I'm not sure why you are replying to arguments I haven't made. I said hams would lose in a consideration of numbers of users and nature of the use. Obviously sea rescue is in a different category from hams.
You also make an argument about the value of hams, I don't find the anecdotal evidence you and other commenters have given to be very convincing. Backup emergency communications is a good idea, I have no confidence in the ham community to provide it, I'd rather it be planned. I get the impression that the ham community is like any other spectrum incumbent with a narrow set of interests, its got spectrum and will latch onto the most politically expedient rational it can to keep it. The impression I have of hams is that they do it because its "cool" (see the comments elsewhere about the guy talking to Ecuador).
I have no problem with the existence of Ham radio. I think it would be a loss if there were no place for it. But if thousands of people speaking will prevent millions of people from speaking, then I think the thousands of people should move to accomodate the millions.
I have no problem with the Ham service existing. But for Hams to refuse to budge on any spectrum because its cool to send messages to Ecuador (read up the comment tree) with the result that mass scale services are held back is unacceptable.
and you'll die, which will be no sad loss
People who express views different than yours should die? If you truly think like that that's amazingly pathetic. I imagine you're a very backward person socially, I hope you never come out of your basement.
I'm making the case that spectrum is a commons and should be managed for the benefit of society as a whole and that hams are a narrow interest and their use of the spectrum should not hold back the deployment of mass scale services.
If you are trying to make a point go ahead and do so. So far you have none.
Powell also hammered through the media ownership rule changes without any public hearings or comment period
There was most certainly both a comment period and public hearings. Thousands and thousands of comments were filed for the rule making you refer to, Powell made sarcastic remarks about them. All FCC meetings are public, there was a special meeting to pass these rules. If you mean a forum where members of the public get up and speak, that did occur in Richmond after Powell got cajoled into it. Copps and Adelstein held additional, nonofficial forums on their own. The FCC did also have a "roundtable discussion" where it invited experts on both sides of the debate to testify.
He didn't inherit alot of brains from the old man.
Powell is quite smart, I don't think you will find anyone who is intimate with the issues that will say otherwise.
There are many reasons to excoriate Powell and the FCC but please be informed enough to do so accurately.
Spectrum is a commons, it should be managed for the benefit of society as a whole. It should not be managed for the trivial use of a very small number of people.
There is a legitimate case to be made for DRM backed by law. The DeCSS example is more complex than that, I think it would be an error to assert it is analgous to the spectrum example.
We've done this at DC Indymedia, using a variety of wireless technologies. Including:
- live video streaming of a protest against the takeover of Pacifica radio using 802.11b
- live audio mp3 stream of the "Sorry State of the Union" event held in front of the Capitol during Bush's address. We did this using a 3G phone. This feed was carried live by full power FM stations. We also had people upload pictures from the event site and chatted on IRC w/ people listening to the stream.
- on the day the Iraq war broke out we had someone out covering the bridge blockages and protests at the White House w/ one of those Sprint picture phones. We had some awesome pictures up minutes after the events were happening.
The protesters at the WTO meeting were not violent. There was some targeted property damage but no one was physically harmed by protesters. The police on the other hand were well documented beating and spraying seated protesters.
Aside from increasing security at their meetings, the protest in Seattle was actually spectacularly effective in bringing more public attention to the workings of international bodies like the WTO, IMF, World Bank. Before Seattle, how many people even knew these institutions existed? How many op-eds in the New York Times defending these institutions were written?
Its really simplistic thinking to presume that a protest, or any other single act, by itself will have a dramatic influence on an issue. Most protest organizers do not. People seriously engaged in effecting policy from a grassroots level expect years of work. Sometimes protests may be a useful tactic, no serious campaign has them as their only tactic.
This is a frequent tactic of unions. They'll pack store checkout lines with people that have overflowing shopping carts and say "oh I forgot my wallet at home" when its their turn. Its pretty effective.
Don't pat yourself on the back too much. I think a lot of people thought something was up when M$ gave Comcast $5 billion back when they bought ATT's cable division. Golly gee, who could have predicted this?
The most intersting point I found in the article was the one about how the reviewer talked about being disappointed that it was hard to load 3rd party apps onto the phone and how much value he placed on that.
Its good to see phones supporting java, cell phones will be an increasingly crucial platform its good to see some openness.
Anyone have links to any development sites or places where 3rd party apps might be available. Ogg vorbis on a cell phone?
Don't forget to mention community radio legend Jeremy Lansman who owns the station. He's been involved in helping the Prometheus Radio Project setup some of the few LPFMs that have been licensed so far.
Here's the page he maintains about locking horns w/ the FCC over KZND.
Churches and schools do make up a large number of the lpfm licensees but there's no restriction on noncommercial entities from applying. I went to a workshop that an environmental group outside of DC had when they were setting up their station, WRYR, 97.5FM.
Slashdot Mirror
Your people will not be allowed to further weaken our position in the world.
What does this mean? Are you not going to allow them to speak?
LOL! Mod this up! This is the highest form of caricature of an indignant righwinger I've seen in a long time.
I think at this point spammers have scored more than "0", perhaps they have scored a trillion or so by this point.
... on when nytimes.com gets defaced. How many times did it have "Free Kevin" plastered on it again?
I'm not sure why you are replying to arguments I haven't made. I said hams would lose in a consideration of numbers of users and nature of the use. Obviously sea rescue is in a different category from hams.
You also make an argument about the value of hams, I don't find the anecdotal evidence you and other commenters have given to be very convincing. Backup emergency communications is a good idea, I have no confidence in the ham community to provide it, I'd rather it be planned. I get the impression that the ham community is like any other spectrum incumbent with a narrow set of interests, its got spectrum and will latch onto the most politically expedient rational it can to keep it. The impression I have of hams is that they do it because its "cool" (see the comments elsewhere about the guy talking to Ecuador).
I have no problem with the existence of Ham radio. I think it would be a loss if there were no place for it. But if thousands of people speaking will prevent millions of people from speaking, then I think the thousands of people should move to accomodate the millions.
I have no problem with the Ham service existing. But for Hams to refuse to budge on any spectrum because its cool to send messages to Ecuador (read up the comment tree) with the result that mass scale services are held back is unacceptable.
and you'll die, which will be no sad loss
People who express views different than yours should die? If you truly think like that that's amazingly pathetic. I imagine you're a very backward person socially, I hope you never come out of your basement.
No.
I'm making the case that spectrum is a commons and should be managed for the benefit of society as a whole and that hams are a narrow interest and their use of the spectrum should not hold back the deployment of mass scale services.
If you are trying to make a point go ahead and do so. So far you have none.
Powell also hammered through the media ownership rule changes without any public hearings or comment period
There was most certainly both a comment period and public hearings. Thousands and thousands of comments were filed for the rule making you refer to, Powell made sarcastic remarks about them. All FCC meetings are public, there was a special meeting to pass these rules. If you mean a forum where members of the public get up and speak, that did occur in Richmond after Powell got cajoled into it. Copps and Adelstein held additional, nonofficial forums on their own. The FCC did also have a "roundtable discussion" where it invited experts on both sides of the debate to testify.
He didn't inherit alot of brains from the old man.
Powell is quite smart, I don't think you will find anyone who is intimate with the issues that will say otherwise.
There are many reasons to excoriate Powell and the FCC but please be informed enough to do so accurately.
Spectrum is a commons, it should be managed for the benefit of society as a whole. It should not be managed for the trivial use of a very small number of people.
There is a legitimate case to be made for DRM backed by law. The DeCSS example is more complex than that, I think it would be an error to assert it is analgous to the spectrum example.
Your views are pretty typical of Hams that I've encountered, putting the narrow interest of thousands over the interests of millions. Its pretty sad.
I would react in proportion to the number of users effected and the nature of the uses that are effected. Hams would lose big on both counts.
We've done this at DC Indymedia, using a variety of wireless technologies. Including:
- live video streaming of a protest against the takeover of Pacifica radio using 802.11b
- live audio mp3 stream of the "Sorry State of the Union" event held in front of the Capitol during Bush's address. We did this using a 3G phone. This feed was carried live by full power FM stations. We also had people upload pictures from the event site and chatted on IRC w/ people listening to the stream.
- on the day the Iraq war broke out we had someone out covering the bridge blockages and protests at the White House w/ one of those Sprint picture phones. We had some awesome pictures up minutes after the events were happening.
The protesters at the WTO meeting were not violent. There was some targeted property damage but no one was physically harmed by protesters. The police on the other hand were well documented beating and spraying seated protesters.
Aside from increasing security at their meetings, the protest in Seattle was actually spectacularly effective in bringing more public attention to the workings of international bodies like the WTO, IMF, World Bank. Before Seattle, how many people even knew these institutions existed? How many op-eds in the New York Times defending these institutions were written?
Its really simplistic thinking to presume that a protest, or any other single act, by itself will have a dramatic influence on an issue. Most protest organizers do not. People seriously engaged in effecting policy from a grassroots level expect years of work. Sometimes protests may be a useful tactic, no serious campaign has them as their only tactic.
This is a frequent tactic of unions. They'll pack store checkout lines with people that have overflowing shopping carts and say "oh I forgot my wallet at home" when its their turn. Its pretty effective.
You mean like Danish Anti-Piracy Organization Bills P2P Users?
Baseball is boring. I'd have to surf just to stay awake.
Don't pat yourself on the back too much. I think a lot of people thought something was up when M$ gave Comcast $5 billion back when they bought ATT's cable division. Golly gee, who could have predicted this?
Too bad the NetTopBox is a dead project.
As a consumer I want the cable co to expose an open set of services that lets 3rd parties compete to add value for me.
You forgot that the review is a network in Australia and has max speed of 384k vs the 144k in the US.
The most intersting point I found in the article was the one about how the reviewer talked about being disappointed that it was hard to load 3rd party apps onto the phone and how much value he placed on that.
Its good to see phones supporting java, cell phones will be an increasingly crucial platform its good to see some openness.
Anyone have links to any development sites or places where 3rd party apps might be available. Ogg vorbis on a cell phone?
this is the best point made in this discussion
Don't forget to mention community radio legend Jeremy Lansman who owns the station. He's been involved in helping the Prometheus Radio Project setup some of the few LPFMs that have been licensed so far.
Here's the page he maintains about locking horns w/ the FCC over KZND.
Churches and schools do make up a large number of the lpfm licensees but there's no restriction on noncommercial entities from applying. I went to a workshop that an environmental group outside of DC had when they were setting up their station, WRYR, 97.5FM.