Day: I'll say the same thing I said several years ago about your opinions on FCC frequency regulations.
The FCC is part of a world-wide frequency allocation consortium and these people pay a heck of a clot of attention to how frequency is allocated. There are public service organizations with truly knowledgeable volunteers and paid staff which spend an incredible number of hours protecting against overlapping of licensed and unlicensed frequencies. They provide bring forward their ideas (lobbying?) to all the nations who allocate frequency within their territory. Facts are what you do in the Ozarks with your rebellious ideas on frequency usage can have an impact on many people. IMO your just typing a lot of BUL**HIT which is not based on the facts of how the real world works. John O Day Brown wrote: > John Oram wrote: > >> Day Brown has often approached FCC 802.1 regulations on this list with >> a "badges, we don't need no stinkin badges" attitude ... > > > The FCC is not yet global. for one. For two, 802 is useless in many > rural areas with steep and/or forested terrain. for three, the FCC dont > really give a rats rectal orifice what we do out here so long as we dont > walk on LEO and emergency services. Increasingly people are abandoning > the standard broadcast bands for satellite and cable, and because the > population is so low, the broadcasters dont care either, not that we'd > havta walk on them either. There is plenty of bandwidth that the FCC > reserved for future licensing, which now will never be sold, but which > unused bandwith could be used. > >> Hmm, wonder how well that would go down if he ever really set up a >> system and went on the air? > > > Nobody would care what I do. They aint gonna send agents all the way out > here to confiscate a hundred bucks worth of equipment. More to the > point, is what my neighbors and others who live in these fringe areas > are going to do. Part of what is going on on the net is planned > obsolescence. Part of it is to sell software to deal with spam, viruses, > and bloated webpages, and hardware with ever larger bandwidth and higher > speed. > > You dont need all that crap to read messages. We could setup a *DOS* > based, user owned, wireless network which would maintain the viability > of DOS. > >
