2 Mar
2017
2 Mar
'17
3:29 p.m.
Yes, think about simply mounting things like WiFi repeaters.
A simple way to think about it is to ignore the accidental properties of the
copper wires except as one optional radio medium. What the companies really
have is ownership of the poles as real estate. Like railroads have become
real estate companies and Sprint (SP as in Southern Pacific) was a company
that start by taking advantage of the railroads right of way. It becomes
even more absurd when we treat radio frequencies as property. One reason why
copper is interesting is the original reason why Ethernet was on coax -- it
was ALOHAnet on a contained radio medium that avoided others' regulations.
If we step back, especially in the US, we have to wonder why the poles are
still owned by power companies and phone companies as a legacy of bad
metaphors. When work has to be done on poles there are complex regulations
and rental schemes. It's time to move on to more rational models with
communities owning those rights of way so we dont have legacy rent-seekers
limiting our ability to communicate.
That won't happen on its own but that's the normative model to look forward
to once there are examples to point to.
-----Original Message-----
From: dc3-bounces(a)listas.altermundi.net
[mailto:dc3-bounces@listas.altermundi.net] On Behalf Of Carlos Afonso
Sent: Thursday, March 2, 2017 09:43
To: Dynamic Coalition on Community Connectivity <dc3(a)listas.altermundi.net>
Subject: Re: [DC3] Collaborating with local power companies
A major problem is signal interference -- both from the power lines
themselves onto the modulated signal and radio interference by the
propagation of relatively low frequency waves along unshielded lines with no
harmonics suppression. Also, modulated signals are unable to "jump"
transformers, which require adaptations on these points.
Power line wifi repeaters may work nicely in internal premises though.
fraternal regards
--c.a.
On 24/02/2017 11:49, Bob Frankston wrote:
--
Carlos A. Afonso
[emails são pessoais exceto quando explicitamente indicado em contrário]
[emails are personal unless explicitly indicated otherwise]
Instituto Nupef - <https://nupef.org.br> https://nupef.org.br
CGI.br - <http://cgi.br> http://cgi.br
ISOC-BR - <https://isoc.org.br> https://isoc.org.br
_______________________________________________
DC3 mailing list
<mailto:DC3@listas.altermundi.net> DC3(a)listas.altermundi.net
<https://listas.altermundi.net/mailman/listinfo/dc3>
https://listas.altermundi.net/mailman/listinfo/dc3
First, I need to preference this is that Im answering
this in terms
of the US and the issues are different elsewhere.
Ive followed this issue over the years and there is a
lot of mythology.
The problem is the US is primarily political and
economic. If the
communities own their wires they could easily light up
the copper to
many megabits or gigabits per second. Unlike cities it
is far easier
to add wired and wireless capacity. The real costs are
actually very low.
What is expensive is taking a 1950s type approach to
use the facilities.
The other twist in the US is the cockamamie idea that
the distribution
system has to be a profit center like railroad tracks
rather than
infrastructure like roads.
The other twist is that the 20 years of interesting
using power lines
goes back to the power companies thinking there is
money in Internet
so they want to use their wires which just happen to
be copper the
same mineral that is used Ethernet thus they can make
big bucks
selling Internet alongside electricity. But if you
read their whole
pitch it becomes obvious that they are institutionally
the worst
choice. They make the phone and cable companies look
agile.
So we get back to the simple idea of communities
owning their
facilities. If they have access to the poles and
existing copper and
the ability to invest in their own gear and take
Internet native
( <http://rmf.vc/InternetNativePolicies>
http://rmf.vc/InternetNativePolicies) instead of use telecom pricing
and policies the limitations would disappear rather
quickly.
*From:*dc3-bounces@listas.altermundi.net
[ <mailto:dc3-bounces@listas.altermundi.net>
mailto:dc3-bounces@listas.altermundi.net] *On Behalf Of *Michael
Oghia
*Sent:* Friday, February 24, 2017 07:08
*To:* DC on Community Connectivity (DC3) <
<mailto:dc3@listas.altermundi.net> dc3(a)listas.altermundi.net>
*Subject:* [DC3] Collaborating with local power
companies
Hi everyone,
I just read this Interesting article:
<https://www.nytimes.com/2016/08/08/technology/how-to-give-rural-americ>
https://www.nytimes.com/2016/08/08/technology/how-to-give-rural-americ
a-broadband-look-to-the-early-1900s.html
I know the idea of providing Internet via power lines
is more or less
a defunct idea (not due to technological constraints,
but the lack of
political will to invest in it to protect existing
revenues). However,
has anyone on this list ever thought about working
with electricity
companies, especially local power companies?
Best,
-Michael
_______________________________________________
DC3 mailing list
<mailto:DC3@listas.altermundi.net>
DC3(a)listas.altermundi.net
<https://listas.altermundi.net/mailman/listinfo/dc3>
https://listas.altermundi.net/mailman/listinfo/dc3
