From: Samantha Atkins (samantha@objectent.com)
Date: Thu Aug 01 2002 - 15:50:55 MDT
Brian D Williams wrote:
>>From: Charles Hixson <charleshixsn@earthlink.net>
>>
>
>>Sorry, spectrum is limited, and spread spectrum isn't less
>>spectrum consuming, it's more. It just lets you dodge whatever
>>frequency is in use at any moment. So high-speed wireless needs
>>to be used for short distance transmissions only. (Or for
>>directional transmissions, if the frequency is high enough, as in
>>orbital communications. But you've got to use directional
>>antennas, and you still need to limit the power.
>>Means the greater the distance, the tighter a beam you need.)
>>
>
> I've long been a convert to the idea of the Negroponte switch, the
> spectrum is far to valuable to use as a broadcast medium, which is
> why I agree it will eventually be for interactive use only.
>
> The fiber in your house will carry far more channels then you'll
> ever need.
>
Who wants to be tethered to a bloody house? Cyborgs require
mobile internet connectivity. If we have enough spectrum for
cell phones (a subset of high-speed mobile connectivity) for
everyone and for plans to greatly upgrade their data speeds then
we have enough bandwidth to form a wireless network across the
country.
I don't need "channels". I need high-speed bi-directional
always available mobile connectivity to the full NET with no bs
chopping it into little over-priced pieces or limiting whether I
can run servers and such.
- samantha
This archive was generated by hypermail 2.1.5 : Sat Nov 02 2002 - 09:15:50 MST