I think you're failing the undestand the *actual* goals of the project. Before I continue, here's a brief excerpt:
"Freenet is designed to make censorship impossible. While most people agree that
excessive censorship is bad, some stop
short of saying that censorship should be
abolished altogether. My personal belief
is that censorship of any form is fundamentally
flawed."
I happen to agree whole heartedly with that. While it's true that Freenet *could* be used for illegal purposes, that is clearly not its intent.
You may argue that Freenet facilitates software piracy, but then, so do computers. Computers make the use and the "theft" of software possible. Maybe you think that's an outlandish statement, well then how about the fact that people can (and probably do) use PGP and annoymous remailers to pass other people's credit card numbers around. Should projects like GNU Privacy Guard and annonymous remailer software not be supported because of this? I certainly don't think so.
Freenet is about privacy NOT piracy, and for me, anything that enables ordinary people to have some degree of electronic *privacy* is worthy of everyone's support.
>As others have commented, the proposal, if it >contains retrictions on commercials and if it >makes onerous demands w.r.t. interference, >will kill low power FM.
Bull. Non-Commercialism is the only viable way for Microradio to flourish. If people insist on commercial microradio the NAB (National Association of Broadcasters) will redouble its efforts to kill it because they will see it as taking potential ad revenue out of their pockets.
I personally want microradio to be a real locally based alternative to big commercial radio.
Microradio is too important to worry about how someone can squeeze a few bucks out it -- frankly folks, you'd more profitably invest your money in swampland in Florida than in a commercial microradio station. Why do I say that? Here's a clue: though the FCC may be proposing 1000 watt Low Power FM stations it ain't likely to become a reality.
They'll end up allowing a 100 watts or less, you can bet on it. They may make a provision for sparsely populated rual areas where it takes 1000 watts just to reach 500 people. But in urban areas and especially major radio markets 1000 LPFM just ain't gonna happen. The radio band is too damn crowded as it is.
It takes less than a 1000 bucks to get a 50 to 100 watt station on the air. The electric bill -- including power used by studio equipment -- is about the same as what heavy use of your clothes dryer would cost you -- or a couple of PC's running 24/7.
If a community wants a station, they'll have little dificulty keeping it running on donations -- especially when people in the neighborhood know that they'll be able to do thier own shows.
If you all want to know about some of the people who who made this possible (put pressure on the FCC to make this proposal).
Check out the list of stations at: http://www.radio4all.org
For Microradio news: http://www.radio4all.org/news.html
BTW, the deadline for public comments is, August 2nd. So make your comments soon!
While your at it, why don't you add your endorsement to the National Lawyers Guild/Committe on Democratic Communications comments on the FCC LPFM proposal:
Slashdot Mirror
"Freenet is designed to make censorship impossible. While most people agree that excessive censorship is bad, some stop short of saying that censorship should be abolished altogether. My personal belief is that censorship of any form is fundamentally flawed."
Freenet Philosphy page
I happen to agree whole heartedly with that. While it's true that Freenet *could* be used for illegal purposes, that is clearly not its intent.
You may argue that Freenet facilitates software piracy, but then, so do computers. Computers make the use and the "theft" of software possible. Maybe you think that's an outlandish statement, well then how about the fact that people can (and probably do) use PGP and annoymous remailers to pass other people's credit card numbers around. Should projects like GNU Privacy Guard and annonymous remailer software not be supported because of this? I certainly don't think so.
Freenet is about privacy NOT piracy, and for me, anything that enables ordinary people to have some degree of electronic *privacy* is worthy of everyone's support.
>As others have commented, the proposal, if it
>contains retrictions on commercials and if it
>makes onerous demands w.r.t. interference,
>will kill low power FM.
Bull. Non-Commercialism is the only viable way for
Microradio to flourish. If people insist on commercial microradio the NAB (National Association of Broadcasters) will redouble its efforts to kill it because they will see it as taking potential ad revenue out of their pockets.
I personally want microradio to be a real locally based alternative to big commercial radio.
Microradio is too important to worry about how someone can squeeze a few bucks out it -- frankly folks, you'd more profitably invest your money in swampland in Florida than in a commercial microradio station. Why do I say that? Here's a clue: though the FCC may be proposing 1000 watt Low Power FM stations it ain't likely to become a reality.
They'll end up allowing a 100 watts or less, you can bet on it. They may make a provision for sparsely populated rual areas where it takes 1000 watts just to reach 500 people. But in urban areas and especially major radio markets 1000 LPFM just ain't gonna happen. The radio band is too damn crowded as it is.
It takes less than a 1000 bucks to get a 50 to 100
watt station on the air. The electric bill -- including power used by studio equipment -- is about the same as what heavy use of your clothes dryer would cost you -- or a couple of PC's running 24/7.
If a community wants a station, they'll have little dificulty keeping it running on donations -- especially when people in the neighborhood know that they'll be able to do thier own shows.
If you all want to know about some of the people who who made this possible (put pressure on the FCC to make this proposal).
Check out the list of stations at:
http://www.radio4all.org
For Microradio news:
http://www.radio4all.org/news.html
BTW, the deadline for public comments is, August 2nd. So make your comments soon!
While your at it, why don't you add your endorsement to the National Lawyers Guild/Committe on Democratic Communications comments on the FCC LPFM proposal:
http://www.nlgcdc.org/fcc.html