Day Brown wrote:

>  [...] Very interesting, thank you.

I was reminded of some of our exchanges early on, but also some with
folks interested in working in Africa and other remote locales. The good
news is the same basic standards and approach should work in both scenarios.

>  But the problem with areas of little infrastructure, is that quite
>  often they have rugged terraine and forests. 802.11b is useless.

Yes and no. With a standard, off-the-shelf 802.11b access point with the
little 2dBi omni antennas, you'll be hard pressed to get much range. But
the can-do types have also figured out that you can make a damn fine
directional (yagi) antenna using nothing more than Pringles chip cans
and some wire and putty. Better models, using the extravigance of $6
cookie cans and 4in-6in duct adaptors have managed to get 13dBi+ for <
$15 in parts. With these antennas, 802.11b 'cantennas' can be used in
*point-to-point* (bridged) mode to connect geographically dispersed
"cells" of many miles (I believe I've seen 15mi cited.) You'd just want
to set the point-point pair on a different channel set than the local cell.

I've moved to a rather more tree-bound, hilly clime (new england) as of
last year, and can tell you from first-hand experience that *with a bit
of tenacity*, you can usually pull off repeater hops between hilltops,
trees and man-made poles/towers to get the necessary line-of-sight.
There will be the cost of additional radio pairs for each hop (2 ea.)
and power/shelter requirements of course. Given the low-power, simple
nature of these beasts, a DC powersource is probably adequate.

Now, for the odd solitary hermit, this may still be unpractical. But for
small communities, it might well be worthwhile. Provide small "cells"
near population clusters, and use long-range "shots" between
communities. Hell, you can still run wire out to the solitary hermit if
need be, but connect the hubs wirelessly.

>  And when I think about the global market for a low power pc that
>  would run off solar panels out beyond the grid, and use lower
>  frequencies for long range thru difficult terraine, I havta wonder
>  why I aint in some kind of "Truman Show"- because nobody else is
>  already doing it. The amount of money to be made would make Bill
>  Gates look like a used car dealer.

You probably won't find products at the local BestBuy, but there are
initiatives underway elsewhere in the world. I've lost track of the URL
for the Indian linux-based handheld that was meant to do exactly that
for < $200 (though I recall that pricepoint was proving tough to hit.)

If nothing else, you could equip a small village with a generator to
provide basic AC, and get phone service up. PCs could follow as
infrastructure support allows.

>  Cringely is right, we could bypass the TELCOs, and as he suggests,
>  setup (on flatland with 802.11b) wireless networks of local hackers
>  that would have so many users that the FCC would be exposed as the
>  paper tiger that it really is.

The good news is the FCC will leave you alone, at least in terms of the
radio spectrum used. These are perfectly legal, although the
technicalities of becoming a "telco" must be noted. For small groups, no
problem though.

>  You could do it in dos, and be bullet proof.

Waitaminit! Do *what* in DOS? Not the access point? Also, realize that
the voice apps do require moderately capable systems and operating
systems. I'm not aware of any voice-over-IP apps for DOS, though I
suppose they could be written.

>  No spam, no Carnivore, no court ordered wiretaps (no wire), and no
>  popups. The users could design the system to meet their needs, rather
>  than the transnational honchos designing a system to maximize
>  profit. We'd only havta put up with crazy ranters like me.

Hehe, yeah but we'd want to talk to other folks, and one day the
spammers would come back, I'm sure. But that's not a technical issue.

>  And you could put me in a twit filter cause I dont change my
>  identity.

Just change your socks once in a while, and we're all happy! Again, I
like this approach because it uses existing technologies and plays
within "the rules", so can be done with no legal entanglements short of
local zoning and such.

>  Cringely is right, that local entrepeneurs could provide much lower
>  cost service. But he dont see that these entrepeneurs could also
>  network globally with each other, and like FIDO, form a *user owned
>  and controlled* network.

Yes, but does that really scale? If I limit my connections to "people I
know" then there's a good chance I'll like what I get. But what happens
when my moderate buddy links to both left-wing anarchist and right-wing
neo-fascist neighbors? HE doesn't mind talking to both, but I may. Not
to mention the "good cause" neighbor who'll send emails about bake sales
to benefit the local fire dept. At that point, I may start griping about
spam and unwanted content.

TECHNOLOGY hasn't caused the breakdown and bad manners we see today.
People have, and they'll probably (and sadly) still be self-centered and
greedy no matter what technology is available, or how it's "intended" to
be used.

>  And rather than just using the slivers of bandwidth the
>  transnationals have left available, we could take over the whole
>  spectrum, and return the power to the people.

Romantic rebellious notions aside, you realize using other spectrum
would add SIGNIFICANTLY to the cost. These things are cheap, simply
because they're mass-produced in huge quantities. You're getting
spread-spectrum technology at prices well below narrow-band. Why on
earth would you insist on using other spectrum that requires more
expensive radios, antennas and what-not, nevermind the licensing issues?

>  There is a clue in the 70$ price tag. FCC regulations were
>  established in the era when hardware costs were daunting, and they
>  threatened regulation violators with seizure of equipment. They aint
>  gonna bother with a wireless platform that is so cheap, any more than
>  they tried to seize the CB radios being used without registration,
>  even when some Jackass was putting a thousand watts on a CB channel.

So you'll knock DPS and Emergency Services off line, and you'll be
happy? 1000w on a CB frequency isn't the same thing as stomping all over
spectrum!

>  The emperor has no clothes, much less armor.

I only wish we had armor against those "rebels" who are intent on
"freeing" us without understanding what the hell they're doing!

Day, THIS STUFF WORKS withOUT having to start a revolution. "The Man" is
LETTING you do this stuff. Put away the molotov cocktails for pete's
sake, and just play nice!

- Bob

Reply via email to