In article k.net, "Bill
Sohl" writes:

Actually, in really high speed optical equipment it is both
time domain and wavelengths/frequency (sometimes called color) domains.

Multiple "carriers" (different light wavelengths) on the same fiber,
right? Kinda like multiple telegraph carriers of old.

But isn't the basic modulation scheme still on-off keying of the
light, rather than shifting its color or phase?

Yes. I wasn't disputing that point, just noting that the on/off time domain
muxing isn't the only way that increased data rates are obtained.

Agreed. Just like containerized shipping has revolutionized freight
transportation, fiber optics has revolutionized communications.

There is equipment out there that operates at 1.6 Terrabits/sec.

lessee...10^12 bits/second...that's more than all of the RF spectrum
normally used for radio, right? And that's through *one* fiber that's
immune to EM fields, weather, ionospheric and tropospheric
propagation, EMI and almost everything else except shovels.

Now that's cool.

But it does have a downside. It permits a significant number of US
jobs to be outsourced to places like India (or anywhere else that has
a significant English-speaking population).

New technology almost always has a downside for some group or groups.
Would you rather such advances not become reality?

Not at all - but I'd rather have it that the downsides be explored more
thoroughly *before* they occur.

73 de Jim, N2EY

"N2EY" wrote in message
...
In article k.net, "Bill
Sohl" writes:

SNIP

There is equipment out there that operates at 1.6 Terrabits/sec.

lessee...10^12 bits/second...that's more than all of the RF spectrum
normally used for radio, right? And that's through *one* fiber that's
immune to EM fields, weather, ionospheric and tropospheric
propagation, EMI and almost everything else except shovels.

Now that's cool.

But it does have a downside. It permits a significant number of US
jobs to be outsourced to places like India (or anywhere else that has
a significant English-speaking population).

New technology almost always has a downside for some group or groups.
Would you rather such advances not become reality?

Not at all - but I'd rather have it that the downsides be explored more
thoroughly *before* they occur.

Surely you jest. Some company or person(s) develope a new
technology, invention, whatever...and you expect them to hold off
bringing that new whatever to market so the negative impacts to
other industries, groups, etc can first be studied?

Cheers,
Bill K2UNK

Bill Sohl wrote:


Surely you jest. Some company or person(s) develope a new
technology, invention, whatever...and you expect them to hold off
bringing that new whatever to market so the negative impacts to
other industries, groups, etc can first be studied?

You mean like............DDT? Thalidomide?


- Mike KB3EIA -

"Mike Coslo" wrote in message
. ..
Bill Sohl wrote:


Surely you jest. Some company or person(s) develope a new
technology, invention, whatever...and you expect them to hold off
bringing that new whatever to market so the negative impacts to
other industries, groups, etc can first be studied?

You mean like............DDT? Thalidomide?

The "negative impacts" I mentioned were not intented to include
health or life threatening side effects. The discussion has been around
"negative
impacts" in the area of job displaceents and/or industries failing.

Cheers,
Bill K2UNK

In article .net, "Bill Sohl"
writes:

"Mike Coslo" wrote in message
...
Bill Sohl wrote:


Surely you jest. Some company or person(s) develope a new
technology, invention, whatever...and you expect them to hold off
bringing that new whatever to market so the negative impacts to
other industries, groups, etc can first be studied?

You mean like............DDT? Thalidomide?

The "negative impacts" I mentioned were not intented to include
health or life threatening side effects. The discussion has been around
"negative
impacts" in the area of job displaceents and/or industries failing.


Losing one's job and not being able to find another can have serious health and
life-threatening side effects.

73 de Jim, N2EY

On Sat, 08 Nov 2003 15:20:47 GMT, Bill Sohl wrote:

Surely you jest. Some company or person(s) develope a new
technology, invention, whatever...and you expect them to hold off
bringing that new whatever to market so the negative impacts to
other industries, groups, etc can first be studied?

Consider the consequemces if they don't.

I had the eyesight in one eye restored with an experimental
medication used in a very high tech procedure that was Phase 2 of a
study for FDA procedure approval. If the company that manufactured
the medication and proposed the procedure had not been required to
do Phase 1 (medication safety test) or indeed the entire approval
study first, what would have happened had the medication not proved
safe to use in the first place (permanent blindness, I was told).

In our field, consider the effects of headlong approval of BPL on
spectrum usability. Full speed ahead, damn the torpedoes.

Yes, Bill, I am 100% in favor of defining and eliminating or at least
guarding against the downsides before running off to market a la
Micro$**t Windows junk.

--
73 de K2ASP - Phil Kane

From a Clearing in the Silicon Forest
Beaverton (Washington County) Oregon

"Phil Kane" wrote in message
et...
On Sat, 08 Nov 2003 15:20:47 GMT, Bill Sohl wrote:

Surely you jest. Some company or person(s) develope a new
technology, invention, whatever...and you expect them to hold off
bringing that new whatever to market so the negative impacts to
other industries, groups, etc can first be studied?

Consider the consequemces if they don't.

I had the eyesight in one eye restored with an experimental
medication used in a very high tech procedure that was Phase 2 of a
study for FDA procedure approval. If the company that manufactured
the medication and proposed the procedure had not been required to
do Phase 1 (medication safety test) or indeed the entire approval
study first, what would have happened had the medication not proved
safe to use in the first place (permanent blindness, I was told).

In our field, consider the effects of headlong approval of BPL on
spectrum usability. Full speed ahead, damn the torpedoes.

Yes, Bill, I am 100% in favor of defining and eliminating or at least
guarding against the downsides before running off to market a la
Micro$**t Windows junk.

The discussion has been on the economic downsides (jobs lost, industries
driven out of existence), not on bonafide health, life, or illegal
interference issues.

Another example. Would you have held back on digital photography
because it is negatively impacting the print film camera industry?

Cheers,
Bill K2UNK

On Sun, 09 Nov 2003 03:24:40 GMT, Bill Sohl wrote:

Another example. Would you have held back on digital photography
because it is negatively impacting the print film camera industry?

Not when the leaders in the print film camera industry are some of
the heavy hitters in the digital photography industry.

--
73 de K2ASP - Phil Kane

From a Clearing in the Silicon Forest
Beaverton (Washington County) Oregon