Another View of the FCC and Spectrum Scarcity

Bob_Robertson writes "Tim Swanson on the Ludwig von Mises Institute site is asking, has the FCC put itself out of a job by allowing the 47-49 MHz, 2.4 GHZ and other "open spectrum" frequencies, thus focusing innovation and development into making fantastic use of limited resources? The basis of the FCC's existence is "scarcity", so what happens when there isn't any scarcity any more? LVMI has looked into the FCC before."

Comments

Who wrote this??

[Muad'Dave]

I hope Mr. Swanson doesn't consider himself an RF Engineer - quotes like this one are laughable:

"These innovations [DSS] were designed to ... increase the effective range of the phone (e.g. spreading the transmission in 360-degrees so there were no dead spots)"

The following quote is wrong on so many levels I don't know where to start.

Not only does it transmit a theoretical 30 Mbps over a distance of 15 miles, but it also uses a sparing 1 watt of power (e.g. 30 watts for WiMax). And because of its unique energy-saving modulation technique its power-footprint is essentially undetectable and therefore the FCC is unable to regulate it (unless of course, they rewrite their own rules).

1. I'll wait for the actual 30Mbps, theoretical Mbps's are useless to me.
2. Is that 1 Watt of power transmitting that theoretical 30Mbps EIRP, or the power at the transmitter? What antennas are specified? 1 Watt into a 30 dBi antenna is the same as 1 kW into a 0 dBi antenna.
3. Excuse me? The FCC can't detect it? Huh? Even with 'normal' DSS, it's detectable. If your 'power-footprint' is so impressive, how can your receivers detect it?
4. The FCC can't regulate it? Double huh? If it's between 9 kHz and 300 GHz, it's already regulated. It may not require a license, but it is regulated.

What a joke. Reminds me of the super-efficient modulation method VMSK debunked by Uber Nerd Phil Karn, KA9Q.