>>>They're referring to spectrum space in between "channels."
Sorry that's wrong.
(1) There's no space between TV channels. They all run directly next to one another, like books on a shelf.
(2) The white space devices operate ON channel not between channels. So if there was an empty slot at 50, the device on connect to the internet ON channel 50.
(3) The problem is that 50 is not open in the northeast. It's occupied. The entire TV band is full.
I' be willing to lose the right to burn a flag, if I gained the right to keep my money, instead of having to pay the Neighborhood pack-a-day Smoker to get a new lung (
The first tight is trivial (I'd rather use words and free press not burn stuff). The second right is fundamental - the difference between being free and being my Smoking neighbor's slave/source for free cash.
The way Obam's White House acted in this case (and many other cases) reminds me of how Mussolini acted in his "white house". i.e.
They don't truly believe in freedom of speech, and that's why they act how they act. Unfortunately they can't stop Americans from speaking, but by god we can ban this British "prick" forever!
>>>his own fucking plane and quite honestly he should be able to do whatever he wants to with his own property,
That changed when some guy flew his private plane into an IRS building. Even private planes can be used for terrorism, so now they are as strictly regulated as public planes. Same rules.
Just realized something, if you adjust the prices to account for inflation (aka devaluation of dollar due to increased supply of the paper), these goods actually are cheaper today than in 2000:
2000 - spent $350 for Win98 laptop. Today - spent [266] for Win7 laptop. 2000 - spent $200 for TV. Today - spent [152] for TV. 2000 - spent $300 for VCR. Today - spent [228] for DVR.
>>>The price of your broadband hasn't decreased, rather the speed has increased
Same with laptops and other gadgets. 2000 - spent $350 for Win98 laptop. Today - spent $350 for Win7 laptop. 2000 - spent $200 for TV. Today - spent $200 for TV. 2000 - spent $300 for VCR. Today - spent $300 for DVR.
Prices have not dropped for other electronic devices, so why do we expect prices to drop for high-speed internet? It is illogical. Actually now that I think about it: ONE thing has dropped. I used to spend $19 for my AOL dialup internet in 2000, but now it costs $7, and I even have the option to get it free (netzero).
>>>English is full of such relics that exist only because the language has changed.
Yes I know but when they updated the spelling in the 1600s, people were no longer saying/kokh/ but coff like we do. They should have made the spelling in their wordbooks match the pronunciation, not the old archaic form. .
>>>Purhaps u wud prifur us tu uz sensibl speling az u si it, but owr curent sistum wurks just fayn I think
I'm just repeating what my professor taught me - that when spelling was standardized, rather than spell the way it sounded (nite), they spelled the words based upon their original source - i.e. mostly Latin and Greek. Unfortunately he said a lot of words were misidentified as to their original location, so even that's frakked up.
Bottom Line: The standard is a mess that, even if you traveled to the 1500s, the preferred spelling would not match the way people were speaking at the time.
>>>I would not pronounce "cof" the same way I pronounce "cough". Maybe "coff" works. As for "swimmed", if you use it in a sentence it is awkward. "Swam" flows better.
Agree on the first and disagree on the second. "Swam" flows better only because you're used to it, but that's not reason to prefer it. Would you replace "I walked" with "I wulk" just because it flows better? That's how our ancestors spoke ~800 years ago, but that's no reason to keep it. All the other verbs have evolved from strongly-typed cases (i.e change spelling with tense) to modern -ed forms. It makes no logical sense to have a few confusing exceptions. .
>>>Your Chaucer quotes are examples of masterful wordplay.
Actually Chaucer is an example of how people spoke. It was routine in pre-1600s English to use double or triple negatives for emphasis, just as it is routine in many modern languages (like Italian and Greek). It's only "illegal" in English because teachers tell us so, but if it's okay in other languages, it should be okay for us too.
>>>writing "he answered affirmatively" instead of "he said yes" doesn't really help anyone, and all that business-speak "utilise" instead of "use" nonsense needs to die.
QFT.
You're probably the only one in this whole thread who understood. Sure "utilize the resources available to you to accomplish the task" makes the mid-level manager sound like a High IQ guy, but it doesn't communicate as effectively to the staff as simply saying, "use the computer and printer".
Well my professors point is that oftentimes people will take a simple directive (clean your desk before you go home), and turn it into a long morass of multi-syllabic words in order to create a document that SOUNDS intelligent. Unfortunately that process obscures the meaning so the recipient doesn't know what the hell you're talking about.... or has to read it 2-3 times to comprehend.
I think you have that backwards. Most people start "pro government" in school, but then as they advance towards middle age they tends towards anti-government, because they see how many things the government screws up.
I doubt that. What about Combat which was "sold" with every Atari ever produced (upto 1983) - that's at least 15 million copies right there. May we have a citation for your claim that Wii Sports is the best-selling?
You think that's old? It's been 33 years since I first laid hands on an Atari console (still one of my favorite machines) with its Commodore-produced 6502 CPU and TIA sound/graphics chip (with an amazing 30x20 resolution).
The Famicom was released in 1983 so we're talking about 27 year old technology! Its contemporaries were the Intellivision, Colecovision, Atari 5200 SuperSystem, Apple IIc/e, and C=64. (The Mac and Amiga didn't even exist yet.) Ancient, old, ancient technology. But hella fun.
..... I'm talking about the 8-bit 6502 of course.;-) Okay yes it was second-sourced but Commodore still made money off the patent/license times 50 millions NESes sold. They also made-out well on the 16-bit 6502 variant inside the Super Nintendo .
>>>Because these frequencies are line of sight in coverage the FCC can have it both ways.
TV signals extend outward in a 100 mile wide circle. If you have a channel 10 in Boston, the next closest channel 10 would have to be in Philadelphia... at least 200 miles distant. .
>>>in parts of the country where channels are not used for TV they could be used for other services.
True but in real-world terms this means the Whitespace internet Device won't be usable anywhere east of the Mississippi. The TV channels are all full. Also: If I'm trying to watch the Baltimore Ravens or Philadelphia Phillies, and you flip-on your Whitespace Net Device such that its broadcasts over the channel, I will politely ask you to turn it off.
If you do not comply, per FCC rules, this is an illegal transmitter and I have the right to make it inoperative. Licensed TV has priority over unlicensed devices.
>>>the proposal is not for the wi-fi to use 44 or 46. It's for them to use the space BETWEEN 44 and 45
BABYLON
Wrong wrong wrong wrong wrong
(5):-) There is no space between channels 44 and 45. They coexist side-by-side without any usable space. You might be able to squeeze a 10 kbit/s streaming radio station through there, but that's it. 44 and 45 are up against another like two teens on prom night. No space between. When the FCC talks about "whitespace" they are talking about the unused CHANNELS not the space between channels.
>>>If they could compress the channels into half the bandwidth, they could create new channels in between.
Digital TV does that..... sort of. The channel is still the same bandwidth as designated back in the 1930s (6 megahertz wide) but the owner of that channel, say WNBC, is free to multiplex it any way they desire. They can have 1 program..... of they can have 12 different programs. But whichever one they choose, the whole channel is used. \
On a spectrum analyzer it looks like a "noisy logic 1" with exactly 6 megahertz width. (The actual height varies with the power output.)
You may be technically right but a dialup modem has a nice clean phoneline, so it can do 33k (analog) or 56k (digital). Real world wireless broadcasting is noisy. If I recall correctly, AM-HD Radio operates in a 10,000 hertz wide channel and gets 30 kbit/s maximum. Digital Radio Mondiale gets 35 kbit/s. So multiplying by 1/3rd for a 3000 hertz width == very very slow datarate of only ~10k. So even if two TV channels did have 3000 hertz between them, it wouldn't be practical to use it for wireless internet devices. .
>>>that 3000 Hz isn't the whitespace that the FCC is talking about.
Nope. Their word "whitespace" refers to UNUSED CHANNELS.
Maybe Australia should hook-up their new filtered internet to the government offices first? Hmmmm. I wonder why such a low-populated country keeps appearing in the news so often?
It's that famous inferiority complex I've witnessed while vacationing there (visited every province except Nunavut). They are very, very nice people but feel the need to prove why they are not just a clone of their neighbor to the south, and how Canada created a ton of inventions and other firsts. Personally I think they should just dissolv the Confederation and join as states 51 through 62(?).
Slashdot Mirror
>>>They're referring to spectrum space in between "channels."
Sorry that's wrong.
(1) There's no space between TV channels. They all run directly next to one another, like books on a shelf.
(2) The white space devices operate ON channel not between channels. So if there was an empty slot at 50, the device on connect to the internet ON channel 50.
(3) The problem is that 50 is not open in the northeast. It's occupied. The entire TV band is full.
I' be willing to lose the right to burn a flag, if I gained the right to keep my money, instead of having to pay the Neighborhood pack-a-day Smoker to get a new lung (
The first tight is trivial (I'd rather use words and free press not burn stuff). The second right is fundamental - the difference between being free and being my Smoking neighbor's slave/source for free cash.
The way Obam's White House acted in this case (and many other cases) reminds me of how Mussolini acted in his "white house". i.e.
They don't truly believe in freedom of speech, and that's why they act how they act. Unfortunately they can't stop Americans from speaking, but by god we can ban this British "prick" forever!
>>>his own fucking plane and quite honestly he should be able to do whatever he wants to with his own property,
That changed when some guy flew his private plane into an IRS building. Even private planes can be used for terrorism, so now they are as strictly regulated as public planes. Same rules.
"He not comin back? Thankee God." - Japanese
An AMD K6-II at ~500 megahertz and 32 megabytes RAM. Ran Win98 just fine. (98 only needs 16 or 24 MB)
Just realized something, if you adjust the prices to account for inflation (aka devaluation of dollar due to increased supply of the paper), these goods actually are cheaper today than in 2000:
2000 - spent $350 for Win98 laptop. Today - spent [266] for Win7 laptop.
2000 - spent $200 for TV. Today - spent [152] for TV.
2000 - spent $300 for VCR. Today - spent [228] for DVR.
>>>The price of your broadband hasn't decreased, rather the speed has increased
Same with laptops and other gadgets.
2000 - spent $350 for Win98 laptop. Today - spent $350 for Win7 laptop.
2000 - spent $200 for TV. Today - spent $200 for TV.
2000 - spent $300 for VCR. Today - spent $300 for DVR.
Prices have not dropped for other electronic devices, so why do we expect prices to drop for high-speed internet? It is illogical. Actually now that I think about it: ONE thing has dropped. I used to spend $19 for my AOL dialup internet in 2000, but now it costs $7, and I even have the option to get it free (netzero).
>>>English is full of such relics that exist only because the language has changed.
Yes I know but when they updated the spelling in the 1600s, people were no longer saying /kokh/ but coff like we do. They should have made the spelling in their wordbooks match the pronunciation, not the old archaic form.
.
>>>Purhaps u wud prifur us tu uz sensibl speling az u si it, but owr curent sistum wurks just fayn I think
Yes please.
>>>>>"swimmed" is more logical than "swam" or "swum".
>>
>>Swim-swam-swum is Old English, much older than the -ed ending
I know. My point was it should be swimmed. It should be modernized, and teachers should not be correcting children who say "swimmed" or "buyed".
>>>Citation?
I'm just repeating what my professor taught me - that when spelling was standardized, rather than spell the way it sounded (nite), they spelled the words based upon their original source - i.e. mostly Latin and Greek. Unfortunately he said a lot of words were misidentified as to their original location, so even that's frakked up.
Bottom Line: The standard is a mess that, even if you traveled to the 1500s, the preferred spelling would not match the way people were speaking at the time.
>>>I would not pronounce "cof" the same way I pronounce "cough". Maybe "coff" works. As for "swimmed", if you use it in a sentence it is awkward. "Swam" flows better.
Agree on the first and disagree on the second. "Swam" flows better only because you're used to it, but that's not reason to prefer it. Would you replace "I walked" with "I wulk" just because it flows better? That's how our ancestors spoke ~800 years ago, but that's no reason to keep it. All the other verbs have evolved from strongly-typed cases (i.e change spelling with tense) to modern -ed forms. It makes no logical sense to have a few confusing exceptions.
.
>>>Your Chaucer quotes are examples of masterful wordplay.
Actually Chaucer is an example of how people spoke. It was routine in pre-1600s English to use double or triple negatives for emphasis, just as it is routine in many modern languages (like Italian and Greek). It's only "illegal" in English because teachers tell us so, but if it's okay in other languages, it should be okay for us too.
>>>writing "he answered affirmatively" instead of "he said yes" doesn't really help anyone, and all that business-speak "utilise" instead of "use" nonsense needs to die.
QFT.
You're probably the only one in this whole thread who understood. Sure "utilize the resources available to you to accomplish the task" makes the mid-level manager sound like a High IQ guy, but it doesn't communicate as effectively to the staff as simply saying, "use the computer and printer".
Well my professors point is that oftentimes people will take a simple directive (clean your desk before you go home), and turn it into a long morass of multi-syllabic words in order to create a document that SOUNDS intelligent. Unfortunately that process obscures the meaning so the recipient doesn't know what the hell you're talking about.... or has to read it 2-3 times to comprehend.
I think you have that backwards. Most people start "pro government" in school, but then as they advance towards middle age they tends towards anti-government, because they see how many things the government screws up.
I doubt that. What about Combat which was "sold" with every Atari ever produced (upto 1983) - that's at least 15 million copies right there. May we have a citation for your claim that Wii Sports is the best-selling?
You think that's old? It's been 33 years since I first laid hands on an Atari console (still one of my favorite machines) with its Commodore-produced 6502 CPU and TIA sound/graphics chip (with an amazing 30x20 resolution).
The Famicom was released in 1983 so we're talking about 27 year old technology! Its contemporaries were the Intellivision, Colecovision, Atari 5200 SuperSystem, Apple IIc/e, and C=64. (The Mac and Amiga didn't even exist yet.) Ancient, old, ancient technology. But hella fun.
..... I'm talking about the 8-bit 6502 of course. ;-) Okay yes it was second-sourced but Commodore still made money off the patent/license times 50 millions NESes sold. They also made-out well on the 16-bit 6502 variant inside the Super Nintendo
.
>>>Because these frequencies are line of sight in coverage the FCC can have it both ways.
TV signals extend outward in a 100 mile wide circle. If you have a channel 10 in Boston, the next closest channel 10 would have to be in Philadelphia... at least 200 miles distant.
.
>>>in parts of the country where channels are not used for TV they could be used for other services.
True but in real-world terms this means the Whitespace internet Device won't be usable anywhere east of the Mississippi. The TV channels are all full. Also: If I'm trying to watch the Baltimore Ravens or Philadelphia Phillies, and you flip-on your Whitespace Net Device such that its broadcasts over the channel, I will politely ask you to turn it off.
If you do not comply, per FCC rules, this is an illegal transmitter and I have the right to make it inoperative. Licensed TV has priority over unlicensed devices.
>>>the proposal is not for the wi-fi to use 44 or 46. It's for them to use the space BETWEEN 44 and 45
BABYLON
Wrong
wrong
wrong
wrong
wrong
(5) :-) There is no space between channels 44 and 45. They coexist side-by-side without any usable space. You might be able to squeeze a 10 kbit/s streaming radio station through there, but that's it. 44 and 45 are up against another like two teens on prom night. No space between. When the FCC talks about "whitespace" they are talking about the unused CHANNELS not the space between channels.
>>>If they could compress the channels into half the bandwidth, they could create new channels in between.
Digital TV does that..... sort of. The channel is still the same bandwidth as designated back in the 1930s (6 megahertz wide) but the owner of that channel, say WNBC, is free to multiplex it any way they desire. They can have 1 program..... of they can have 12 different programs. But whichever one they choose, the whole channel is used. \
On a spectrum analyzer it looks like a "noisy logic 1" with exactly 6 megahertz width. (The actual height varies with the power output.)
You may be technically right but a dialup modem has a nice clean phoneline, so it can do 33k (analog) or 56k (digital). Real world wireless broadcasting is noisy. If I recall correctly, AM-HD Radio operates in a 10,000 hertz wide channel and gets 30 kbit/s maximum. Digital Radio Mondiale gets 35 kbit/s. So multiplying by 1/3rd for a 3000 hertz width == very very slow datarate of only ~10k. So even if two TV channels did have 3000 hertz between them, it wouldn't be practical to use it for wireless internet devices.
.
>>>that 3000 Hz isn't the whitespace that the FCC is talking about.
Nope. Their word "whitespace" refers to UNUSED CHANNELS.
The Boxee boxshape reminds me of the 2001-2005 era Nintendo Gamecube after a saw accident.
Here's the tactic I woulda used:
"I did not view porn."
"It was just naked men and women"
Maybe Australia should hook-up their new filtered internet to the government offices first? Hmmmm. I wonder why such a low-populated country keeps appearing in the news so often?
It's that famous inferiority complex I've witnessed while vacationing there (visited every province except Nunavut). They are very, very nice people but feel the need to prove why they are not just a clone of their neighbor to the south, and how Canada created a ton of inventions and other firsts. Personally I think they should just dissolv the Confederation and join as states 51 through 62(?).
Except for Quebec. Give it to France. Or the EU.
What about a Libertarian Canadian? Where do they fit? Right or left? Or maybe up?