I've run a normal WiFi signal 60 miles (with double the US legal [at the time] of 3 watts rf) and both the transceivers antennas (Laptops with the added rf power) 180 feet above mean high tide water. Of course, there were ZERO obstructions in between the antennas. No weird Fresnel effects created in-between. Yes, it was a special case but 5 miles is easy.
-
WANTED: Happy members who like to discuss audio and other topics related to our interest. Desire to learn and share knowledge of science required. There are many reviews of audio hardware and expert members to help answer your questions. Click here to have your audio equipment measured for free!
Our phone company has a sense of humor....
- Thread starter amirm
- Start date
That is bonkers and would have been illegal in the UK. I cannot even imagine it even...
On an other thread I asked ChatGBT: Is the US a democracy? The answer seems to explain how such a situation you described can happen. The people who are elected seems to work for the companies not for the people.
The United States is a federal constitutional republic, not a pure democracy. In a pure democracy, the people directly participate in the decision-making process and have the ultimate authority to make decisions for the community. In contrast, the United States has a representative democracy, in which the people elect representatives to make decisions on their behalf.
I don't think the US rail is a good example. It doesn't come close to servicing the country, and it doesn't need to, to make a profit. It just needs to move a large amount of freight from one side of the country to the other, where it can take the last miles on trucks.
Prime deliver is not a good example, because it's really roads that make it happen—they didn't build any new ones. And people situate themselves near roads—it's impractical to even build a house without them, so nearly ever house in the country is next to a road (even if it's dirt). Cheap internet alone is not nearly as compelling as roads—you're not going to only build near a fiber or cable deployment. People without cheap internet are basically grumbling about when a good, inexpensive road is going to be built for them. Something like Starlink is good for this, because your exact location doesn't matter, as long as satellite coverage is available. Something like 5G has the advantage that they aren't tied to physical connections (no need to string fiber to a house, without a reasonable distance of a CO), and it comes alone with something else that's needed as well—mobile phone coverage.
I also don't think it's "excuses", it's not like we're noting these things and stopping further development. It's recognizing limitations. People tend to not fully appreciate the scope of the US, compared with other countries. "Why can't we have Japan's high speed rail" is something I've heard, for instance. Easy—Japan is long and narrow, the high speed rail lines mostly run in a single line the length of the country, with shorter regular trains filling out the width a bit, servicing a very high population density. It doesn't mean we can't utilize rail, but it does mean we'd not be very smart to try to duplicate what Japan does.
As I said: excuses, nothing else. US boasts to be the most developed country. In this instance they are not.I don't think the US rail is a good example. It doesn't come close to servicing the country, and it doesn't need to, to make a profit. It just needs to move a large amount of freight from one side of the country to the other, where it can take the last miles on trucks.
Prime deliver is not a good example, because it's really roads that make it happen—they didn't build any new ones. And people situate themselves near roads—it's impractical to even build a house without them, so nearly ever house in the country is next to a road (even if it's dirt). Cheap internet alone is not nearly as compelling as roads—you're not going to only build near a fiber or cable deployment. People without cheap internet are basically grumbling about when a good, inexpensive road is going to be built for them. Something like Starlink is good for this, because your exact location doesn't matter, as long as satellite coverage is available. Something like 5G has the advantage that they aren't tied to physical connections (no need to string fiber to a house, without a reasonable distance of a CO), and it comes alone with something else that's needed as well—mobile phone coverage.
I also don't think it's "excuses", it's not like we're noting these things and stopping further development. It's recognizing limitations. People tend to not fully appreciate the scope of the US, compared with other countries. "Why can't we have Japan's high speed rail" is something I've heard, for instance. Easy—Japan is long and narrow, the high speed rail lines mostly run in a single line the length of the country, with shorter regular trains filling out the width a bit, servicing a very high population density. It doesn't mean we can't utilize rail, but it does mean we'd not be very smart to try to duplicate what Japan does.
Well, if I had not found this forum, I would have absolutely no real use for a computer. There are many like me. We live in more rural areas & would prefer to be hunting, fishing (catfish noodling [please watch some videos of this]), mud bogging, racing (horses, cars, Big Wheels, whatever), spelunking, pretty much anything else other than being on a computer.
Your reasoning is so persuasive
KellenVancouver
Addicted to Fun and Learning
- Joined
- Nov 16, 2021
- Messages
- 859
- Likes
- 6,081
You are lucky... to not have the FCC in your way.
Well, that's true enough. At one time they had a noble purpose (but by 1947 they had been pretty well corrupted by cooperate greed).
From: Radio Fidelity's:
The history of FM radio: The search for sensational sound
So, when did FM radio start gaining popularity? Not until years after its original creation. When Armstrong came up with the FM radio frequency, AM broadcasts were big business for companies all over the world.In 1933, Edwin Armstrong successfully received four patents for his FM technology and began to appeal to the RCA for support with his new system. The Radio Corporation of America was responsible for determining which radio innovations were permitted at the time.
Although the engineers within the company were impressed by the potential of frequency modulation, the legal and sales departments saw FM radio frequency as a threat.
The head of the RCA at the time, David Sarnoff decided that there wasn’t enough of a market for FM radio, particularly as he was beginning to promote television more aggressively.
Though Armstrong earned some support for his invention from companies like Zenith and General Electric, he was forced to continue developing his technology on his own.
Most of his experimentation was paid for out-of-pocket, while he gradually earned the attention of broadcasters and engineers.
Finally, in 1940, the FCC caved in and began authorizing commercial FM broadcasting, allocation a tiny region of 42 MHz to 50 MHz to channels in the FM spectrum. By the end of 1941, almost 400,000 FM radio sets had been sold.
There were many organizations that wanted to keep things the same. The founder of the RCA, David Sarnoff, was one of the men happy to let FM radio die out. Sarnoff was responsible for controlling many of the technical aspects of radio’s growth.
He was also responsible for the development of the ABC and NBC television networks.
When Armstrong went to Sarnoff for support with his FM radio frequency, Sarnoff was currently pushing the growth of television. He’s actually the man responsible for developing the NTSC standard for TV – a standard we still recognise today.
Seeing FM as a threat, Sarnoff’s company lobbied with the FCC to have the spectrum removed entirely from Armstrong’s frequencies, and into the ones that we use today (88 to 108MHz).
At the time, the move rendered Armstrong’s network of FM radio stations completely obsolete. It also meant that the radio sets Armstrong had poured his own money into became useless.
The ruling delivered by the FCC announced that the 40MHz band that FM radio had previously relied on would now be given to television broadcasts. At the time, the RCA had a substantial stake on those channels.
Additionally, the RCA also had allies everywhere. Even AT&T actively supported the move in frequencies, because the loss of the radio stations for FM companies forced networks to purchase links from AT&T.
The issue grew even worse when Armstrong ended up in another patent battle with NBC and the RCA, who were trying to use FM technology, though they weren’t paying royalties. It wasn’t until after Armstrong’s tragic death that radio’s emerging golden years began.
So yes, you are luck to not have the FCC in your way.
