What is Digg?Sponsored by truTV
70 Comments
- jodimcmullen, on 11/05/2008, -1/+50This is a huge deal, I applaud the FCC for once coming down on the side of progress and the consumer.
- StacyWebb, on 11/05/2008, -2/+34Living in a mostly Rural area, I think this will benefit everyone. From schoolchildren to Adults. It's nice to see America starting to catch up to the rest of the world when it comes to Broadband availability.
- MarkusX, on 11/05/2008, -1/+21Finally something useful from the FCC.
- shawns, on 11/05/2008, -1/+17This is a huge benefit to the country as a whole. Extending high-speed Internet access will do incredible things for expanding educational resources and getting more people throughout the U.S. on a level playing field. Great News!
- jmkiii, on 11/05/2008, -0/+15***** Comcast, Time Warner, Verizon, AT&T and any others I am forgetting.
- mingohills, on 11/05/2008, -2/+12This is really a beautiful thing, opening many doors for rural areas across the country.
- susanswilk, on 11/05/2008, -5/+14It was a Landslide Tuesday! The future is looking to be ULTRA promising!
- stukdog, on 11/05/2008, -2/+11This sounds great and promising. Though, I'm sure given some time, Cox/Comcast/AT&T will be able to screw it up.
- billbugger, on 11/05/2008, -1/+9They have become quiet efficient at doing that, but i think Google will be in the forefront of this one... I hope!
- killtrocity, on 11/05/2008, -0/+8I see what you did there...
- Permanent4, on 11/05/2008, -1/+7Saving the white whales?
Free lunches at White Castle?
Tottenham Hotspur in the Champions League? - inactive, on 11/05/2008, -0/+5"Free lunches at White Castle?"
FTL - cgibbo, on 11/05/2008, -1/+6Fox news, It, Battletoads.
- D3koy, on 11/05/2008, -1/+5I went from Cox (briefly stopping at 'suddenlink') to Comcast to AT&T... I'm confident you are correct
- utlandssvensk, on 11/05/2008, -1/+5"transmit Internet signals" - OMG
- chaon93, on 11/05/2008, -0/+4the RIAA, the MPAA
- jmkiii, on 11/05/2008, -0/+4Google is your friend and mine.
- Ductapemaster, on 11/05/2008, -0/+4Awesome, they're opening up the tubes between the tubes
- cgibbo, on 11/05/2008, -0/+4
- Iwantawii, on 11/05/2008, -0/+4and i sawwww my reflection, in a snow covered hill
- 7m7uf, on 11/05/2008, -0/+4So how long before we start seeing something from this? I live in rural area and i'm damn tired of dial-up.
- monkeyrun, on 11/05/2008, -1/+4I look forward to see the potential innovations coming from this.
- TripinVA, on 11/06/2008, -0/+3No, it isn't licensed. I guarantee you it is not. Unless the 10 companies I know of that are using it are all operating illegally, along with my cordless phones, etc.
- coreyb, on 11/05/2008, -0/+3Higher frequencies (UHF, VHF) require more power but would run similar to mobile phones. I assume encryption would probably differentiate the signals similar to the way your cell phone does now.
- dougbot, on 07/14/2009, -1/+4i just crapped my pants, on top of the crap in my pants from obama winning yesterday. i believe they call this a "double decker."
- LANjackal, on 11/05/2008, -1/+4Nice move, but given how long Wi-Max took to come to market WITHOUT needing FCC approval, only to face off against the far superior LTE once it actually arrived, I'm not holding out much hope. Wi-Max and BPL have proven that no network, wireless or wired, can spring up nationwide overnight, nor can it exist without vast capital outlays. Anyone looked at the economy lately? While I support the FCC's decision, I'm certainly NOT holding my breath. I wouldn't be suprised if it were 5+ years before we saw any significant use of white spaces for broadband access.
- phishneslo, on 11/05/2008, -0/+3i sure some vested interests somewhere will make this difficult...
- barfooz, on 11/05/2008, -0/+3Hooray Python! Oh wait...
- heartsblood, on 11/05/2008, -0/+3Sorry about the typos. Dyslexics need more than 4 minutes to review what they're trying to say :(
- ezran, on 11/05/2008, -5/+8First it was white house. Now it's white spaces.
Whats the next 'white landslide win' ? - inactive, on 11/05/2008, -1/+4I have dial-up is this bad?
- jakatak, on 11/06/2008, -0/+3let's not forget about how this will loosen control of cell companies. Google will use this space for cell phone use, too. This in turn will cause major discounts in the gouging that is already going on with Verizon and AT&T.
- 69me, on 11/05/2008, -1/+3There's so much bandwidth available in the country and the world; it's just legislation that's keeping us from accessing it. Bravo to whoever pushed this through.
- cgibbo, on 11/05/2008, -2/+4Beautiful? Really?
- mmilton, on 11/06/2008, -0/+2Beginning of the end of Comcast and AT&T
- heartsblood, on 11/05/2008, -0/+2While I agree I don't like it when they force their morality across public airwaves, we do need them to keep the spectrum organized in the US. Without federal demarcation wifi, tv, and radio would be impossible. Instead of producing better content everybody would be building stronger towers.
- rjt69, on 11/05/2008, -0/+2i have to assume that this would mean only high speed downloads, but the user would have to have a specially configured dial-up modem for any sort of upload, including web site requests.
Hope i am proved wrong, but sounds to me that this will only be used by media companies to push content. - Murphys, on 11/06/2008, -0/+2I, too, live in a rural area. The trade-off I personally have to look forward to is the sizable investment in wireless microphones that will become unusable. All of the high end mics like the Shure ones I use will become useless. They currently use the white space that is in question. I guess I will just cross that bridge when AND IF it ever happens.
- nrox653, on 11/06/2008, -0/+2I find it funny that one of the related videos is the rickroll.
- heartsblood, on 11/05/2008, -0/+2I'm not sure how I feel about this. If they can figure out a way to get a 'paid for by advertising wifi' setup like they have with TV it's could be fantastic. Can you imagine being able to buy an blackberry, or iphone, or android and and not being tied to a cell company? No more forced contracts, no more talking and data plans, no more monthly bills period. Just tap into the public wifi for e-mail and IMs and use Skype if you have to make a land-line call.
However this could get ugly. As far the TV broadcast spectrum is concerned, you can't watch unrestricted content without paying a premium for it. What happens if the FCC tries to censor their broadband spectrum as well? What if they fine admins, who host within the spectrum, that allow their community to publish profanity or pornography? Or worse they use an algorithm that does a blanket replace on anything it deems 'dangerous to children'. I know it seems unlikely but the Fcc hasn't exactly been the first amendment's best friend. - TripinVA, on 11/06/2008, -0/+2Living in a rural area, you and I will gain nothing. Nobody is going to be any more willing to build a tower or run fiber optic cabling to the tower in order to make WSDs work than they were before.
Companies pushing WSDs promised this magic Internet that will pop out of nowhere to service rural areas. It doesn't work that way. They will still require licensed base stations, located on towers of some height, and will need some kind of dedicated backhaul. - sindex, on 11/05/2008, -0/+2[this message sent to you on channel {shhhhhhhhhhhhhhhh}.]
- Cerebron, on 11/06/2008, -0/+1Invest in sniffers!
- Wintergreen0803, on 11/06/2008, -0/+1I have been on a dial-up connection for 10 years. Although I could probably afford cheap broadband through NSA Telecom--I mean AT&T--I refuse to give my hard-earned money to a large corporate outfit that wants to spy on my online travels and prevent me from accessing certain sites. Hopefully, I can now have affordable high-speed access without worrying about privacy or net neutrality violations.
- suprchunk, on 11/06/2008, -1/+2Because the majority of lumberjacks are now bull-dykes. Hence, the feminists want their lesbian porn when they use up the other lumberjacks.
- rusty_g, on 11/06/2008, -0/+1http://digg.com/tech_news/Open_skies_for_white_spa ...
- inactive, on 11/06/2008, -0/+1that's weird really weird i don't know what these Comcast type companies wants to prove
- inactive, on 11/06/2008, -0/+1Let's hope that Adelstein and Copps are in the FCC forever.
- endyminion, on 11/06/2008, -0/+1You don't seem understand how broadcasting works at all. Television stations are licensed to use a particular range of frequencies. These do not butt up against eachother, for reasons you've outlined. White Spaces are not a dynamic range between stations that depends on how they are used, white spaces are the FCC *DEFINED* spaces where it is currently illegal to broadcast *anything* without their prior permission.
- inactive, on 11/06/2008, -0/+1AOL
-
Show 51 - 71 of 71 discussions
