Maybe I somehow absolutely missed it, but looking at both the summary and TFA, I cannot figure out just WHAT the hell these new "standards" even are.
And really, with manufacturers shoving tablets that "act as laptops" which are meant to be desktop replacements and can be charged over USB cable, is evenergy efficiency of new computers even a concern at all anymore?
This is all I read in it:
The California standards set a benchmark for a machine's overall energy use and leave manufacturers the flexibility to choose which efficiency measures to use to meet it - an approach that the NRDC says fosters innovation.
And then sell a power supply as an easy add on component separately. Every computer wil be sold as a zero energy usage device, problem solved!
Too soon. That comes after three failures over a five year period of mandating and adjusting the allowable limits, throwing people into mass-hysteria.:)
I once worked for a company that had mandated GPOs which turned machines off at a certain time each day. If you were working past 7:00, expect to deal with the power cycle. Of course, coming in and waiting for the machine to come up was a time waster as well. Ironic thing is that the "IT" department that did this learned really quickly to not toss the DCs and SQL server boxes into the OU that this policy applied to.
I can see it now - stories popping up on/. about power companies in CA experiencing two period-tied brownouts in the morning hours because of all of the people turning computing devices on in their homes and workplaces.:)
Perhaps they'll do what was a major flop in Ohio - Emissions Testing, but in this case power use testing. You have to register with the state every piece of computer or computer-related equipment you have, and have to take it once/year to a station somewhere within 20 miles of you to be tested to ensure it meets the legislatively-set guidelines of efficiency. If not, you need to take it to a repair shop where they will correct the problem(s) (read: get you a new machine) and then you have to go back to have the "fixed" device tested. Repeat process until all limits are met and you get a cute little sticker that shows you're allowed to use the equipment for another 12 months. Oh, that's after you've paid the fee for each visit for inspection.
Oh, wait, I said that didn't work in Ohio. N/M.
P.S. It would be hilarious to see if this actually happens. My first finger points to the energy being used to power the facilities for testing, and the power used for the testing itself, offsetting the savings of the device(s) that save power. Typical "energy is imaginary when it's not being metered" crud.
P.P.S. This is coming from someone living in a house with solar panels w/ microinverters who has saved 84.1 kWh out of 1600 kWh used over three months.
The California standards set a benchmark for a machine's overall energy use and leave manufacturers the flexibility to choose which efficiency measures to use to meet it - an approach that the NRDC says fosters innovation.
Really. I mean, really? So basically I (pretend I'm a manufacturer) can build a computer that has a slow processor that throttles constantly, a SSD drive for long-term storage that will cost more but not grant much benefit given the throttling of resources, a machine that enters hibernation-mode sleep after 30 seconds of non-use, a GPU that can have an entire video uploaded to it and plays it on its own with no other system resource usage beyond basic interface, or a new type of display that has near-zero loss (dreaming now).
I'm just saying.. that's what it sounds like. There's no "innovation" to be had in computers anymore; at least not ones that will screw with the power factor more and more, basically using more fossil fuel to use less fossil fuel?
Speaking of which, there's an idea.. How about a direct non-switching power supply that doesn't screw with the AC line harmonics and stores, in capacitors, what it will need for fast surges of use?
Alternate idea: turn ANY devices or lighting/etc off when you're not using it. Apparently that's not possible for some reason, so we have to start nibbling at things that eat smaller amounts of power rather than the largest consumers of electricity - HVAC and other AC motor-driven devices...? This is a bit fishy. There has to be another reason behind the pushing of law to accomplish something, unless it's basically a way to force consumers to do what saves power already instead of giving them the option not to do it if they don't feel like it.
Pricing their video service over cellular implies that the cost of the cellular hop is zero, and that the expense of transmitting the video to the viewer is all in the Internet link. Since their own video service is hosted locally, there is no Internet bandwidth consumed, and thus the price should be zero (which was what Netflix offered these guys for free on their landline ISP service and they turned it down). For a market economy to function properly, the minimum pricing has to reflect the expense incurred by the seller.
I can understand zero rating as a temporary promotional measure (e.g. streamed video doesn't count against your cap for the first 6 months if you use our service). But making it the standard price is equivalent to dumping to try to kill off competition. Especially if they're using revenue from other sources to subsidize this service, like say, extra money they're collecting from Netflix in contravention of Net Neutrality.
You got that right. It also implies that there is a load of bandwidth available to use. So, wait a sec.. If there's a load to use, why do you place a high value on it because of its limitation? Then, why do you encourage people to use it for something that limits it further and then say there isn't a a problem with limitation? Stupid circle.
"AT&T said exempting services like DirecTV Now from data caps saves customers money. "
No, it doesn't. Wireless network costs are shifted onto consumers who don't buy their streaming services. If all the costs of streaming bandwidth are included in the price of the streaming service, then reduce the cost of that service and let the consumers pay for the bandwidth directly, just like customers who use competitive streaming services.
My reply to them: "Yeah.. Why don't you reduce my data cap and save me, as a customer, money."
Ethically/morally/etc it's one thing. It gets a bit trickier. When you offer a service like that, it also pushes more traffic onto the network, which affects other users of said network.
Personally, I think it's interesting that the FCC is calling out a company early (though this would have to be fought outside the FCC in the end). If I'm paying for bandwidth that isn't throttled and don't abuse it, it seems a bit lopsided that my bandwidth gets throttled by the heavy usage of others that were encouraged to use the LTE network for a service that eats a lot (especially the more users are using). Basically, it's throttling without throttling.
In terms of what I think is a better idea, that's not something I can technically address without impeding on the morals of others. From a technical standpoint, it's dumb, and I don't want to be pigeonholed by dumb. I might be going overboard, but if there will be lots of video eating up available short-bursts fast bandwidth, I don't want to be paying for it. Lower my cost or fix the technical dilemma. Just an opinion, and I know that doesn't matter.:)
Surely that's not good! Such behaviour is only justified if the software developer refuses to do anything about it
Oh, but worry not! The fix is randomly applied to your machine when they feel okay about releasing it to your neighbor's computer for download. Okay, okay, I'll stop.
No! The FS is ROT-13ned and important files' contents with passwords and other sensitive data (read: registry) are ROT-1024ed. The fix they are going to release ROT-?s the data with Unicode 6.0 Emoji characters as keys to each block. Too soon?
Wow, mapping a buildings from space with millimeter accuracy. From an orbit 693km high. That's an accuracy of 1:100,000,000 while flying 24,000 km/h.. Crazy. And then imagine the capabilities of really good US satellites aren't even known because classified.
THAT'S the damn thing that pulled an eye image when I looked to the sky the other day. I was wondering how in the hell the government of Jaiaguanaga found me after all of this time. *shakes fist at sky...and stuff*
...I have a phone with a screen that curves around and encases my entire body, and I move the ball I'm in around by taking steps. For some reason, when I watch en episode of NCIS in it, it looks all weird and distorted, though. </snort>
Microsoft doing this is like asking a safety-conscious analytical security freak to yield their control for a moment to a control freak.
We don't 'not use your OS' because of its lack of kernel-level power (the Windows 98 days were done a long time ago). We don't use it because it USES US. For eff's sake, you sound like an old 1980s Reagan-era "drug pusher" by making requests like that. "Just try it, you'll love it and want more! Here, I'll prove it by giving you some for free to try."
I, personally, don't know of one single Linux developer OR user that hasn't experimented with Windows 10, in the retail storefront or outside of it, that hasn't just made a simple statement with a laugh like, "Oh. Yay. There's another one. This time they are taking more control away from the user. Gee, why don't I get on it right now?" That quote isn't exact, but it pretty much covers every individual I know in the OSS/Linux communit[y|ies].
Whatever happened to all that dark fiber companies were installing?
When Google backed off of their fiber expansion, well, I don't need to anything more. I was going to have gigabit (read: 500-700mbit) fiber near my place of living a year ago, now it's almost certainly not going to happen. MaBell stopped saying that expansion was happening and also stopped honoring non-FTTN requests the day before the Google slowdown news made it to/.
It's a valid claim if they can prove they've been damaged by climate change/warming/etc. Therein lies the rub.
Agreed. This is another cigarette lawsuit. There will also be a group of people who claim their life and liberty are compromised by the lack of progress due to restrictions. And no, for others reading this, I'm not saying that either is okay. I'm saying that it's a lawsuit that will go on and on and on and on and on and.... Before the lawsuit is settled, natural progression will probably have proven its merit, or disproved it. At that point, arguments can destroy the internals of the years of "lies" from "the other party". Sigh. Maybe the children will get to see how the legal system in a capitalist society REALLY works and be quite, uh, educated.
See, back in the "good ol' days", we used to pay attention to market trends, gets news releases about a huge new storefront corporation opening, etc. Now it's starting to degrade to "News" being released about a single website/corporation's "records" being "broken". It's starting to actually sound like a broken record now.
To stoop to the level of "News" release advertising to try and gather more uneducated peoples' purchases is different from SPAM.. how?
Slice Intelligence says the new MacBook Pro accumulated more revenue SO FAR, from online orders during its first five days of availability than the Microsoft Surface Book, ASUS Chromebook Flip, Dell Inspiron 2-in-1, and Lenovo Yoga 900, based on e-receipt data from 12,979 online shoppers in the United States.
If I sell apples and oranges by the street for 8 hours, and I sell 10 apples and 8 oranges in the first 5 minutes, it does not indicate that apples are the winner.
I'm gonna look up "Slice Intelligence" and see where they're headquartered and if they have any satellite locations. Ah. Here ya go, and BTW, San Mateo, CA and Cupertino, CA are about 50 miles apart:
PALO ALTO OFFICE Slice 800 Concar Drive, Floor 5 San Mateo, CA 94402
...but sort of. People using FB as a point of blame for their not getting what they want is humorous, as they didn't get what they want because of the electoral college system. She DID win the popular vote, so why not blame the electoral college?
I guess that they think there will be something they somehow gain from finger pointing a corporation rather than a government process that's been in play since..well.. the beginning. They used to have to take tallied vote totals and rush them by horseback to districts, etc etc to the actual central point of decision. It's unnecessary nowadays due to telecom and other forms of near-instant communication, but people aren't really attacking that. I'm not pro-Clinton, BTW. I'm not pro-Trump, either. I was pro-NON OF THE ABOVE on this election. None. No party. Nobody. I'm not speaking in support of a party, is what I'm getting at.
This election will be the defining moment for these online millennials as they learn to deal and grow the fuck up.
I'm still wondering when slashdot will do that. Literally every summary posted somehow can't deal with the reality that its (obviously) favored side just fucking lost. In this case it blames facebook, of all fucking things.
Scapegoating logic and bias is a constant over Human evolution. You can probably predict who/what will be "blamed" for their not getting what they want next after Facebook-centered finger pointing has started to settle a hair. Sad but true and easily predictable. ALMOST as predictable as "the sun rising tomorrow". I'm a bit bold on that loose analogy, but I'll bet on it.:)
...that the reason she would consider buying a new MacBook (even though she won't due to $$) is because of the latest OS release not being supported on her current MacBook hardware. Like many other things in technology, persuasion through defiance of desire combined with uncertainty of safety (updates generally help with that.....generally) wins some sales. I haven't seen the actual numbers, but I would assume that number is greater than the number of users it convinced to switch platforms. Sort of a "duh" there. Switching platforms taking more time and effort generally ensures income by the manufacturer for simplicity and laziness.
I noticed a lot of associations during the election period between the words "Trump" and "behave", used in the same story/article/etc. Post-election, they seem to be more closely spaced; same paragraph, same sentence. Just thought I'd throw the psychology out there for whoever wants to give a few brain cycles over the media/social associative narrowing of distance, aforementioned.
Damnit. Forgot to mention that this is previously from television. Smartphones aren't much different other than using interactive body motion in coordination with perception and processing. That makes them kind of worse.
...particularly when smartphones were used near participants' bedtime.
Uh, yeah. That information has been known for decades. The amount of brain activity, light color and intensity, and distance of device from sleeping space (disassociation of device activity with sleep area) are known causes of trouble getting to sleep and maintaining a healthy sleep pattern. Unsure what this is supposed to be telling us that was previously unknown.
If they were using a one-meter-plus parabolic antenna that had to be aimed to an accuracy of 0.07 degrees, and since they pointed out that this part of the spectrum is blocked by rain and fog, I'm going to say "totally". Millimeter-wave gets attenuated by just about anything. If the AC below is correct that there was a ridge in the way, then they must have been using really tall towers -- or, as hinted in the article, an airborne target.
I can't begin to imagine the ERP needed for sustained propagation in that frequency range, even with the +1m parabolic! Yow. But hey. Fast.
Slashdot Mirror
Maybe I somehow absolutely missed it, but looking at both the summary and TFA, I cannot figure out just WHAT the hell these new "standards" even are.
And really, with manufacturers shoving tablets that "act as laptops" which are meant to be desktop replacements and can be charged over USB cable, is evenergy efficiency of new computers even a concern at all anymore?
This is all I read in it:
The California standards set a benchmark for a machine's overall energy use and leave manufacturers the flexibility to choose which efficiency measures to use to meet it - an approach that the NRDC says fosters innovation.
And then sell a power supply as an easy add on component separately. Every computer wil be sold as a zero energy usage device, problem solved!
Too soon. That comes after three failures over a five year period of mandating and adjusting the allowable limits, throwing people into mass-hysteria. :)
I once worked for a company that had mandated GPOs which turned machines off at a certain time each day. If you were working past 7:00, expect to deal with the power cycle. Of course, coming in and waiting for the machine to come up was a time waster as well. Ironic thing is that the "IT" department that did this learned really quickly to not toss the DCs and SQL server boxes into the OU that this policy applied to.
I can see it now - stories popping up on /. about power companies in CA experiencing two period-tied brownouts in the morning hours because of all of the people turning computing devices on in their homes and workplaces. :)
Perhaps they'll do what was a major flop in Ohio - Emissions Testing, but in this case power use testing. You have to register with the state every piece of computer or computer-related equipment you have, and have to take it once/year to a station somewhere within 20 miles of you to be tested to ensure it meets the legislatively-set guidelines of efficiency. If not, you need to take it to a repair shop where they will correct the problem(s) (read: get you a new machine) and then you have to go back to have the "fixed" device tested. Repeat process until all limits are met and you get a cute little sticker that shows you're allowed to use the equipment for another 12 months. Oh, that's after you've paid the fee for each visit for inspection.
Oh, wait, I said that didn't work in Ohio. N/M.
P.S. It would be hilarious to see if this actually happens. My first finger points to the energy being used to power the facilities for testing, and the power used for the testing itself, offsetting the savings of the device(s) that save power. Typical "energy is imaginary when it's not being metered" crud.
P.P.S. This is coming from someone living in a house with solar panels w/ microinverters who has saved 84.1 kWh out of 1600 kWh used over three months.
FTFA:
The California standards set a benchmark for a machine's overall energy use and leave manufacturers the flexibility to choose which efficiency measures to use to meet it - an approach that the NRDC says fosters innovation.
Really. I mean, really? So basically I (pretend I'm a manufacturer) can build a computer that has a slow processor that throttles constantly, a SSD drive for long-term storage that will cost more but not grant much benefit given the throttling of resources, a machine that enters hibernation-mode sleep after 30 seconds of non-use, a GPU that can have an entire video uploaded to it and plays it on its own with no other system resource usage beyond basic interface, or a new type of display that has near-zero loss (dreaming now).
I'm just saying.. that's what it sounds like. There's no "innovation" to be had in computers anymore; at least not ones that will screw with the power factor more and more, basically using more fossil fuel to use less fossil fuel?
Speaking of which, there's an idea.. How about a direct non-switching power supply that doesn't screw with the AC line harmonics and stores, in capacitors, what it will need for fast surges of use?
Alternate idea: turn ANY devices or lighting/etc off when you're not using it. Apparently that's not possible for some reason, so we have to start nibbling at things that eat smaller amounts of power rather than the largest consumers of electricity - HVAC and other AC motor-driven devices...? This is a bit fishy. There has to be another reason behind the pushing of law to accomplish something, unless it's basically a way to force consumers to do what saves power already instead of giving them the option not to do it if they don't feel like it.
Pricing their video service over cellular implies that the cost of the cellular hop is zero, and that the expense of transmitting the video to the viewer is all in the Internet link. Since their own video service is hosted locally, there is no Internet bandwidth consumed, and thus the price should be zero (which was what Netflix offered these guys for free on their landline ISP service and they turned it down). For a market economy to function properly, the minimum pricing has to reflect the expense incurred by the seller.
I can understand zero rating as a temporary promotional measure (e.g. streamed video doesn't count against your cap for the first 6 months if you use our service). But making it the standard price is equivalent to dumping to try to kill off competition. Especially if they're using revenue from other sources to subsidize this service, like say, extra money they're collecting from Netflix in contravention of Net Neutrality.
You got that right. It also implies that there is a load of bandwidth available to use. So, wait a sec.. If there's a load to use, why do you place a high value on it because of its limitation? Then, why do you encourage people to use it for something that limits it further and then say there isn't a a problem with limitation? Stupid circle.
"AT&T said exempting services like DirecTV Now from data caps saves customers money. "
No, it doesn't. Wireless network costs are shifted onto consumers who don't buy their streaming services. If all the costs of streaming bandwidth are included in the price of the streaming service, then reduce the cost of that service and let the consumers pay for the bandwidth directly, just like customers who use competitive streaming services.
My reply to them: "Yeah.. Why don't you reduce my data cap and save me, as a customer, money."
You're right, that makes NO sense.
Ethically/morally/etc it's one thing. It gets a bit trickier. When you offer a service like that, it also pushes more traffic onto the network, which affects other users of said network.
Personally, I think it's interesting that the FCC is calling out a company early (though this would have to be fought outside the FCC in the end). If I'm paying for bandwidth that isn't throttled and don't abuse it, it seems a bit lopsided that my bandwidth gets throttled by the heavy usage of others that were encouraged to use the LTE network for a service that eats a lot (especially the more users are using). Basically, it's throttling without throttling.
In terms of what I think is a better idea, that's not something I can technically address without impeding on the morals of others. From a technical standpoint, it's dumb, and I don't want to be pigeonholed by dumb. I might be going overboard, but if there will be lots of video eating up available short-bursts fast bandwidth, I don't want to be paying for it. Lower my cost or fix the technical dilemma. Just an opinion, and I know that doesn't matter. :)
I have to say it, I'm sorry. Glancing through the comments, I read your title as "Only the lazy terminals..."
Have to throw that one out there. :)
Surely that's not good! Such behaviour is only justified if the software developer refuses to do anything about it
Oh, but worry not! The fix is randomly applied to your machine when they feel okay about releasing it to your neighbor's computer for download.
Okay, okay, I'll stop.
So, is that double as in 2 ROT13s of the data?
No! The FS is ROT-13ned and important files' contents with passwords and other sensitive data (read: registry) are ROT-1024ed. The fix they are going to release ROT-?s the data with Unicode 6.0 Emoji characters as keys to each block. Too soon?
Wow, mapping a buildings from space with millimeter accuracy. From an orbit 693km high. That's an accuracy of 1:100,000,000 while flying 24,000 km/h.. Crazy. And then imagine the capabilities of really good US satellites aren't even known because classified.
The ESA link to this story: http://www.esa.int/Our_Activities/Observing_the_Earth/Copernicus/Sentinel-1/Satellites_confirm_sinking_of_San_Francisco_tower
THAT'S the damn thing that pulled an eye image when I looked to the sky the other day. I was wondering how in the hell the government of Jaiaguanaga found me after all of this time. *shakes fist at sky...and stuff*
...I have a phone with a screen that curves around and encases my entire body, and I move the ball I'm in around by taking steps. For some reason, when I watch en episode of NCIS in it, it looks all weird and distorted, though.
</snort>
Microsoft doing this is like asking a safety-conscious analytical security freak to yield their control for a moment to a control freak.
We don't 'not use your OS' because of its lack of kernel-level power (the Windows 98 days were done a long time ago). We don't use it because it USES US. For eff's sake, you sound like an old 1980s Reagan-era "drug pusher" by making requests like that. "Just try it, you'll love it and want more! Here, I'll prove it by giving you some for free to try."
I, personally, don't know of one single Linux developer OR user that hasn't experimented with Windows 10, in the retail storefront or outside of it, that hasn't just made a simple statement with a laugh like, "Oh. Yay. There's another one. This time they are taking more control away from the user. Gee, why don't I get on it right now?"
That quote isn't exact, but it pretty much covers every individual I know in the OSS/Linux communit[y|ies].
Whatever happened to all that dark fiber companies were installing?
When Google backed off of their fiber expansion, well, I don't need to anything more. I was going to have gigabit (read: 500-700mbit) fiber near my place of living a year ago, now it's almost certainly not going to happen. MaBell stopped saying that expansion was happening and also stopped honoring non-FTTN requests the day before the Google slowdown news made it to /.
It's a valid claim if they can prove they've been damaged by climate change/warming/etc. Therein lies the rub.
Agreed. This is another cigarette lawsuit. There will also be a group of people who claim their life and liberty are compromised by the lack of progress due to restrictions. And no, for others reading this, I'm not saying that either is okay. I'm saying that it's a lawsuit that will go on and on and on and on and on and.... Before the lawsuit is settled, natural progression will probably have proven its merit, or disproved it. At that point, arguments can destroy the internals of the years of "lies" from "the other party". Sigh. Maybe the children will get to see how the legal system in a capitalist society REALLY works and be quite, uh, educated.
This is getting quite annoying and disappointing.
See, back in the "good ol' days", we used to pay attention to market trends, gets news releases about a huge new storefront corporation opening, etc. Now it's starting to degrade to "News" being released about a single website/corporation's "records" being "broken". It's starting to actually sound like a broken record now.
To stoop to the level of "News" release advertising to try and gather more uneducated peoples' purchases is different from SPAM.. how?
Slice Intelligence says the new MacBook Pro accumulated more revenue SO FAR, from online orders during its first five days of availability than the Microsoft Surface Book, ASUS Chromebook Flip, Dell Inspiron 2-in-1, and Lenovo Yoga 900, based on e-receipt data from 12,979 online shoppers in the United States.
If I sell apples and oranges by the street for 8 hours, and I sell 10 apples and 8 oranges in the first 5 minutes, it does not indicate that apples are the winner.
I'm SURE they don't have any relationship whatsoever.
I'm gonna look up "Slice Intelligence" and see where they're headquartered and if they have any satellite locations. Ah. Here ya go, and BTW, San Mateo, CA and Cupertino, CA are about 50 miles apart:
PALO ALTO OFFICE
Slice
800 Concar Drive, Floor 5
San Mateo, CA 94402
MEDIA
jaimee@slice.com
+1 206-390-6637
...but sort of. People using FB as a point of blame for their not getting what they want is humorous, as they didn't get what they want because of the electoral college system. She DID win the popular vote, so why not blame the electoral college?
I guess that they think there will be something they somehow gain from finger pointing a corporation rather than a government process that's been in play since..well.. the beginning. They used to have to take tallied vote totals and rush them by horseback to districts, etc etc to the actual central point of decision. It's unnecessary nowadays due to telecom and other forms of near-instant communication, but people aren't really attacking that. I'm not pro-Clinton, BTW. I'm not pro-Trump, either. I was pro-NON OF THE ABOVE on this election. None. No party. Nobody. I'm not speaking in support of a party, is what I'm getting at.
This election will be the defining moment for these online millennials as they learn to deal and grow the fuck up.
I'm still wondering when slashdot will do that. Literally every summary posted somehow can't deal with the reality that its (obviously) favored side just fucking lost. In this case it blames facebook, of all fucking things.
Scapegoating logic and bias is a constant over Human evolution. You can probably predict who/what will be "blamed" for their not getting what they want next after Facebook-centered finger pointing has started to settle a hair. Sad but true and easily predictable. ALMOST as predictable as "the sun rising tomorrow". I'm a bit bold on that loose analogy, but I'll bet on it. :)
...that the reason she would consider buying a new MacBook (even though she won't due to $$) is because of the latest OS release not being supported on her current MacBook hardware. Like many other things in technology, persuasion through defiance of desire combined with uncertainty of safety (updates generally help with that.....generally) wins some sales. I haven't seen the actual numbers, but I would assume that number is greater than the number of users it convinced to switch platforms. Sort of a "duh" there. Switching platforms taking more time and effort generally ensures income by the manufacturer for simplicity and laziness.
I noticed a lot of associations during the election period between the words "Trump" and "behave", used in the same story/article/etc. Post-election, they seem to be more closely spaced; same paragraph, same sentence. Just thought I'd throw the psychology out there for whoever wants to give a few brain cycles over the media/social associative narrowing of distance, aforementioned.
Damnit. Forgot to mention that this is previously from television. Smartphones aren't much different other than using interactive body motion in coordination with perception and processing. That makes them kind of worse.
FTA:
...particularly when smartphones were used near participants' bedtime.
Uh, yeah. That information has been known for decades. The amount of brain activity, light color and intensity, and distance of device from sleeping space (disassociation of device activity with sleep area) are known causes of trouble getting to sleep and maintaining a healthy sleep pattern. Unsure what this is supposed to be telling us that was previously unknown.
If they were using a one-meter-plus parabolic antenna that had to be aimed to an accuracy of 0.07 degrees, and since they pointed out that this part of the spectrum is blocked by rain and fog, I'm going to say "totally". Millimeter-wave gets attenuated by just about anything. If the AC below is correct that there was a ridge in the way, then they must have been using really tall towers -- or, as hinted in the article, an airborne target.
I can't begin to imagine the ERP needed for sustained propagation in that frequency range, even with the +1m parabolic! Yow. But hey. Fast.