Re: [TowerTalk] BPL

[doc <kd4e@verizon.net>]

Gene Smar wrote:
> Tom et al:
>
>    Rat cheer:  http://www.arrl.org/news/stories/2004/10/14/1/?nc=1 .


The FCC Democrats are posturing like Kerry, big words but zero
action -- they could have made a big noise and have demanded
real protections *prior* to approval but are trying to benefit
from the appearance of caring about Hams as they gave the
industry what it wanted.

This is hardly a national voting issue, America faces many more
critical challenges, and likely is much ado about nothing given
superior competition from other broadband technologies.

It may well be that the FCC believes this is a never-to-be-implemented
technology (or not successfully) but that by giving this to the industry 
it allows them to satisfy a noisy lobby with minimal downside.

Hams have cause for concern in-theory but perhaps not in practice,
every real-world trial has failed ... we shall see.

IMHO, YMMV ...

--
Thanks! & 73, doc kd4e
West Central Florida  100% Linux.  Suse 9.1
Drake, Hallicrafters, Heathkit, TenTec, Yaesu
Radio Life: http://www.gospelcom.net/twr/
Linux-Incompatible hardware is defective!
USA Pres. Election 2004: http://www.rnc.org/
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
_______________________________________________

See: http://www.mscomputer.com  for "Self Supporting Towers", "Wireless Weather Stations", and lot's more.  Call Toll Free, 1-800-333-9041 with any questions and ask for Sherman, W2FLA.

_______________________________________________
TowerTalk mailing list
TowerTalk@contesting.com
http://lists.contesting.com/mailman/listinfo/towertalk