  Zonerider Zonerider Premium join:2004-12-01 united kingd 3 edits | possibly for fixed wireless But if used for mobile it may well cause interference. | |
|
 |
  inteller Sociopaths always win.
join:2003-12-08 Tulsa, OK | oh you just wanted an excuse to show dolly's big boobs. | |
|
 |  nasadude
join:2001-10-05 Rockville, MD | Re: oh you just wanted an excuse and we thank you for that. | |
|
 |  |
 |  |   Transmaster Don't Blame Me I Voted For Bill and Opus
join:2001-06-20 Cheyenne, WY | Re: oh you just wanted an excuse You don't suppose Dolly objects to the Broad in Broadband.  | |
|
 nasadude
join:2001-10-05 Rockville, MD | support from scofflaws? it's funny how the NAB is enlisting the support of all the groups that illegally use unlicensed wireless mics.
of course the people using wireless mics don't pose a threat to NAB's business like widespread, affordable broadband would. | |
|
 |  |
 |  |   ropeguru Premium join:2001-01-25 Bridgeport, WV clubs:
·VOIPo
| Re: support from scofflaws? said by bender :said by nasadude :...widespread, affordable broadband... what? you have to be kidding... Not at all... Once Obama is elected, taxes will go up so he can redistribute wealth bring broadband to all. | |
|
 |  |  |  |
 |  |  |  |   GOLFnSUN Enjoy the sun Premium join:2002-03-03 Avalon, NJ
·Sprint Mobile Broa..
·Comcast
| Re: support from scofflaws? said by bender :considering that I don't pay income taxes(disabled vet pulling disability while I go to school on the post 9/11 GI bill » en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Post-9/11_···_of_2008) i dont give a rats ass about raising taxes. so if thats what it takes to get more competition in the broadband markets then by all means bring it on! You might someday if you ever end up working and paying taxes. -- My BLOG .. .. Internet News .. .. My Web Page Ask yourself one question: 'Do I feel lucky?' Well, do ya punk? | |
|
 |  |  |  |  callihn
join:2008-10-24
1 edit | said by bender :considering that I don't pay income taxes(disabled vet pulling disability while I go to school on the post 9/11 GI bill » en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Post-9/11_···_of_2008) i dont give a rats ass about raising taxes. so if thats what it takes to get more competition in the broadband markets then by all means bring it on! Interesting, I was thinking that instead of raising taxes we could just make some of these sorry, so called disabled people and some of these lazy adults hiding in school ( that don't know how to use apostrophes ) get out and go to work and contribute to society, instead of just sitting around sucking it dry, then we wouldn't have to ever raise taxes. Since I'm neither I think that would be a grand solution! | |
|
 |  |  |  |  |  fiberguy My views are my own. Premium join:2005-05-20
| Re: support from scofflaws? Watch what you say about "so called" disabled people especially in responding to a post from a self described disabled vet. For what ever reason he's a DV, they pay a lot more than any tax can do by serving in the military.. which by the way, has protected your rights to spout off like an ass as you did. Served in the military have you? (Please don't answer yes.. I already know the answer because you wouldn't have posted such trash even though I DO agree on you with point about lazy adults.)
And mods, trust me, I'm being VERY nice on this one and biting my tongue as a Iraq War 1 vet. | |
|
 |  |  |  |  |  |   bender Bite my shiny metal ass Premium join:2005-03-19 Evanston, IL clubs: | Re: support from scofflaws? thanks for the post brother. | |
|
 |  |  |  |  |  |
 |  |  |  |  |
 |  |  |   NetAdmin CCNA
join:2008-05-22
2 edits | said by ropeguru :Not at all... Once Obama is elected, taxes will go up so he can redistribute wealth bring broadband to all. At least one of the candidates is being somewhat honest about the fact that his programs cost money and that to pay for them, he will have to raise taxes on the people who dodge most of their taxes anyway. McCain will just continue the last eight years of driving the government further into debt, as evidenced by the way he talks about his budget.
Just a side note, both of the candidates suck, so don't mistake me for Obama supporter. -- --- Drilling for more oil is akin to giving a methhead the keys to the meth lab. | |
|
 |  |  |  |   ropeguru Premium join:2001-01-25 Bridgeport, WV clubs:
·VOIPo
1 edit | Re: support from scofflaws? said by NetAdmin :said by ropeguru :Not at all... Once Obama is elected, taxes will go up so he can redistribute wealth bring broadband to all. At least one of the candidates is being somewhat honest about the fact that his programs cost money and that to pay for them, he will have to raise taxes on the people who dodge most of their taxes anyway. McCain will just continue the last eight years of driving the government further into debt, as evidenced by the way he talks about his budget. But the fact of the matter is that it will be raise don those that hire people to work for them. When this happens, it will just force more companies to downsize and move overseas which will kill the economy even more.
said by NetAdmin :Just a side note, both of the candidates suck, so don't mistake me for Obama supporter. Afraid I have to agree with you there. Can't we just vote none of the above and start over?  | |
|
 |  |  |  |  |   NetAdmin CCNA
join:2008-05-22
| Re: support from scofflaws? said by ropeguru :But the fact of the matter is that it will be raise don those that hire people to work for them. When this happens, it will just force more companies to downsize and move overseas which will kill the economy even more. I have heard that claim made many times - that raising the tax rates on the PERSONAL incomes of CEOs, other overpaid execs and people with high incomes would result force companies to downsize - but have yet to see anyone prove that higher tax rates on PERSONAL income and unemployment rates are linked. I would believe high corporate tax rates might affect employment numbers, but not taxes on personal income. -- --- Drilling for more oil is akin to giving a methhead the keys to the meth lab. | |
|
 |  |  |  |  |  |   ropeguru Premium join:2001-01-25 Bridgeport, WV clubs:
·VOIPo
1 edit | Re: support from scofflaws? said by NetAdmin :said by ropeguru :But the fact of the matter is that it will be raise don those that hire people to work for them. When this happens, it will just force more companies to downsize and move overseas which will kill the economy even more. I have heard that claim made many times - that raising the tax rates on the PERSONAL incomes of CEOs, other overpaid execs and people with high incomes would result force companies to downsize - but have yet to see anyone prove that higher tax rates on PERSONAL income and unemployment rates are linked. I would believe high corporate tax rates might affect employment numbers, but not taxes on personal income. I wasn't talking only about personal incomes. He stands to raise taxes and put other burdens directly on businesses too. That is where the issue will be in forcing them overseas. | |
|
 |  |  |  |  |  |  |   knightmb Everybody Lies
join:2003-12-01 Franklin, TN
·AT&T DSL Service
| Re: support from scofflaws? said by ropeguru :I wasn't talking only about personal incomes. He stands to raise taxes and put other burdens directly on businesses too. That is where the issue will be in forcing them overseas. Spin on words, you forgot that the raise on taxes for business can be offset by keeping jobs here, good health insurance for employees, and many other tax breaks/perks for the business that would be in the same tax plan, etc. All of which their Accountant/Tax CPA will know about and certainly use come tax time. You should really read in depth of what both candidates want to do because you are just taking one part "he's going to raise taxes" and applying the chicken little sky falling effect to it. -- Fight NebuAD and the like: Click Here to pollute their data | |
|
 |  |  |  |  |   funchords Hello Premium,MVM join:2001-03-11 Washington, DC | TOPIC: Dolly Parton Hates White Space Broadband | |
|
 |  |  |  chriskern Premium join:2007-10-19 Hudson, FL 1 edit | Want some cheese with that WHINE!!!!! | |
|
 |  |  |  clickie
join:2005-05-22 Monroe, MI
| As opposed to the system now of redistributing wealth from people yet unborn to people living now.
That's exactly why deficits matter.
You're naive if you think your taxes are not going up; there's trillions of dollars to be paid back. Where do you think the money is going to come from? You, that's who. They'll get it two ways by either taxing you directly, or inflating the money supply and stealth taxing you through inflation. | |
|
 |  |  |  |  chriskern Premium join:2007-10-19 Hudson, FL | Re: support from scofflaws? BINGO!!!!! Give that man a CIGAR!!!!! | |
|
 |  |  |   BF69
join:2004-07-28 Camden, TN
| said by ropeguru :said by bender :said by nasadude :...widespread, affordable broadband... what? you have to be kidding... Not at all... Once Obama is elected, taxes will go up so he can redistribute wealth bring broadband to all. Unlike McCain right? I mean in order to give people too "poor" to get their own health insurance a $5000 government check for health insurance he's going to tax the insurance premiums of those that currently get their insurance through their job. Not only is that redistributing wealth it's also a tax hike on WORKING Americans. But go ahead and bash Obama. | |
|
 |  |  |  |  |
 |  |  |  |  |   knightmb Everybody Lies
join:2003-12-01 Franklin, TN | Re: support from scofflaws? Me too with my Icon.  | |
|
 |  |  |  |  |   BF69
join:2004-07-28 Camden, TN
1 edit | said by ropeguru :said by BF69 :But go ahead and bash Obama. Thank you. I will exercise my First Amendment right. Your right to be ignorant of the facts. I'm not even an Obama supporter, but if you insist calling out Obama you better look at YOUR candidate because he isn't any different despite WTF he says. George Bush Sr said in 1988 "read my lips, no new taxes" them promptly raised them anyways. So sorry if I take McCain's BS with a grain of salt. | |
|
 |  |  |  |  |  |   ropeguru Premium join:2001-01-25 Bridgeport, WV clubs:
·VOIPo
| Re: support from scofflaws? said by BF69 :said by ropeguru :said by BF69 :But go ahead and bash Obama. Thank you. I will exercise my First Amendment right. Your right to be ignorant of the facts. I'm not even an Obama supporter, but if you insist calling out Obama you better look at YOUR candidate because he isn't any different despite WTF he says. George Bush Sr said in 1988 "read my lips, no new taxes" them promptly raised them anyways. So sorry if I take McCain's BS with a grain of salt. That is why Obama is letting all the current tax cuts Bush put in place expire. So I guess some are right as he will not be raising taxes. Another spin on words WhooHoo!!! | |
|
 |  |  |   knightmb Everybody Lies
join:2003-12-01 Franklin, TN
·AT&T DSL Service
| said by ropeguru :said by bender :said by nasadude :...widespread, affordable broadband... what? you have to be kidding... Not at all... Once Obama is elected, taxes will go up so he can redistribute wealth bring broadband to all. Ha, taken right from the Republican spin machine, well copied/pasted 
Republican tax plan would make more sense if they also included a top level tax CPA for free that would do your taxes every year. Somehow I don't think top companies or private business that make enough to be affected are really worried about the tax increase that much.  -- Fight NebuAD and the like: Click Here to pollute their data | |
|
 |  |  |  |   BF69
join:2004-07-28 Camden, TN
| Re: support from scofflaws? said by knightmb :Ha, taken right from the Republican spin machine, well copied/pasted  Republican tax plan would make more sense if they also included a top level tax CPA for free that would do your taxes every year. Somehow I don't think top companies or private business that make enough to be affected are really worried about the tax increase that much. Obama = tax and spend McCain = borrow from China with interest and spend. | |
|
 |  |  nasadude
join:2001-10-05 Rockville, MD
·Comcast
| said by bender :said by nasadude :...widespread, affordable broadband... what? you have to be kidding... naw, just dreaming. | |
|
 |  clickie
join:2005-05-22 Monroe, MI | They are not illegal. These are Part-15 devices and require no licensing. | |
|
 |  |  |
 |  |  |
 |   MrMoody Carbon Based Lifeform
join:2002-09-03 Smithfield, NC
·Embarq
·Skype
·magicjack.com
| said by nasadude :of course the people using wireless mics don't pose a threat to NAB's business like widespread, affordable broadband would. How does broadband compete with the NAB members' FREE, AD-SUPPORTED service? They are genuinely concerned with interference and loss of spectrum, and with good reason.
As far as widespread, affordable broadband goes, this will only be it if you define broadband as wireless dialup. At best it will be a much larger area version of an open WiFi point on a university campus. It will have thousands of users crowded onto a few dozen Mb of available bandwidth. At worst, it will be another overcrowded WiFi with more range (bad), with everyone using it to try to create private links to their office, their buddy's house, etc.
And if the cheap devices don't interfere right out of the box (likely), hackers will see to it that they do by using high-gain antennas, boosting power and forcing operation on interfering channels.
WiMAX is far better, capable of serving broadband to all users and can serve the same purpose WSDs supposedly will.
WSDs have too much likelihood of causing unsolvable problems; we CANNOT allow them. -- "It is absurd to say that our country can issue $30 million in bonds and not $30 million in currency. Both are promises to pay, but one promise fattens the usurers and the other helps the people."-Thomas Edison | |
|
 |  |   funchords Hello Premium,MVM join:2001-03-11 Washington, DC
·Verizon Online DSL
·Skype
| Re: support from scofflaws? said by MrMoody :said by nasadude :of course the people using wireless mics don't pose a threat to NAB's business like widespread, affordable broadband would. How does broadband compete with the NAB members' FREE, AD-SUPPORTED service? If you don't think that the Internet competes with broadcast TV for time and attention, then you're starting the game hopelessly lost.
said by MrMoody :They are genuinely concerned with interference and loss of spectrum, and with good reason. ?
said by MrMoody :As far as widespread, affordable broadband goes, this will only be it if you define broadband as wireless dialup. At best it will be a much larger area version of an open WiFi point on a university campus. It will have thousands of users crowded onto a few dozen Mb of available bandwidth. At worst, it will be another overcrowded WiFi with more range (bad), with everyone using it to try to create private links to their office, their buddy's house, etc. At worst. At best it works great!
said by MrMoody :And if the cheap devices don't interfere right out of the box (likely), hackers will see to it that they do by using high-gain antennas, boosting power and forcing operation on interfering channels. I can't say this won't happen sometimes, but by and large people will buy a cheap device and it will either work or not work. Only a teenie-tiny portion have the knowledge or desire to spend significant time and effort on it.
said by MrMoody :WiMAX is far better, capable of serving broadband to all users and can serve the same purpose WSDs supposedly will. This is not a choice between WiMAX and WSD.
said by MrMoody : WSDs have too much likelihood of causing unsolvable problems; we CANNOT allow them. Sure we can. We allowed cordless phones, and they generally worked. They even worked in several different modes. They even worked even though hackers could modify them.
You're spreading worry. -- Robb Topolski -= funchords.com =- Hillsboro, Oregon More features, more fun, Join BroadbandReports.com, it's free...
| |
|
 |  |  |   MrMoody Carbon Based Lifeform
join:2002-09-03 Smithfield, NC
·Embarq
·Skype
·magicjack.com
| Re: support from scofflaws? said by funchords :If you don't think that the Internet competes with broadcast TV for time and attention, then you're starting the game hopelessly lost. You can't seriously think that a new wireless internet is going to take many eyes away from broadcast that aren't already on the internet some other way.
At worst. At best it works great! There's no way it CAN "work great," it's physically impossible. It's a poorly thought out model being rammed through by companies who think they can make a killing with wide-area hotspots (maybe) and PAY portable wireless service (definitely). It doesn't have enough bandwidth available to serve the area it would cover with any reasonable broadband.
I can't say this won't happen sometimes, but by and large people will buy a cheap device and it will either work or not work. Only a teenie-tiny portion have the knowledge or desire to spend significant time and effort on it. It only takes 1 guy in the right spot to cause a problem for someone else, a problem they shouldn't by all rights have to have, and with DTV won't even likely suspect the source of his trouble.
How many cantennas do you think are out there being used to steal WiFi? And they had to build that antenna, with WSD they will be able to walk into Radio Shack and buy a $40 yagi. It also only takes 1 hacker to hack the firmware and release it, then every pirate wannabe on the internet has it with NO effort.
This is not a choice between WiMAX and WSD. Says you. They both will provide the same service (or so the WIA claims: this is a lie of course), but WiMAX can do it much better without destroying free TV.
Sure we can. We allowed cordless phones, and they generally worked. They even worked in several different modes. They even worked even though hackers could modify them. Cordless phones are much harder to hack than a computer network device (hardware vs soft/firmware), they aren't operating in the TV bands and there's not much incentive for anyone to boost the signal. Apples to oranges. WiFi already runs in some of the cordless phone bands. WiFi is hacked routinely. Luckily (or rather due to existing rules putting them where they are in the spectrum), they don't cause problems with other services, only each other. -- "It is absurd to say that our country can issue $30 million in bonds and not $30 million in currency. Both are promises to pay, but one promise fattens the usurers and the other helps the people."-Thomas Edison | |
|
 |  |
 |   xyar Premium join:2001-06-21 Portland, OR
| Every professional wireless microphone system I've seen is at or below the FCC limit for unlicensed broadcasting, which in that case I think is 50 mW. They're completely legal unless someone has jacked up the output above the manufactured threshold. | |
|
 |  |  |
  jjoshua Premium join:2001-06-01 Scotch Plains, NJ | So if... If I say that I don't particularly care for Dolly Parton, does that make everything even. | |
|
 cornelius785
join:2006-10-26 Worcester, MA
| so apparently when money doesn't get the job done... just find the nearest sex toy (or celebrity, bonus if they are both) to seduce the politicians and other government officials to get them to vote the way you want? it is actually pretty scary how much extensive a celebrities influence can be. is a wrestler qualified to be a politician? how about a former actor/body builder? | |
|
 |  nasadude
join:2001-10-05 Rockville, MD | Re: so apparently when money doesn't get the job done... and if that doesn't work, the next step is to say white spaces broadband will spread child pornography - that should stop WSD in it's tracks  | |
|
  Lortab jones
@verizon.net | Mic Douglas Tell me more of these unlicensed wireless mics. I am unaware of the issue, but I always enjoy hearing of fresh contention. | |
|
  NetAdmin CCNA
join:2008-05-22
| Nice choice of spokesperson I have to say, choosing Dolly Parton to talk about whitespace broadband is like picking Brittany Spears to warn people about the "dangers" of the LHC. Neither of them know anything about either issue, but of course clueless people everyone are going to take them seriously because they are famous. -- --- Drilling for more oil is akin to giving a methhead the keys to the meth lab. | |
|
 |   DavePR
join:2008-06-04 | Re: Nice choice of spokesperson Why do you assume Dolly Parton is stupid? She seems to have done quite well for herself. | |
|
 |  |   NetAdmin CCNA
join:2008-05-22
| Re: Nice choice of spokesperson said by DavePR :Why do you assume Dolly Parton is stupid? She seems to have done quite well for herself. Money and success does not always equal intelligence, as demonstrated by Britney Spears, Lindsay Lohan, Paris Hilton, Michael Jackson... The list goes on. There are plenty of clueless people out there with money and/or fame. But that is neither here nor there, as that was not my point.
My point is that Dolly Parton lacks the qualifications to make a sound argument for or against White Space Devices. Her opinion on the issue is worth about as much as the average Joe's opinion on the issue. And her statements should have NO bearing on policy decisions made at the FCC. It breaks down to her using her position as a public figure to expound on something that she doesn't have the qualifications to be talking about. -- --- Drilling for more oil is akin to giving a methhead the keys to the meth lab. | |
|
 |  |  |   DavePR
join:2008-06-04
·DSL EXTREME
| Re: Nice choice of spokesperson So you equate "doing well" with making beaucoups bucks?
I meant that she has had a long career as an artist, composer, actor, producer and philanthropist; and just maybe along the way she's used one or two wireless mics.
Look at Joe Walsh, the consumate burnout, who in real life has an Amateur Extra, the highest FCC ham radio license possible.
»wireless2.fcc.gov/UlsApp/UlsSear···y=893189 | |
|
 |  |  |  |   NetAdmin CCNA
join:2008-05-22
| Re: Nice choice of spokesperson said by DavePR :So you equate "doing well" with making beaucoups bucks? Most people equate "doing well" with being financially well off. -- --- Drilling for more oil is akin to giving a methhead the keys to the meth lab. | |
|
 VariableARK
join:2003-03-17 USA | Competition is Dead The only people who are going to be able to afford to a big wireless role out like this are going to be the big guys anyways. This isn't going to increase competition at all just give ATT and the like another avenue to deliver service. | |
|
 |
 |   MrMoody Carbon Based Lifeform
join:2002-09-03 Smithfield, NC | Re: that's not a picture of Dolly LOL, good spot. | |
|
 |
 Sammer
join:2005-12-22 Canonsburg, PA
3 edits | Untrue Statement by WSD engineers. "While most engineers we've spoken to in the industry do admit that White Space will be tricky to implement (the initial low power of devices in particular may hamper usefulness) most agree that after half a decade of debating the idea that it's time to at least give it a shot." These are not low power devices in relation to Wi-Fi. Even 40 milliwatts at TV frequencies will have considerably more range than Wi-Fi. For their claimed intended purpose 10 milliwatts on adjacent channels and 50 milliwatts on non-adjacent channels for unlicensed mobile white space devices would probably be adequate and would certainly reduce any unintentional interference. Some of the WSD proponents have made it very clear they want all of TV channels 21-36,38-51 eventually. They won't say this but the way to accomplish that is to make sure the devices have enough power to interfere. Why is there such an insistence on such an aggressive start to WSDs? It will be impossible to get rid of any such devices that interfere once they're out there in numbers but it will always be possible to increase the power of future devices if the technology to diminish interference improves. | |
|
  DavePR
join:2008-06-04
·DSL EXTREME
| White Space Devices won't work In big cities there are too many TV stations to be able to find interference-free spectrum. In rural areas they would cause way too much interference to weak TV signals from the big cities. Bill Gates and Google will have to go elsewhere besides UHF 470-698 mHz. I suggest they try 54-72, 72-88 MHz. This propagates better than UHF anyway. | |
|
 |  |
 |  philwells
join:2004-02-03 San Diego, CA
| said by DavePR : Bill Gates and Google will have to go elsewhere besides UHF 470-698 mHz. I suggest they try 54-72, 72-88 MHz. This propagates better than UHF anyway. I don't know about you but I wouldn't WANT it to propagate. I'd want it to be line-of-site. Like cellular, low-power TV, etc, it should cover a relatively small geographic area (whether it's WSD or WiMAX or WiFi or whatever). In that case, the frequency range used is pretty much moot. What's more, the lower frequencies are more susceptible to seasonal interference due to ducting and sporadic E-layer reflection (ask the CHP and other State Police depts which use frequencies below 50mc).
The higher the frequency, the easier it is to control the radiation and get "gain", shielding, and directivity, from a small antenna, and the less likely it is that a WS ISP in LA will get useless, wasteful, interference from a co- or adjacent-channel ISP in San Diego.
I don't know enough about these various systems from a technical standpoint to have an opinion, so I'm reading all the comments in this thread to learn a little. I do believe that we will need more Internet access as time goes on and I think that this will be necessary for a society that wishes to inform itself, enrich itself (I mean in $, not in poetry), and entertain itself. If the spectra left fallow by the Feb 2009 switch to DTV doesn't already have an anointed occupant(s), then why shouldn't engineers be experimenting with methods of connecting people's homes and businesses using it? If it IS already spoken for, then maybe those folks will, in turn, be abandoning other bands that can be used. All I can say for sure is that, when five-9's are desired, spectra below a couple hundred megahertz - minimum - are not ideal. They're fine for voice, even TV to some degree, but not, I don't think, for data (even with good error correction).
Thanks for the soapbox. I'll go back to absorbing your comments. -- Phil Wells, AF6AV San Diego, US | |
|
 |  |   DavePR
join:2008-06-04 | Re: White Space Devices won't work At least there is error correction. Digital TV has no handshake; no way to request a resend of broken packets.
The FCC has already severely diminished AM and FM coverage areas; they are on track to destroy free television as well. | |
|
 wispalord
join:2007-09-20 House Springs, MO
·Charter Pipeline
| ummm like this whole point is dsl/cable dont want a new point of access to the home in rural areas, cause they know THEY WILL NEVER be able to compette and it just breaks there heart, im betting the 700mhz will be fixed like current wispa 900mhz instalations. | |
|
  lalalalalalala
@direcpc.com
| about poloticians If Obama will raise taxes to improve broadband and they're such polar opposites that must mean McCain would probably tell the companies to get off their asses and clean up their act(corruption)! He's already going on about the people behind the current finacial crisis and how he's gonna make them pay and we will know their names. If true BRAVO i say. | |
|
 |   DavePR
join:2008-06-04 | Re: about poloticians That should be easy for Mr. McCain as most of the perpetrators work for him. | |
|
 russotto
join:2000-10-05 Collegeville, PA
| White Space Broadband = no TV They can't avoid interfering with TV. First, TV tuners have relatively wide front-end filters. So it's not just devices on the channel which cause problems, it's adjacent and in come cases 2nd adjacent channels which cause problems. You can get away with 1st adjacent if the transmitting antennas are co-located and the power of the signal is similar, but that's simply not true with white space devices.
Second, people in these rural areas where this white space broadband stuff is proposed often need to use a pre-amp to get their TV reliably. A pre-amp amplifies across the whole band (or bands). A nearby white space transmitter anywhere within the band will overload the pre-amp and result in loss of reception.
It's just not feasible to run white space devices in the same spectrum as the current TV infrastructure without degrading the latter significantly. | |
|
  Raioku
@windstream.net
| give us whitespace
White space would be really beneficial to alot of people including myself using windstreams low ass internet speed (1.5 mbps) and having to pay some 40-50$ for it. If white space comes download speeds would be rocket fast 30-50 mbps. Dolly parton doesnt even know what the hell she is talking about. I support whitespace 300%. If the people at the FCC have a brain they will allow this. And as for watching TV: look on the internet and I am sure you will find your favorite shows. | |
|
 |
|
 |