Comments on news posted 2013-02-04 10:41:11: The Washington Post's Cecilia Kang is exciting numerous people this morning by noting the FCC is pushing for a new, free "Super Wi-Fi" initiative that would deploy wireless service "so powerful and broad in reach that consumers could use them to make.. ..
Don't talk about what you don't know, it'll severely interfere with wireless microphone systems. Wireless mic users just had to move off the LTE bands a few years ago, don't force a move into an even narrower space again already at costs of approx $1000/ch - most of them borne by non-profits (community theatres, churches, etc).
Actually, I did know about that. (I'm sure the issue will show up in some astroturf organization report any day now.) -- "Face piles of trials with smiles; it riles them to believe that you perceive the web they weave."
So you're okay with community theatres, churches, nightclubs, concert venues, etc being forced to spend thousands of dollars each on new equipment because they're being trampled on by ISPs and cell phone providers when they were there first?
The spectrum is owned by the people of the United States; and if those people ever get lucky enough to actually use that spectrum in a meaningful way that benefits them and saves them money... then, yeah, I'm OK with that. "The needs of the many outweigh the needs of the few" (relatively speaking).
However, feel free to contact your Representative and Senators in Congress (who are the persons who might actually be able to do something about it to your liking). Frankly, though, I'm dubious about any need for you to worry about the situation any time soon. -- "Face piles of trials with smiles; it riles them to believe that you perceive the web they weave."
So you never go to concerts? You never rock out at clubs? You never go to community theatre or high school theatre performances?
Those are meaningful uses of the spectrum that benefit the people of the United States.
There *are* alternatives to white space microphones, but they are expensive, offer no real benefit, and make the use of 2.4GHz Wi-Fi in an area impractical (which doesn't just harm public Wi-Fi but also other theatre applications).
You can take it to the bank. This will never become a true reality. The big providers will spend millions to make sure it doesn't happen and protect their bottom line. Washington whores A.K.A. the 545 entrusted with the dominion of the US)have their hands out and their wallets open to collect their bribes!
White Spaces: the wireless spectrum that can be used without causing harmful interference to primary users of a band of spectrum.. (think of lawyers drawing circles on maps that define keep-out distances in hope of preventing interference) Note: the swiss cheese around all the holes left (ie the "white spaces" between & around said circles) are the spectrum white space.. Go to WhiteSpaceAlliance.org for more info.. DL
of when, the corrupt Mayor Boss Tweed killed any thoughts on having the new york city subway built, accept it is the corporations & the shills in congress, that are the Boss Tweeds of our day. I wish more people in this country would realize these facts. This way of doing business should be totally unacceptable. Corporations should not be allowed to kill competing technologies because, they themselves cannot not compete, period. Because just as sure as there "will be another ice age" innovations will move forward.
I don't believe the government should be so powerful that they can stop this kind of thing. Remove the snakes, and then all we need to deal with are alligators. They're a lot easier to see and stop than the snakes.
I am against this for the sole reason that it interferes!
I remember the article on broadband reports several years ago that showed that tests concluded that cable tv systems were having interference problems with white space devices. Also who knows these devices could interfere with ajacent channel assignments and is no use in markets like LA, Dallas, Philly, NYC, Chicago, San Francisco, Houston, etc. that have a ton of low power channels that are using almost all of the spectrum from 2-51 that is not on ajacent channels from neighboring markets. Also how would this survive the planned reduction of OTA TV allotments from 2-51 to 2-31 I think white space is dead there as we will have channels fighting for 2-31 yet alone have any open space for white space channel devices we would be better served if the FCC auctioned a block of spectrum to companies that would use it as a WISP than to give it to white space.
If that were true it would already be deployed. Wake up.
It is true, and I would have deployed one in my rural ISP's service area 5 years ago if they would have gotten their act together, gotten the rules out right away, set the approval standards, and started actually approving devices. Instead, they have made about 1 year worth of progress in the last decade, and all the companies who WANT to offer broadband to the rural areas that are too expensive to wire are stuck with nothing that really works well for a last mile full of forest.
I can't believe you suckers keep falling for this. It's never happening. AT&T and Verizon are busily lobbying to have the UHF TV spectrum slashed in half again and when the dust settles and it's repacked--again--you won't be able to slide a splinter between stations, let alone "White Space" broadband.
Give up...the corporations have won and they are coming for your wallet.
Anything the government supplies it can take away, limit, monitor, or apply conditions to receive. We all see what wonderful strides the government has made with Amtrak. You want to really "F" up the internet, let the government take it over.