Forum unknown
· Software Developers
Ayn Rand,LP,Packet Radi
3 messages in this thread
To argue for regulations that prohibit the free interchange of information, and
permit a small body of people to determine the actions of many, is in itself a
revolting thought.
Perhaps early radio WAS chaotic, but so is the home computer industry, and so
is any new industry undergoing great technological innovation. To regulate is
to set standards which impede innovation (witness he IBM PC's de facto standard
impact – and this one was voluntary!).
No business can stay chaotic for long – and left to it's own devices industries
either settle down and make aequitable arrangements between all parties, or
they inovate themselves out of existance. To impose controls is to deny the
intelligence of people, which is to assume the existance of an elite which can
(and will) make rules for the rest, which leads to the cause of 99.9999% of the
problems in today's world… — chris
I find myself in the awkward position of defending the FCC though I have done
my share of complaining about some of their decisions, but here goes.
Due to the laws of physics and technological limitations, the useful radio
frequency spectrum is limited. The primary job of the FCC is to fairly allocate
those limited frequencies and insure that one transmitter does not infringe
upon the operation of another. Television requires much more bandwidth than
radio or current digital transmission and so one television channel uses as
much spectrum 'real estate' as many radio stations would. For this reason,
amoung others, television channels were alloted as little spectrum as possible.
In order to increase the number of scan lines from 525 to 625, would either
require more space being alotted for TV (thus bumping ALOT of radio channels)
or some kind of new method for getting more info. in the same bandwidth.
The FCC does its job primarily by saying, "your equipment will operate on these
frequencies and within these tolerances.". How you do that is your business. I
have never heard of the FCC writing a standard that was a defacto endorsement
of one company's product.
– Bob
I find myself in the awkward position of defending the FCC though I have done
my share of complaining about some of their decisions, but here goes.
Due to the laws of physics and technological limitations, the useful radio
frequency spectrum is limited. The primary job of the FCC is to fairly allocate
those limited frequencies and insure that one transmitter does not infringe
upon the operation of another. Television requires much more bandwidth than
radio or current digital transmission and so one television channel uses as
much spectrum 'real estate' as many radio stations would. For this reason,
amoung others, television channels were alloted as little spectrum as possible.
In order to increase the number of scan lines from 525 to 625, would either
require more space being alotted for TV (thus bumping ALOT of radio channels)
or some kind of new method for getting more info. in the same bandwidth.
The FCC does its job primarily by saying, "your equipment will operate on these
frequencies and within these tolerances.". How you do that is your business. I
have never heard of the FCC writing a standard that was a defacto endorsement
of one company's product.
– Bob