[R-390] How to ruin Radio As We Know It

[Richard Loken]

On Fri, 16 Jul 2004, Sheldon Daitch wrote:

> He and I agreed that the morning streaming done, the larger
> the internet pipe has to be from the outside network, but he
> said, well, maybe the next step after copper and fiber will
> be wireless.  I thought about that a moment, and told him
> hmmm, don't we call that radio!

But it is much less efficient than radio.  An AM  radio station clutters up
15KHz and that signal can be used simultaniously by millions of listeners 
within the listening area and the listeners can use a device with eight odd
transistors plus a fist full of additional components in a plastic box with
minimal power requirements.  The bandwidth required for the same data over
tcp/ip to your computer is larger and you don't get to share (with the
present protocols etc.) so everybody will want their slice - the wireless
concept here (and cable modems for that matter) give you lots of bandwidth 
but you run out when you start to share it with other users because you don't
share it but rather you slice it up.  A radio signal is truly shared but
network bandwidth is sliced up.  Next, it takes very serious hardware to
translate data into audio - you will not find little boys building sound cards
on a wooden breadboard with a slolen razer blade and some wire.

Our netowrk administrator has blocked the majority of such connections because
we cannot afford the bandwidth.  If our staff wants to listen to radio they can
spend $10.00 and buy a radio. 

We need to relearn the concept of appropriate technology.

-- 
   Richard Loken VE6BSV, Systems Programmer - VMS  
   Athabasca University
   Athabasca, Alberta Canada
   ** richardlo at admin.athabascau.ca **