Skip to content
Do you have adblock enabled?
 
If you can read this, either the style sheet didn't load or you have an older browser that doesn't support style sheets. Try clearing your browser cache and refreshing the page.

(CNN)   Elon Musk: expanding 5G would cut into my profits, Twitter time   (cnn.com) divider line
    More: Obvious, Satellite television, Dish Network, Federal Communications Commission, Wireless, DirecTV, Wireless network, Bell TV, Co-channel interference  
•       •       •

1435 clicks; posted to Business » and STEM » on 24 Jun 2022 at 4:10 AM (23 weeks ago)   |   Favorite    |   share:  Share on Twitter share via Email Share on Facebook



49 Comments     (+0 »)
View Voting Results: Smartest and Funniest
 
2022-06-24 4:33:42 AM  
Not a good use of resources to keep launching shiat into space so rural communities can jerk off to porn they want banned cuz Jesus.
 
2022-06-24 4:35:32 AM  
And why should his profits matter?
 
2022-06-24 4:44:55 AM  

Gubbo: And why should his profits matter?


Because it costs good money to bribe people. As long as you outspend the poors, they give you money.
 
2022-06-24 5:43:39 AM  
Translation: it doesn't benefit me enough to justify the cost
 
2022-06-24 6:22:35 AM  
I'm sure all the US telecoms will just stop their rollouts because Elon wants them to. In fact, I'd like to see Musk try to bait Stankey at at&t. It would end really poorly for Musk.
 
2022-06-24 6:58:21 AM  
Listen... I know it's a lot to ask, but can you guys read the article? No?

Carry on, then.
 
2022-06-24 7:08:52 AM  
Note to Elon:  Good!
 
2022-06-24 7:18:14 AM  
Typical rich person. Begging for the government to interfere when it benefits him, but screaming about government overreach when he gets regulated.

fark off Elon.  Born on third, saying you hit a triple mother farker.
 
2022-06-24 7:32:01 AM  

Likwit: Listen... I know it's a lot to ask, but can you guys read the article? No?

Carry on, then.


Just looking at the headline limits my responses, and you want me to click the link too now?  That's a big ask.
 
2022-06-24 7:35:50 AM  
OK, I RTFA.  The real issue is that the FCC is going to have one hell of a time deciding who is going to deliver a larger bribe package, Dish or Starlink.  It's going to be tight.
 
2022-06-24 7:37:33 AM  
huh, didn't realize it was start begging the government for another socialist hand out o'clock again.
 
2022-06-24 7:40:00 AM  
Liberation of the airwaves! I don't need no stinking government to tell me I can't broadcast howler monkey screams at 12GHz.
 
2022-06-24 7:40:40 AM  

IRS.Agent.009: huh, didn't realize it was start begging the government for another socialist hand out o'clock again.


Yes, allocation of wireless spectrum = gov handout

Totally not an administrative task.
 
2022-06-24 8:08:40 AM  
Isn't this the kind of thing that should be sorted out before deploying millions/billions of dollars' worth of hardware?
 
2022-06-24 8:14:19 AM  

Sasquach: IRS.Agent.009: huh, didn't realize it was start begging the government for another socialist hand out o'clock again.

Yes, allocation of wireless spectrum = gov handout

Totally not an administrative task.


It's required that "government handout" roll out early in an Elon thread.  I'm sure that "emerald mine" will make an appearance soon.
 
2022-06-24 8:17:08 AM  
I'll have to double check, because I'm unfamiliar with C Band, but it sounds like it could be Dish could be trying to pull a Lighsquared and use much higher over than normal in a band. Should that be the case, then no matter how much I think Edgelord Elon is a twit, Dish should lose.
 
2022-06-24 9:20:01 AM  

scanman61: Sasquach: IRS.Agent.009: huh, didn't realize it was start begging the government for another socialist hand out o'clock again.

Yes, allocation of wireless spectrum = gov handout

Totally not an administrative task.

It's required that "government handout" roll out early in an Elon thread.  I'm sure that "emerald mine" will make an appearance soon.


Why doesn't he just 'libertarian' principles and let the free market settle who uses what band-- by winning the transmitter power arms race?

You're saying that doesn't work?  What is this, socialism?
 
2022-06-24 9:42:17 AM  

Gubbo: And why should his profits matter?


If he launched Starlink with the expectation that he could use that spectrum, he can sue, depending on what promises was made.
 
2022-06-24 9:43:50 AM  

IRS.Agent.009: huh, didn't realize it was start begging the government for another socialist hand out o'clock again.


Try looking up Socialism.

Unless you enjoy talking like a MAGA, of course.
 
2022-06-24 9:46:29 AM  

inglixthemad: I'll have to double check, because I'm unfamiliar with C Band, but it sounds like it could be Dish could be trying to pull a Lighsquared and use much higher over than normal in a band. Should that be the case, then no matter how much I think Edgelord Elon is a twit, Dish should lose.


Those spectrum leases are regionalized (although some are sold covering all regions) and include restrictions on power output to ensure that resonant frequencies won't have enough power to interfere with adjacent frequencies operated by others.

If Dish legally owns the leases and is operating (or planning to operate) within the established criteria than Musk can go cry somewhere else. It sounds like Musk is whining in an effort to get something for nothing. Fark him.
 
2022-06-24 9:49:36 AM  

Ketchuponsteak: Gubbo: And why should his profits matter?

If he launched Starlink with the expectation that he could use that spectrum, he can sue, depending on what promises was made.


Here's the issue. Governments control the frequencies used in their territory. I highly doubt that Musk has purchased the exact same frequencies from every nation on Earth. It isn't even clear if he owns those frequencies in the US. He may be using public frequencies (if they exist in the ghz range) in which case fark him some more.
 
2022-06-24 10:08:44 AM  

madgonad: inglixthemad: I'll have to double check, because I'm unfamiliar with C Band, but it sounds like it could be Dish could be trying to pull a Lighsquared and use much higher over than normal in a band. Should that be the case, then no matter how much I think Edgelord Elon is a twit, Dish should lose.

Those spectrum leases are regionalized (although some are sold covering all regions) and include restrictions on power output to ensure that resonant frequencies won't have enough power to interfere with adjacent frequencies operated by others.

If Dish legally owns the leases and is operating (or planning to operate) within the established criteria than Musk can go cry somewhere else. It sounds like Musk is whining in an effort to get something for nothing. Fark him.


Fark user imageView Full Size



Did DISH just start the 12 GHz spectrum it or did they pay for it?

A Brief History of 12 GHz MVDDS Spectrum

FCC awarded existing 12 GHz licenses through 2 auctions - auction 53 in January, 2004 and auction 63 in December, 2005. As summarized here, 12 GHz MVDDS spectrum ( 214 licenses across 2 auctions) is held by 11 companies. However, the largest chunks are owned by 3 of them - South.com (an affiliate of Dish Network) with 37 areas, DTV Norwich (an affiliate of ex-Cablevision, which became part of Altice USA in 2016) with 46 areas, and MDS Operations (an affiliate of MDS America, which transferred the spectrum rights to newly formed RS Access in 2018) with 80 areas. In 2012, Dish Network acquired Cablevision's areas, making it the largest owner of 12 GHz spectrum in the US with 83 areas. In terms of population, Dish's licenses cover ~75%, whereas RS Access holds licenses covering ~15% of US population.

It looks like DISH legally owns the spectrum and Musk is a whinny sack of shiat.
 
2022-06-24 10:10:02 AM  

Ketchuponsteak: Gubbo: And why should his profits matter?

If he launched Starlink with the expectation that he could use that spectrum, he can sue, depending on what promises was made.


I imagine he launched and just assumed that he could sue. Because forward planning doesn't seem his strong suit
 
2022-06-24 10:33:04 AM  

Muta: It looks like DISH legally owns the spectrum and Musk is a whinny sack of shiat.


This can't be stated enough.

Now I'm curious if Musk's Starlink is based upon frequencies that he has no right to.
 
2022-06-24 10:45:46 AM  

Muta: Did DISH just start the 12 GHz spectrum it or did they pay for it?

A Brief History of 12 GHz MVDDS Spectrum

FCC awarded existing 12 GHz licenses through 2 auctions - auction 53 in January, 2004 and auction 63 in December, 2005. As summarized here, 12 GHz MVDDS spectrum ( 214 licenses across 2 auctions) is held by 11 companies. However, the largest chunks are owned by 3 of them - South.com (an affiliate of Dish Network) with 37 areas, DTV Norwich (an affiliate of ex-Cablevision, which became part of Altice USA in 2016) with 46 areas, and MDS Operations (an affiliate of MDS America, which transferred the spectrum rights to newly formed RS Access in 2018) with 80 areas. In 2012, Dish Network acquired Cablevision's areas, making it the largest owner of 12 GHz spectrum in the US with 83 areas. In terms of population, Dish's licenses cover ~75%, whereas RS Access holds licenses covering ~15% of US population.

It looks like DISH legally owns the spectrum and Musk is a whinny sack of shiat.


Yeah, I'm scratching my head right now because apparently the FCC has allowed Musk to use the following frequencies for sat-based internet service.

10.70-12.70GHz
13.85-14.50GHz
17.80-18.60GHz
18.80-19.30GHz
27.50-29.10GHz
29.50-30.00GHz
37.50-42.50GHz
47.20-50.20GHz
50.40-51.40GHz

That spectrum is worth probably $200-400B on the open market AND the frequencies around 12ghz have already been sold to Dish. I am assuming that the FCC permission allows his sats to use whatever open spectrum is currently available within those numerous listed bands and if Charlie start lighting-up his 12ghz stuff it will reduce the maximum amount of bandwidth that his Starlink sats can utilize.

Who thought up this idea?
 
2022-06-24 10:47:31 AM  

madgonad: Ketchuponsteak: Gubbo: And why should his profits matter?

If he launched Starlink with the expectation that he could use that spectrum, he can sue, depending on what promises was made.

Here's the issue. Governments control the frequencies used in their territory. I highly doubt that Musk has purchased the exact same frequencies from every nation on Earth. It isn't even clear if he owns those frequencies in the US. He may be using public frequencies (if they exist in the ghz range) in which case fark him some more.


He's complaining about USA isn't he?

I don't understand your point about other nations existing. If his business model hedged on a promise, or contract with USA, then he has grounds to sue.

Maybe he'd launch Starlink without any assurances, that seems naive. But since it is Musk.
 
2022-06-24 10:49:47 AM  

Gubbo: Ketchuponsteak: Gubbo: And why should his profits matter?

If he launched Starlink with the expectation that he could use that spectrum, he can sue, depending on what promises was made.

I imagine he launched and just assumed that he could sue. Because forward planning doesn't seem his strong suit


That could be true.

Starlink seems better for the developing world anyway. Places where they need Starlink, they'll probably assign him the spectrum.
 
2022-06-24 10:54:44 AM  

madgonad: Yeah, I'm scratching my head right now because apparently the FCC has allowed Musk to use the following frequencies for sat-based internet service.

10.70-12.70GHz
13.85-14.50GHz
17.80-18.60GHz
18.80-19.30GHz
27.50-29.10GHz
29.50-30.00GHz
37.50-42.50GHz
47.20-50.20GHz
50.40-51.40GHz


I also wanted to provide some comparison. Apparently the FCC is allowing Musk to use about 15ghz of bandwidth when all bands are combined.

For reference, no mobile data provider in the US has more than 0.4ghz of spectrum anywhere in the US. Yes, most of their spectrum is in the mhz range, but that is preferred because those lower frequencies can penetrate better. The potential bandwidth Musk has permission to use dwarfs all other communications providers in the US combined.
 
2022-06-24 10:55:35 AM  

StatelyGreekAutomaton: Liberation of the airwaves! I don't need no stinking government to tell me I can't broadcast howler monkey screams at 12GHz.


My pirate television station broadcasting hardcore porn didn't last long. The gestapo at PBS objected to overriding sesame street with backdoor sluts 9.
 
2022-06-24 10:59:10 AM  

Ketchuponsteak: madgonad: Ketchuponsteak: Gubbo: And why should his profits matter?

If he launched Starlink with the expectation that he could use that spectrum, he can sue, depending on what promises was made.

Here's the issue. Governments control the frequencies used in their territory. I highly doubt that Musk has purchased the exact same frequencies from every nation on Earth. It isn't even clear if he owns those frequencies in the US. He may be using public frequencies (if they exist in the ghz range) in which case fark him some more.

He's complaining about USA isn't he?

I don't understand your point about other nations existing. If his business model hedged on a promise, or contract with USA, then he has grounds to sue.

Maybe he'd launch Starlink without any assurances, that seems naive. But since it is Musk.


I think that he has been given 'permission' to utilize a lot of different frequencies if the frequency isn't otherwise being used. So as companies like Dish begin to turn on communications using the frequencies that they have purchased under Lease the number of 'available' frequencies for Starlink are reduced.

In a way Musk is a squatter on wireless spectrum.
 
2022-06-24 11:04:09 AM  

Ketchuponsteak: That could be true.

Starlink seems better for the developing world anyway. Places where they need Starlink, they'll probably assign him the spectrum.


Kinda. Starlink base-stations are bit on the power-hungry side. They eat 100 watts while in operation. Compare that to a 5G smartphone which uses about 0.1 watts when the screen is off but data is being sent/received.
 
2022-06-24 11:30:52 AM  
SpaceX says 5G expansion would make Starlink 'unusable' for most Americans


and as most Americans  can't afford the service anyway, this sounds like it's not any kind of anything to give any chits about.
 
2022-06-24 11:32:41 AM  

madgonad: Ketchuponsteak: That could be true.

Starlink seems better for the developing world anyway. Places where they need Starlink, they'll probably assign him the spectrum.

Kinda. Starlink base-stations are bit on the power-hungry side. They eat 100 watts while in operation. Compare that to a 5G smartphone which uses about 0.1 watts when the screen is off but data is being sent/received.


You could serve a village with one base station though.

Or I don't know, maybe the World is already covered with cellphone access. Something one could look into.
 
2022-06-24 11:58:16 AM  
How dare he try to protect his company! He should let it go down the tubes so that some Cheeto-stained virgins can jerk themselves into a frenzy. FFS guys, get another hobby.

And you who work at Blue Origin or ULA, shut up and get some work done. You're at least two years behind.
 
2022-06-24 12:24:08 PM  

madgonad: inglixthemad: I'll have to double check, because I'm unfamiliar with C Band, but it sounds like it could be Dish could be trying to pull a Lighsquared and use much higher over than normal in a band. Should that be the case, then no matter how much I think Edgelord Elon is a twit, Dish should lose.

Those spectrum leases are regionalized (although some are sold covering all regions) and include restrictions on power output to ensure that resonant frequencies won't have enough power to interfere with adjacent frequencies operated by others.

If Dish legally owns the leases and is operating (or planning to operate) within the established criteria than Musk can go cry somewhere else. It sounds like Musk is whining in an effort to get something for nothing. Fark him.


You say that after the FCC f**ked up radar altimeters? You say that after they initially agreed to let Lightsquared operate test facilities at high power in a bad known for working at milliwatt power?

The EU didn't have a problem with radar altimeters for a reason: They cut band range a small amount, told them to operate at lower power, made them tilt the antennas, as modifications within airport safety zones. However in the US cell carriers can afford to write fatter checks, so retrofit aircraft instead.

The reason Lightsquared failed is that GPS companies, and shipping companies, et al., could write a bigger check than they could ever hope to cover. They really knew that, but were angling to buy "cheap" spectrum and swap it (after they threatened to f**k with GPS) for far more expensive spectrum. That also failed because they couldn't even write a check fat enough to be seriously considered.

The FCC is nothing but a tool of whomever writes the biggest check.
 
2022-06-24 12:32:16 PM  

madgonad: In a way Musk is a squatter on wireless spectrum.


How hypocritical of him.  From the link I posted earlier...

SpaceX, for its part, is advocating for guaranteed access to 12 GHz spectrum to facilitate their constellation design change (in the form of lower altitude). They are highlighting 2 data points-

1)     12-year gap: MVDDS license holders have done nothing between 2004-2016 and even today there is no terrestrial 5G operations in the band

2)     Significant investment at risk: SpaceX claims to have made $70M investment for Starlink consumer terminals. For downlink connectivity, these terminals will use the same 12 GHz frequency as the MVDDS coalition is planning for 5G terrestrial network
.

One of the reasons Musk says he deserves the right to use 12GHz is that DISH was squatting on the frequency range for 12 years.

His other reason is he already spent the money.  Someone upthread speculated that Musk's team didn't do their due diligence and went ahead under the assumption the 12GHz was available.  That person was right.
 
2022-06-24 12:49:54 PM  

inglixthemad: You say that after the FCC f**ked up radar altimeters? You say that after they initially agreed to let Lightsquared operate test facilities at high power in a bad known for working at milliwatt power?

The EU didn't have a problem with radar altimeters for a reason: They cut band range a small amount, told them to operate at lower power, made them tilt the antennas, as modifications within airport safety zones. However in the US cell carriers can afford to write fatter checks, so retrofit aircraft instead.

The reason Lightsquared failed is that GPS companies, and shipping companies, et al., could write a bigger check than they could ever hope to cover. They really knew that, but were angling to buy "cheap" spectrum and swap it (after they threatened to f**k with GPS) for far more expensive spectrum. That also failed because they couldn't even write a check fat enough to be seriously considered.

The FCC is nothing but a tool of whomever writes the biggest check.


FCC didn't fark-up the altimeters. That was the FAA. FAA said they had to be gone so the FCC could continue with the auctions. Then the FAA didn't force the airlines to update the antiquated equipment on schedule.
 
2022-06-24 12:57:20 PM  

Muta: madgonad: In a way Musk is a squatter on wireless spectrum.

How hypocritical of him.  From the link I posted earlier...

SpaceX, for its part, is advocating for guaranteed access to 12 GHz spectrum to facilitate their constellation design change (in the form of lower altitude). They are highlighting 2 data points-

1)     12-year gap: MVDDS license holders have done nothing between 2004-2016 and even today there is no terrestrial 5G operations in the band

2)     Significant investment at risk: SpaceX claims to have made $70M investment for Starlink consumer terminals. For downlink connectivity, these terminals will use the same 12 GHz frequency as the MVDDS coalition is planning for 5G terrestrial network.

One of the reasons Musk says he deserves the right to use 12GHz is that DISH was squatting on the frequency range for 12 years.

His other reason is he already spent the money.  Someone upthread speculated that Musk's team didn't do their due diligence and went ahead under the assumption the 12GHz was available.  That person was right.


Not quite. The 12ghz spectrum was used in a few cities that the tighter tower kerning and high bandwidth requirements made it useful. It certainly wasn't done on a wide basis. The realities of those upper mid-band frequencies make them useful for low-powered devices only in urban areas because those frequencies don't penetrate. Putting the antennas on a dozen downtown buildings allows the creation of many very small, but very high bandwidth 'cells'. At higher power with fixed external antennas they are also useful - which is what Musk has in mind.

Musk is trying to steal hundreds of billions of dollars in spectrum.
 
2022-06-24 1:13:55 PM  

PvtStash: SpaceX says 5G expansion would make Starlink 'unusable' for most Americans


and as most Americans  can't afford the service anyway, this sounds like it's not any kind of anything to give any chits about.


Based on its vpn performance for my remote staff I'd say that's already the case...
 
2022-06-24 1:30:45 PM  

madgonad: inglixthemad: You say that after the FCC f**ked up radar altimeters? You say that after they initially agreed to let Lightsquared operate test facilities at high power in a bad known for working at milliwatt power?

The EU didn't have a problem with radar altimeters for a reason: They cut band range a small amount, told them to operate at lower power, made them tilt the antennas, as modifications within airport safety zones. However in the US cell carriers can afford to write fatter checks, so retrofit aircraft instead.

The reason Lightsquared failed is that GPS companies, and shipping companies, et al., could write a bigger check than they could ever hope to cover. They really knew that, but were angling to buy "cheap" spectrum and swap it (after they threatened to f**k with GPS) for far more expensive spectrum. That also failed because they couldn't even write a check fat enough to be seriously considered.

The FCC is nothing but a tool of whomever writes the biggest check.

FCC didn't fark-up the altimeters. That was the FAA. FAA said they had to be gone so the FCC could continue with the auctions. Then the FAA didn't force the airlines to update the antiquated equipment on schedule.


Antiquated? The 787 doesn't have an antiquated radar altimeter. My GRA55 isn't antiquated. You need an education:

Fark user imageView Full Size


The FCC sold off the C-Band spectrum, and many have wondered... why didn't the FAA stop the FCC? Well, it couldn't straight-up stop the FCC, but it did voice its displeasure. It tried to get the auction delayed when it happened at the end of 2020, but the FCC brushed it off, saying everything would be fine. The military did the same since it happens to fly a whole lot of airplanes itself. The RTCA put a study out in 2020 saying in part that "the results presented in this report reveal a major risk that 5G telecommunications systems in the 3.7-3.98GHz band will cause harmful interference to radar altimeters on all types of civil aircraft...."

Hmm, doesn't sound like the FAA was just sitting idly by, nor is it a few types of "antiquated equipment" at all.

Apparently all this fell on deaf ears, but that doesn't mean the FAA should get off unscathed here. Maybe if it hadn't waited so long to ban certain airplanes from flying after 5G deployment, then people would have listened more. Then again, the FCC under Ajit Pai seemed hell-bent on making this happen regardless. And now, here we are.

Oh, yeah, the FCC was run by a Verizon lackey at the time. The biggest fault is the FAA should've ground some planes, well threatened to ground them anyway. Still, I'm wagering Verizon (and others) wrote fat checks to ensure they got their way.

The French antennas have permanent safeguards in airport buffer zones that provide more protection than the US ones. Further, the French antennas near airports have to be tilted downward to reduce interference, and the French antennas have far less power. Not mentioned here but also notable is that in Europe, the C-Band spectrum is in the 3.4 to 3.8 GHz range, so it's further away from the range that radio altimeters use.

Wow, so the Frenchies basically told cell companies, "You get a little less spectrum, have to angle your antennas, observe these safe zone power limitations, and such for safety. You don't like it? You can GFY.

In the US, it's just pure madness. Either regulatory authorities completely failed here, or the structure of the regulators just isn't set up to properly handle this situation. Either way, it's bad, and now we're up against this deadline where everybody is pissed off.

The system didn't fail here, the biggest check writer won. That's the way regulation has worked in the US since Ronnie Ray-Gun.

By the by: I'm rarely wrong about things that affect aircraft. I am an Commercial (only fly for fun though) ASEL / AMEL, IFR, with high performance, aerobatic, high power, high altitude, tailwheel, and turboprop signoffs. I've even got a couple type ratings for larger aircraft... again for fun. I follow this stuff because it affects me directly.
 
2022-06-24 2:42:45 PM  

inglixthemad: By the by: I'm rarely wrong about things that affect aircraft. I am an Commercial (only fly for fun though) ASEL / AMEL, IFR, with high performance, aerobatic, high power, high altitude, tailwheel, and turboprop signoffs. I've even got a couple type ratings for larger aircraft... again for fun. I follow this stuff because it affects me directly.


I'll explain it to you in wireless terms. The spectrum isn't even close to the same. It is barely even adjacent. The 5G licenses were for 3.7ghz while the altimeters operate at 4.2-4.4ghz. It honestly isn't even an issue. The LTE signals are barely going to go over 1Kw of output. There isn't enough resonant frequency bleed at that output. Even towers broadcasting at the megawatt level can't interfere with signals 500mhz down the dial. This is a made-up issue in a turf war between aviation and communications. The actual likelihood of such low powered antennas operating at such distant frequencies is nil. Sure, broadcast at a high enough gain - say a terawatt - and you would jam a whole lot of spectrum, but that isn't what is happening here.
 
2022-06-24 4:02:15 PM  
o.pinside.comView Full Size
 
2022-06-24 5:35:14 PM  

madgonad: inglixthemad: By the by: I'm rarely wrong about things that affect aircraft. I am an Commercial (only fly for fun though) ASEL / AMEL, IFR, with high performance, aerobatic, high power, high altitude, tailwheel, and turboprop signoffs. I've even got a couple type ratings for larger aircraft... again for fun. I follow this stuff because it affects me directly.

I'll explain it to you in wireless terms. The spectrum isn't even close to the same. It is barely even adjacent. The 5G licenses were for 3.7ghz while the altimeters operate at 4.2-4.4ghz. It honestly isn't even an issue. The LTE signals are barely going to go over 1Kw of output. There isn't enough resonant frequency bleed at that output. Even towers broadcasting at the megawatt level can't interfere with signals 500mhz down the dial. This is a made-up issue in a turf war between aviation and communications. The actual likelihood of such low powered antennas operating at such distant frequencies is nil. Sure, broadcast at a high enough gain - say a terawatt - and you would jam a whole lot of spectrum, but that isn't what is happening here.


I'm going to explain this in terms of hearing because you are hard of it,

IF I'M A WIRELESS PROVIDER BLASTING OUT SOMETHIGN AT A COUPLE THOUSAND WATTS IT TENDS TO FILL THE AIR WITH A LOT OF BACKGROUND NOISE THAT DIDN'T EXIST PREVIOUSLY. THIS IS AKIN TO HAVING A NEIGHBOR WHO HAS CONCERT SPEAKERS BLARING MUSIC ALL HOURS OF THE DAY/NIGHT. REALLY HARD, NIGHT IMPOSSIBLE, TO HAVE A QUIET CONVERSATION WITH A FRIEND IF ALL YOU CAN HEAR IS YOUR NEIGHBOR'S MUSIC! A FUNCTIONAL GOVERNMENT REGULATORY BODY TOLD CELL COMPANIES THEY COULDN'T DO WHAT THEY DO IN THE UNITED STATES. WHAT DID THAT LEAD TO? NO CHANGES BECAUSE THEY DO NOT INTERFERE.

Because radar altimeters designed to broadcast, and receive, very low power signals. Part of this was intentional because planes didn't always have lots of spare power to run equipment, so the lower the power requirement the better the equipment was generally received. Even today, lower power is generally considered better except for communication radio transmitters. The reason being you always plan as minimal a power draw as plausible.

The fun part being that we know the planes / equipment you despise so much as "antiquated" so much do not have a problem with France, proving my point. Oh and the previously quoted text shredded your point about the FAA doing nothing. They tried to get the FCC to stop the auction. Ajit "I love cell company checks" Pai ignored the warnings of the FAA.

Would you like to try again or have you gotten enough egg on your face today?
 
2022-06-24 7:17:31 PM  
inglixthemad: IF I'M A WIRELESS PROVIDER BLASTING OUT SOMETHIGN AT A COUPLE THOUSAND WATTS IT TENDS TO FILL THE AIR WITH A LOT OF BACKGROUND NOISE THAT DIDN'T EXIST PREVIOUSLY. THIS IS AKIN TO HAVING A NEIGHBOR WHO HAS CONCERT SPEAKERS BLARING MUSIC ALL HOURS OF THE DAY/NIGHT. REALLY HARD, NIGHT IMPOSSIBLE, TO HAVE A QUIET CONVERSATION WITH A FRIEND IF ALL YOU CAN HEAR IS YOUR NEIGHBOR'S MUSIC! A FUNCTIONAL GOVERNMENT REGULATORY BODY TOLD CELL COMPANIES THEY COULDN'T DO WHAT THEY DO IN THE UNITED STATES. WHAT DID THAT LEAD TO? NO CHANGES BECAUSE THEY DO NOT INTERFERE.

Is it akin, though? If I tune my radio to 900*, it doesn't pick up what's going on at 920**.

*can't remember the last time I tuned a radio
** still can't remember
 
2022-06-24 8:26:54 PM  

inglixthemad: IF I'M A WIRELESS PROVIDER BLASTING OUT SOMETHIGN AT A COUPLE THOUSAND WATTS IT TENDS TO FILL THE AIR WITH A LOT OF BACKGROUND NOISE THAT DIDN'T EXIST PREVIOUSLY.


No it doesn't.

XL = X2ℼfL = 1/ (2ℼfC) fr = 1/ (2ℼ √LC)

The first two resonant frequencies for 1000 watts/henrys for a 3.7ghz signal is .06 and .11 mhz adjacent to the broadcast frequency. Getting 500mhz off the broadcasting frequency is simply not measurable. While a nearby FM station that has 60db of gain over a station many miles away that is 200khz off might sometimes impact the reliability of that distant station, the reality is that 500mhz is 2500x that value AND the signal strength received at the plane from a tower is going to be closer to half a watt at best (due to distance from towers, inverse square drops that 1000 watts fast).
 
2022-06-24 9:58:25 PM  

mistahtom: Not a good use of resources to keep launching shiat into space so rural communities can jerk off to porn they want banned cuz Jesus.


Dealt with in the Boobies.

If you want to live in the arse-end of nowhere and enjoy all the wilderness and solitude and everything else along those lines, that's fine. But don't expect broadband internet.

If you want to enjoy the fruits of civilisation, like developed infrastructure, have at it, it is there for you. But understand that you have less access to untamed nature.

But here, we have an asshat who's blocking out the sky for any amateur astronomer and generally making things worse for everyone. People who like watching the skis have their view obstructed by an asshat's satellites, and aren't the costs for Muskrat's stupid internet service also very steep, too?
 
2022-06-24 10:17:58 PM  
Oh great! Appears that Dish is going to pull one like they do with TV: Cut off a major portion of their programming, engage in a 4-6 week round of finger-pointing with whichever asshats they get the programming from, and then all of a sudden restore services until the next round. The only difference being that it'll be with cell towers this time.

/Musk is still a garbage person, though.
 
2022-06-25 10:33:50 AM  

PartTimeBuddha: inglixthemad: IF I'M A WIRELESS PROVIDER BLASTING OUT SOMETHIGN AT A COUPLE THOUSAND WATTS IT TENDS TO FILL THE AIR WITH A LOT OF BACKGROUND NOISE THAT DIDN'T EXIST PREVIOUSLY. THIS IS AKIN TO HAVING A NEIGHBOR WHO HAS CONCERT SPEAKERS BLARING MUSIC ALL HOURS OF THE DAY/NIGHT. REALLY HARD, NIGHT IMPOSSIBLE, TO HAVE A QUIET CONVERSATION WITH A FRIEND IF ALL YOU CAN HEAR IS YOUR NEIGHBOR'S MUSIC! A FUNCTIONAL GOVERNMENT REGULATORY BODY TOLD CELL COMPANIES THEY COULDN'T DO WHAT THEY DO IN THE UNITED STATES. WHAT DID THAT LEAD TO? NO CHANGES BECAUSE THEY DO NOT INTERFERE.

Is it akin, though? If I tune my radio to 900*, it doesn't pick up what's going on at 920**.

*can't remember the last time I tuned a radio
** still can't remember


Receiver filters are on the expensive and large side and the existing receivers were designed without considering the out of band noise introduced.
To use your analogy, try tuning in a weak station from 100 miles away when there's a strong local station on the next adjacent channel.
Ain't gonna happen without better front end filtering added to the receiver.
 
2022-06-25 2:17:33 PM  
most americans don't have starlink so who gives a shiat.
 
Displayed 49 of 49 comments

View Voting Results: Smartest and Funniest

This thread is archived, and closed to new comments.

Continue Farking




On Twitter


  1. Links are submitted by members of the Fark community.

  2. When community members submit a link, they also write a custom headline for the story.

  3. Other Farkers comment on the links. This is the number of comments. Click here to read them.

  4. Click here to submit a link.