Slashdot Mirror

← Back to Stories (view on slashdot.org)

FCC To Open Up Vacant TV Airwaves For Broadband

Posted by CmdrTaco on from the why-the-heck-not dept.

crimeandpunishment writes "Get ready for 'super Wi-Fi.' If the FCC works out the last details of new spectrum rules, they'll open up the so-called 'white spaces'... the vacant airwaves between broadcast TV channels ... for wireless broadband connections. If the plan goes through, it will lead to Wi-Fi with longer range and stronger power. The stumbling blocks have included concerns about interference with TV signals and wireless microphones, but the FCC plans to vote next week on rules meant to resolve those issues."

8 of 187 comments (clear)

  1. Re:FUCK THE WORLD by Pharmboy · · Score: 4, Funny

    Dear Slashdot,
    I'm killing myself. My wife left me today.

    Thank god. I'm personally tired of all the useless comments from that guy named "Anonymous Coward" anyway.

    --
    Tequila: It's not just for breakfast anymore!
  2. The important question is... by Jafafa+Hots · · Score: 3, Insightful

    ...to whom will we have to fork over the hefty monthly charges to use our "public" airwaves?

    --
    This space available.
  3. You can have my Mr. Microphone by jjeffries · · Score: 5, Funny
    when you pry it from my cold, dead hands.

    Hey good lookin, we'll be back to pick you up later!

  4. Re:Gravity? Thermodynamics? by Yamata+no+Orochi · · Score: 4, Insightful

    The stumbling blocks have included concerns about interference with TV signals and wireless microphones, but the FCC plans to vote next week on rules meant to resolve those issues.

    Why can't those politicians vote on something more useful, like repealing the law of gravity, or laws of thermodynamics? I'm sure its likely to be equally successful.

    What are you talking about? "Rules to resolve issues" doesn't sound anything like anyone implying magical physics-breaking measures, it sounds like regulations on exact frequency and signal-strength, which there would obviously be anyway. Sensationalist much?

  5. Re:TV signals by commodore64_love · · Score: 4, Insightful

    >>>Imo, TV signals are a waste of bandwidth...

    Not really. They stream ~20 Mbit/s of video to approximately 0.5 million homes per city/market. That's over 6000 gigabytes of television/news per home, or 3,000,000 terabytes total. Show me any internet or cellphone that can do the same, and at $0.00 cost per year. You can't. - (Imo, only a fool pays for watching Supernatural or CSI or whatever else you enjoy, when it's available for free.)

    --
    "I disapprove of what you say, but I will defend to the death your right to say it." - historian Evelyn Beatrice Hall
  6. Phased Arrays Yet? by Doc+Ruby · · Score: 3, Interesting

    Phased array antennas can detect the 3D position of the source of a signal, distinguished from other transmitter locations sending on the same frequency. It's how humans with eyes can tell there's two blades of grass in front of them, not just "it's green out".

    A phased array could make frequency segregation unnecessary, and vastly increase bandwidth without interference. By doing so, it would completely destroy the entire basis of the FCC, except as certification that phased array devices work properly.

    How far along has phased array tech come for either stationary devices like base stations, relocatable ones like notebooks, or low power ones like phones? Products with these features are long overdue, and mobile telecom will be revolutionized by them.

    --

    --
    make install -not war

    1. Re:Phased Arrays Yet? by s122604 · · Score: 3, Informative

      "By doing so, it would completely destroy the entire basis of the FCC" -- I think that is a tad premature...
      Google adaptive beam-forming, this is what you are referring to. It is used in the electronic warfare field, and a crude version of it has even made its way into some lower power consumer equipment like N-band routers...Creating an adaptable phased array directional enough to null out, to the point of non-interference one of two powerful/closely located transmitters is no easy, or cheap task.

      Also, we aren't talking about a 2.4GHZ router. On the low end of UHF, there is also a significant size/portability issue governed by physics/antenna theory that won't be solved even if you figured out the economic issue.
      The idea that adaptive beamforming is going to come to every piece of consumer VHF/UHF equipment and make the FCC irrelevant is wildly optimistic

  7. Re:Good idea, with guarded concern... by hedwards · · Score: 3, Interesting

    2 to 25 is plenty for most of the country. Around here, we'd have to more or less triple the stations to use that up. Probably have to go to HD to do it.

    As much sympathy as I have, why should most of the country suffer for what is an east coast centric problem? I get that there are a lot of people over there, but it got old a long time ago having to suffer for problems which are way over there.

    It shows a distinct arrogance to screw us once again over an issue that doesn't affect us.