In article , Mike Coslo writes:

And there *is* a tie to BPL in all this. BPL advocates are trying to sell it
as
a cheap, easy, quick solution to the broadband access problem. The
administration is trying to sell it as a way back to the technoboom of the
'90s, without a lot of tedious mucking about with infrastructure. Trying to
tie
it in with homeland security is a classic example of adhomineming those who
oppose it. 'Those dern pinko liberal antenna-huggers!'

Interference? Reliability? Spectrum pollution? Too complicated!

Not complicated at all.

BPL will be the demise of low-level-signal HF communications in
urban areas. Kiss off any thoughts of signal-to-noise ratios
required in modern receivers. All that advanced technology will
go to waste. Hams can go back to using one-tube regenerative
receivers, those being as "low-signal-level" as any other in an
RF cesspool of noise on HF.

If BPL makes inroads as a legacy system, it will be very difficult
to remove, let alone stop.

BPL system companies will make money, the whole purpose of
that kind of thing. The rest of the HF communications world can
go away. Simple. A no-brainer.

Michael Powell will have made his small mark on history, unable
to complete his military career or emulate his father much.