That's more-properly expressed as "right to not be killed", but I don't have a right to live forever. Nobody does. Everything dies. And therefore I don't have a right to steal other people's money in a worthless attempt to live forever. I can use my OWN money for that purpose, but not others. That's theft both of money & another man's labor.
>>>I assume when you house catches fire you have your private fire truck turn up at great expense to yourself to put out the fire... >>>
As a matter of fact, yes I do. I also have my own private ambulance which I support with yearly dues. And of course the roads I pay when I fill up with gasoline (road tax collected at the pump).
>>>And everyone in the world agrees with that till they get sick.
Even if I was laying on my deathbed, I would NOT steal money from my neighbor. I'm going to die anyway, whether it's now at age 60, or later at age 70. The end point (coffin) is not changing and there's no point trying to fight the inevitable destination.
But if I steal money from my neighbor, and force them to pay my doctor's bill, well, that could have dramatic consequences. Like eternal damnation.
All I meant is that you have a Right to Free Speech, and that you can direct your speech at a doctor, and request that he heal your sick body. That's it. (And I'm sure you knew perfectly well that's what I meant, even if I didn't run my language past a lawyer prior to posting.)
What you do NOT have a right to do is take you Bill, hand it to your neighbors, and force them to pay the bill. That's theft. (It's also partial enslavement.)
>>>>Wouldn't there be huge amounts of interference if the spectrum was unlicensed?
I sent a comment to the FCC about this November 4 hearing, and in short I said this: "My channel count will drop from 15 to just 3 channels, if you allow whitespace devices to broadcast on the television band." If a neighbor turns-on a WSD next year, its broadcasts will block any television station further away that 25 miles. So instead of watching Baltimore, Philly, or Harrisburg television like I normally do, I will be limited to just the local DTV stations in little podunk Lancaster PA.
Furthermore even if I had cable, testing has shown the her Ipod, since her bedroom is literally just feet away, will cause interference on both the analog and digital channels.
I'm all for whitespace, but I'm NOT for destroying the existing television spectrum (channel 2 to 51). Keep the whitespace devices off the TV band.
"The broadcasters contend that adjacent channel interference would be significant even at the 40 mW level proposed by Kevin Martin. In fact, they claim that such a device would interfere with digital television signals when the viewer is 25 miles from the television tower and the whitespace device is 40 feet or less from the TV set. At 50 miles from the television tower, a whitespace device within 200 feet from a set could allegedly cause interference."
External signals still "leak in" through the television or set-top box's internal receiver. My brother sees a "ghost" of local channel WGAL-8 superimposed over his cable channel 8.
And of course there are also those unterminated connections hanging out of people's walls; they act just like antennas to pick-up broadcasting transmitters (like whitespace devices).
"The broadcasters contend that adjacent channel interference would be significant even at the 40 mW level proposed by Kevin Martin. In fact, they claim that such a device would interfere with digital television signals when the viewer is 25 miles from the television tower and the whitespace device is 40 feet or less from the TV set. At 50 miles from the television tower, a whitespace device within 200 feet from a set could allegedly cause interference."
>>>you imply that the health care provided does not need to be paid for
Did you even bother to read my WHOLE post? It's clear you did not. Let me quote the relevant portion: "What they do NOT have a right to do is take the bill and hand-it-off to their neighbors & force the neighbors to pay the bill. That's called theft. It's YOUR bill; YOU pay for it."
Just the same as buying a car. You have a right to buy a Lexus; you don't have the right to make your neighbors cover the cost.
>>>So far all practical purposes the only possibility for me getting any sort of broadband
Why don't you call your local phone company and inquire if you can upgrade your line to DSL? They might have some requirement such as, "We need at least 10 subscribers to make it work," at which point you can round-up your neighbors and get them all to agree to join DSL. All the telephone lines are already installed; all you need is the company to install a DSLAM at the central switching office, and you're done.
My DSL costs me $15 a month; in a rural community it might cost a little bit more.
>>>Manufacturers don't adhere to specs well enough and make devices that are too powerful
Or else people modify their devices to output more power. It's often as easy as just taking a screwdriver to the operational-amplifier's variable resistor & turning the screw. I've never experienced someone driving-by with the XM/Sirius transmitter turned-on, but yes I can see how that would be annoying.
>>>Why not use some space allocated to UHF mobile radios?
The FCC has already approved whitespace devices for use on channels 52 to 69 (the portion that was recently auctioned-off), but you know how it goes. Corporations like Google and Microsoft want more.
I sent a comment to the FCC about this November 4 hearing, and in short I said this: "My channel count will drop from 15 to just 3 channels, if you allow whitespace devices to broadcast on the television band." If my neighbor flips-on her whitespace-enabled Ipod next year, its broadcasts will block any television station further away that 25 miles. So instead of watching Baltimore, Philly, or Harrisburg television like I normally do, I will be limited to just the local DTV stations in little podunk Lancaster PA.
Yuck. Furthermore even if I had cable, testing has shown that my neighbor's Ipod, since he's literally just feet away, will cause interference on both the analog and digital channels.
I'm all for whitespace, but I'm NOT for destroying the existing television spectrum (channel 2 to 51). Keep the whitespace devices off the TV band.
FALSE. The National Association of Broadcasters has done testing and determined that any Whitespace device within approximately 100 feet will block any TV station 25 miles away, even if the WSD is broadcasting on an adjacent channel (for example channel 16 next to WPHL17). Any WSD within 600 feet will block any TV station 50 miles away. These are the testing results that the NAB has submitted to the FCC.
Furthermore the Cable Television Coalition has submitted testing showing that any WSD within 50 feet of their service will not block the channel, but definitely will cause interference with analog or digital reception. In other words if you're trying to watch Ghost Hunters on Sci-Fi Channel, and your kid sister turns on her WS-enabled Ipod, the picture will degrade into a bunch of noise and/or macroblocking.
Google and Microsoft keep insisting this won't happen because, of course, they stand to make millions of dollars off the sale of WSDs. They have $$$ dancing in front of their eyes.
Personally I'm torn; I'm not sure which greed-mongering corporation to believe, but I do know I won't be happy to see my television plummet from 15 to just 3 channels. I've invested a LOT of money upgrading from analog-to-digital television, and I have no desire to see that ~$300 wasted.
A 100 milliwatt WSD will travel about four football fields distance. If the WSD is broadcasting on VHF (channels 2-13), it won't be blocked by trees, but if it's broadcasting on UHF (channels 14-51), then trees will block the signal quite easily.
>>>>. They will probably make some money for their efforts, but they deserve to make some cash for all that work.
Isn't the same true for the local TV stations broadcasting on channels 2 to 51? Don't you think they deserve the right to have their spectrum free of interference, and therefore free of white-space devices?
Or what about those who have invested ~$300 in antennas, digital converter boxes, and monitors to watch channels 2 to 51? Don't they ALSO deserve to have access to the over-the-air television in which they've invested lots of money, and free of interference from whitespace devices? The answer for me is "yes".
"QUIET SPOTS" (WHITE SPACES) BETWEEN STATIONS ON THE DIAL
The fact that there are locations on a radio or television tuning dial which do not receive a broadcast station does not necessarily indicate that a station can be added on that frequency. A station's signal on the same frequency or an adjacent frequency which is too distant or weak to be picked up by a radio receiver can still cause interference to other broadcast stations. For this reason, the Commission's rules require that stations located very close in frequency be located in different communities separated by some physical distance, so as to limit any potential interference.
Before it can be determined whether any "quiet spot" could support a broadcast station, the interested individual or group would need to have an engineering study performed to determine whether the frequency can actually be used. See our Information Sheet about How To Apply For A Broadcast Station.
>>>then its operator will be required to cease operation, at least until the interference problem is corrected.
+1 Informative! And if the operator refuses to turn-off his Whitespace-enabled Ipod, per FCC Regulation Part 15, because it's blocking my TV viewing of WBAL-11, can I smash it to pieces?;-)
Thanks for modding me down from 2 to 1. Moderators who subtract points simply because they disagree with another user's comment should be immediately banned (imho).
I don't mind people disagreeing with me; multiple opinions is what makes this country strong. But the proper method of disagreement is to exercise your free speech via a "reply post" Not through exacting punishment (subtracting points).
You are 100% correct. Everybody has a right to healthcare.
Everybody has a right to walk into a doctor's office, say "I'm sick," and expect the doctor to try to heal them.
What they do NOT have a right to do is take the bill and hand-it-off to their neighbors & force the neighbors to pay the bill. That's called theft. It's YOUR bill; YOU pay for it.
Even regulated, having a bunch of broadcasting whitespace devices "running around" in my neighborhood WILL cause me to lose any DTV stations further away than 25 miles. There will be so much interference that my channel count will drop from 15 to 3.
>>>>Wouldn't there be huge amounts of interference if the spectrum was unlicensed?
I sent a comment to the FCC about this Nov 4 hearing, and in short I said this: "My channel count will drop from 15 to just 3 channels, if you allow whitespace devices to broadcast on the television band." If my neighbor's teenaged daughter flips-on her whitespace-enabled Ipod next year, its broadcasts will block any television station further away that 25 miles. So instead of watching Baltimore, Philly, or Harrisburg television like I normally do, I will be limited to just the local DTV stations in little podunk "Amish Country" Lancaster PA.
Yuck. Furthermore even if I had cable, testing has shown the her Ipod, since her bedroom is literally just feet away, will cause interference on both the analog and digital channels.
I'm all for whitespace, but I'm NOT for destroying the existing television spectrum (channel 2 to 51). Keep the whitespace devices off the TV band.
>>>Try that as "We Democrats" and Republicans Rammed.." and you have it right.
The Republicans only control ~25% of the Maryland Legislature. They can't ram-throuh legislation; in fact most of the time the Republicans are completely ignored, and the Democrats just run the whole show.
I'd rather send back a letter with a one-word response: "NO." And then go to court if they drag me there. I think it would be fun. (By the way I made a mistake. The fine is approximately US$1000, not 500.)
Slashdot Mirror
>>>So, what you're saying is that under the current system (which has the same problem) the poor are the ones more deserving of death?
No one is "deserving" of death. It just happens live the weather. And it's not just the poor. We ALL die. It's an equal opportunity outcome.
>>>Don't you also have a right to life?
That's more-properly expressed as "right to not be killed", but I don't have a right to live forever. Nobody does. Everything dies. And therefore I don't have a right to steal other people's money in a worthless attempt to live forever. I can use my OWN money for that purpose, but not others. That's theft both of money & another man's labor.
>>>I assume when you house catches fire you have your private fire truck turn up at great expense to yourself to put out the fire...
>>>
As a matter of fact, yes I do. I also have my own private ambulance which I support with yearly dues. And of course the roads I pay when I fill up with gasoline (road tax collected at the pump).
>>>And everyone in the world agrees with that till they get sick.
Even if I was laying on my deathbed, I would NOT steal money from my neighbor. I'm going to die anyway, whether it's now at age 60, or later at age 70. The end point (coffin) is not changing and there's no point trying to fight the inevitable destination.
But if I steal money from my neighbor, and force them to pay my doctor's bill, well, that could have dramatic consequences. Like eternal damnation.
Jeez. Picky-picky.
All I meant is that you have a Right to Free Speech, and that you can direct your speech at a doctor, and request that he heal your sick body. That's it. (And I'm sure you knew perfectly well that's what I meant, even if I didn't run my language past a lawyer prior to posting.)
What you do NOT have a right to do is take you Bill, hand it to your neighbors, and force them to pay the bill. That's theft. (It's also partial enslavement.)
>>>>Wouldn't there be huge amounts of interference if the spectrum was unlicensed?
I sent a comment to the FCC about this November 4 hearing, and in short I said this: "My channel count will drop from 15 to just 3 channels, if you allow whitespace devices to broadcast on the television band." If a neighbor turns-on a WSD next year, its broadcasts will block any television station further away that 25 miles. So instead of watching Baltimore, Philly, or Harrisburg television like I normally do, I will be limited to just the local DTV stations in little podunk Lancaster PA.
Furthermore even if I had cable, testing has shown the her Ipod, since her bedroom is literally just feet away, will cause interference on both the analog and digital channels.
I'm all for whitespace, but I'm NOT for destroying the existing television spectrum (channel 2 to 51). Keep the whitespace devices off the TV band.
MORE FROM ARS TECHNICA:
http://arstechnica.com/news.ars/post/20081023-white-space-battle-gets-dirty-as-the-mud-flies.html
"The broadcasters contend that adjacent channel interference would be significant even at the 40 mW level proposed by Kevin Martin. In fact, they claim that such a device would interfere with digital television signals when the viewer is 25 miles from the television tower and the whitespace device is 40 feet or less from the TV set. At 50 miles from the television tower, a whitespace device within 200 feet from a set could allegedly cause interference."
External signals still "leak in" through the television or set-top box's internal receiver. My brother sees a "ghost" of local channel WGAL-8 superimposed over his cable channel 8.
And of course there are also those unterminated connections hanging out of people's walls; they act just like antennas to pick-up broadcasting transmitters (like whitespace devices).
MORE FROM ARS TECHNICA:
http://arstechnica.com/news.ars/post/20081023-white-space-battle-gets-dirty-as-the-mud-flies.html
"The broadcasters contend that adjacent channel interference would be significant even at the 40 mW level proposed by Kevin Martin. In fact, they claim that such a device would interfere with digital television signals when the viewer is 25 miles from the television tower and the whitespace device is 40 feet or less from the TV set. At 50 miles from the television tower, a whitespace device within 200 feet from a set could allegedly cause interference."
>>>you imply that the health care provided does not need to be paid for
Did you even bother to read my WHOLE post? It's clear you did not. Let me quote the relevant portion: "What they do NOT have a right to do is take the bill and hand-it-off to their neighbors & force the neighbors to pay the bill. That's called theft. It's YOUR bill; YOU pay for it."
Just the same as buying a car. You have a right to buy a Lexus; you don't have the right to make your neighbors cover the cost.
>>>So far all practical purposes the only possibility for me getting any sort of broadband
Why don't you call your local phone company and inquire if you can upgrade your line to DSL? They might have some requirement such as, "We need at least 10 subscribers to make it work," at which point you can round-up your neighbors and get them all to agree to join DSL. All the telephone lines are already installed; all you need is the company to install a DSLAM at the central switching office, and you're done.
My DSL costs me $15 a month; in a rural community it might cost a little bit more.
>>>Manufacturers don't adhere to specs well enough and make devices that are too powerful
Or else people modify their devices to output more power. It's often as easy as just taking a screwdriver to the operational-amplifier's variable resistor & turning the screw. I've never experienced someone driving-by with the XM/Sirius transmitter turned-on, but yes I can see how that would be annoying.
>>>Why not use some space allocated to UHF mobile radios?
The FCC has already approved whitespace devices for use on channels 52 to 69 (the portion that was recently auctioned-off), but you know how it goes. Corporations like Google and Microsoft want more.
I sent a comment to the FCC about this November 4 hearing, and in short I said this: "My channel count will drop from 15 to just 3 channels, if you allow whitespace devices to broadcast on the television band." If my neighbor flips-on her whitespace-enabled Ipod next year, its broadcasts will block any television station further away that 25 miles. So instead of watching Baltimore, Philly, or Harrisburg television like I normally do, I will be limited to just the local DTV stations in little podunk Lancaster PA.
Yuck. Furthermore even if I had cable, testing has shown that my neighbor's Ipod, since he's literally just feet away, will cause interference on both the analog and digital channels.
I'm all for whitespace, but I'm NOT for destroying the existing television spectrum (channel 2 to 51). Keep the whitespace devices off the TV band.
>>>mostly unsubstantiated bullshiting
FALSE. The National Association of Broadcasters has done testing and determined that any Whitespace device within approximately 100 feet will block any TV station 25 miles away, even if the WSD is broadcasting on an adjacent channel (for example channel 16 next to WPHL17). Any WSD within 600 feet will block any TV station 50 miles away. These are the testing results that the NAB has submitted to the FCC.
Furthermore the Cable Television Coalition has submitted testing showing that any WSD within 50 feet of their service will not block the channel, but definitely will cause interference with analog or digital reception. In other words if you're trying to watch Ghost Hunters on Sci-Fi Channel, and your kid sister turns on her WS-enabled Ipod, the picture will degrade into a bunch of noise and/or macroblocking.
Google and Microsoft keep insisting this won't happen because, of course, they stand to make millions of dollars off the sale of WSDs. They have $$$ dancing in front of their eyes.
Personally I'm torn; I'm not sure which greed-mongering corporation to believe, but I do know I won't be happy to see my television plummet from 15 to just 3 channels. I've invested a LOT of money upgrading from analog-to-digital television, and I have no desire to see that ~$300 wasted.
A 100 milliwatt WSD will travel about four football fields distance. If the WSD is broadcasting on VHF (channels 2-13), it won't be blocked by trees, but if it's broadcasting on UHF (channels 14-51), then trees will block the signal quite easily.
>>>>. They will probably make some money for their efforts, but they deserve to make some cash for all that work.
Isn't the same true for the local TV stations broadcasting on channels 2 to 51? Don't you think they deserve the right to have their spectrum free of interference, and therefore free of white-space devices?
Or what about those who have invested ~$300 in antennas, digital converter boxes, and monitors to watch channels 2 to 51? Don't they ALSO deserve to have access to the over-the-air television in which they've invested lots of money, and free of interference from whitespace devices? The answer for me is "yes".
From FCC.gov:
"QUIET SPOTS" (WHITE SPACES) BETWEEN STATIONS ON THE DIAL
The fact that there are locations on a radio or television tuning dial which do not receive a broadcast station does not necessarily indicate that a station can be added on that frequency. A station's signal on the same frequency or an adjacent frequency which is too distant or weak to be picked up by a radio receiver can still cause interference to other broadcast stations. For this reason, the Commission's rules require that stations located very close in frequency be located in different communities separated by some physical distance, so as to limit any potential interference.
Before it can be determined whether any "quiet spot" could support a broadcast station, the interested individual or group would need to have an engineering study performed to determine whether the frequency can actually be used. See our Information Sheet about How To Apply For A Broadcast Station.
>>>then its operator will be required to cease operation, at least until the interference problem is corrected.
+1 Informative! And if the operator refuses to turn-off his Whitespace-enabled Ipod, per FCC Regulation Part 15, because it's blocking my TV viewing of WBAL-11, can I smash it to pieces? ;-)
Thanks for modding me down from 2 to 1. Moderators who subtract points simply because they disagree with another user's comment should be immediately banned (imho).
I don't mind people disagreeing with me; multiple opinions is what makes this country strong. But the proper method of disagreement is to exercise your free speech via a "reply post" Not through exacting punishment (subtracting points).
You are 100% correct. Everybody has a right to healthcare.
Everybody has a right to walk into a doctor's office, say "I'm sick," and expect the doctor to try to heal them.
What they do NOT have a right to do is take the bill and hand-it-off to their neighbors & force the neighbors to pay the bill. That's called theft. It's YOUR bill; YOU pay for it.
Even regulated, having a bunch of broadcasting whitespace devices "running around" in my neighborhood WILL cause me to lose any DTV stations further away than 25 miles. There will be so much interference that my channel count will drop from 15 to 3.
>>>>Wouldn't there be huge amounts of interference if the spectrum was unlicensed?
I sent a comment to the FCC about this Nov 4 hearing, and in short I said this: "My channel count will drop from 15 to just 3 channels, if you allow whitespace devices to broadcast on the television band." If my neighbor's teenaged daughter flips-on her whitespace-enabled Ipod next year, its broadcasts will block any television station further away that 25 miles. So instead of watching Baltimore, Philly, or Harrisburg television like I normally do, I will be limited to just the local DTV stations in little podunk "Amish Country" Lancaster PA.
Yuck. Furthermore even if I had cable, testing has shown the her Ipod, since her bedroom is literally just feet away, will cause interference on both the analog and digital channels.
I'm all for whitespace, but I'm NOT for destroying the existing television spectrum (channel 2 to 51). Keep the whitespace devices off the TV band.
>>>Try that as "We Democrats" and Republicans Rammed.." and you have it right.
The Republicans only control ~25% of the Maryland Legislature. They can't ram-throuh legislation; in fact most of the time the Republicans are completely ignored, and the Democrats just run the whole show.
No not really. MTV doesn't show music videos anymore. And almost-all the "video jockies" were laid off.
The BCLU. (British Civil Liberties Union).
>>>"Anything for a quiet life."
I'd rather send back a letter with a one-word response: "NO." And then go to court if they drag me there. I think it would be fun. (By the way I made a mistake. The fine is approximately US$1000, not 500.)
>>>M.T.V. Get off the air; And so it was; Our beloved corporate gods; Claimed they created music video.
What's a music video?
I don't think I've ever
seen one of those on MTV.
(shrug)
(surfs over to youtube for some mindless vegetating)