I thought that was the definition of a politico..
On 10/31/18 12:59 PM, Mark Radabaugh wrote:
I’m not a huge fan of muni broadband for some of the reasons you cite.
I was just amazed that he is all for free speech when it meets his goals
and then completely against it another circumstance.
Mark
On Oct 31, 2018, at 3:53 PM, ch...@wbmfg.com <mailto:ch...@wbmfg.com>
wrote:
I actually agreed with the muni wireless and free speech issue. He
cited exact language in the AUPs. Hate speech is hard to define and
muni’s should not have that in their AUPs in my opinion. I also liked
that he didn’t think munis should be able to compete with private sector.
I am only a socialist when it serves my purposes, at all other times I
am a libertarian...
*From:* Mark Radabaugh
*Sent:* Wednesday, October 31, 2018 1:49 PM
*To:* AnimalFarm Microwave Users Group
*Subject:* Re: [AFMUG] Mobile in CBRS
Oh, it’s even better.
In the same speech where he was railing against municipal broadband on
free speech grounds he was also busy bragging about how tough the FCC
is being on those dastardly free speech pirate radio stations.
Because, you know, pirate radio is obviously the lowest of the
scofflaws. How dare someone use a FM transmitter without a
license! The FCC has managed to take a whole slew of incredibly
dangerous pastors broadcasting sermons off the air.
Mark
On Oct 31, 2018, at 3:06 PM, Ken Hohhof <af...@kwisp.com> wrote:
True. The Pai FCC and the Trump Administration in general seems
dedicated to leaving a legacy that can’t easily be undone. Like
selling spectrum, or appointing Supreme Court Justices. They
probably see Wheeler as a fool whose accomplishments could be undone
with the stroke of a pen, and Obama much the same. I’m not being
political, and I guess you have to give them credit for understanding
how the game is played. If you want a legacy that lasts longer than
the next election, you have to build it with bricks not straw.
BTW, did you see where O’Rielly argued that muni broadband, promoted
by the evil Wheeler, presented a “particularly ominous threat to the
First Amendment”, citing TOS language against hate speech and threats.
https://docs.fcc.gov/public/attachments/DOC-354770A1.pdf
https://motherboard.vice.com/en_us/article/bj49j8/fcc-falsely-claims-community-broadband-an-ominous-threat-to-the-first-amendment
*From:*AF <af-boun...@af.afmug.com>*On Behalf Of*Mark Radabaugh
*Sent:*Wednesday, October 31, 2018 1:47 PM
*To:*AnimalFarm Microwave Users Group <af@af.afmug.com>
*Subject:*Re: [AFMUG] Mobile in CBRS
Michael O’Rielly absolutely positively thinks it’s a fantastic idea.
The really scary part is that he thinks it’s better for private
industry to own it, since he can’t trust future FCC commissioners.
He’s that guy that won’t date a girl that would go out with a guy
like him.
Mark
On Oct 31, 2018, at 12:06 PM, Joe Novak <jno...@lrcomm.com> wrote:
" On the other hand, they get rewarded for carrying spectrum as an
asset on their balance sheet."
This is the most disgusting thing about the American auctioning
system right now.
Who in their right minds thought it was a good idea to just auction
a finite resource to the highest bidder? Why isn't a use it or lose
it system enforced, or at the very least a system like we will see
in CBRS? It all seems like such a sham that gets propped up
continuously.
On Wed, Oct 31, 2018 at 10:42 AM Ken Hohhof <af...@kwisp.com> wrote:
It’s going to be interesting, I wonder why the carriers would pay
anywhere near the kind of money for CBRS spectrum that they are
used to for low and mid band spectrum, when they can use it for
free as GAA. Similar to 5 GHz. No cost, and opportunistic use for
carrier aggregation.
On the other hand, they get rewarded for carrying spectrum as an
asset on their balance sheet.
I’m thinking of a scenario where the auction sets too high a
minimum bid, and they get zero bids. Even 10 cents per MHz-POP
might be too high, if it can be used as GAA at no cost. As long as
they have an anchor channel in other spectrum, CBRS is like icing
on the cake, nice but not mission critical, and possibly not worth
paying much money to “own”.
*From:*AF <af-boun...@af.afmug.com>*On Behalf Of*Dave
*Sent:*Wednesday, October 31, 2018 10:13 AM
*To:*af@af.afmug.com
*Subject:*Re: [AFMUG] Mobile in CBRS
That makes it easier for the carriers to stomp out the little GAA
guys :)
On 10/31/18 9:50 AM, Joe Novak wrote:
I think it's more likely that they will have a licensed anchor
channel and only aggregate 3.65 in the downlink, using different
frequencies for uplink. Carrier aggregation is a whole different
game of spectrum usage.
On Wed, Oct 31, 2018 at 9:38 AM Adam Moffett <dmmoff...@gmail.com>
wrote:
One thing that was unfortunate about the NN license was that mobile
stations had a stupid low Tx power limit. Basically mobile
wasn't viable.
Is CBRS going to have that type of restriction?
--
AF mailing list
AF@af.afmug.com
http://af.afmug.com/mailman/listinfo/af_af.afmug.com
--
--
AF mailing list
AF@af.afmug.com
http://af.afmug.com/mailman/listinfo/af_af.afmug.com
<image001.jpg>--
AF mailing list
AF@af.afmug.com
http://af.afmug.com/mailman/listinfo/af_af.afmug.com
--
AF mailing list
AF@af.afmug.com
http://af.afmug.com/mailman/listinfo/af_af.afmug.com
------------------------------------------------------------------------
--
AF mailing list
AF@af.afmug.com <mailto:AF@af.afmug.com>
http://af.afmug.com/mailman/listinfo/af_af.afmug.com
--
AF mailing list
AF@af.afmug.com <mailto:AF@af.afmug.com>
http://af.afmug.com/mailman/listinfo/af_af.afmug.com
--
AF mailing list
AF@af.afmug.com
http://af.afmug.com/mailman/listinfo/af_af.afmug.com
