The FCC has acted to approve the implementation of Brodband Over
Powerline technology (BPL) for widspread Internet access in the
United States. We were able to get in and record part of the October
14th proceeding which is now posted as a downloadable MP3 file at our
website: www.arnewsline.org/quincy under the title of "EXTRA".

The speakers you will hear inorder of their appearance are FCC
Commissioners Michael Copps, Kevin Martin, Jonathan Adelstein and FCC
Chairman Michael Powell. The presentation concludes with the actual
vote to proceed with the implementation of BPL

(ARNewsline)

I saw a TV news story that said power transformers acted as ''speed bumps''
on the information superhighway. Have they found away around this? Or is
the powerline Internet service still slower than competing technologies?

--Fred Cantu
Austin, TX

"Mike Terry" wrote in message
...
The FCC has acted to approve the implementation of Brodband Over
Powerline technology (BPL) for widspread Internet access in the
United States. We were able to get in and record part of the October
14th proceeding which is now posted as a downloadable MP3 file at our
website: www.arnewsline.org/quincy under the title of "EXTRA".

The speakers you will hear inorder of their appearance are FCC
Commissioners Michael Copps, Kevin Martin, Jonathan Adelstein and FCC
Chairman Michael Powell. The presentation concludes with the actual
vote to proceed with the implementation of BPL

(ARNewsline)

"fredtv" wrote in message ...
I saw a TV news story that said power transformers acted as ''speed bumps''
on the information superhighway. Have they found away around this? Or is
the powerline Internet service still slower than competing technologies?

This is, in my opinion, a gimme by the FCC to the power distribution companies who
want into an industry far above the old technologies they're in now. I've said for
years, when a British firm was doing trials, that this technology would never work -
that the power lines, being unshielded, would be both a source of interference and
prone to noise and intermodulation from the alternating current being transferred by
the lines' primary function. The trials were scuttled prematurely, for all these
reasons. The fundamental problems still exist, and the methods needed to work around
them require equipment which interfaces and/or is raised to lethally high voltages.
To maintain the system would require conventional power linemen, wearing gloves and
other protective clothing. You can imagine what level of service is to be expected
under these circumstances. Further, as power lines are the top-most utilities on a
utility pole, they're most prone to lightning hits, as well.

I'd stay away from this, if an investment opportunity were to come around. It
wouldn't be the first time the FCC has type-accepted a failed technology, and it
wouldn't be the first time that a proposed standard's supporting technical
documentation wasn't "cleaned-up", if you know what I mean, so as to demonstrate to
the Commission that it met the requirements necessary for type-acceptance.
--
-----------------------------------------------------------------------------
If there's nothing that offends you in your community, then you know you're not
living in a free society.
Kim Campbell - ex-Prime Minister of Canada - 2004
-----------------------------------------------------------------------------
For direct replies, take out the contents between the hyphens. -Really!-




"Mike Terry" wrote in message
...
The FCC has acted to approve the implementation of Brodband Over
Powerline technology (BPL) for widspread Internet access in the
United States. We were able to get in and record part of the October
14th proceeding which is now posted as a downloadable MP3 file at our
website: www.arnewsline.org/quincy under the title of "EXTRA".

The speakers you will hear inorder of their appearance are FCC
Commissioners Michael Copps, Kevin Martin, Jonathan Adelstein and FCC
Chairman Michael Powell. The presentation concludes with the actual
vote to proceed with the implementation of BPL

(ARNewsline)

"Bob Haberkost" wrote in message
...


This is, in my opinion, a gimme by the FCC to the power distribution
companies who
want into an industry far above the old technologies they're in now.

I suspect politics are behind it. Not the political differences between
liberals and conservatives or the presumed differences between Demorcrats
and Republicans. It's the politics of opportunism. Anyone who acts to
restrict BPL on technical grounds will be called a "thief of broadband
rights" and "a pawn of the telecommunications establishment".

The FCC commissioners put themselves into a no lose situation by allowing
BPL. If it works, they take the credit. If it fails, they don't get the
blame.


The fundamental problems still exist,

Thank you for making sense.

[snip]

I'd stay away from this, if an investment opportunity were to come around.

[snip]

One of the major BPL suppliers has publicly traded stock. They've gone
through a big decline, and are a penny stock now. A terrific buying
opportunity for those who are certain BPL is the next big thing!!

Frank Dresser

"Frank Dresser" wrote in message
...

One of the major BPL suppliers has publicly traded stock. They've gone
through a big decline, and are a penny stock now. A terrific buying
opportunity for those who are certain BPL is the next big thing!!

Even if it isn't the Next Big Thing, it will take time for that to be
evident.

There be a period during which they can still sell people their dreams.

Frank Dresser wrote:

The FCC commissioners put themselves into a no lose situation by allowing
BPL. If it works, they take the credit. If it fails, they don't get the
blame.

What has happened to the FCC interference protection standards, though?
I am regularly seeing appliances for sale which can't even come close to
meeting the Part 15 requirements for emission. Now we've got BPL coming
down the pike, on top of all the touch lamps and noisy TV sets. Is there
anyone at the FCC that cares about MW and HF use at all?

One of the major BPL suppliers has publicly traded stock. They've gone
through a big decline, and are a penny stock now. A terrific buying
opportunity for those who are certain BPL is the next big thing!!

I think BPL is a terrible idea, and I say that as someone who holds stock
in several power companies. But then, I thought VOIP was a terrible idea
also.
--scott
--
"C'est un Nagra. C'est suisse, et tres, tres precis."

What has happened to the FCC interference protection standards, though?

Scott, Scott, Scott. Haven't you learned yet? The FCC can rewrite the laws of
physics!!!! If you don't believe it, just ask them!

:
: What has happened to the FCC interference protection standards, though?
: I am regularly seeing appliances for sale which can't even come close to
: meeting the Part 15 requirements for emission. Now we've got BPL coming
: down the pike, on top of all the touch lamps and noisy TV sets. Is there
: anyone at the FCC that cares about MW and HF use at all?


a bigger question should be what has happened to the FCC period (hint:
michael powell is no help). AM and FM interference "standards" went out
with the fairness doctrine. both bands have been totally ghettoized. fits
in nicely with the crud channel corporate sound of slop. no standards on
the technical side and no standards on the programming side. no wonder
listenership is down....

"Fuller Wrath" wrote in message
...

:


a bigger question should be what has happened to the FCC period (hint:
michael powell is no help). AM and FM interference "standards" went out
with the fairness doctrine. both bands have been totally ghettoized. fits
in nicely with the crud channel corporate sound of slop. no standards on
the technical side and no standards on the programming side. no wonder
listenership is down....



The fairness doctrine is interference. It was used as a political club.
Richard Nixon and the Republican party were using the so-called fairness
doctrine to go after the licenses of radio and TV properties of networks and
newspapers they didn't like. But Nixon didn't invent the tactic. It was
first used in the Kennedy administration. Given today's political
climate,I'm sure both parties would enthusiastically hammer the media
companies whenever embarrassing stories got out.

Is that really what you want?

There's a mistaken belief that dropping the fairness doctrine made right
wing political talk radio possible. That's not true. In Chicago, Howard
Miller had a greatly entertaining political talk show back in the early
seventies. Miller was to the right of Limbaugh, Hannity and Atilla the Hun.

Let's also consider who else gets treated shabbily by the fairness doctrine.
Who should determine what the audience should hear -- the government or the
audience?

Frank Dresser

"Scott Dorsey" wrote in message
...

What has happened to the FCC interference protection standards, though?
I am regularly seeing appliances for sale which can't even come close to
meeting the Part 15 requirements for emission.

You're right. Interference requirements seem to have to become a dead issue
in the last 10 or 15 years. It would be asking alot of the FCC to have them
start caring now.


Now we've got BPL coming
down the pike, on top of all the touch lamps and noisy TV sets. Is there
anyone at the FCC that cares about MW and HF use at all?

I don't think so.



I think BPL is a terrible idea, and I say that as someone who holds stock
in several power companies. But then, I thought VOIP was a terrible idea
also.
--scott


Are any of those power companies considering BPL? I'd worry about the
company ****ing away cash on a goofy idea.

Frank Dresser