http://www.arrl.org/field/regulations/allocate.h tm l
If you add them all up, it's around 3 MHz total I think. Enough for one person to get 3Mbits/sec.
So what this should tell you is that there are lots of other users in the 0.5-30 MHz spectrum space. It's going to stomp on lots of services, not only Amateur Radio.
Amateur Radio is just a tiny user of this spectrum.
BTW, 0.5-30MHz is all the frequencies which we can reliably use for long distance communications. That is just under 30 MHz of bandwidth. Go look up how much bandwidth just ONE HDTV station takes up....
"That doesn't work for me. Science is about the application of logic and critical thinking. You might get people used to the idea of a spaceship with TV sci-fi shows, but this will do nothing to raise the level of 'real' scientific thinking. If anything, it might make it worse because people pick up dodgy concepts and expect technology to work that way."
Because you're thinking of "education" as 'teaching facts'. This education is more psychological in nature instead of scientific.
It's about taking a concept and moving it from the impossible-crazy to the simply-fantastic-but-still-not-possible, then to we-found-evidence-it-might-not-be-completely-impos sible-just-improbably, then to not-as-improbable-as-we-thought, and eventually to possible-but-we-haven't-found-evidence-yet.
There have been lots of 'difficult concepts' in science, for which many men have been laughed at and excommunicated, which we take as simple truths today. The more difficult the concept, the more impact it could have on a society, the longer it takes to 'get out'. How long did it take for the Earth-centrist view of the solar system to actually get eradicated? Many decades - and that's a concept you can prove with just simple math.
There's a quote from Men In Black that I love to use as an example. K and James Edwards (not J yet) are sitting on the park bench(?), talking about how Edwards just found out about the existence of aliens, since he just ran one down.
K says: "1500 years ago, everybody "knew" that the earth was the center of the universe. 500 years ago, everybody "knew" that the earth was flat. And 15 minutes ago, you "knew" that humans were alone on this planet. Imagine what you'll "know" tomorrow."
I think that pretty well sums it up. The majority of what we thought was "impossible" even 200 years ago has been shown to be possible, and lots of it is simply commonplace.
Be careful what you laugh at something someone says. You may be laughing at the next Galileo.
if a lot of Sci-Fi on TV wasn't a big "public education" project.
This was covered, on a tangent, in a STNG episode. The short-version is Picard attempts to make first contact, but the political leaders decide that the populous isn't ready - and that a public education project will be started/expanded.
For example, there are the persistant rumors that Orson Welles radioplay was an experiment designed to gauge public response, and that shortly thereafter it was decided that *we* aren't ready.
Continuing rumors like that the original Star Trek didn't have enough advertising income to keep it on the air for a single season, and certainly not enough to carry it for three.
Now the government is getting publicly involved in the effort, with the 'life on Mars' possibilities that were thrown about in the last few years.
40 years ago, how would people have reacted to the government saying that there might actually be life on Mars? Today, it's no big deal - because we've been "educated".
"According to a search on Lexis/Nexis [lexisnexis.com] (paid search; subscription required) Claria Corporation donated $10,000 to Mozelle Thompson's campaign and WhenU.com donated $20,000."
The problem with your idea is that it won't work for the very entities that are most vulnerable: Tier 1 ISPs.
They have agreements with lots of ISPs to carry traffic from place to place, called Transit Agreements.
There may be traffic flowing on my network that is not "from" me and not "to" me, but that I'm merely moving for someone that I have a transit agreement for. *They* may also have a transit agreement with someone else, down the line.
It is possible, likely in fact, that there is traffic on my network (if I'm a big ISP, mind you) whose source address does not match one of my directly connected neighbor's networks, but that traffic is no less legitimate.
Transit agreements are agreements between networks to carry their traffic to the 'outside world'. Many or most of the large ISPs have transit agreements with several of their peer networks.
If ISP A has a problem getting to ISP C, he may send his traffic to ISP B if ISP B can still reach ISP C. Thus there will be packets flowing from ISP B to ISP C with ISP A's source IP address in the headers, and it's completely legit.
There's no mechanism today to differentiate between valid transited packets and forged packets. You couldn't even use a route-matching scheme (checking to see if you have a route to the source that matches where the packets are coming from), because there is a lot of asymmetric routing going on out on the internet.
iBGP is vulnerable to this as well, and very few of the networks I've worked on went to this level of filtering on their internal peering, just their external.
Find a large network, determine it's topology, hope they're using iBGP for announcing the routes internally to the edge peering routers. Then it's a matter of finding which one to disrupt. Find the right one and a/16 drops out of your internal tables, just through knocking out an iBGP peer - never having had to touch the edge router. The route falls out of the edge router's table, and so he stops advertising it.
Wait. Let it come back. Route gets advertised to external peer again.
Repeat 3-4 times until the route is dampened by your victim's peers. Repeat 3-4 more times to get the default maximum 60 minute time-out.
Anyway, the way I read it you basically run the TCP attack against a BGP peering router, causing it to drop one or more of it's peering relationships. Do that enough and you can cause the routes being advertised by that router (and also TO that router from the peering connections you're breaking) to be 'dampened' - a protective mechanism in BGP to prevent a flapping route from making all the peers recalculate their routes nonstop.
It's kind of like one peer putting the other one's routes in "time-out" until he plays nice.
Yep, lots of electricity to get bauxite to Al, since bauxite is not so clean. But then if you were able to capture the 'cleaner' aluminum oxide from these H2 generators and recycle it back into aluminum, it would probably take less to convert it back into pure Al than from bauxite. The aluminum could be a mostly closed system with enough recycling, and the recycling would be easy with the proper design. Put in a new spool of Al wire, change out the aluminum oxide collector for a new one - maybe free with exchange to encourage recycling, add some distilled water, and you're ready to keep producing more H2 on demand.
Seeing how much energy we use as a society, we're not going to get away with pure solar. Just not enough energy density per square foot using today's technology. Something like a few pebble bed nuclear reactors, or maybe throw in some solar, wind, geothermal, tidal, hydro, whatever other energy sources we have access to, and we can probably get mostly away from fossil fuels... at least as a fuel source for vehicles.
Fossil products will probably still be used for a long time for plastics and such...
Does the energy used to create all of the things that acre of corn needs to get from "Just Harvested, Needs Seeding" to that 300 gallons of ethanol add up to more than the 300 gallons of ethanol provides?
I'd venture a guess to say it does, once you consider:
-Tractor to plow, seed, etc etc (whether electric or diesel, still takes x energy to accomplish) -Water, including the pumps to get the water from here to there, purification, processing of any wastewater and/or runoff -Production, transportation, etc of all chemicals needed for growth, like fertilizers insecticides herbicides blah blah -Processing and transportation from "harvested corn" to "300 gallons of ethanol"
I'm guessing it's going to take MUCH more than the energy equivalent of 300 gallons of ethanol.
Someone, please do something with this technology. Maybe someone can do a quick energy conversion analysis to see what the energy cost of doing this conversion is?
So the only way amateur radio should be protected is if a scenario can be concocted where it is the ONLY means of communications?/boggle
Amateur radio isn't the only thing that will be severely impacted by BPL. You need to go read up on what it will do. Lots of links provided in this article's threads.
If a disaster comes through town and we need the ham operators for communication, the power lines have probably been long dead and no longer causing interference.
And who will they talk to? The whole point of disaster communications is to talk to the outside world... you know, the ones who still have power?
Remember to tell that to the guy holding the radio the next time a disaster comes through your town. He's probably a ham, donating his time, energy and knowledge to helping others by providing communications when every other system is down.
Be sure to tell him you don't need his help. Get cozy on the roof during that flood, cause you might just be there a while.
Wonder if Taco will rewrite the headline, now that he's been wtfpwn3d by the ARRL Lab Manager.
Just goes to show you that the/. editors don't actually READ the crap they post 90% of the time, and they sensationalize 75% of that.
Nowhere is 'danger' brought up in any of the ARRL material that I see. Where the hell did the editor come up with that, and why did Taco let it through?
"As pointed out in numerous stories and reports from countries where BPL implementations have been tested, the unavoidable radiation from power lines and associated modems raises noise floor limits to an unacceptable level. This interference will severely impair FEMA's mission-essential HF radio operations in areas serviced by BPL technology. Tests have shown that in order for licensed transmitters to compensate for this noise level, there would have to be an increase in the signal level on the order of +30dB
6. FNARS utilizes transmitters that range from 1 kW to 10 kW in output power. An increase in power of +30 dB to offset the increased noise floor would require a 10 kW station to increase power output to 1 MW."
And the 30db figure came from tests in Finland, where they also shot down BPL.
FEMA's quotes: See Gerhard Latzin, "PLC for the present rejected by Finnish Telecommunication Minister", 25 May 2001, published on the Internet at http://www.darc.de/referate/emv/plc/plc-oh.pdf; Ministry of Public Management, Home Affairs, Posts and Telecommunications, Japan, "Announcement of report by Power Line Communication Study Group" 9 August 2002, published on the Internet at http://www.soumu.go.jp/joho_tsusin/eng/Release s/Te lecommunications/news020809_3.html; Koos Fockens, "PLC Measurements", 7 May 2002, published on the Internet at http://www.darc.de/referate/emv/plc/VERON_PLC_ Repo rt.pdf; Mel Maundrell, "Concerns for the continued Military Use of HF over the Potential Increases to the Background Noise Level", 11 January 2002, published on the Internet at http://www.radio.gov.uk/topics/interference/docume nts/dera.pdf
And one other gem section:
"Currently, there is no alternative to HF radio communications in terms of meeting national security and emergency preparedness requirements at the national, state and local levels. 10. FNARS HF radio stations are normally located in residential areas that would be serviced by Power Line Communication (PLC) systems. FEMA also utilizes HF radio stations from other Government programs, including the Military Affiliate Radio System (MARS), the US Air Force Auxiliary - Civil Air Patrol (CAP), and the Radio Amateur Civil Emergency Service (RACES), which are similarly situated. The interference from PLC would render these essential communications services useless. 2002, published on the Internet at http://www.radio.gov.uk/topics/interference/docume nts/dera.pdf
Which is only relevant if the unshielded, in-house bit carries the full signal of the shielded version, which it won't.
No, now every house in the node region will be 'broadcasting' every bit being sent downstream, whether or not they're customers of the service. The voltage of the AC doesn't matter here (much), only the power of the sub-carrier being used to distribute the internet service.
Either way you cut it, you will not be able to realistically shield the AC wiring in every house downstream from a node, which means they're all going to radiate the interference... er, I mean product.
The point was, the OP is talking about having a shielded distribution system. If the last few feet of the system is not shielded, it doesn't really matter. It just changes the length of the antenna from which to radiate.
And I was speaking more to the interference than the bio issues...
Slashdot Mirror
IIRC, the Xbox2 is going to be a completely different architecture (processor). There's no way they could make it backwards compatible without:
1) Putting a whole Xbox inside the Xbox2
or
2) Writing emulation software
Neither sounds particularly appealing...
A very small set of bands:
h tm l
http://www.arrl.org/field/regulations/allocate.
If you add them all up, it's around 3 MHz total I think. Enough for one person to get 3Mbits/sec.
So what this should tell you is that there are lots of other users in the 0.5-30 MHz spectrum space. It's going to stomp on lots of services, not only Amateur Radio.
Amateur Radio is just a tiny user of this spectrum.
BTW, 0.5-30MHz is all the frequencies which we can reliably use for long distance communications. That is just under 30 MHz of bandwidth. Go look up how much bandwidth just ONE HDTV station takes up....
"I only have a problem when me and one of my roommates go nuts on bit-torrent while playing X-box live."
Get a decent router and prioritize your traffic.
With Home Media Option (extra one-time fee, not available for DirecTiVos)
You should have said "With Home Media Option, now completely free on Standalone Series 2 Tivos.
"That doesn't work for me. Science is about the application of logic and critical thinking. You might get people used to the idea of a spaceship with TV sci-fi shows, but this will do nothing to raise the level of 'real' scientific thinking. If anything, it might make it worse because people pick up dodgy concepts and expect technology to work that way."
s sible-just-improbably, then to not-as-improbable-as-we-thought, and eventually to possible-but-we-haven't-found-evidence-yet.
Because you're thinking of "education" as 'teaching facts'. This education is more psychological in nature instead of scientific.
It's about taking a concept and moving it from the impossible-crazy to the simply-fantastic-but-still-not-possible, then to we-found-evidence-it-might-not-be-completely-impo
There have been lots of 'difficult concepts' in science, for which many men have been laughed at and excommunicated, which we take as simple truths today. The more difficult the concept, the more impact it could have on a society, the longer it takes to 'get out'. How long did it take for the Earth-centrist view of the solar system to actually get eradicated? Many decades - and that's a concept you can prove with just simple math.
There's a quote from Men In Black that I love to use as an example. K and James Edwards (not J yet) are sitting on the park bench(?), talking about how Edwards just found out about the existence of aliens, since he just ran one down.
K says:
"1500 years ago, everybody "knew" that the earth was the center of the universe. 500 years ago, everybody "knew" that the earth was flat. And 15 minutes ago, you "knew" that humans were alone on this planet. Imagine what you'll "know" tomorrow."
I think that pretty well sums it up. The majority of what we thought was "impossible" even 200 years ago has been shown to be possible, and lots of it is simply commonplace.
Be careful what you laugh at something someone says. You may be laughing at the next Galileo.
if a lot of Sci-Fi on TV wasn't a big "public education" project.
This was covered, on a tangent, in a STNG episode. The short-version is Picard attempts to make first contact, but the political leaders decide that the populous isn't ready - and that a public education project will be started/expanded.
For example, there are the persistant rumors that Orson Welles radioplay was an experiment designed to gauge public response, and that shortly thereafter it was decided that *we* aren't ready.
Continuing rumors like that the original Star Trek didn't have enough advertising income to keep it on the air for a single season, and certainly not enough to carry it for three.
Now the government is getting publicly involved in the effort, with the 'life on Mars' possibilities that were thrown about in the last few years.
40 years ago, how would people have reacted to the government saying that there might actually be life on Mars? Today, it's no big deal - because we've been "educated".
"According to a search on Lexis/Nexis [lexisnexis.com] (paid search; subscription required) Claria Corporation donated $10,000 to Mozelle Thompson's campaign and WhenU.com donated $20,000."
And why does this not suprise me?
he gets from these so-called "software companies" in contributions?
The problem with your idea is that it won't work for the very entities that are most vulnerable: Tier 1 ISPs.
They have agreements with lots of ISPs to carry traffic from place to place, called Transit Agreements.
There may be traffic flowing on my network that is not "from" me and not "to" me, but that I'm merely moving for someone that I have a transit agreement for. *They* may also have a transit agreement with someone else, down the line.
It is possible, likely in fact, that there is traffic on my network (if I'm a big ISP, mind you) whose source address does not match one of my directly connected neighbor's networks, but that traffic is no less legitimate.
Won't work.
Transit agreements are agreements between networks to carry their traffic to the 'outside world'. Many or most of the large ISPs have transit agreements with several of their peer networks.
If ISP A has a problem getting to ISP C, he may send his traffic to ISP B if ISP B can still reach ISP C. Thus there will be packets flowing from ISP B to ISP C with ISP A's source IP address in the headers, and it's completely legit.
There's no mechanism today to differentiate between valid transited packets and forged packets. You couldn't even use a route-matching scheme (checking to see if you have a route to the source that matches where the packets are coming from), because there is a lot of asymmetric routing going on out on the internet.
iBGP is vulnerable to this as well, and very few of the networks I've worked on went to this level of filtering on their internal peering, just their external.
/16 drops out of your internal tables, just through knocking out an iBGP peer - never having had to touch the edge router. The route falls out of the edge router's table, and so he stops advertising it.
Find a large network, determine it's topology, hope they're using iBGP for announcing the routes internally to the edge peering routers. Then it's a matter of finding which one to disrupt. Find the right one and a
Wait. Let it come back. Route gets advertised to external peer again.
Repeat 3-4 times until the route is dampened by your victim's peers. Repeat 3-4 more times to get the default maximum 60 minute time-out.
Yep, that's the issue. I submitted too, but :(.
Anyway, the way I read it you basically run the TCP attack against a BGP peering router, causing it to drop one or more of it's peering relationships. Do that enough and you can cause the routes being advertised by that router (and also TO that router from the peering connections you're breaking) to be 'dampened' - a protective mechanism in BGP to prevent a flapping route from making all the peers recalculate their routes nonstop.
It's kind of like one peer putting the other one's routes in "time-out" until he plays nice.
mobile phone fscks YOU!
Yep, lots of electricity to get bauxite to Al, since bauxite is not so clean. But then if you were able to capture the 'cleaner' aluminum oxide from these H2 generators and recycle it back into aluminum, it would probably take less to convert it back into pure Al than from bauxite. The aluminum could be a mostly closed system with enough recycling, and the recycling would be easy with the proper design. Put in a new spool of Al wire, change out the aluminum oxide collector for a new one - maybe free with exchange to encourage recycling, add some distilled water, and you're ready to keep producing more H2 on demand.
Seeing how much energy we use as a society, we're not going to get away with pure solar. Just not enough energy density per square foot using today's technology. Something like a few pebble bed nuclear reactors, or maybe throw in some solar, wind, geothermal, tidal, hydro, whatever other energy sources we have access to, and we can probably get mostly away from fossil fuels... at least as a fuel source for vehicles.
Fossil products will probably still be used for a long time for plastics and such...
Does the energy used to create all of the things that acre of corn needs to get from "Just Harvested, Needs Seeding" to that 300 gallons of ethanol add up to more than the 300 gallons of ethanol provides?
I'd venture a guess to say it does, once you consider:
-Tractor to plow, seed, etc etc (whether electric or diesel, still takes x energy to accomplish)
-Water, including the pumps to get the water from here to there, purification, processing of any wastewater and/or runoff
-Production, transportation, etc of all chemicals needed for growth, like fertilizers insecticides herbicides blah blah
-Processing and transportation from "harvested corn" to "300 gallons of ethanol"
I'm guessing it's going to take MUCH more than the energy equivalent of 300 gallons of ethanol.
Wow, that didn't format like I expected... time to start using preview. :)
I've been waiting for someone to exploit the following system for several years now. Maybe some intrepid slashdotter will do so soon.
Google's cache of layo.com outlines a procedure and mechanism to use plain old aluminum welding wire as a storage medium for hydrogen. No metallic hydrides need, no pressure storage, and a very small amount of hydrogen exists in the system at any one time... meaning lower explosion potential than even carrying around 20 gallons of gasoline under your car today.
Someone, please do something with this technology. Maybe someone can do a quick energy conversion analysis to see what the energy cost of doing this conversion is?
So the only way amateur radio should be protected is if a scenario can be concocted where it is the ONLY means of communications? /boggle
Amateur radio isn't the only thing that will be severely impacted by BPL. You need to go read up on what it will do. Lots of links provided in this article's threads.
If a disaster comes through town and we need the ham operators for communication, the power lines have probably been long dead and no longer causing interference.
And who will they talk to? The whole point of disaster communications is to talk to the outside world... you know, the ones who still have power?
Remember to tell that to the guy holding the radio the next time a disaster comes through your town. He's probably a ham, donating his time, energy and knowledge to helping others by providing communications when every other system is down.
Be sure to tell him you don't need his help. Get cozy on the roof during that flood, cause you might just be there a while.
Wonder if Taco will rewrite the headline, now that he's been wtfpwn3d by the ARRL Lab Manager.
/. editors don't actually READ the crap they post 90% of the time, and they sensationalize 75% of that.
Just goes to show you that the
Nowhere is 'danger' brought up in any of the ARRL material that I see. Where the hell did the editor come up with that, and why did Taco let it through?
Loved this section from the FEMA document...
e s/Te lecommunications/news020809_3.html; Koos_ Repo rt.pdf; Mel Maundrell, "Concerns for the continued Military Use of HF over the Potential Increases to the Background Noise Level", 11 January 2002, published on the Internet at http://www.radio.gov.uk/topics/interference/docume nts/dera.pdf
e nts/dera.pdf
"As pointed out in numerous stories and reports from countries where BPL implementations have been tested, the unavoidable radiation from power lines and associated modems raises noise floor limits to an unacceptable level. This interference will severely impair FEMA's mission-essential HF radio operations in areas serviced by BPL technology. Tests have shown that in order for licensed transmitters to compensate
for this noise level, there would have to be an increase in the signal level on the order of
+30dB
6. FNARS utilizes transmitters that range from 1 kW to 10 kW in output power. An
increase in power of +30 dB to offset the increased noise floor would require a 10 kW
station to increase power output to 1 MW."
And the 30db figure came from tests in Finland, where they also shot down BPL.
FEMA's quotes: See Gerhard Latzin, "PLC for the present rejected by Finnish Telecommunication Minister", 25 May
2001, published on the Internet at http://www.darc.de/referate/emv/plc/plc-oh.pdf; Ministry of Public
Management, Home Affairs, Posts and Telecommunications, Japan, "Announcement of report by Power
Line Communication Study Group" 9 August 2002, published on the Internet at
http://www.soumu.go.jp/joho_tsusin/eng/Releas
Fockens, "PLC Measurements", 7 May 2002, published on the Internet at
http://www.darc.de/referate/emv/plc/VERON_PLC
And one other gem section:
"Currently, there is no alternative to HF radio
communications in terms of meeting national security and emergency preparedness
requirements at the national, state and local levels.
10. FNARS HF radio stations are normally located in residential areas that would be
serviced by Power Line Communication (PLC) systems. FEMA also utilizes HF radio
stations from other Government programs, including the Military Affiliate Radio System
(MARS), the US Air Force Auxiliary - Civil Air Patrol (CAP), and the Radio Amateur
Civil Emergency Service (RACES), which are similarly situated. The interference from
PLC would render these essential communications services useless.
2002, published on the Internet at http://www.radio.gov.uk/topics/interference/docum
Insulation is not shielding...
Which is only relevant if the unshielded, in-house bit carries the full signal of the shielded version, which it won't.
No, now every house in the node region will be 'broadcasting' every bit being sent downstream, whether or not they're customers of the service. The voltage of the AC doesn't matter here (much), only the power of the sub-carrier being used to distribute the internet service.
Either way you cut it, you will not be able to realistically shield the AC wiring in every house downstream from a node, which means they're all going to radiate the interference... er, I mean product.
The point was, the OP is talking about having a shielded distribution system. If the last few feet of the system is not shielded, it doesn't really matter. It just changes the length of the antenna from which to radiate.
And I was speaking more to the interference than the bio issues...