Slashdot Mirror


LightSquared CEO Resigns Amid Appearance of Bribery

New submitter msauve writes "LightSquared, the company who's request to use make use of spectrum in a way likely to interfere with GPS was recently denied, has suffered another setback. CEO Sanjiv Ahuja has now resigned, only a week after a report detailing political contributions and the personal financial interests of Obama and officials in his administration in SkyTerra, the precursor company to LightSquared. Ahuja's one and only contribution to the Democratic Party occurred on the same day he tried to arrange a meeting with Obama administration officials, apparently as part of LightSquared's desire to fast track FCC approval of a change beneficial to the company."

62 of 211 comments (clear)

  1. Important to note by geekoid · · Score: 4, Interesting

    He attempt to do what many /.ers say happen all the time, and got busted.

    --
    The Kruger Dunning explains most post on /. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Dunning%E2%80%93Kruger_effect
    1. Re:Important to note by ColdWetDog · · Score: 4, Insightful

      He attempt to do what many /.ers say happen all the time, and got busted.

      Oh, that's just because he tried to cheap it out. 28K for a Senate Seat, 50K for Obama.

      When you're in the big leagues, you've got to drop the big bucks. Remember this kids, you get what you pay for!

      --
      Faster! Faster! Faster would be better!
    2. Re:Important to note by ColdWetDog · · Score: 5, Funny

      Actually it was only 8K for the Senate seat. The Dems returned $20,000.

      Must have been running a special that week.

      --
      Faster! Faster! Faster would be better!
    3. Re:Important to note by vlm · · Score: 2

      LS raised billions of dollars... yet just defaulted on their first payment to inmarsat last week. Those billions are gone. All of it.
      If I were that guy, I'd be getting out of my contract by any means necessary, purchasing a new identity, grabbing my family and running for the hills.
      Heck if I took company paper clips home I'd be using that as an ethics violation to get the heck out, alive.

      --
      "Science flies us to the moon. Religion flies us into buildings." - Victor Stenger
    4. Re:Important to note by Kythe · · Score: 4, Informative

      F&F began under Bush. And I'm aware only of one solar company that received a grant, yet later failed (not sure what a business failing has to do with anything, that DOES happen in a market economy). Perhaps you can elaborate?

      --

      Kythe
    5. Re:Important to note by ColdWetDog · · Score: 4, Funny

      Perhaps you can elaborate?

      It's Obama's fault!

      Further explanations are unnecessary and might complicate things.

      --
      Faster! Faster! Faster would be better!
    6. Re:Important to note by tripleevenfall · · Score: 3, Informative

      To be fair, F&F was not doing anything close to what it did under Holder during the Bush years, and it's not Bush's attorney general lying up and down about what he knew about the program and when.

    7. Re:Important to note by russotto · · Score: 2

      This was a clumsy and failed bribe that doesn't really reflect on Obama. Also I think the gun-running program started under Bush Jr. (and then ATF used their own program to argue for gun control by claiming that legal gun owners in the US were providing guns to Mexican drug cartels), though Bush III Obama did continue it.

    8. Re:Important to note by steelfood · · Score: 5, Insightful

      He wasn't doing it right.

      First off, at that level, he needs to start bri *ahem* making campaign donations to everybody, not just to the President. Senators, congressmen, judges, even the ones running the party all need their cut. And he needs to be doing it over multiple election years.

      A few thousand dollars doesn't cut it anymore these days--at least not at the Federal level. To play in that game, he needs a warchest of at least half a million.

      Additionally, he needed a lobbying firm to do the dirty work on his behalf. If it was a lobbying firm who did the brib *ahem* gift-giving instead, he would be shielded from all this by plausible deniability and would have kept his job. He could've just fired the lobbying firm and re-hired them under a different company name *ahem* I mean find another one.

      --
      "If a nation expects to be ignorant and free in a state of civilization, it expects what never was and never will be."
    9. Re:Important to note by GrumpySteen · · Score: 5, Interesting

      The only thing 'funny' about it is that LightSquared's CEO didn't anything for his 'donation'. No private audience with Obama and no fast-track approval for the company's idiotic plan.

      The Democratic Party took the donation and treated it as a donation while the administration killed the company, which is exactly what should have happened. For once, the system worked as intended.

    10. Re:Important to note by hairyfeet · · Score: 5, Insightful

      Sadly F&F was nothing under Bush, and Solyndra was just the tip of a VERY stinky iceberg, one of the Kennedy kids got millions in tax free handouts for a "green' company that had never made a single dime. I'd google it for you but I'm just about to head out the door "Solyndra tip of iceberg" in any search engine will find the info for you. Summary 19 out of the 20 companies that got huge handouts were significant donors to the elect Obama fund. I'm a democrat and hated Bush but Obama is trying his damnedest to be worse than Bush in EVERY single way, worse on human rights, worse on jack booted crap, worse on bribery, hell i can't think of a single thing the man did better and that's just fricking sad. if you want to see what changed read this. Frankly I'm voting green rather than waste my vote on such a lousy POTUS. don't worry he'll still win simply nobody is gonna vote for mittens.

      --
      ACs don't waste your time replying, your posts are never seen by me.
    11. Re:Important to note by tragedy · · Score: 3, Insightful

      They all failed because they can't compete with China. US solar companies can't compete with Chinese solar companies because the Chinese government backs its renewable tech companies while the US doesn't.

    12. Re:Important to note by Kozz · · Score: 4, Funny

      Actually it was only 8K for the Senate seat. The Dems returned $20,000.

      Must have been running a special that week.

      8K should be enough for anybody.

      --
      I only post comments when someone on the internet is wrong.
    13. Re:Important to note by ShavedOrangutan · · Score: 3, Insightful

      Ia lot of the noise about F&F is coming in the form of conspiracy theories from the NRA

      Mainstream news is almost totally ignoring the debacle, so at least one organization is talking about it.

      It's not really a conspiracy theory when gun dealers openly say, "Yeah, we knew that buyer was a drug runner but the ATF agent in our back office told us to sell him the guns anyways."

      --
      Godaddy is a scam and a ripoff.
    14. Re:Important to note by NicknameAvailable · · Score: 2

      He attempt to do what many /.ers say happen all the time, and got busted.

      Actually he got busted because he was trying to bribe his way around a technological limitation that has no known solution and would completely disable the American military - and he's not being tried for treason. I'd hardly say he got busted.

    15. Re:Important to note by Mister+Whirly · · Score: 2

      Yes but apparently they may have been on strike.

      --
      "But this one goes to 11!"
    16. Re:Important to note by Feyshtey · · Score: 3, Insightful

      I think you could argue that it was a mistake to break the law to begin with... On the part of the CEO, and Democrat party reps, and the Obama administration....

      --
      "But we have to pass the bill so that you can find out what is in it,..." - Nancy Pelosi
    17. Re:Important to note by j35ter · · Score: 2

      They all failed because they can't compete with China. US solar companies can't compete with Chinese solar companies because the Chinese government backs its renewable tech companies while the US doesn't.

      Oh, and if a Chinese company goes down the drain for corruption (AKA greedy CEO), there is quite a chance that their board gets a front row seat in an open-air public execution spectacle. Makes them think twice about stealing subsidies!

      --
      Delta-Mike November Bravo Tango
    18. Re:Important to note by tnk1 · · Score: 2

      Obama probably has almost nothing to do with this, except that it's under his watch. The people responsible are those bits of dirt and grime that are swept into positions of authority on his very long coat-tails.

      This sort of thing can happen with *any* modern President, and while I am not an Obama supporter, this isn't something wrong with him, or even the Democrats as individuals. It's what's wrong with government that is big enough that it has its fingers in everything.

      If there is something wrong with Obama and the Democrats, it's that they are trying to add even more services, and hence size, to the government. Granted, the Republicans haven't always been on target with their own actions, either, but at least they are pretending to work for smaller government.

    19. Re:Important to note by poity · · Score: 2

      That only happens if they didn't establish the right connections in government. The ones who get shot are the little guys who stepped on bigger toes.

      --
      your thin skin doesn't make me a troll
    20. Re:Important to note by GodfatherofSoul · · Score: 2

      hell i can't think of a single thing the man did better and that's just fricking sad.

      Finding Osama Bin Laden for one. Oh, you were speaking in hyperbole.

      --
      I swear to God...I swear to God! That is NOT how you treat your human!
    21. Re:Important to note by Gilmoure · · Score: 2

      Ah, like that old Bloom County Picayune editor: It's Reagan's Fault!

      --
      I drank what? -- Socrates
    22. Re:Important to note by HornWumpus · · Score: 5, Insightful

      Had it been left entirely up to the FCC they would have made their money.

      Their mistake was underestimating the strength of the push back from the GPS users and manufacturers.

      That and overestimating the power of law. They thought all they had to do was bribe someone to change the laws of physics.

      --
      John McAfee 'It was like that time I hired that Bangkok prostitute; to do my taxes, while I fucked my accountant'
    23. Re:Important to note by RenderSeven · · Score: 2

      A fair point, but the Fed's should have been smart enough to know that before handing over the coin. Accurately assessing market conditions and foreign competition should have been a key part of the vetting process. If that vetting was done by smart knowledgeable professionals then they are culpable for not getting it right. If it wasnt done by smart knowledgeable professionals then they are culpable for not vetting properly. Either way blaming it on China doesnt give the Feds a pass, even if its true.

    24. Re:Important to note by Kythe · · Score: 3, Informative

      Spectra Watt did not receive a loan guarantee (they received a small grant). Evergreen Solar received no federal assistance. Uni-Solar is still in business, and at any rate did NOT receive a loan guarantee. I'd tell you to take your own advice, but given your anonymous sniping, I truly doubt accuracy is among your values.

      --

      Kythe
    25. Re:Important to note by HornWumpus · · Score: 2

      When in the big leagues you've got to bribe both political parties just to start.

      Then buy lots of inexplicable advertising time on the news networks, sponsor a PBS show or two.

      Keep it up for a decade or two. Always remember, it's soft power, it disappears in daylight. So use a light hand.

      Light Squared are children grabbing at candy. No surprise they got caught.

      --
      John McAfee 'It was like that time I hired that Bangkok prostitute; to do my taxes, while I fucked my accountant'
    26. Re:Important to note by Seraphim1982 · · Score: 3, Informative

      F&F began under Bush.

      No, "Project Gunrunner" began under President Bush. "Operation Fast and Furious", while part of Project Gunrunner, didn't begin until 2009.

      And I'm aware only of one solar company that received a grant, yet later failed

      I can think of three off the top of my head: Solyndra and Beacon Power who both received DOE money, and Evergreen Solar who received Massachusetts money.
      While they are still around I personally don't have high hopes for 1366 Technologies, who also received DOE money. They appear to be repeating the same mistake Evergreen made, specifically, betting that the price of silicon isn't going to go down. They may also be falling into the non-standard panels problem but I don't know enough about their final process to be sure.

      Also, while not a solar company, Ener1, another DOE recipient filed for chapter 11 about a month ago.

    27. Re:Important to note by wganz · · Score: 2, Insightful

      Gunwalker started under Bush and was ended because the Mexican authorities weren't catching them on their side. The Mexican authorities were informed prior to the sale unlike F&F were it was unilaterally decided to let weapons go.

      Fast & Furious was 0bama's baby. We're three years into this mess and time for 0bama to 'man up' to take responsibilities.

    28. Re:Important to note by Kythe · · Score: 4, Informative

      See above. SpectraWatt and Evergreen Solar did NOT receive federal loan guarantees (Evergreen received no federal assistance at all). AES Eastern was a coal subsidiary of AES that went bankrupt, not the project funded by DoE. Beacon is probably the closest you get on that list, and they paid back their loan.

      When I get the time, I'll look up the others.

      My suggestion would be: perhaps before you get your "blood boiling", you should consider NOT taking what the right wing says about Obama at face value. They have a strong vested interest in generating scandal where there is none.

      --

      Kythe
    29. Re:Important to note by HornWumpus · · Score: 2

      It's just a market in government influence. No government has ever been able to stop markets. They can however make the economic incentives perverse.

      I think 'Perverse Economic Incentives' would make a good porno title.

      --
      John McAfee 'It was like that time I hired that Bangkok prostitute; to do my taxes, while I fucked my accountant'
    30. Re:Important to note by im_thatoneguy · · Score: 4, Interesting

      I don't buy the "Bribery" angle that's just more anti-obama birther nonsense.

      It's true that the Democratic party received about $20k from Falcone in 2010. But the Republican Party received nearly $50k in 2008.

      If you go through his political contributions he tended to shotgun across party lines. And none of the money in 08 was for Obama. It was almost exclusively for Senatorial candidates and Giuliani and Chris Dodd.
      http://www.campaignmoney.com/political/contributions/philip-falcone.asp?cycle=08

      And yes I do imagine there was some Lightsquared/Obama white house conversations--One of Obama's campaign promises was broadband for all. Lightsquared promised to deliver on that promise for the president. I'm unaware of another company which Lightsquared favoritism would have pushed out of business. By the very nature of their technology it seemed that there *can't* be a competitor since they themselves don't work. ;)

    31. Re:Important to note by ravenshrike · · Score: 3, Informative

      No you stupid fuckwit, it didn't. Operation Wide Receiver did, however that was known and sanctioned by the Mexican government and was a serious attempt to track the routes the guns used, with the majority of the weapons having GPS trackers in them, albeit ones that turned out to be ineffectual. Said operation used less than 500 guns and was STOPPED because it was completely ineffectual. The operations, multiple, started under Obama all had the express purpose of shifting as many guns as possible across the border to, and I quote, be recovered at crime scenes. It did NOT have the sanction of the Mexican government, technically making it an act of war, and coincided with the 90% of Mexican crime guns FUD pushed by the government and helped along by CBS NBC et al. The operation started after the Brady bunch was told Obama was working on gun control back in early 2009 and the only logical interpretation of what happened was that they were attempting to drum up support for another AWB. Either that or they're batshit fucking insane. Completely different fucking operations to anybody with two fucking neurons to rub together.

    32. Re:Important to note by Straif · · Score: 3, Interesting

      F&F did not involve legal gun sales that just happened to end up being misused, it involved illegal gun sales to suspected traffickers. Gun store owners were directly instructed to illegally sell guns and were told that the ATF would be tracking them. The owners were actually very wary about making the sales but were instructed to keep selling by the ATF agents in charge.

      So people are crying foul because A) the ATF had to instruct shop owners to disregard local, state and federal laws to sell the guns in question, B) there was no real program in place to track the illegally sold guns which led to terrible consequences and C) people in Washington are already using F&F as an excuse to talk about toughening gun laws even though the laws in place to prevent just such sales had to be expressly ignored to allow the program to take place.

      --
      Of course that's just my opinion...... you could be wrong!
    33. Re:Important to note by Straif · · Score: 2

      As I posted above, F&F did not involve the legal sale of guns, gun shop owners were directly instructed by the ATF to sell weapons illegally. There are even official statements released by the ATF showing shop owners were concerned about making the sales.

      --
      Of course that's just my opinion...... you could be wrong!
  2. Re:I knew it was too good to be true. by MightyMartian · · Score: 2

    Well, of course, apart from the fact that it would smashed neighboring frequencies and would probably have never worked properly, of course.

    --
    The world's burning. Moped Jesus spotted on I50. Details at 11.
  3. Implications for the administration? by sandytaru · · Score: 2

    It's an election year so they're probably happy to accept any money they can get, but I wonder if anyone within the administration or the DNC itself is going to get some smackdown for this incident.

    --
    Occasionally living proof of the Ballmer peak.
    1. Re:Implications for the administration? by msauve · · Score: 4, Informative

      "the intended effect (fast track approval) didn't happen."

      Actually, it did, in a way. The fast track process was started, the filing was accepted in one day (a process which normally takes months). The normally required 30 day comment period was reduced by the FCC to an effective 5 1/2 days (it was 10 days, but across a long US holiday weekend). Granted, the actual approval didn't end up happening, but not because the FCC didn't try to help them out. It was an alert CTIA which filed an extension request, and alerted GPS users of the potential issues.

      --
      "National Security is the chief cause of national insecurity." - Celine's First Law
    2. Re:Implications for the administration? by vlm · · Score: 5, Informative

      For them to offer conditional approval later shows someone was pushing for Lightsquared to succeed.

      They appear to be crooks and what they're doing was a dumb idea from a tech standpoint ... but... from personal experience the FCC will license almost anyone to do almost anything on a conditional experimental non-interfering basis. I know this goes against /. group think about the govt, but at least WRT to temporary conditional experimental licenses the FCC has always been very libertarian, perhaps the most so of all the fedgov, maybe more than all the rest of the fedgov put together.

      The way its supposed to work, for a real world example, is 20 ham radio guys who know what they're doing, get a temporary experimental license to F around near the now unused traditional 500 KHz marine radio band, mostly trying to figure out how they can do it without interfering with any remaining primary users (if any?). Then the experiment ends and everyone goes away, more or less happy. Someday, maybe Very Soon the data those guys gathered will get the hams a 500 KHz allocation ... or maybe not. What LS did instead of basically a big lab experiment, was get their standard off the shelf FCC response of "go out there, F around, and for gods sake don't break anything and stop the moment I tell you to" permission slip that anyone else can get for the asking, and then used it to raise Billions of dollars and make campaign contributions and then started crying unfair when it turns out it didn't work out.

      Its not like the FCC was "pushing" just for LS, they pretty much rubber stamp any non-totally stupid experimental request. LS is just crying because the experiment failed and they owe Billions and though thousands in campaign contributions would fix it. Millions in bribes might have. But thousands? Not gonna work.

      --
      "Science flies us to the moon. Religion flies us into buildings." - Victor Stenger
    3. Re:Implications for the administration? by Kythe · · Score: 2

      Well said. It should also be remembered (or learned, for those who don't know) that FCC is considered an "independent agency", meaning that while they're technically in the executive branch, their leadership is not part of the Cabinet. They are more responsive to Congress than to the White House.

      --

      Kythe
  4. Re:Wow by GodInHell · · Score: 4, Informative

    Actually... this keeps happening when people try to buy Obama. He got burned by his dealings with Rezzko and has been really strict about reporting and clean hands accounting since.

    -GiH

  5. Nothing new by jone_stone · · Score: 2

    There's absolutely nothing new about this situation. It's a fact of modern political life that if you want face time with a politician you have to donate to their campaign. Planet Money did an interesting podcast about the concept of political fundraisers in Washington that really sheds light on the problem: http://www.npr.org/blogs/money/2011/11/01/141913370/the-tuesday-podcast-inside-washingtons-money-machine

    1. Re:Nothing new by geekoid · · Score: 2, Informative

      AS someone who has met with politician, and not made any kind of donation, I call you a liar.

      --
      The Kruger Dunning explains most post on /. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Dunning%E2%80%93Kruger_effect
  6. Re:I knew it was too good to be true. by OverlordQ · · Score: 5, Informative

    You know, really depressing thing I've found is that there appears to be no proof of this allegation. The accusation enough seems to have been sufficient to stop anyone from even trying to prove it.

    Because there isn't anything to prove, it's basic physics. But to appease shills like you, they did do that test.

    --
    Your hair look like poop, Bob! - Wanker.
  7. Why Bother resigning? by geminidomino · · Score: 4, Insightful

    Seriously? Chris Dodd basically dick-smacked the entire concept of "bribing government is bad" into non-existence, but they force this guy out?

    I guess that "contribution" wasn't big enough.

  8. Re:I knew it was too good to be true. by Baloroth · · Score: 5, Informative

    You've obviously not been looking hard enough. The Ars Technica article sums up the science behind it pretty well (basically, they did a test run of the terrestrial base-stations and it interfered with ~75% of GPS devises, after LightSquared reduced the stations power to try to fix the problem). There is a ton of proof that they actually interfere with GPS signals, namely, actual experiments.

    --
    "None can love freedom heartily, but good men; the rest love not freedom, but license." --John Milton
  9. Disgusting in context with Chris Dodd by BMOC · · Score: 3, Informative

    This is enough to get someone to resign on the appearance of Bribery but Chris Dodd's blatant admission of buying representation is not? double standard continues for elected officials.

    --
    I swear they give me mod points to shut me up.
    1. Re:Disgusting in context with Chris Dodd by geekoid · · Score: 2

      If Chris Dodd had been involved in bribery, you might have had a point, but he wasn't. I'm sure Fox told you he was, and I should expect you to thin for yourself. Still, I have hope you people can rub your two remaining brain cells together.

      He was a victim of the same machine that tried to scandalize Clinton. Make a huge issue and of normal stuff, but when nothing comes out just stop reporting, let the rumor mill work around, and don't mention you were wrong in the first place. If you are lucky, you might find something people don't like and blow it out of proportion.

      --
      The Kruger Dunning explains most post on /. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Dunning%E2%80%93Kruger_effect
    2. Re:Disgusting in context with Chris Dodd by BMOC · · Score: 2

      So, his open complaint pasted all over the internet about not getting the correct result on PIPA/SOPA doesn't strike you as an admission of bribery of elected officials? Mind you, this open admission by Dodd caused thousands of people to directly petition Obama to open an investigation into him. I sincerely doubt most of those people were "Fox News watchers."

      --
      I swear they give me mod points to shut me up.
  10. Re:Wow by tripleevenfall · · Score: 2

    I agree this happens in politics all the time. The differences are that the purchase of influence is extraordinarily well documented in these cases, and the people buying influence from Obama don't seem to know how to run a business at a profit.

  11. So Ahuja Got Fired by Kozar_The_Malignant · · Score: 2

    He didn't get fired for trying to bribe the administration. He got fired for not being successful at it.

    --
    Some mornings it's hardly worth chewing through the restraints to get out of bed.
  12. Re:Of course it was Bush's fault! by Kythe · · Score: 2

    I'm sorry, but this simplistic view is laughable. After nearly 200,000 documents and several investigations, no evidence that any political pressure was applied to approve the loan has been found.

    None.

    So no, it wasn't "team Obama" -- it was career feds, doing what they're supposed to do: review loan applications and decide whether to approve or deny.

    Some loan recipients go bust. That's the way it is -- which you'd likely admit, if an honest appraisal of the situation were your main goal.

    --

    Kythe
  13. Re:Of course it was Bush's fault! by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 4, Informative

    Rejected? Rejected is a bit of a strong word. Try deferred until they met certain conditions like raising further outside capital.

    Which they met.

    And no, it was not Bush's fault. Nobody is saying that. They are saying that Bush originated the program, and that Solyndra was a fast-track candidate, but fault is distinct from the clarification. When it comes to fault, It was China's. Because China massively subsidized their own solar industry.

    However, Solyndra DID build their factory, they DID follow through on what they claimed to do, so you know what? The people who claim it was a fraud and a scam are wrong.

  14. Less government power is the answer by Kohath · · Score: 2

    The way to have less corruption is for government to have less power over people. Why bribe someone who can't help (or hurt) you? Smaller government is the answer.

    1. Re:Less government power is the answer by tnk1 · · Score: 2

      In his defense, he did say "less corruption", not "no corruption". Corruption is not a good thing, but there's a difference between someone paying off a cop to get out of a speeding ticket and someone paying the government to give them thousands or millions in taxpayer money. You'll probably never get rid of the more venial sort of corruption, except possibly through education and strict control, but you can reduce the scope of what government corruption makes possible. After all, one of the reasons that they can get away with this sort of stuff is because it can all happen without anyone having insight into it, even someone like the President.

      Like water, government is mostly transparent in smaller amounts, but turn it into a lake or an ocean and it gets a lot more murky.

  15. Names, but no circumstances by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 3, Informative

    Let's see, counting Solyndra, you have now come up to 4.

    You're still 4 short.

    Oh wait, Uni-Solar's PARENT company is the one that filed for bankruptcy, not just the Uni-Solar unit. Maybe the whole company had problems, but the unit itself could have been fine. Evergreen got subsidies from the State of Massachusetts, not the Feds. I'd look up SpectraWatt, but I think two out of three is enough disputation to demand that you share more facts to justify your claims.

  16. Re:That link is dead. by geekoid · · Score: 2

    Wikipedia talks about it:
    http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/LightSquared

    IT does look like they were working through the issues; which mostly involved GPS.

    Now, maybe they couldn't completely do it, so he tried to bribe people.

    --
    The Kruger Dunning explains most post on /. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Dunning%E2%80%93Kruger_effect
  17. Re:Of course it was Bush's fault! by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 2, Insightful

    you're on slashdot. No evidence IS evidence of wrongdoing.

  18. Re:Not sure what the fuss is about by msauve · · Score: 2

    "If political contributions are not intended to sway the people in charge, or to be in charge, what are they for?"

    Are you serious? They're contributions made under the US Campaign Finance laws. The legal intent is that they are to be spent on political campaigns to sway voters to support the candidate/party to whom they're given, not to directly influence policy. The latter is bribery.

    If a company has an interest in particular areas of government policy, they should be contributing to candidates who best support their position, not bribing the current officeholder in an attempt to directly influence policy.

    --
    "National Security is the chief cause of national insecurity." - Celine's First Law
  19. Re:I knew it was too good to be true. by chihowa · · Score: 2

    "intermodulation distortion"

    GPS receivers are built too cheap

    So? GPS receivers were built under the assumption that no terrestrial signals would exist near them (which was a safe assumption given the frequency allocations). If the choice comes down to 1) keep GPS as it is (receivers are relatively cheap, small, and readily available) or 2) have the service LS was developing at that frequency, then I'd say GPS is the clear winner. Why have to dispose of decades worth of GPS receivers just for yet another LTE network? Why doesn't LS just use a different frequency? There's nothing essential about this particular frequency except that it was (supposed to be) cheap. Fuck 'em.

    --
    If you want a vision of the future, imagine a youtube comments section scrolling - forever.
  20. Re:That link is dead. by gl4ss · · Score: 2

    the businessweek link is indeed dead.

    on top of that, if you search for the article, you can find it on the businessweek site, but that link is a 404 too, and most other sites linked to that.

    anyhow. http://www.dot.gov/affairs/2011/dot16411.html should suffice.

    --
    world was created 5 seconds before this post as it is.
  21. Of course it matters. by drainbramage · · Score: 3, Informative

    From reading /. I learned that only those morally bankrupt evil conniving lowdown scumbag Republicans take bribes.
    Democrats take campaign donations.
    Hope that clears things up.

    --
    No brain, no pain.
    1. Re:Of course it matters. by FishOuttaWater · · Score: 2

      So, what you're saying is that America is a socialist state now, and any return to capitalism will result in starvation and civil war? If I understand you correctly, that's a bold statement. Can you point us to something to support that position?