Re: The FCC

I agree with you there. I work for one of those smaller ISPs in 
Berkeley without deep pockets, LMi.net. There is no way we could ever 
buy the spectrum in this area to roll out a wireless network. 
Something which could be interesting is some sort of bandwidth co-op. 
Group buy the spectrum, and share it based on uplink antenna location 
with informed users and ISPs.


At 8:58 AM -0700 6/23/04, [email protected] wrote:
>On Tue, Jun 22, 2004 at 03:39:12PM -0700, Michael M wrote:
>>
>>  Clean spectrum costs about $150,000 for a 50km range. Fairly cheap if
>>  you need it. That is what the canopy system uses.  No problems. but
>>  when there is a sieman's phone blasting at a full watt 24/7 wether it
>>  is in use or not, your range suffers.
>>
>It shouldn't cost anything. This is, after all, a zero cost medium.
>Whoever gives money to the government to buy part of the spectrum
>will have to make that money back by by charging consumers.
>This is in a sense a tax on EM waves.
>
>If you look at all the small Wi-Fi networks that are springing up all over
>the country, it seems pretty obvious that many of us are providing a great
>public service at very low cost.
>
>IMHO the FCC should consider who can provide the best service at the lowest
>cost, not who can come up with most money.


-- 
---------------------------
Never attribute to malice what can more easily be explained by incompetence.
_______________________________________________
BAWUG's general wireless chat mailing list
[unsubscribe] http://lists.bawug.org/mailman/listinfo/wireless