Its not normally within the rules for an amateur service to compete with commercial services.
It may not be in the rules but there is no reason a private person should be prevented from doing so. The only reason the airwaves and radio transmissions were licensed was because big businesses, the mass media, wanted it that way. How many billions of dollars did the FCC ask for for the frequencies that were being freed with the switch to digital TV?
You don't want to use satellite and you say cellular coverage isn't good enough. What exactly are you expecting? If there's no connectivity, there's no connectivity. No amount of homebrew can fix that.
It's only impossible until someone does it. Take almost everything you take for granted now back 200 years and you may find yourself accused of witchcraft. Radio wasn't thought possible until Tesla came along, or TV with Philo Farnsworth.
Regularly is one thing. I like having an iPhone that can get my e-mail every few days when I hit some coverage. The "daily connectivity" the poster wants is going to limit where he can go unless he takes a sat phone along.
A laptop with wireless access can replace the phone. And with IM and or video conferencing, which phones don't do, they can even do more.
most people (ie, non-slashdotters) take the RV to get away from the constant barrage of tech and telecom, to see sights not (web)sites, to look out the window and not at Windows.
Some of those people like to photograph, write, and otherwise document it too. Even when camping or hiking I like bringing my camera with me. When I was in the army my commanding officer made me the unit's photographer because no matter where we went to out in the field, my military occupation specialty or MOS was small arms specialist or infantry, I always took my camera. We didn't have laptops or the web then but with them and a digital camera I could go crazy shooting pictures and uploading them. Once the unit went to an Army base in Alaska for winter warfare training for 3 weeks. I took 11 rolls of film, 4 rolls of black and white film with 24 exposures the CO gave me and 7 rolls of 36 exposure colour film. I shot every shot before the first week was over. I could fill up drives for digital camera faster.
Or I could take my camera with me scuba diving, which I also love doing. I could go under water and fill up my storage, then upload the photos to a server before back in the water.
Quite simply, just because you may not think of a use for wireless access out in the middle of nowhere doesn't mean there aren't good reasons to have it. Another use for wireless access is medical, in an accident a paramedic could record and upload vital life signs among other things.
Except it's not common sense. Common sense says a person doesn't need to be always connected. I know when I'm out hiking, with my camera equipment and laptop, I'd like to be able to upload photos and updates occasionally. I oppose being always available but connecting perhaps once or twice a day may be good.
The very size of a typical RV is going to limit the roughing it. You won't be driving it cross country, you'll likely be on Interstates and staying in campgrounds.
That can still be cross country though maybe not wilderness travel. When I lived in Florida I knew this couple who when they retired, they worked at the college I was going to, bought an RV and drove it on a cross country journey. They were gone for more than a year driving all over the US and part of Canada. They even drove up to Alaska. If that's not cross country I don't know is cross country.
And this was before the internet was even widely known or used.
That was just an example. The modern world and it's economy was built on cheap oil. Once peak oil is hit, some say it has already though others say we've still got years before we hit peak oil, oil prices will skyrocket. Now economics, rational economics, says that as prices increase demand for travel and other uses for petroleum will decrease, until something else can compeat economically. Which is why the market in bioplastics is growing. Before DuPont received a patent on cracking petroleum to make a type of plastic plastic was made from plants. The old cellophane plastic wrapper got it's name from plant cellulose.
No I don't. That I'm aware of I'm not allergic to anything others aren't also allergic to. Heck as a kid I had an immunity to poison ivy, I guess because I frequently contacted it.
I know 4 people know who had chronic eczema for years who eliminated gluten and their eczema went away within a few weeks.
I don't avoid food with gluten in it but I'll been seeing more and more food labeled gluten free.
if the Corporation owned just the one ship then it's loss meant the Corporation was Bankrupt. Even if the owners were largely untouched.
Actually that way, one corporation owning one ship, is the way to go. If a corporation owned more than one and lost one it could lose the others too, in liability payouts. However a way around that would be to have one corporation own one ship with another corporation owning more than one ship owning corporation. Something like that's done now.
Saturn LLC is a subsidiary owned by General Motors.
Real estate investors do the same, set up a corporation or LLC to own or develop a specific property. Doing this also provides another benefit, as long as profits are not taken out of the business it is not taxed. And when it is the owner lists it on their personal income tax. That is unlike Real estate investment trusts or REITs. REITs are required to pay out, distribute, most of their profits. They both allow a number of people to pool resources to invest though.
In fact, shipping risk appears to be one of the major factors in the creation of insurance as we know it, dating back almost 4000 years.
According to Financial Web ancient Chinese farmers pooled their produce then shipped it on different boats or ships so that if a shipment was lost a farmer would only lose a portion of the crop. It further says the first actual "insurance contracts originated in the 13th century with ship owners who wanted to protect themselves against the possibility of catastrophic losses."
Is there substantially more risk in a modern space launch than in a 400 years ago from England to the East Indies?
I wouldn't say there's more risk but the potential losses are greater, with the possible exception of the Spanish galleons of gold, other precious metals, and stones.
Shouldn't that be reducing if not eliminating throwaway components?
That depends solely on cost. It is a LOT cheaper to build a disposable unit to spec than it is to build a reusable one.
That's why I said "reducing if not eliminating". If resources are wasted they become more expensive. And throwing away many resources wastes them. Wait until oil production drops to find out if costs don't go up.
The idea that private enteprise is simply 'better' - an idea rubbished by experiences with healthcare, banking, transport, energy supply, and many other things - is blinding you to how clearly absurd these people are.
That's really going to replace those 1,000 MW single nuclear reactors.
Wow, what'ja know, there are wind turbines bigger than 2.5 MW. Erect 10 5 MW or 5 10 MW wind turbines a month for 10 months and you add 1,000 MW of capacity. If work is done all year you've added 1.2 GW. How long will that nuclear power plant of yours take to build? And don't say a year. Construction on Finland's Olkiluoto 3 reactor started in 2005. It was originally scheduled to start operations this year, 2009, but is 3 years behind schedule and isn't expected to start until 2011-12. Also it's cost overrun is EUR1.5 billion so far. And you can't complain that is because of US regulations, nor because of the inexperience of the builders. One of those contractors is the French government owned Areva, Siemens is another. Both companies have experience building nuclear power plants.
Similar to the reason that we don't see many new power plants these days. Old plants were grandfathered in after safety and environmental laws were enacted. New plants are held to much higher standards.
So we just have to get by on the old and busted plants which spew tons of junk in the air.
So new plants should be allowed to meet the lower standards? What's the difference between old plants and new ones doing it?
in the old days it was tough to stay in the shipping business after your ship sank.
This is why corporations were created, because shipping was a risky business. Way back when, before 1600, if a cargo ship or any of it's cargo was lost the ship's owners were liable. They were also liable for the crews. If a ship sank because of a hurricane or was attacked by pirates too bad for the owners. So in 1600 the British crown granted a corporate charter to the East India Company. The corporate charter gave the owners of the corporation limited liability. Whereas someone who owned a ship could lose everything, including their home, the most a share or stockholder in a corporation can lose is the amount they paid for the shares. Corporations also allow the pooling of a lot of people's money for a business. The next corporate charter was granted to the Dutch East India Company by the Dutch crown in 1602.
However something has been lost in the years since. Corporations were only granted charters if they served the common or public good, and shipping was considered a good. If a corporation no longer did serve the good it's charter could be revoked. Those charters aren't revoked in the US anymore.
Seriously, if this has no benefits towards a cancer cure, I don't care...
Because it looks like a promising step towards helping auto-immune disorders.
Cancer either kills you, or you live...
auto-immune, you live, and suffer, and live, and suffer, and live (goddamn it).
You should care if this is good for auto-immune disorders. If it cures them you wouldn't have to live with eczema, unlike me. Unless a breakthrough in neurogenesis happens there is no cure and little therapy to treat my injury, I survived a Traumatic Brain Injury. And I do mean survived, while I was in a coma the docs told my family it would be a miracle if I lived. Well I did live, but if I could I'd argue with those docs because my life has been a living hell since.
Then again rereading your post there could be another meaning to it. You may not care whether it cures cancer or not so long as it cures auto-immune diseases.
I get cancer, get the treatment, but now need blood transfusions because all of my blood cells have been turned into immune cells and I have no more cells to carry oxygen around my body.
Except the blood cells that are NK cells are white blood cells, they don't carry oxygen to other cells. The cells that carry oxygen are red blood cells. It's the fe, iron, in the cells that bind to oxygen which then forms ferrous oxide. And the ferrous oxide is what makes the red blood cells red. Just like corroded iron, rust, is red.
hat is the goal and that is what was promised but never achieved with the shuttle.
The ho-hum, like regularly scheduled shuttle trip, should be done by businesses though not government. That's why I said NASA should have a mission like the Apollo mission to land man on the moon. Of course that's been done now, so private entities should be who sponsors new moon landings. Now that the ball is rolling government should shrink NASA, continue to operate Hubble and other sats perhaps with the NOAA working with weather sats and those being used for climate studies, but encourage private businesses to go into space.
Slashdot Mirror
Its not normally within the rules for an amateur service to compete with commercial services.
It may not be in the rules but there is no reason a private person should be prevented from doing so. The only reason the airwaves and radio transmissions were licensed was because big businesses, the mass media, wanted it that way. How many billions of dollars did the FCC ask for for the frequencies that were being freed with the switch to digital TV?
Falcon
You don't want to use satellite and you say cellular coverage isn't good enough. What exactly are you expecting? If there's no connectivity, there's no connectivity. No amount of homebrew can fix that.
It's only impossible until someone does it. Take almost everything you take for granted now back 200 years and you may find yourself accused of witchcraft. Radio wasn't thought possible until Tesla came along, or TV with Philo Farnsworth.
Falcon
Regularly is one thing. I like having an iPhone that can get my e-mail every few days when I hit some coverage. The "daily connectivity" the poster wants is going to limit where he can go unless he takes a sat phone along.
A laptop with wireless access can replace the phone. And with IM and or video conferencing, which phones don't do, they can even do more.
Falcon
most people (ie, non-slashdotters) take the RV to get away from the constant barrage of tech and telecom, to see sights not (web)sites, to look out the window and not at Windows.
Some of those people like to photograph, write, and otherwise document it too. Even when camping or hiking I like bringing my camera with me. When I was in the army my commanding officer made me the unit's photographer because no matter where we went to out in the field, my military occupation specialty or MOS was small arms specialist or infantry, I always took my camera. We didn't have laptops or the web then but with them and a digital camera I could go crazy shooting pictures and uploading them. Once the unit went to an Army base in Alaska for winter warfare training for 3 weeks. I took 11 rolls of film, 4 rolls of black and white film with 24 exposures the CO gave me and 7 rolls of 36 exposure colour film. I shot every shot before the first week was over. I could fill up drives for digital camera faster.
Or I could take my camera with me scuba diving, which I also love doing. I could go under water and fill up my storage, then upload the photos to a server before back in the water.
Quite simply, just because you may not think of a use for wireless access out in the middle of nowhere doesn't mean there aren't good reasons to have it. Another use for wireless access is medical, in an accident a paramedic could record and upload vital life signs among other things.
Falcon
advocating common sense on Slashdot!?
Except it's not common sense. Common sense says a person doesn't need to be always connected. I know when I'm out hiking, with my camera equipment and laptop, I'd like to be able to upload photos and updates occasionally. I oppose being always available but connecting perhaps once or twice a day may be good.
Falcon
If I could somehow get 2-3 weeks off, and friends that could do the same, and just to the 'iron-butt' ride around a good bit of the US.
In the US horse would be better. And llamas in South America's Andes.
Falcon
Forget the RV and the hotel, I want to hike, with my camera equipment and laptop. With wireless access I could then upload photos and updates.
And the distance from the hotel to "nature" is typically only half-an-hour.
I want to get hours if not days away from buildings and wiring. At least something like hiking the Appalachian Trail. Hike it not drive it.
Falcon
The very size of a typical RV is going to limit the roughing it. You won't be driving it cross country, you'll likely be on Interstates and staying in campgrounds.
That can still be cross country though maybe not wilderness travel. When I lived in Florida I knew this couple who when they retired, they worked at the college I was going to, bought an RV and drove it on a cross country journey. They were gone for more than a year driving all over the US and part of Canada. They even drove up to Alaska. If that's not cross country I don't know is cross country.
And this was before the internet was even widely known or used.
Falcon
That was just an example. The modern world and it's economy was built on cheap oil. Once peak oil is hit, some say it has already though others say we've still got years before we hit peak oil, oil prices will skyrocket. Now economics, rational economics, says that as prices increase demand for travel and other uses for petroleum will decrease, until something else can compeat economically. Which is why the market in bioplastics is growing. Before DuPont received a patent on cracking petroleum to make a type of plastic plastic was made from plants. The old cellophane plastic wrapper got it's name from plant cellulose.
Falcon
No I don't. That I'm aware of I'm not allergic to anything others aren't also allergic to. Heck as a kid I had an immunity to poison ivy, I guess because I frequently contacted it.
I know 4 people know who had chronic eczema for years who eliminated gluten and their eczema went away within a few weeks.
I don't avoid food with gluten in it but I'll been seeing more and more food labeled gluten free.
Falcon
if the Corporation owned just the one ship then it's loss meant the Corporation was Bankrupt. Even if the owners were largely untouched.
Actually that way, one corporation owning one ship, is the way to go. If a corporation owned more than one and lost one it could lose the others too, in liability payouts. However a way around that would be to have one corporation own one ship with another corporation owning more than one ship owning corporation. Something like that's done now. Saturn LLC is a subsidiary owned by General Motors.
Real estate investors do the same, set up a corporation or LLC to own or develop a specific property. Doing this also provides another benefit, as long as profits are not taken out of the business it is not taxed. And when it is the owner lists it on their personal income tax. That is unlike Real estate investment trusts or REITs. REITs are required to pay out, distribute, most of their profits. They both allow a number of people to pool resources to invest though.
Falcon
If I'm not mistaken (and Wikipedia's got it right) it's also the origins of Lloyds of London.
Lloyd's says the same thing.
In fact, shipping risk appears to be one of the major factors in the creation of insurance as we know it, dating back almost 4000 years.
According to Financial Web ancient Chinese farmers pooled their produce then shipped it on different boats or ships so that if a shipment was lost a farmer would only lose a portion of the crop. It further says the first actual "insurance contracts originated in the 13th century with ship owners who wanted to protect themselves against the possibility of catastrophic losses."
Is there substantially more risk in a modern space launch than in a 400 years ago from England to the East Indies?
I wouldn't say there's more risk but the potential losses are greater, with the possible exception of the Spanish galleons of gold, other precious metals, and stones.
Falcon
as philosophy is to double-entry accounting.
I got a laugh out of this, and couldn't agree more. Unfortunately I haven't played weiqi in about 15 years.
Falcon
Shouldn't that be reducing if not eliminating throwaway components?
That depends solely on cost. It is a LOT cheaper to build a disposable unit to spec than it is to build a reusable one.
That's why I said "reducing if not eliminating". If resources are wasted they become more expensive. And throwing away many resources wastes them. Wait until oil production drops to find out if costs don't go up.
Falcon
The idea that private enteprise is simply 'better' - an idea rubbished by experiences with healthcare, banking, transport, energy supply, and many other things - is blinding you to how clearly absurd these people are.
Yeap, communism has triumphed over capitalism.
Falcon
And thus the strong survive to propagate their superior technology and business model.
Business model yes but not necessarily the superior technology.
Falcon
Wow!
2.5 MW.
That's really going to replace those 1,000 MW single nuclear reactors.
Wow, what'ja know, there are wind turbines bigger than 2.5 MW. Erect 10 5 MW or 5 10 MW wind turbines a month for 10 months and you add 1,000 MW of capacity. If work is done all year you've added 1.2 GW. How long will that nuclear power plant of yours take to build? And don't say a year. Construction on Finland's Olkiluoto 3 reactor started in 2005. It was originally scheduled to start operations this year, 2009, but is 3 years behind schedule and isn't expected to start until 2011-12. Also it's cost overrun is EUR1.5 billion so far. And you can't complain that is because of US regulations, nor because of the inexperience of the builders. One of those contractors is the French government owned Areva, Siemens is another. Both companies have experience building nuclear power plants.
Falcon
Similar to the reason that we don't see many new power plants these days. Old plants were grandfathered in after safety and environmental laws were enacted. New plants are held to much higher standards.
So we just have to get by on the old and busted plants which spew tons of junk in the air.
So new plants should be allowed to meet the lower standards? What's the difference between old plants and new ones doing it?
Falcon
1. lower cost for throwaway components (boosters etc...)
Shouldn't that be reducing if not eliminating throwaway components?
Falcon
in the old days it was tough to stay in the shipping business after your ship sank.
This is why corporations were created, because shipping was a risky business. Way back when, before 1600, if a cargo ship or any of it's cargo was lost the ship's owners were liable. They were also liable for the crews. If a ship sank because of a hurricane or was attacked by pirates too bad for the owners. So in 1600 the British crown granted a corporate charter to the East India Company. The corporate charter gave the owners of the corporation limited liability. Whereas someone who owned a ship could lose everything, including their home, the most a share or stockholder in a corporation can lose is the amount they paid for the shares. Corporations also allow the pooling of a lot of people's money for a business. The next corporate charter was granted to the Dutch East India Company by the Dutch crown in 1602.
However something has been lost in the years since. Corporations were only granted charters if they served the common or public good, and shipping was considered a good. If a corporation no longer did serve the good it's charter could be revoked. Those charters aren't revoked in the US anymore.
Falcon
Why on earth is every article about biotech tagged "whatcouldpossiblygowrong"?
Perhaps that's because it's a question that should be asked.
Falcon
Seriously, if this has no benefits towards a cancer cure, I don't care...
Because it looks like a promising step towards helping auto-immune disorders.
Cancer either kills you, or you live...
auto-immune, you live, and suffer, and live, and suffer, and live (goddamn it).
You should care if this is good for auto-immune disorders. If it cures them you wouldn't have to live with eczema, unlike me. Unless a breakthrough in neurogenesis happens there is no cure and little therapy to treat my injury, I survived a Traumatic Brain Injury. And I do mean survived, while I was in a coma the docs told my family it would be a miracle if I lived. Well I did live, but if I could I'd argue with those docs because my life has been a living hell since.
Then again rereading your post there could be another meaning to it. You may not care whether it cures cancer or not so long as it cures auto-immune diseases.
Falcon
I get cancer, get the treatment, but now need blood transfusions because all of my blood cells have been turned into immune cells and I have no more cells to carry oxygen around my body.
Except the blood cells that are NK cells are white blood cells, they don't carry oxygen to other cells. The cells that carry oxygen are red blood cells. It's the fe, iron, in the cells that bind to oxygen which then forms ferrous oxide. And the ferrous oxide is what makes the red blood cells red. Just like corroded iron, rust, is red.
Falcon
hat is the goal and that is what was promised but never achieved with the shuttle.
The ho-hum, like regularly scheduled shuttle trip, should be done by businesses though not government. That's why I said NASA should have a mission like the Apollo mission to land man on the moon. Of course that's been done now, so private entities should be who sponsors new moon landings. Now that the ball is rolling government should shrink NASA, continue to operate Hubble and other sats perhaps with the NOAA working with weather sats and those being used for climate studies, but encourage private businesses to go into space.
Falcon
As I've said in replies to other's reply I hadn't about frequencies that are not visible by humans.
Falcon