Remember, current bands where "anything goes" aren't quite like that: they have strict power limits,
And I suppose it never occurred to you that the FCC could limit power here in the same way as 2.4?
If you do some research, the FCC was VERY close to legalizing low power FM stations, but then the measure just quietly died.
You can put on a tin foil hat here, but I would bet good money some corporations slipped some money under the table to the right person, and some low-end competition was killed.
So see, it is possible to kill competition without even having a transmitter.
I agree, but there also needs to be some part of the spectrum allocated to "anything goes."
It is possible to have both. 2.4 has licensed only bands on both sides of it.
I can't speak for everyone, but I think a lot of low power FM & TV stations would be great. At least much better than having a choice of one or two Clearchannel stations.
Notice that Apple filed approx a day after the WoW copyright decision. If there was some doubt on Psystar beating Apple on the validity of of the EULA...it is pretty safe to say that Psystar is about to get slapped down.
What I think would be smart is if they added a really good printed manual and/or Ubuntu book with it. I read through the description and couldn't find anything about extra material, but again, I think what they are doing is ok, but for a non-expert, a really nice install guide / intro to Ubuntu would make it look more tempting than say, just downloading an.iso file and burning your own disks.
I had the same trouble on Firefox 3. It even hung on Slashdot about 50% of the time...and on Flash stuff left and right. Did the above and everything is really smooth now and the crashes are really far between.
In a surprising development Microsoft stated today that it would not be using the eight year old NT kernel in its next generation operating system. The new system, to be called Windows BSD, will be based around the freely available OpenBSD operating system.
Microsoft's Steve Ballmer had the following to say: "As part of our new commitment to security, we are developing the next Windows product based upon OpenBSD. We feel that OpenBSD's security record fits well with our new proactive security model. Furthermore, we fully approve of the BSD license and encourage developers continue to write similarly-licensed code and avoid the infernal GNU GPL." When asked whether the decision to base the new Windows operating system on OpenBSD had anything to do with the success of Apple's BSD-based OS X, Ballmer exclaimed "There's nothing those Mac people can do that we can't do better. Microsoft has a long history with Unix-like systems, dating back from our original development of Xenix. We are dedicated to providing the Windows experience to Unix on the desktop."
And it is not just the desktop that is the target of the new OS. As servers have traditionally been Unix's strong point, Microsoft sees a bright future for Windows BSD, Server Edition. One of the first tests of Windows BSD Server will be running on Microsoft's Hotmail servers, a trial by fire that always left Windows NT a bit scorched. Said de Raadt "We are confident that Windows BSD can more than hold its own in the server arena. Indeed, we expect it to become the benchmark against which all others are judged."
OpenBSD founder and project lead The de Raadt will be relocating from Calgary, Canada to Redmond, Washington to oversee the new endeavor. When asked if he felt he was selling out, de Raadt replied with characterist aplomb "I've dedicated my life to free software, it's about time I got something in return." Other OpenBSD developers will likely be moving to Microsoft's Redmond campus soon. Joining de Raadt in Redmond is OpenBSD packet filter designer Daniel Hartmeier. Hartmeier has already started work on a new firewall codenamed "Microsoft Ward." Said Hartmeier, "I had some trouble getting to the states, what with the airline problems we've been having in Switzerland, but I'm looking forward to working with my development team on the new firewall."
When confronted with the apparent inconsistency of developing a Unix-based system while at the same time sponsoring a wave of anti-Unix marketing, Chairman Bill Gates replied "That campaign is targeted towards those other, incompatible versions of Unix. It has no bearing whatsoever on Windows BSD."
One potential problem with Microsoft's plans were the revelation that the BSD trademark is currently owned by embedded operating systems specialist WindRiver systems. According to Microsoft chairman Bill Gates, "WindRiver will surrender the BSD trademark to us or we will bury them!"
During the announcement of Windows BSD at a PR blitzkrieg, Ballmer, Gates and de Raadt jumped around shouting "Whoo! Whoo! Whoo! Come on, get up, get up... Give it up for BSD!". A beta version of Windows BSD, codenamed `Brobdingnag', will be available to MSDN subscribers in 6 month's time.
However, not everyone was happy with the news of OpenBSD's commercial success. A group of disgruntled OpenBSD developers who were not offered jobs at Microsoft have created a competitor to OpenBSD. Unlike OpenBSD, this operating system will be available under the GNU GPL, effectively preventing Microsoft from using their code. The new project, called GNU/BSD, is headed by French former OpenBSD developers Dr. Marc Espie and Miod Vallat. In a joint statement, Espie and Vallat stated "We feel it is grossly unfair to the European developers of OpenBSD that all the attention sh
They knew they couldn't just outlaw alcohol because they didn't have the authority to, so they made a constitutional amendment to do it. Back then, they understood how the constitution worked.
Now, the Supreme Court *almost* put itself in a position to decide if the Constitution was "constitutional" or not. What the heck would have happened if the Constitution was not "constitutional," I'm afraid to know. In fact, that is pretty darn scary.
Now we might even debate if an inalienable right cold be taken away by a Constitutional amendment, but it is, once again, pretty darn scary that everyone just thought they could blatantly ignore the Constitution and get away with it.
Don't know how valid that is, but it would also work if a large percentage of downloaders kicked just a few bucks into a slush fund to help people fight if sued.
The above article stated the odds of getting sued at: 1:1840
So if Ron Paul released a Halloween mask, he would be our next president?
Also, I could see a crap storm happen with an Obama Halloween mask. Seriously, that could go in so many directions of political correctness that it makes my head hurt.
Actually, it is kind of a semi-licensed process, because if you are the first one in the area on this frequency, you kind of get it.
The Alvarian sales person we talked to said there is basically a "land grab" going on at the moment, as people try to put up systems to be the first one in a certain area.
Also, the public safety 4.9 band is somewhat of a semi-licensed band. It works similar, because you just have to apply for a license and you get one if you qualify. However, it is still a quirky process, and you could still end up with another public safety entity interfering with you, because it isn't a licensed channel in the normal sense that we have always thought of "licensed" channels.
That's why *I* came up with the term semi-licensed.
However, other people actually use the term as well. Do a google on some of these key words:
The FCC has recently opened a semilicensed band in the 3.65GHz to 3.7GHz range..... as 1800/1900MHz bands, and the 4.9GHz band for broadband public safety.
I think one of the real benefits of WiMax will be that it will use a semi-licensed spectrum, which should really help with the interference issues being experienced with other wireless equipment in the unlicensed bands.
But if I wanted to be in any one part of the WiMax supply chain, it would be either a sales person at one of the big vendors supplying it...or the person that owned a company that sold the equipment. Or in other words, like in much of the wireless industry, the real winners will be the people selling the equipment.
We are looking into it right now, and one site can easily cost 80,000.00 dollars. With that breaking down to a 48,000.00 Alvarion base radio, coax, antennas, tower rent, etc.
Actually, RouterOS is 802.11 a/b/g compliant. I've seen a Mikrotik AP have Deliberant and Ubiquity CPE clients, and have connected to an AP with my laptop. If you want them to only communicate between routerboards, you can use nstream, which is a proprietary protocol (or you could use something like a 3.6, 4.9, 900 Mhz radio card).
I've also seen a Mikrotik board in 5.8 that kept dropping connection every 30 - 45 seconds or so. The reason? An 802.11a printer was attempting to connect to it...repeatedly. Turn off "default authenticate" and make an access list and it will solve this problem.
Get two Netgear WG602 v2 routers. Other models may work, but this is the exact model in use, so I know it works well. Take two and put them inside of some Rootenna outdoor enclosures. These routers will configure as a transparent bridge. We have two that are used as a backhaul between two hotels, and they have worked for several years without hardly a single glitch.
Also, I have no idea how well they hold up, but look at the Ubiquity Nanostations. We have some deployed and they seem to work well, but we haven't used them long enough for me to get a good feel for them. I do know the price is right, as the retail price is supposed to be around 80.00 per unit. They should be able to do a wireless bridge with no problems, and have connectors for external antennas.
I'm just about to the point where I hate wireless, but for a non-commercial shot like this, mikrotik should work well. You could get into it for 300.00 - 600.00 for a couple of units configured as a wireless bridge.
I recommend using Ubiquity sR2 or SR5 mini-pci cards...and ground everything especially well.
Mikrotik boards run Linux and are extremely roboust and feature rich. But you can follow this wiki and have a transparent bridge running in no time flat:
We use mikrotik a lot in a wireless WISP situation. If someone thinks they are going to throw a bunch of this stuff hundreds of feet in the air and make a lot of money doing wireless Internet, they are in for a wild ride...that ends somewhere between hairloss and a straight jacket...but I do something almost exactly like what you are wanting to do with your father using Mikrotik, and it has worked very well and wasn't super expensive.
Again, ground everything as best you can, and use directional, not omni antennas (cheap omni antennas often have grounding issues than can pop the radio card really easy).
Sell xboxes at a loss, pay people to search; the next thing you know, they will be paying vendors to put a stripped down version of XP onto mini-notebooks. In Google's case, they could afford to fork over some money to searchers, too. But Linux couldn't compete if it had to pay the vendors. So that's how MS competes with free and/or better stuff, buy them off.
I agree 100%. I figure the local computer guy would lose about 60% of his income if everyone switched to Linux, because 60% of his income comes from removing viruses at $50.00 a pop, as well as other windows bugs.
With Linux, a person could make some money installing drivers, software, printers, etc. for people.
But note the difference. One person is making money fixing crap software, and the other person is making money increasing the functionality of the system.
In a small business wanting to not devote a lot of time to this issue, we are using nospamtoday. There isn't anything perfect, and it isn't either, but it does a good job, is fairly priced, and is server side. Basically it is a front-end for spamassassin, with some RBLs and other measures used as well. Yeah, you could install spamassassin for free, but this gives you an easy installer and at least someone to e-mail if you have issues. And it is a one time fee, as there are no monthly or yearly subscription fees!
If our only hope is wireless mesh, then we have had it. Mesh is one of those really cool, but over-hyped words...and I shudder every time I hear it. Mesh on a large scale like that would be one huge cluster...and if by cluster you mean cluster $%^&, then yes, that would describe what would happen perfectly.
Just set up a limit to how many times someone can report something in a given amount of time. That way it would limit false positives. Also, if multiple people give a report, mod that alert up, as it is more likely to be a true report.
But I posted on about an almost identical system, which I called "copwatch" here on Slashdot, about a year ago...and it was something I 100% thought out on my own. Pretty cool someone did it.
Basically, it uses the same principle, but every time you see a traffic cop, you press a button somewhere in your car. Your car, with the use of a GPS, then beacons the location of the police car. Other cars then repeat the beacon, which does have a TTL value on it as well.
To prevent false positives, there is a limit to how many reports someone could generate in a set time period, and multiple reports in the same area could mod the threat up.
This would all be happening pretty transparently to everyone, unless they were within a set distance of an active alert, at which point they would be alerted to the danger.
Slashdot Mirror
Back in the day, I would have been happy with a 2-node cluster in the backseat of my Fiero.
Jokes aside, I did have a Fiero and it was a two-seater like a 'vette. There was no backseat.
Remember, current bands where "anything goes" aren't quite like that: they have strict power limits,
And I suppose it never occurred to you that the FCC could limit power here in the same way as 2.4?
If you do some research, the FCC was VERY close to legalizing low power FM stations, but then the measure just quietly died.
You can put on a tin foil hat here, but I would bet good money some corporations slipped some money under the table to the right person, and some low-end competition was killed.
So see, it is possible to kill competition without even having a transmitter.
I agree, but there also needs to be some part of the spectrum allocated to "anything goes."
It is possible to have both. 2.4 has licensed only bands on both sides of it.
I can't speak for everyone, but I think a lot of low power FM & TV stations would be great. At least much better than having a choice of one or two Clearchannel stations.
Notice that Apple filed approx a day after the WoW copyright decision. If there was some doubt on Psystar beating Apple on the validity of of the EULA...it is pretty safe to say that Psystar is about to get slapped down.
Never! Never William Shatner, Never.
There, fixed that for you.
What I think would be smart is if they added a really good printed manual and/or Ubuntu book with it. I read through the description and couldn't find anything about extra material, but again, I think what they are doing is ok, but for a non-expert, a really nice install guide / intro to Ubuntu would make it look more tempting than say, just downloading an .iso file and burning your own disks.
If you are running Ubuntu 8.04 and Firefox 3, the following using "sudo apt-get install":
flashplugin-nonfree
gnash
gnash-common
mozilla-plugin-gnash
I had the same trouble on Firefox 3. It even hung on Slashdot about 50% of the time...and on Flash stuff left and right. Did the above and everything is really smooth now and the crashes are really far between.
It could be done... in a sense. If they used their new virtualization technology
I checked and http://win4win.com/ has already been snagged. Someone at Virtual Bridges dropped the ball on that one.
transporter_ii
April 1, 2002
"Microsoft to base next generation OS on OpenBSD"
In a surprising development Microsoft stated today that it would
not be using the eight year old NT kernel in its next generation
operating system. The new system, to be called Windows BSD, will
be based around the freely available OpenBSD operating system.
Microsoft's Steve Ballmer had the following to say: "As part of our
new commitment to security, we are developing the next Windows
product based upon OpenBSD. We feel that OpenBSD's security record
fits well with our new proactive security model. Furthermore, we
fully approve of the BSD license and encourage developers continue
to write similarly-licensed code and avoid the infernal GNU GPL."
When asked whether the decision to base the new Windows operating
system on OpenBSD had anything to do with the success of Apple's
BSD-based OS X, Ballmer exclaimed "There's nothing those Mac people
can do that we can't do better. Microsoft has a long history with
Unix-like systems, dating back from our original development of
Xenix. We are dedicated to providing the Windows experience to
Unix on the desktop."
And it is not just the desktop that is the target of the new OS.
As servers have traditionally been Unix's strong point, Microsoft
sees a bright future for Windows BSD, Server Edition. One of the
first tests of Windows BSD Server will be running on Microsoft's
Hotmail servers, a trial by fire that always left Windows NT a bit
scorched. Said de Raadt "We are confident that Windows BSD can
more than hold its own in the server arena. Indeed, we expect
it to become the benchmark against which all others are judged."
OpenBSD founder and project lead The de Raadt will be relocating
from Calgary, Canada to Redmond, Washington to oversee the new
endeavor. When asked if he felt he was selling out, de Raadt replied
with characterist aplomb "I've dedicated my life to free software,
it's about time I got something in return." Other OpenBSD developers
will likely be moving to Microsoft's Redmond campus soon. Joining
de Raadt in Redmond is OpenBSD packet filter designer Daniel
Hartmeier. Hartmeier has already started work on a new firewall
codenamed "Microsoft Ward." Said Hartmeier, "I had some trouble
getting to the states, what with the airline problems we've been
having in Switzerland, but I'm looking forward to working with my
development team on the new firewall."
When confronted with the apparent inconsistency of developing a
Unix-based system while at the same time sponsoring a wave of
anti-Unix marketing, Chairman Bill Gates replied "That campaign is
targeted towards those other, incompatible versions of Unix. It
has no bearing whatsoever on Windows BSD."
One potential problem with Microsoft's plans were the revelation
that the BSD trademark is currently owned by embedded operating
systems specialist WindRiver systems. According to Microsoft
chairman Bill Gates, "WindRiver will surrender the BSD trademark
to us or we will bury them!"
During the announcement of Windows BSD at a PR blitzkrieg, Ballmer,
Gates and de Raadt jumped around shouting "Whoo! Whoo! Whoo! Come
on, get up, get up... Give it up for BSD!". A beta version of
Windows BSD, codenamed `Brobdingnag', will be available to MSDN
subscribers in 6 month's time.
However, not everyone was happy with the news of OpenBSD's commercial
success. A group of disgruntled OpenBSD developers who were not
offered jobs at Microsoft have created a competitor to OpenBSD.
Unlike OpenBSD, this operating system will be available under the
GNU GPL, effectively preventing Microsoft from using their code.
The new project, called GNU/BSD, is headed by French former OpenBSD
developers Dr. Marc Espie and Miod Vallat. In a joint statement,
Espie and Vallat stated "We feel it is grossly unfair to the European
developers of OpenBSD that all the attention sh
They knew they couldn't just outlaw alcohol because they didn't have the authority to, so they made a constitutional amendment to do it. Back then, they understood how the constitution worked.
Now, the Supreme Court *almost* put itself in a position to decide if the Constitution was "constitutional" or not. What the heck would have happened if the Constitution was not "constitutional," I'm afraid to know. In fact, that is pretty darn scary.
Now we might even debate if an inalienable right cold be taken away by a Constitutional amendment, but it is, once again, pretty darn scary that everyone just thought they could blatantly ignore the Constitution and get away with it.
Did a little research and did fine a company in Sweden that offered it:
http://www.boingboing.net/2006/06/28/p2p-insurer-will-pay.html
Don't know how valid that is, but it would also work if a large percentage of downloaders kicked just a few bucks into a slush fund to help people fight if sued.
The above article stated the odds of getting sued at: 1:1840
So if Ron Paul released a Halloween mask, he would be our next president?
Also, I could see a crap storm happen with an Obama Halloween mask. Seriously, that could go in so many directions of political correctness that it makes my head hurt.
Actually, it is kind of a semi-licensed process, because if you are the first one in the area on this frequency, you kind of get it.
.... as 1800/1900MHz bands, and the 4.9GHz band for broadband public safety.
The Alvarian sales person we talked to said there is basically a "land grab" going on at the moment, as people try to put up systems to be the first one in a certain area.
Also, the public safety 4.9 band is somewhat of a semi-licensed band. It works similar, because you just have to apply for a license and you get one if you qualify. However, it is still a quirky process, and you could still end up with another public safety entity interfering with you, because it isn't a licensed channel in the normal sense that we have always thought of "licensed" channels.
That's why *I* came up with the term semi-licensed.
However, other people actually use the term as well. Do a google on some of these key words:
The FCC has recently opened a semilicensed band in the 3.65GHz to 3.7GHz range.
I think one of the real benefits of WiMax will be that it will use a semi-licensed spectrum, which should really help with the interference issues being experienced with other wireless equipment in the unlicensed bands.
But if I wanted to be in any one part of the WiMax supply chain, it would be either a sales person at one of the big vendors supplying it...or the person that owned a company that sold the equipment. Or in other words, like in much of the wireless industry, the real winners will be the people selling the equipment.
We are looking into it right now, and one site can easily cost 80,000.00 dollars. With that breaking down to a 48,000.00 Alvarion base radio, coax, antennas, tower rent, etc.
Transporter_ii
Was doing a little research and found a lot of people claiming Clearwire wasn't fully WiMax. For instance, here is a recent comment I just found:
I have seen this question asked on Slashdot before, but it went unanswered at the time.
transporter_ii
You must be new here.
Actually, RouterOS is 802.11 a/b/g compliant. I've seen a Mikrotik AP have Deliberant and Ubiquity CPE clients, and have connected to an AP with my laptop. If you want them to only communicate between routerboards, you can use nstream, which is a proprietary protocol (or you could use something like a 3.6, 4.9, 900 Mhz radio card).
I've also seen a Mikrotik board in 5.8 that kept dropping connection every 30 - 45 seconds or so. The reason? An 802.11a printer was attempting to connect to it...repeatedly. Turn off "default authenticate" and make an access list and it will solve this problem.
transporter_ii
Get two Netgear WG602 v2 routers. Other models may work, but this is the exact model in use, so I know it works well. Take two and put them inside of some Rootenna outdoor enclosures. These routers will configure as a transparent bridge. We have two that are used as a backhaul between two hotels, and they have worked for several years without hardly a single glitch.
Also, I have no idea how well they hold up, but look at the Ubiquity Nanostations. We have some deployed and they seem to work well, but we haven't used them long enough for me to get a good feel for them. I do know the price is right, as the retail price is supposed to be around 80.00 per unit. They should be able to do a wireless bridge with no problems, and have connectors for external antennas.
Transporter_ii
I'm just about to the point where I hate wireless, but for a non-commercial shot like this, mikrotik should work well. You could get into it for 300.00 - 600.00 for a couple of units configured as a wireless bridge.
I recommend using Ubiquity sR2 or SR5 mini-pci cards...and ground everything especially well.
Mikrotik boards run Linux and are extremely roboust and feature rich. But you can follow this wiki and have a transparent bridge running in no time flat:
http://wiki.mikrotik.com/wiki/Transparently_Bridge_two_Networks
We use mikrotik a lot in a wireless WISP situation. If someone thinks they are going to throw a bunch of this stuff hundreds of feet in the air and make a lot of money doing wireless Internet, they are in for a wild ride...that ends somewhere between hairloss and a straight jacket...but I do something almost exactly like what you are wanting to do with your father using Mikrotik, and it has worked very well and wasn't super expensive.
Again, ground everything as best you can, and use directional, not omni antennas (cheap omni antennas often have grounding issues than can pop the radio card really easy).
See also: wisp-router.com
Transporter_ii
Sell xboxes at a loss, pay people to search; the next thing you know, they will be paying vendors to put a stripped down version of XP onto mini-notebooks. In Google's case, they could afford to fork over some money to searchers, too. But Linux couldn't compete if it had to pay the vendors. So that's how MS competes with free and/or better stuff, buy them off.
I agree 100%. I figure the local computer guy would lose about 60% of his income if everyone switched to Linux, because 60% of his income comes from removing viruses at $50.00 a pop, as well as other windows bugs.
With Linux, a person could make some money installing drivers, software, printers, etc. for people.
But note the difference. One person is making money fixing crap software, and the other person is making money increasing the functionality of the system.
transporter_ii
In a small business wanting to not devote a lot of time to this issue, we are using nospamtoday. There isn't anything perfect, and it isn't either, but it does a good job, is fairly priced, and is server side. Basically it is a front-end for spamassassin, with some RBLs and other measures used as well. Yeah, you could install spamassassin for free, but this gives you an easy installer and at least someone to e-mail if you have issues. And it is a one time fee, as there are no monthly or yearly subscription fees!
If our only hope is wireless mesh, then we have had it. Mesh is one of those really cool, but over-hyped words...and I shudder every time I hear it. Mesh on a large scale like that would be one huge cluster...and if by cluster you mean cluster $%^&, then yes, that would describe what would happen perfectly.
Transporter_ii
Just set up a limit to how many times someone can report something in a given amount of time. That way it would limit false positives. Also, if multiple people give a report, mod that alert up, as it is more likely to be a true report.
But I posted on about an almost identical system, which I called "copwatch" here on Slashdot, about a year ago...and it was something I 100% thought out on my own. Pretty cool someone did it.
http://slashdot.org/comments.pl?sid=227045&cid=18394299
March 18 2007
Basically, it uses the same principle, but every time you see a traffic cop, you press a button somewhere in your car. Your car, with the use of a GPS, then beacons the location of the police car. Other cars then repeat the beacon, which does have a TTL value on it as well.
To prevent false positives, there is a limit to how many reports someone could generate in a set time period, and multiple reports in the same area could mod the threat up.
This would all be happening pretty transparently to everyone, unless they were within a set distance of an active alert, at which point they would be alerted to the danger.