| 1 |
On 26/02/20 03:10, james wrote: |
| 2 |
> I'm just not convinced that our USA government continuing to "sell |
| 3 |
> bandwidth rights", is constitutional? |
| 4 |
|
| 5 |
Problem is, if bandwidth is "opened to all" the reality in the past |
| 6 |
would have been a free-for-all leading to a major tragedy of the |
| 7 |
commons. Much like we're seeing in space and low-earth orbit now. If |
| 8 |
we're not *very* careful, soon we will not be able to launch low-earth |
| 9 |
and geo-synchronous satellites, because there'll be a massive debris |
| 10 |
belt that will destroy satellites within a few years. |
| 11 |
|
| 12 |
The new high-frequency bandwidths I'm not too worried about - like |
| 13 |
low-earth orbit stuff there will decay into the atmosphere and |
| 14 |
self-cleanse over 30-40 years - high frequencies don't travel far - but |
| 15 |
where there is the likelihood of interference some sort of regulation is |
| 16 |
necessary. |
| 17 |
|
| 18 |
Do you really want your home network to collapse in a heap every time |
| 19 |
your neighbour jacks up his power because your network is causing his |
| 20 |
home network to collapse in a heap? (That's why my home network is |
| 21 |
mostly cat-5 or ethernet-over-power :-) |
| 22 |
|
| 23 |
Cheers, |
| 24 |
Wol |
Archives