Broadband over powerlines isn't such a great idea. It is still segmentented, and the immediate (and limited) access bandwidth is shared with all subscribers (yes, I know in the end the internet is shared).
You still have to invest into expensive infrastructure to get the bandwidth out to the segmented BPL deployments, much the same way (traditionally) you would use an ethernet line to supply a WiFi access point with backbone access.
I think the big misconception about this technology is that it (access) would simply 'flow' all over the place no matter where a 120v outlet is. This is not the case. Much of the BPL signal is lost completely once it passes thru a transformer. Special provisioning needs to take place for this to happen.
I think wireless is probably the better way to supply access to rural america.
I think a lot more time and money has to be put into force to deliver access via powerlines for a limited number of subscribers.
BPL also interfers with radio services, yes, including the hams. The only reason you hear that the 'hams are bitching' all of the time, is because (for the most part) they are an aware and smart bunch, where commerical interest may have an alternative means of communicating.
Radio is amazing, especially below 50Mhz. That band is non-line of sight, an exceptionally low power signal (.1 to 10 watts) can travel the whole planet! Think about that! A commerical FM radio station transmits in the tens of thousands of watts, and can only get a few hundred kilometers at it's very best. But with a measily 2 Watts, you can communicate around the world.
I think BPL will destroy a lot of radio services that are damn valuable. It's not just putting a bunch of HAM/amateur radio operators out of a hobby.
The gov should do more to get broadband where it is presently unavailable. BPL is not the solution, it's a pretty bad one, and I don't think (in the long-term) it's going to have the bandwidth to be a TRUE broadband access method.
I do not own a WiFiVoIP phone, however I presume it would require (for roaming) an access point that is OPEN to work. Am I correct?
What about those IP to GEO databases? That would probably give the city you are in away to the VoIP provider when making a call - wouldn't this be 'close enough' for the 911 centers for call routing if your position couldn't otherwise be routed?
Mapping out where each and every access point is almost an IMPOSSIBLE TASK.
So, in my infinite wisdom, I say this is CRAP!
Can't 911 centers route calls to one another, if need be? (bad idea to leave it to the 911 centers to route each others calls, but let's say something messes up and they need to.
I've used those IP to geographical location engines a number of times, and they are fairly accurate. I've never had it report the wrong city or anything like that.
Sounds like big brother to me. I didn't read the article.
I don't think so. The hams are a group who, DO use all of their spectrum. They are not constantly using the whole spectrum at any given time.
Also, many HAMs are radio technology engineers that learn and experient nearly consequence free in those bands to create products that can work in the commercial band space. Hams represent only a vew small portion of the usable VHF UHF SHF, etc bands.
I think in the WHOLE VHF band they use 4 to 6 Mhz (this is the eqv to 1 broadcast TV channel) I the UHF band I believe they use 30 Mhz. There are experiements with TV signals and medium speed networks.
The license free band (2.4 ghz) have much more bandwidth available then Amateurs have access to. The difference is Amateurs have access in bands that aren't as desirable for broadband use.
For instance, VHF has little use for broadband other than long distance and good propogation. You would have to use a much larger portion of the VHF band than the 2.4 ghz band to get the same 11mbps (or 54mbps, or whatever modulation scheme you're using for data xfr).
Other problem in the VHF band is that your signals would go SO far, you would have to share/contend with a FAR GREATER number of users in the air space.
Leave the HAMs alone, they innovate and don't take up much space. In fact, the license free 2.4 band overlaps with the a amateur allocation. So in a way, some space has already been taken. Generally, there are no problems as a result of this overlap because many hams simply use WiFi equipment there too.
I'd say NO to 'putting it self out of business'. Althought amazing things have been done in license free bands - they are still license free bands.
Odd things can happen, and if the application is mission critical, it will likely fail.
The only reason we do things via the license free band is because of the fact, that it is, free.
I bet for most of us, if we had to pay $$$ to use our own private wireless networks (licensing) the popularity would have never been as high as it is.
For instance, FRS are relatively new frequencies for us to use. It has only been recently that we can use these (approx) 460Mhz radio spectrum with out a license.
Anyone who uses FRS knows that in a city all of the channels can be congested. This is the reason why mission critical services (like police, airport, etc) pay for 'private' spectrum. These organizations usually have access to big money, hence the reason why it is big money to purchase spectrum.
It costs way more to buy digital spectrum than analogue/narrow channel/voice/digital voice/low-speed spectrum.
I think in Canada to buy a 10khz wide VHF or UHF piece of the spectrum, say for a few mobiles with in a 25 km distance is only a few thousand a year. Where large (say 24mhz wide) microwave allocations get auctioned for millions of dollars.
I completely agree with your comments - but I'd take it to another step.
Who the hell cares if it's fiber or copper or coax.. let's just have conduits running all over the place.
A conduit to a (multiple) central (spots) to all the homes on a street. For instance, there should be a 'box' or 'home' for every home with in, say up to a 500 meters radius or something. We could run whatever we want, as the needs change.
I run a pay hotspot system - it's inexpensive, and we try to provide people with a better than average connection - for instance: they can choose a firewalled NAT connection, or a static ip connection with no firewall.
Wi-Fi runs in the UNLICENSED BAND. People can do WHAT THEY WANT.
I think WiMAX could solve this. But if you think about it this way, if someone is offering a free telephone (with no dirty germs on the handset!) why would anyone use their mobile to make an outgoing call.
If you have to parties selling cold cans of coke-a-cola, are you going to the line that charges $1 or the line that charges.50c ? This is competition.
Hey fuck face, you don't know the whole sitation. We were the cable guys at the time, not the network engineers. It needed setup fast, so thanks for the advice.
I have some for you, go fuck yourself. Nice spirit of helping.
Also, it's a FREE service from the hotel. It's no different from how majority of the hotels are setup, and almost no different from plugging in your notebook directly to the internet.
For the most part, it seems you won't be staying at many hotels as you've just narrowed your selection probably by 99 percent!
And switches cost big bucks - I only can do what the customer wants to spend.
A bit of a rant, off-topic - I know. The site isn't doing something so spectacular where it needs to complain about my non-standards compliant browser. I've seen more elaborate sites, and they don't have anything against my Internet Explorer.
Give me a break, it's like the site is discriminating against me - how RACIST of it.
I got modded 'flaimbait' - f-off moderator, that's BS. Based on other comments, I am offering an observation and I believe it is accurate.
I bet you $100 if you got an speak to industry audio professionals, they would agree.
Analog is better - but the format we have the analog signalling in is not practical.
We don't have home analog computers do we? There is a reason for that - this isn't flaimbait this is a reality - stop being an asshole.
I've setup a 120 room hotel
on
Hacking Hotels 101
·
· Score: 2, Interesting
I've setup a 120 room hotel, we wired the joint and installed switches on every floor.
At the moment, we have a pretty crumby system - a d-link router - yes I know why this is bad, but we're changing that (we knew about this to begin with)
My question to the slashdot crowd is, what can you think of that we can do to stop a guest from running their own DHCP server? (screwing the network)
I think what happens now is like the 'take a penny, leave a penny' dish.
What they are proposing is like 'rounding to the nearest nickle'--no pennies.
Althought I like the nickle thing (pennies suck!), we need pennies to keep the books balanced. Let's not go chaning the way we do time, just for the odd penny every year.
Tripping over pennies when there are bigger things across the street -- sheesh!
There is a reason why it's called 'natural light', because it's natural, not artificial.
I moved my office from a building where we had NO windows. Productivity has gone up tremendously. We don't feel as worn out at the end of the day, and we don't feel like we missed out on anything.
I saw this on the Discovery channel, and it's fantastic for commerical space as you can distribute 'natural' light all over the office where windows can't be located. It saves on energy use as well. As yes, there are UV filters.
I wish it was a little more affordable, i'd do it in a heart beat.
Could we get a poll on slashdot of fav matrix technology?
LCD / DLP / CRT / PLASMA / ??? / ???? / ?????
I prefer LCD over everything else at the moment, including DLP. I don't like the effect of the pixel being switched on/off the produce a shade, where LCD can be varible (control wise) to produce variable shades.
I have owned several projects since 1997. I've never owned a CRT projector, however I like the color on the LCD ones by far. I notice the LCD's don't last as long as DLP. I am using them for entertainment purposes, I'm not doing power point.
Let's say analogue is better than digital - I have excellent ears and pay attention to fine detail..
I still think digital is better, because no matter 'how good' vinyl is, there is always dust debris and other annoyances while trying to listen to vinyl recording.
Too much care and attention and space those old records take up too.
I think the cons definately outnumber the pros when using vinyl over digital
Anonymous - I don't believe you, if your on slashdot, you're probably a pretty smart guy and know enough not to waste your time on bullshit like the link you included.
Slashdot Mirror
The description sounds so good, it's like an April fools joke... I'm glad it's not April 1st !!
You still have to invest into expensive infrastructure to get the bandwidth out to the segmented BPL deployments, much the same way (traditionally) you would use an ethernet line to supply a WiFi access point with backbone access.
I think the big misconception about this technology is that it (access) would simply 'flow' all over the place no matter where a 120v outlet is. This is not the case. Much of the BPL signal is lost completely once it passes thru a transformer. Special provisioning needs to take place for this to happen.
I think wireless is probably the better way to supply access to rural america.
I think a lot more time and money has to be put into force to deliver access via powerlines for a limited number of subscribers.
BPL also interfers with radio services, yes, including the hams. The only reason you hear that the 'hams are bitching' all of the time, is because (for the most part) they are an aware and smart bunch, where commerical interest may have an alternative means of communicating.
Radio is amazing, especially below 50Mhz. That band is non-line of sight, an exceptionally low power signal (.1 to 10 watts) can travel the whole planet! Think about that! A commerical FM radio station transmits in the tens of thousands of watts, and can only get a few hundred kilometers at it's very best. But with a measily 2 Watts, you can communicate around the world.
I think BPL will destroy a lot of radio services that are damn valuable. It's not just putting a bunch of HAM/amateur radio operators out of a hobby.
The gov should do more to get broadband where it is presently unavailable. BPL is not the solution, it's a pretty bad one, and I don't think (in the long-term) it's going to have the bandwidth to be a TRUE broadband access method.
What about those IP to GEO databases? That would probably give the city you are in away to the VoIP provider when making a call - wouldn't this be 'close enough' for the 911 centers for call routing if your position couldn't otherwise be routed?
Mapping out where each and every access point is almost an IMPOSSIBLE TASK.
So, in my infinite wisdom, I say this is CRAP!
Can't 911 centers route calls to one another, if need be? (bad idea to leave it to the 911 centers to route each others calls, but let's say something messes up and they need to.
I've used those IP to geographical location engines a number of times, and they are fairly accurate. I've never had it report the wrong city or anything like that.
Sounds like big brother to me. I didn't read the article.
Propogation increases and bandwidth decreases as you enter the popular ham bands 144, 430 mhz.
As propogation increases, you share with more users.
As bandwidth decreases, it is less desireable to use, especially when shared with so many!
Also, many HAMs are radio technology engineers that learn and experient nearly consequence free in those bands to create products that can work in the commercial band space. Hams represent only a vew small portion of the usable VHF UHF SHF, etc bands.
I think in the WHOLE VHF band they use 4 to 6 Mhz (this is the eqv to 1 broadcast TV channel) I the UHF band I believe they use 30 Mhz. There are experiements with TV signals and medium speed networks.
The license free band (2.4 ghz) have much more bandwidth available then Amateurs have access to. The difference is Amateurs have access in bands that aren't as desirable for broadband use.
For instance, VHF has little use for broadband other than long distance and good propogation. You would have to use a much larger portion of the VHF band than the 2.4 ghz band to get the same 11mbps (or 54mbps, or whatever modulation scheme you're using for data xfr).
Other problem in the VHF band is that your signals would go SO far, you would have to share/contend with a FAR GREATER number of users in the air space.
Leave the HAMs alone, they innovate and don't take up much space. In fact, the license free 2.4 band overlaps with the a amateur allocation. So in a way, some space has already been taken. Generally, there are no problems as a result of this overlap because many hams simply use WiFi equipment there too.
Odd things can happen, and if the application is mission critical, it will likely fail.
The only reason we do things via the license free band is because of the fact, that it is, free.
I bet for most of us, if we had to pay $$$ to use our own private wireless networks (licensing) the popularity would have never been as high as it is.
For instance, FRS are relatively new frequencies for us to use. It has only been recently that we can use these (approx) 460Mhz radio spectrum with out a license.
Anyone who uses FRS knows that in a city all of the channels can be congested. This is the reason why mission critical services (like police, airport, etc) pay for 'private' spectrum. These organizations usually have access to big money, hence the reason why it is big money to purchase spectrum.
It costs way more to buy digital spectrum than analogue/narrow channel/voice/digital voice/low-speed spectrum.
I think in Canada to buy a 10khz wide VHF or UHF piece of the spectrum, say for a few mobiles with in a 25 km distance is only a few thousand a year. Where large (say 24mhz wide) microwave allocations get auctioned for millions of dollars.
Those prices do not seem that far off.
Call me old fashion, but I've been polluted into thinking anything under a few hundred a month, that is greater than 1.5Meg is a deal.
I pay $800.00/month for bonded ADSL (two six meg pipes combined) for a 12 Mbps connection with about 2 Mbps upstream.
A buddy of mine lives in australia, he's getting something like 768/256 for about $80 USD/month.
Who the hell cares if it's fiber or copper or coax.. let's just have conduits running all over the place.
A conduit to a (multiple) central (spots) to all the homes on a street. For instance, there should be a 'box' or 'home' for every home with in, say up to a 500 meters radius or something. We could run whatever we want, as the needs change.
Wi-Fi runs in the UNLICENSED BAND. People can do WHAT THEY WANT.
I think WiMAX could solve this. But if you think about it this way, if someone is offering a free telephone (with no dirty germs on the handset!) why would anyone use their mobile to make an outgoing call.
If you have to parties selling cold cans of coke-a-cola, are you going to the line that charges $1 or the line that charges .50c ? This is competition.
My .02 cents - I didn't read the article.
I have some for you, go fuck yourself. Nice spirit of helping.
Also, it's a FREE service from the hotel. It's no different from how majority of the hotels are setup, and almost no different from plugging in your notebook directly to the internet.
For the most part, it seems you won't be staying at many hotels as you've just narrowed your selection probably by 99 percent!
And switches cost big bucks - I only can do what the customer wants to spend.
Thanks again, fuck face.
Give me a break, it's like the site is discriminating against me - how RACIST of it.
I bet you $100 if you got an speak to industry audio professionals, they would agree.
Analog is better - but the format we have the analog signalling in is not practical.
We don't have home analog computers do we? There is a reason for that - this isn't flaimbait this is a reality - stop being an asshole.
At the moment, we have a pretty crumby system - a d-link router - yes I know why this is bad, but we're changing that (we knew about this to begin with)
My question to the slashdot crowd is, what can you think of that we can do to stop a guest from running their own DHCP server? (screwing the network)
Sounds to me however, some people will in fact care.
What they are proposing is like 'rounding to the nearest nickle'--no pennies.
Althought I like the nickle thing (pennies suck!), we need pennies to keep the books balanced. Let's not go chaning the way we do time, just for the odd penny every year.
Tripping over pennies when there are bigger things across the street -- sheesh!
Althought floppy discs suck (speed, capacity), they are way ahead of cd-roms/dvd-roms.
We shouldn't be able to 'touch' the media! How's that for a suggestion?
Blast a thinkgeek laser beam in reverse from your cubicle fiber port and wake up some alien race.
I moved my office from a building where we had NO windows. Productivity has gone up tremendously. We don't feel as worn out at the end of the day, and we don't feel like we missed out on anything.
I saw this on the Discovery channel, and it's fantastic for commerical space as you can distribute 'natural' light all over the office where windows can't be located. It saves on energy use as well. As yes, there are UV filters.
I wish it was a little more affordable, i'd do it in a heart beat.
Sun, via fiber to free space = darn efficient
that is the annoying sound you're hearing.
Unitl you get a 3 chip DLP projector, there are moving parts (fan aside)
I think LCD has better color (personally) but the longevitiy isn't there.
LCD / DLP / CRT / PLASMA / ??? / ???? / ?????
I prefer LCD over everything else at the moment, including DLP. I don't like the effect of the pixel being switched on/off the produce a shade, where LCD can be varible (control wise) to produce variable shades.
I have owned several projects since 1997. I've never owned a CRT projector, however I like the color on the LCD ones by far. I notice the LCD's don't last as long as DLP. I am using them for entertainment purposes, I'm not doing power point.
I still think digital is better, because no matter 'how good' vinyl is, there is always dust debris and other annoyances while trying to listen to vinyl recording.
Too much care and attention and space those old records take up too.
I think the cons definately outnumber the pros when using vinyl over digital
Russia, Fuck Yeah!
Anonymous - I don't believe you, if your on slashdot, you're probably a pretty smart guy and know enough not to waste your time on bullshit like the link you included.
I meant 'sound' not 'should' What are you? A sick KKK asshole or something?