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."

76 of 300 comments (clear)

  1. 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.
  2. 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 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.

    2. 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
  3. 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 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)
    2. 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.
    3. 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.

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

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

  5. 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?"
  6. 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.

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

    Shocking. Simply shocking.

    --
    Try to hack my 31337 firewall!
  8. 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 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

    3. 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!"
    4. 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
    5. 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.
    6. 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.

    7. 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)
  9. 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 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...

    2. 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.

  10. 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

  11. 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).

  12. 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

  13. 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.

  14. 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)
  15. 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.
  16. 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.
  17. 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.

  18. Re:BPL? by NoMoreNicksLeft · · Score: 2, Interesting

    Maybe we should just put in our own fiber.

  19. 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.

  20. 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 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.

  21. 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 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.

  22. 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 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.

    2. 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...
  23. 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.

  24. 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 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.

  25. 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!

  26. 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?

  27. 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. "
  28. 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...
  29. 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.

  30. 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
  31. 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...

  32. 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?

  33. 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.

  34. 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

  35. 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.
  36. 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.

  37. 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

  38. 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.

  39. 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.
  40. 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.

  41. 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

  42. 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!

  43. 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.
  44. 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

  45. 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
  46. 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]

  47. 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
  48. 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.

  49. 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.

  50. 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.

  51. 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/ .