Topband: Interference questions dog broadband over power lines - more anti-ham radio propaganda

[k3ky at erols.com]

On 8 Jan 2004 at 9:33, jsb at digistar.com wrote:
> 
> Interference questions dog broadband over power lines
> 
> http://www.computerworld.com/governmenttopics/government/policy/story/0,10801,88829,00.html
>
> I like the way this guy panned the blame on ham radio operators...
> 
> Be sure to send mailto:grant_gross at infoworld.com to let him know how you
> feel...
> 
> 73 Jason N1SU
> 
Quoting from the 2nd of 3 pages in the article, we have
a VP attorney with Current Technologies LLC saying this:

But Current Technologies LLC, which offers BPL service in the 
Cincinnati and Rockville, Md., areas, can't find interference caused 
by its system, said Jay Birnbaum, the company's vice president and 
general counsel. Current Technologies uses a technology standard 
called HomePlug, designed to not interfere with other radio signals.

"[Interference] just doesn't exist," Birnbaum said. "They based a lot 
of their assumptions on outdated noise flow analysis."

Perhaps I slept through that class, but does anyone
else have the feeling that "noise flow analysis" is
more of a made up term than an actual radio engin-
eering discipline today? I have certainly never heard
that term before in any EMI/RFI discussions over the
years. Is there such a thing as "noise flow analysis"?
This sounds like pseudo-scientific, made-up
goobledygook to me. Comments?  73, David K3KY