who got rubbed the wrong way.

    I should have responded to your parent, the AC, not you.

    Although I am not a HAM, I have many friends who are. I tinker with mostly the sciency stuff, they tinker with RF, and they have thoroughly impressed me with their intimate knowledge of how RF propagation really works. They have studied antenna theory and design relentlessly and have lots of freely shared empirical data backing up what they say. These guys have outdone every corporate lab I have ever been in, as the HAMS are internally driven to pursue this, whereas a lot of the corporate suit-guys are just pushing paper for a paycheck. Every corporate group I have been in seemed to have a couple of HAMS who knew how the thing is supposed to work, with a couple dozen more supervisory personnel hanging off his back.

    When amateur radio operators report back that something is causing broadband interference, its not just a hobby thats getting trashed - its the entire RF environment that everyone uses thats getting trashed. An ambulance driver having trouble communicating on his radio is not in a position to pinpoint why his radio has degraded performance - he just knows he's having trouble contacting the hospital to let them know what's coming. We depend on people like the Amateur Radio operators to watch over the airwaves and bring anomalies out.

    Sorry if I overreacted... if anyone even gets close to knocking a radio amateur, I start getting hot under the collar. In my mind, a radio amateur in a kindred tinkerer - one who knows how his stuff works.

    People who speak from power get my obedience, but only people who speak from wisdom and knowledge get my respect.

    --
    "Prove all things; hold fast that which is good." [KJV: I Thessalonians 5:21]

  116. Re:On behalf of 99.999% of the population... by Da_Biz · · Score: 1

    And, when I was a volunteer with Civil Air Patrol and sheriff's SAR groups in Oregon, yes, we did indeed spend our very own hard earned cash (probably around $1500 over 10 years), to purchase radio equipment that would be used for The Common Good.

    Did we have organized procedures and methods, based on years of experience, science and analysis? Yes. Did we practice? Yes. Were we used when the local tri-county Motorola trunked radio system went down several years ago in Portland? Yes.

    Believe it or not, there are quite a few people who do spend a not insignificant portion of their time to DEVELOP, PRACTICE and VOLUNTEER when disasters come up. I've been doing it for about 10 years now.

  117. Re:On behalf of 99.999% of the population... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Shit....I hope I never get lost in your jurisdiction, even assuming you're not lying - which I doubt because you've got too much talk to be much action and everyone's a hero on the internet anyway - you're still pretty stone fucking stupid.

  118. Black Talon != copkiller by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    I should have my head examined butting into an AC flame war but,

    "cop killer" bullets = armor piercing, whether that be teflon-coated, carbide core, or some kind of sabot or flechette.

    "Black Talon" = a type of jacketed hollow point bullet with additional claws to increase vascular damage.

    http://www.firearmstactical.com/briefs2.htm#Black- Talon

  119. Re:On behalf of 99.999% of the population... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Go get your license, dude - sounds like it would be great to have you join us!

    73!

  120. Re:On behalf of 99.999% of the population... by finkployd · · Score: 1

    It's easy enough to check on...

    So why do you say that? What have I said that has led you to believe I "got too much talk" and that I'm "stone fucking stupid"? Are you interested in actually interacting with people in this discusison or do you just get your rocks off acting like an anonymous dick on /.?

    Finkployd

  121. Re:BPL by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Thanks.

  122. Sorry ... by some+guy+I+know · · Score: 1

    Accidentally posted that as an AC.
    Anyway, thanks.

    --
    Those who sacrifice security to condemn liberty deserve to repeat history or something. - Benjamin Santayana