[Bloat] ESR's comment popped up on slashdot

I've invited readers to submit their own. When we're ready, people with local credibility should post links everywhere. I assume the FCC doesn't publish the comments as they arrive (Canada does, but gets behind due to manual moderation (:-)) --dave -- David Collier-Brown, | Always

Re: [Bloat] ESR's comment popped up on slashdot

I meant everything I said in that comment - I don't think dtaht's worthy effort rang the "national security" bell anywhere near hard enough, either as a matter of substance or as a rhetorical move. But I was also thinking tactically about how my comment would implicitly reposition the others.

Re: [Bloat] ESR's comment popped up on slashdot

Solandri wrote, at http://tech.slashdot.org/comments.pl?sid=8141531=50686089 So based on a few vague comments, I managed to track down what the issue is since neither this nor the previous/. article nor the sites opposed to it (who seem to want to portray it as a Big Evil Government conspiracy

Re: [Bloat] Another comment re FTC and weather radar from /.

Anyone who's an American citizen want to write a short to-the-point response suggesting that this was vendor error, caused by not using the database that linux uses for wi-fi cards? I want them to have a public "out" from the current scheme of telling the vendors to protect their code. I

Re: [Bloat] ESR's comment popped up on slashdot

[offtopic] And this kind of thing drives my paranoid friends *batty*. --dave I suspect none of them ever worked in a large enough organization that it had lots of inertia... which I've seen in a five-person team (;-)) On 08/10/15 03:36 PM, Dave Taht wrote: The *only* report of interference

Re: [Bloat] Another comment re FTC and weather radar from /.

How does a router that transmits at milliwatts interfere with airport equipment? This seems like such an isolated case. At the very least would it not require the routers to be relatively close? On Thu, Oct 8, 2015, 13:20 David Collier-Brown wrote: > Anyone who's an American

Re: [Bloat] Another comment re FTC and weather radar from /.

Here's a draft, below. Also at https://docs.google.com/document/d/1-HSewmPustGmV00E8u7KZ_8srNhKX_jMSSZxGcyuTaI/edit?usp=sharing On 08/10/15 04:20 PM, David Collier-Brown wrote: Anyone who's an American citizen want to write a short to-the-point response suggesting that this was vendor error,

Re: [Bloat] ESR's comment popped up on slashdot

David Collier-Brown wrote: > Based on that, it sounds like the issue is that you can buy a 5 GHz > device off the shelf, then hack the firmware to re-enable those > frequencies. And the FCC is proposing this action because people have > been doing exactly

Re: [Bloat] ESR's comment popped up on slashdot

The *only* report of interference with radars I have been able to find is a vaguely worded complaint in a 2011 document, where 40 reports of interference were found, 25 at one airport in Puerto Rico. The FCC has utterly failed to provide proof for it's argument, thus far. On Thu, Oct 8, 2015 at