Welcome to the Slashdot Beta site -- learn more here. Use the link in the footer or click here to return to the Classic version of Slashdot.

Thank you!

Before you choose to head back to the Classic look of the site, we'd appreciate it if you share your thoughts on the Beta; your feedback is what drives our ongoing development.

Beta is different and we value you taking the time to try it out. Please take a look at the changes we've made in Beta and  learn more about it. Thanks for reading, and for making the site better!

Non Line of Sight Broadband

CmdrTaco posted more than 11 years ago | from the wouldn't-it-be-nice dept.

Hardware 168

gfilion writes "IEEE Spectrum has an article about nifty wireless adapters that don't require LOS. At first, NLOS wireless may not sound like a big deal. After all, ordinary radios and cellphones are non-line-of-sight devices. But they don't carry broadband data. What makes the latest generation of NLOS wireless technology worth talking about and having is that it delivers data at high rates over substantial distances."

cancel ×
This is a preview of your comment

No Comment Title Entered

Anonymous Coward 1 minute ago

No Comment Entered



CLIT (581942) | more than 11 years ago | (#3653293)

Pucker Up
by Tristan Taormino

Pump Up Your Clit

For years, the penis pump has been a sex toy for boys. While the devices are available in several different styles, the Dom Perignon of penis pumps is the Millennium Pump (www.millenniumpumps.com, 866-333-PUMP), a handheld contraption with assorted sizes of detachable plastic cylinders. The bottom of the cylinder creates a vacuum seal around the base of the dick, and with each squeeze of the pump, suction and pressure increases, and blood rushes to your chubby. Part of the pump's appeal is its multifaceted personality. Slip your cock into its cylinder, and this baby can get you up and help you stay that way (who needs Viagra?). The advantage of a detachable cylinder is that you can pump up, then detach the pump, leaving the pressurized cylinder on. It will also suck you off better than an ambitious intern. It may even give your hot rod a lasting boost--some guys who pump up on a regular basis report permanent increases in length (research has shown that pumping can stretch an internal ligament up to two inches).
I must admit that I am jealous that such a multitasking toy only works on men. Why can't I indulge in the pleasures of a tight seal and the suctioning ability of a Hoover? Thank the goddess, lesbian ingenuity has struck once again. In yet another step toward equal orgasmic rights, women have commandeered something originally intended only for phallic pleasure and transformed it into a tool of pussy power. Using the same pumping mechanism, and replacing the penis-sized cylinder with a smaller one (originally intended for use on nipples), chicks have created the Clit Pump.

I first took the Clit Pump for a spin when my friend Sarah brought one with her on a recent visit. When she took it out of the plastic bag, I admit that it didn't put me in the mood right away. It appeared complicated (a pressure gauge that looked like it belonged in the Tour de France, not my bedroom), clinical (tubing attached to a cylinder three and a half inches long with a five-eighths-of-an-inch diameter), and a little intimidating (a brass pump with a metal handle reminiscent of hedge clippers).

"Drop your drawers," she said with her thick English accent.

I did as I was told, and soon she was rubbing a handful of I-D Glide on my "bits" (the English have such bizarre words to describe anything sexual) and lubing up the inside of the cylinder as well. I slid my clit, its hood, and part of my inner lips in the cylinder, then pressed the rim firmly against my skin.

"Try to create a perfect seal so that the vacuum action will work," recommended Sarah.

Pump in hand, she squeezed once, and I felt a pull, like a suction cup was on my clit. She squeezed again, and blood rushed to my pussy, making it throb. Squeeze number three, and I looked down to see my clit red, swollen, and filling half the cylinder. It looked huge.

I suddenly remembered the first time I saw porn star Sydnee Steele on the set of an adult film. Like all women, when the juices started flowing, Sydnee's clit grew. But she had one of the largest I've ever seen--I was captivated by her juicy pussy and full, luscious clit that could fill my entire mouth. I recall being super turned on but also really envious. It would be so cool to have a really big clit. (See, guys, you are not the only ones who can be obsessive about size.)

With Sarah's hand wrapped firmly on the pumping mechanism, and the cylinder fused to my pussy, I was well on the way to a bigger clit (at least temporarily). As a bonus, not only was it big, when I took the cylinder off, it was supersensitive. One touch of a vibrator, and I was in outer space. I was raring to go in five minutes flat!

Scientifically speaking, it makes perfect sense that the same pleasure principle can be applied to both cock and clit. Even though we have been conditioned to think that penis is to vagina as yin is to yang, that's entirely incorrect and has kept all of us in the dark about women's pleasure. The fact is that the clitoris (not the cunt) and the penis are very similar in structural design: Both are made of erectile tissue, both fill with blood, swell, and harden during arousal. Before you reach for the pump--well, before you touch another clit (your own or someone else's), you must read Rebecca Chalker's fantastic new book The Clitoral Truth: The Secret World at Your Fingertips (Seven Stories Press). Chalker details every last millimeter of the clitoris. While it is similar to its penile counterpart, it's much more than mini-manmeat.

Which is good news for butches and other genderbenders. Karlyn Lotney, a San Francisco sex celeb and advice columnist also known as "Fairy Butch" (www.fairybutch.com), details the ups and downs of clit pumping in her book The Ultimate Guide to Strap-On Sex. One of the most knowledgeable and experienced pumping aficionados, Lotney says, "Some female-bodied people such as transmen and stone butches who do not identify with their female genitalia find that oral sex is transformed after clit pumping; because the size of the clitoris may increase dramatically, fantasies of fellatio are easily accommodated." Lotney has even pioneered a technique of penetration with a cylinder, but don't you dare attempt it without carefully reading her tips and caveats first.

Before you accuse me of penis envy (again), let me assure you I am smitten with my new toy not because it makes my clit into a cock, but because it shows me yet another incredible thing my body can do. I love new gadgets and gimmicks that get me off! The Clit Pump is an expensive little gift (around $90 for the pump and the cylinder) but I say a better stocking stuffer than that scooter you were gonna get. Your best bet is the Internet, since the pumps are not yet widely distributed in stores; however, New Yorkers are in luck. I hear Santa dropped off a big shipment at Toys in Babeland.

this FP for The Lyrics Guy, a fine CLIT (-1)

Sexual Asspussy (453406) | more than 11 years ago | (#3653295)

We're gonna be a white minority
We won't listen to the majority
We're gonna feel inferiority
We're gonna be white minority

White pride
You're an American
I'm gonna hide
Anywhere I can

Gonna be a white minority
We don't believe there's a possibility
Well you just wait and see
We're gonna be white minority

White pride
You're an American
White pride
Anywhere I can?

Gonna be a white minority
There's gonna be large cavity
Within my new territory
We're all gonna die

--Black Flag, "White Minority"

ordinary radios ...are non line of sight (2, Informative)

wiredog (43288) | more than 11 years ago | (#3653300)

Actually, FM radio is line of sight.

Re:ordinary radios ...are non line of sight (2, Informative)

Salden (571264) | more than 11 years ago | (#3653322)

Really? Then how come I can receive FM radio in my basement behind cinder block?

Re:ordinary radios ...are non line of sight (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 11 years ago | (#3653345)

The radio waves "bounce" around objects, but technically...yes, AM and FM are line-of-sight. So are cell-phones.

There's a popular tower in my metro area - rented by just about every radio station in town. On my way home from work I drive just about directly under it. My radio cuts out on every station because FM is...line of sight.

Re:ordinary radios ...are non line of sight (2)

PD (9577) | more than 11 years ago | (#3653524)

No, the signal is still there, it's just attenuated by the structure of the building. I bet that it's steel, and it's grounded. It may also be due to the fact that antennas are not omnidirectional for commercial broadcast, even AM stations. The antenna just isn't broadcasting in your direction.

Re:ordinary radios ...are non line of sight (1)

Salden (571264) | more than 11 years ago | (#3653359)

Ok, I understand that our definitions vary.

Re:ordinary radios ...are non line of sight (-1, Flamebait)

Anonymous Coward | more than 11 years ago | (#3653453)

Ok, I understand that our definitions vary.

Uh, yea, his definition is technical and yours is retarded.

Re:ordinary radios ...are non line of sight (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 11 years ago | (#3653470)

There's plenty of variance between correct definitions and ones you made up yourself. 100% variance, actually! There's nothing that makes me feel like flaming more than dumb people who try to act smart by co-opting the language of smart people.

Re:ordinary radios ...are non line of sight (2)

epepke (462220) | more than 11 years ago | (#3653367)

Cinder block is a poor conductor. Unless there's a lot, radio goes right through.


Anonymous Coward | more than 11 years ago | (#3653475)

What moron modded this retard up?

Hell, who modded the parent, who HAS A CLUE, down?

Define line of site? (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 11 years ago | (#3653330)

What is the definition of line of site for this.... as it pertains to FM reception indoors, in basements, over the horizon from the tower, etc.

Re:ordinary radios ...are non line of sight (2)

NanoGator (522640) | more than 11 years ago | (#3653348)

My FM radio works inside a tunnel...

I'm curious why you made that comment. Don't worry, I'm not assuming you're a dumb ass, I'm assuming you know more about it than I do and was hoping you could explain a little more clearly what you meant. :)

Re:ordinary radios ...are non line of sight (2, Informative)

client32 (316110) | more than 11 years ago | (#3653435)

When "line of sight" is used for FM stations it means that the signal can only carry to the horizon. Meaning your radio station would can only broadcast as far as you can see from the transmitter. This has to do with the type of wave, the fact that the earth is round, and the atmosphere. There are several website that discuss this. Search google for it.

I hope that this clears up some confusion.

Re:ordinary radios ...are non line of sight (2)

NanoGator (522640) | more than 11 years ago | (#3653484)

I hope that this clears up some confusion.

Yes it does, thank you. :)

Re:ordinary radios ...are non line of sight (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 11 years ago | (#3653441)

FM can see through tunnel walls...you don't say "well, it works behind glass!" do you? Just 'cos you use a silly wavelength of light that doesn't go through concrete doesn't mean the rest of us do.

Re:ordinary radios ...are non line of sight (1)

kryptobiotic (451986) | more than 11 years ago | (#3653499)

Your FM will work but AM probably doesn't. You recieve FM in a tunnel because it acts as a wave guide, much like TV coax cable. AM wavelengths are much longer and most tunnels won't support a propogation mode. So although you can't "see" the broadcast antenna from your car, the entrance to the tunnel can.

Re:ordinary radios ...are non line of sight (2)

NanoGator (522640) | more than 11 years ago | (#3653562)

I noticed that AM goes out in tunnels, damn near brought it up heh.

So are you saying that the radio wave enters the tunnel and then bounces around? If so, that explanation is better than the 'radio passes through concrete' explanation I got a couple of posts ago.

Re:ordinary radios ...are non line of sight (1)

tomzyk (158497) | more than 11 years ago | (#3653410)

Actually, FM radio is line of sight
Um... what's YOUR definition of Line of Sight? Because it doesn't appear to be the same as everyone else's definition. (Unless of course, you can "see" radio waves with your eyes!)

If you read the entire article, you would have read:
"LOS systems rely on a high-power transmitter at the base station, an unimpeded line of sight between transmitter and customer, and a highly directional outdoor antenna at the customer premises, ..."

How would you explain people being able to listen to a radio in their house/apartment/dorm-room? (And don't go telling me that "the radio signal goes in through a window and bounces around your house until it finds your radio antenna", because it just isn't true.)

Re:ordinary radios ...are non line of sight (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 11 years ago | (#3653438)

It is Line of Sight for the radio waves, not for visible light!
UGH!! Why are illiterates so literal?

Re:ordinary radios ...are non line of sight (5, Informative)

Lumpy (12016) | more than 11 years ago | (#3653428)

Not. not by a long shot.

FM is Frequency Modulation. it is a mode of transmitting. what you are talinkg about FM or the 88-108Megahertz broadcast band, is not line of sight. that low of a frequency has both ground waves and sky-waves. this is how in west michigan I can recieve WLUP Chicago on 97.9MHZ easily by swinging a directional gain antenna in that direction. Also, Frequencies from 88MHZ up past 450MHZ also can take advantage of tropospheric ducting.

Line of sight doesn't start until past 1.2 GHZ 802.11 equipment at 2.4ghz act like line of sight outside because of water vapro and water bearing items (leaves, squirrels, children) suck up large amounts of signal..

so NO FM is not line of sight. not in the correct term nor in your definition.

Re:ordinary radios ...are non line of sight (2)

Skuld-Chan (302449) | more than 11 years ago | (#3653600)

The reason why the 3 meter broadcast band seems like its everywhere is because a lot of stations are running out like 27,000 watts (or much more in some cases) - it would be interesting to see what path the signal takes to get to your radio. If broadcast companies used lower powers I'm sure you'd notice a big difference in propagation. Here in Oregon its hard to hear most Portland stations after you drive west on sunset highway over the Cascade Range. Anyhoo - I've seen line of sight make a big difference on all the vhf/uhf/shf bands. 70cm band for instance seems highly reflective to trees, rain, hills etc. The 2m band seems to be less prone to that sort of thing, but trust me it still exists.

Also vhf/uhf ducting is a pretty rare occurance - I only seem to hear it happening a few times a year - like when you get the chance to talk on a repeater thats way up in Canada (done that) when you normally can't.

Re:ordinary radios ...are non line of sight (2)

Lumpy (12016) | more than 11 years ago | (#3653641)

It's rare in some areas, while it happens on a monthly basis here in michigan. As for how the radio waves propagate... Buy a book called the ARRL handbook. it will teach you everything there it to know about radio wave propagation. and to get the level of Ham radio license I have you need to know it along with almost everytinhg about radio. Get that book and the ARRL antenna handbook.. they are the only two real refrences about radio propagation and reception on the planet that are readable.

Re:ordinary radios ...are non line of sight (3, Informative)

Muad'Dave (255648) | more than 11 years ago | (#3653432)

Modulation schemes have nothing to do with whether a particular transmission is line-of-sight or not. Carrier frequency does. I assume by "FM radio" you mean commercial broadcast FM as in 88-108 MHz. Why then was I receiving 96.5 WFLB (which is in Fayetteville, NC) in Richmond, VA the other morning (which has a 96.5 of its own)? Hint - Tropospheric Ducting (or tropo-ducto, as I call it, since it's nearly indistinguishable from magic - presto-chango and all that).

In general, as frequency increases, so does the line-of-sight nature of the RF. Light, being extremely high frequency RF, is very much line-of-sight. AM Radio, being between 540 kHz and 1600 kHz, can span the globe because of groundwave bending and ionospheric ducting. Amateur radio operators deal with lots of different propagation modes all the time.

Re:ordinary radios ...are non line of sight (1)

Knoxvill3 (578169) | more than 11 years ago | (#3653651)

Another thing guys is like TV, Radio waves also bounce off into Space, granted were talking AM/FM here, but their signals go anyway it can, up, down, left, right, and everyway inbetween. I feel reduntant adding this, but I didn't see it mentioned yet and hopefully will get the story striaght that radio is deffinately NLOS.

Re:ordinary radios ...are non line of sight (2, Informative)

Cmdr Taco (luser) (578089) | more than 11 years ago | (#3653458)

The best way of saying it...

FM radio is more line-of-sight than is AM radio. But of course line-of-sightedness is a characteristic that has absolutely nothing to do with the modulation method but everything to do with carrier frequency. The higher the frequency, the more line-of-sight it is. Consider light, which is very line-of-sight.

FM = Frequency Modulation in which information is encoded by varying (modulating) the frequency of the carrier.

AM = Amplitude Modulation in which information is encoded by varying the amplitude of the carrier.

Mod this up (2, Informative)

metatruk (315048) | more than 11 years ago | (#3653518)

Wiredog's right.
FM broadcast radio, as well as cell phones, and broadcast television work in the VHF and UHF bands.
Because of the frequency of the carrier wave, these bands propagate using line of sight which means that the signal's means of propagation are not by reflecting off of something such as the ground or sky.
Lower frequencies, such as local AM broadcast use ground wave propagation, because the signal reflects off of the ground.
Short wave radio tends to propagate using sky wave propagation, because the radio signal bounces off of the earth's ionosphere. This is often refered to as "skip" and can cause signals to travel across the globe.

Re:ordinary radios ...are non line of sight (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 11 years ago | (#3653599)

How do you figure? I'm in an office with no windows and reception is a-ok.

Now if.. (1, Offtopic)

ImaLamer (260199) | more than 11 years ago | (#3653307)

Only if they had this for the people in the last story they could not have had to lay so much fiber.

Re:Now if.. (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 11 years ago | (#3653341)

actually, they didnt lay much (if any) fibre. they re-used telephone wires.

Re:Now if.. (2, Interesting)

msl521 (468252) | more than 11 years ago | (#3653374)

Per household reached, its always cheaper for a wireless solution than a wireline system. Of course that return doesn't start happening until you've got quite a few people buying your service.

It costs on average about $1000-$5000 per home passed by cable. So you can start out building your network small. Or you can spend several hundred thousand dollars to over a million to build a TV station and reach a whole city.

The opinions expressed above are those off one side of my brain, the other side and my employer may not agree.

Re:Now if.. (-1)

ElCagado (575762) | more than 11 years ago | (#3653554)

I enjoy laying cable. In fact *brap thhhhp* im going to lay some right now *brap brap* esccccuse me!

This story is boring (-1, Offtopic)

Anonymous Coward | more than 11 years ago | (#3653311)

Really. *yawn* Go read it.

rural areas (2, Interesting)

TweeKinDaBahx (583007) | more than 11 years ago | (#3653318)

This is especially good for people like me, who reside in rural areas. One of the biggest bottlenecks on geting broadband up in the mountains is the fact that trenchs are expensive to dig (damned granite) and that there is no line of site.

Hopefully something useful is done with this and some committee in congress doesn't deem it a threat to 'homeland security'.

Re:rural areas (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 11 years ago | (#3653681)

are you nuts? a mountian is ALL line of sight!
let's see... put antenn on mountian, point it at a location I can see farther down... pretty damned simple if you ask me. you want ot go voer the mountian? put and antenna at the top and point down each side with a different system coupled together.

Not first post! (-1, Troll)

Anonymous Coward | more than 11 years ago | (#3653323)

It would of been, but linux dosen't have support for fast PCI modems. So I have to go on a painfully slow 300 baud serial modem instead.

Because of my circamstances, please treat this post as if it was the first.

Re:Not first post! (-1, Flamebait)

an Anonymous Cowboy (539199) | more than 11 years ago | (#3653362)

Just another point in the long list of why Linux sucks so bad. an Unstable kernel on an unstable file system, running unusable programs...but hey, its free (as in gang rape)

Re:Not first post! (1)

pbrammer (526214) | more than 11 years ago | (#3653489)

What exactly is a fast PCI modem??? What is the need to have a "fast PCI" modem??? You aren't going to throw any more data through a fast PCI pipe than a regular PCI pipe with a modem, now are you??

Network cards, SCSI cards, etc..., now that'd be a different story.

So take your Linux smackdown out of here.

Re:Not first post! (2)

NanoGator (522640) | more than 11 years ago | (#3653630)

I have a better question for you, what is a fast PCI slot? All the PCI slots I have are the same. I suppose you could mean a 64-bit PCI slot, heh that'd be overkill for a modem.

Dontcha think he meant a 'fast modem' in a PCI configuration? I haven't been able to find the reference you mentioned so I can't read the context.

On a side note: Would a 64-bit PCI slot be better suited for a Video Card than an AGP port? Just curious, I'm not very knowledgable of such things.

getting my life back (5, Funny)

orcldba (195785) | more than 11 years ago | (#3653324)

Finally I can take down my tent under that tower and move in with girl I really love.

Re:getting my life back (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 11 years ago | (#3653514)

Sorry to tell you this buddy, but she was at a "Friends & Family of Computer Addicts" meeting and it sounds like this is too late.

Noone wants broadband? (5, Interesting)

Enry (630) | more than 11 years ago | (#3653333)

What if you built a network and nobody came? The February 2002 FCC report also cited a survey from the Strategis Group (Washington, D.C.) that found that only 12 percent of on-line customers were willing to pay $40 per month for high-speed access, a number that rose to only 30 percent when the price was dropped to $25 per month.

That's really strange. Doesn't AOL cost $30/mo already? What this apparently says is that even though users can have 24x7 net access at a higher speed that doesn't tie up their phone line for a lower cost, they'll stick with what they have.

Who paid for the study, Disney?

Re:Noone wants broadband? (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 11 years ago | (#3653364)

AOL's $22/month.

Re:Noone wants broadband? (1)

gTsiros (205624) | more than 11 years ago | (#3653380)


AOL did.

Re:Noone wants broadband? (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 11 years ago | (#3653427)

Actually, AOL provides broadband services themselves. IIRC, they also do some DSL service. Their TW counterpart is also a cable company, which provides RoadRunner Cable Broadband. So even if AOL sponsored that study, it didnt really seem to influence the result

Re:Noone wants broadband? (3, Insightful)

fruey (563914) | more than 11 years ago | (#3653425)

When offering staff here a better webmail client, more than 50% said they would rather stick with what they have than to change. With training included, and additional features explained, I might add.

Saving $5 a month but having to learn a new interface, change email, or any other impediment, will stop a large number of users who read maybe 2 sites a week and read email on a non-daily basis. Broadband as a business model is shaky to say the least. Those consumers who want it happen to be those that are least wanted as consumers by the ISPs. Their cuddly minimal use people will be tying up modem pools for decades to come.

Of Course Not... (2, Funny)

LordYUK (552359) | more than 11 years ago | (#3653436)

And of course the <SARCASM> WONDERFULLY INTELLIGENT AND FRIENDLY CUSTOMER SERVICE/TECH SUPPORT REPS </SARCASM> have NOTHING to do with the lack of people getting/staying with broadband. I know when MYcable modem was going out DAILY from 2pm-6pm they <SARCASM>rushed right out to fix it!</SARCASM>

I love the "No Broadband Killer App" Argument (2)

JohnDenver (246743) | more than 11 years ago | (#3653513)

From the article:

Outside of playing interactive games, which is hardly a universal activity, no broadband "killer app" has yet emerged.

I don't know about you, but isn't quickly pirating movies and music a KILLER app? If I had broadband connection like my brother, I would probably have a collection of 200 some movies too.

So what's the real reason? You have a killer app, and a low price in some areas, yet only a fraction of people are subscribing to it? Something is fishy...

Re:I love the "No Broadband Killer App" Argument (1)

fruey (563914) | more than 11 years ago | (#3653587)

Yeah absolutely, but it's not as universal as all that. Some people just don't ever own physical copies of music, happy with duff quality AM radio, and never go to the cinema and all that

Most people want email and web access. I bet a lot of that is for occasional porn, too... statistics somewhere probably suggest that.

I think that for some low usage types, broadband adds nothing to the experience. If they have to wait 2 or 20 minutes for that one mp3 they download a week, what does it matter? They're probably online for a 30-40 minute session anyway.

HDTV hasn't had a big pickup either. A killer app won't be just more speed, but something completely new available. Most people who want good movies are perfectly happy to subscribe to cable or rent, rather than the hassle (and it is a hassle) of downloading movies "for free (not)" from the 'net.

The true broadband usefulness I see for corporate WAN and teleworking. Can't see it being useful to the home user who doesn't do much with the 'net in his/her home. Just those who are already pushing their modem to its limits and staying online forever. Chat users with no local call fees wouldn't get broadband anyway, unless they are big DCC users.

Hi! (-1, Troll)

Anonymous Coward | more than 11 years ago | (#3653356)

th1s e4rly ps0t 1s d3d1c4t3d t0:
0n by, CLITs O th3 sp0rks,
"kl3rck" o o 4nd 4ll
n0n o. .o 4Cs
o . . o
4nd o. .o p4g3
w1d3n3rs o o 4nd 4ls0
l3ngth3n3rs O 4V3RYWH3R3!
tr0llz r0x0r !!! cr4pfl00d r3wlz!

Am I the only one that's tired of radiation? (5, Interesting)

green pizza (159161) | more than 11 years ago | (#3653358)

Ok, I'm not scared enough to wear a tinfoil suit... but I'm somewhat worried about the rapid growth of wireless gear, especially those gizmos that brag about their ability to trasmit thru almost anything. Is there a point where our wireless usage will begin to cause some damage to the human body? That's a lot of energy zipping around every which way.

I know nothing about this field... but I am curious.

Nothing to worry about. (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 11 years ago | (#3653366)

The "danger of radio" myths have kicked around since Marconi. It comes from the same mindset of the person who might say "Oooh! There is an atom on me! Get it off!"

Re:Am I the only one that's tired of radiation? (5, Funny)

jandrese (485) | more than 11 years ago | (#3653390)

Better not go outside. There is the daystar thing some people refer to as the "Sun". This Sun emits tremendous amounts of radiation all across the spectrum. Fortunatly the stuff in the high spectrum is absorbed by the Ozone layer, but most of our radios operate at much lower frequencies than that. Be careful though, if you spent too much time in line of sight of the sun, it can actually burn your skin!

The Sun? (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 11 years ago | (#3653589)

Slashbots have nothing to worry about.

Re:Am I the only one that's tired of radiation? (2, Interesting)

Zerbey (15536) | more than 11 years ago | (#3653446)

Stop listening to media hype!

It's all very low power (less than 1 watt) and you should be fine, just make sure you keep the antenna pointed away from your head. Now, if it was a big 100watt transmitter you would have something to worry about. If you're really, really nervous the FCC recommends you only broadcast for 6 minutes at a time.

You're much more likely to get killed trying to make cellphone calls whilst driving.

Re:Am I the only one that's tired of radiation? (0, Troll)

Soul-Burn666 (574119) | more than 11 years ago | (#3653462)

Thei poot antenna nir mai home...

pepol sai it maik pepol stoopad!

datz total BS!!

Low tech solution (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 11 years ago | (#3653519)

When using your mobile phone, drive very fast so you will outrun the cancer rays coming from the phone. If not in a vehicle, run very fast.

Remember, it is rude to pay attention to anything besides the person you are speaking to.

Cancer rays from cell phone (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 11 years ago | (#3653678)

I think I'm covered. Every time I complete a cell call, I wash the rays off my head. I also vacuum the car so the photums and quirks and other parmicles don't collect in the carpeting.

Outrunning the rays only works if you cover the antenna in vaseline: vaseline is not a radiacion combuster.

Voltages generated by broadcast RF are tiny (2)

zerofoo (262795) | more than 11 years ago | (#3653617)

Turn on a radio or television where you normally hang out. If you get a signal you are in the RF field of that broadcast station. Wireless communication works by generating a very small voltage in any conductive material in the RF field....so anywhere you can pickup radio, television, or cell-phone signal, you have a voltage being generated in your body.

As a comparison, the voltages generated by the human nervous system are much higher since you don't lose motor control every time you enter one of these RF fields.

You probably want to avoid standing in front of a Megawatt radar station on an Aegis class destroyer, and sticking your head in a running microwave....but other than that I wouldn't worry.


Novel published in Analog + minor spoiler (0, Offtopic)

eagl (86459) | more than 11 years ago | (#3653369)

This novel was published in a multi-part format in Analog Science Fiction and Fact magazine just a few months ago. It definately kept me waiting for the next issue.

Warning - minor spoiler

One issue dealt with the book was what happens when the all-knowing personal monitoring system is compromised or degraded. The ultimate ramifications were not completely explored by the end of the novel, but the chink in the armor was exposed.


Re:Novel published in Analog + minor spoiler (0, Offtopic)

eagl (86459) | more than 11 years ago | (#3653387)

Of course I somehow posted this in the wrong topic...

Skip! (2, Funny)

Salden (571264) | more than 11 years ago | (#3653370)

Wow, now I can blow the dust off of my Antron-99 and 40 foot mast. And during the day, I may be even able to lower my routes with skip!

Re:Skip! (1)

mixbsd (574131) | more than 11 years ago | (#3653585)

Not sure you'd get EHF out of an Antron-99 - the standing wave ratio would be off the meter. Still, with a 500watt "burner", you might get some distance out of it ;)

Information wants to be WIDE! (-1, Troll)

Anonymous Coward | more than 11 years ago | (#3653378)

http://www.eveeieyhfgfcdoosammgwsnboivvbsczxlzgabc / /ooieiabdcdjsvbkeldfogjhiyeeejkagclmieooionoepdk / /abcdefmfighyiqxjklmonopqrosoyotuvwxoyqwertyuiov / /sdfghjklqewiuznmbjadzmcloeuirquakndsflksjdflkas / /fskdfasiewurznmcvweroiqewrnamdnzcvuowieramnfkas / /dfhzuxcihskjrnakjzkjcxbviusayrkajsfzxncvizudyri / /bakdnfbzkcvhgiuegriweramdnfzxlcvueirhamdnzkciue / /jranbsdmfzcowierandmfxzncbkjhfabsdifuweajzkxcuw / /erhasdfzxncvkjdfyiuzxcnvsikirkajeajsbdfkzxbuyef / /rahsdjbzcvxmnvcuweyriausdnfzxbcvkwueyrajnbvkjxg / /iwueyajdfkzxjcnbkeyriaushdfkjbzbuowrnasdkfbhuie / /asjmfnkkbyiurnakjsndfkzjbhiuwerajsknfkzbyhweiua / /dkfjbzkxvbjywekrjaskjnvzxjcweruiasdhfkzjxnsjkld / /fasoidfjalskdfasklhfxjdnmenrqoiuozxcopjgneaksjo / /nzxdkfajlsdfkljsdfoiasdfasndflzxkcvozixucoqweiu / /pwoeiruzxmncvoutyqwerizxnvmxmcnvoweurqmznxmbouw / /rmnzbkhuyrtjghanzxcvbkhgjweyriaudfbznbkweruyabz / /bcvnkdhityqhagsdfjglsieurakfsdnfbvfdsajkbiuyqwe / /kweorjasdknfbkjsdoifuzxbcmfgsltjewioahsdfnbzxcb / /heoiroaisjdfzbxckjksrhiuehadsfbzkxjcbhkeuryaksj / /fzbxcvkxlkcnvmndskfjwehaiursdfzjxnbjkdfhskdflas / /yroausdfzxmncvskeyiqozsjhfasdfoiwueranmcnzbkjhd / /ueafhksjfwheuirasdjhbzxiuewjhasmdnkfzxciurhaskj / /roiquwermcvkhiruhasdkjfnzxkjyeiuahsdbzxckjvopwe / /uqweuirjhvxzckjhweriuasydfoiqurnmxckvhweruiahdj / /znkxcvjhwierahsfzkxhhidufhsakjbzxjchiwueryqagsd / /kjhaksdfnbakwreyhaisknfjkzxbcvkoiqwueraskfzxcbk / /nlkwejrasoidjfxzlknvlkwjeroiasudflknzxlkbjeoiru / /slkdjfzxnmvkljdfawienzxveoriuaskdfjzxcmbnkseuri / /kfjlznxcvksjroeijasdklzjfowierqouasdhfzxncbkjhd / /jsdfljkweoriuasdfkjzxmcnvlkjdowuieraksdflkzxjbo / /werklasdnfmzxclkjewoijasdlfknzlkjwoeirqpweoiasd / /kjzxjvwperaksdjfxzweirjaslkdfzxnclvkjweroiasufd / /zxclkjeworijasdflknzlbkoiwuraksjflknxblkwjerois / /jfweknasdkfjzoxijkenraksjdfoizxjvlknwerlkajsdfo / /yroausdfzxmncvskeyiqozsjhfasdfoiwueranmcnzbkjhd / /ueafhksjfwheuirasdjhbzxiuewjhasmdnkfzxciurhaskj / /roiquwermcvkhiruhasdkjfnzxkjyeiuahsdbzxckjvopwe / /uqweuirjhvxzckjhweriuasydfoiqurnmxckvhweruiahdj / /znkxcvjhwierahsfzkxhhidufhsakjbzxjchiwueryqagsd / /kjhaksdfnbakwreyhaisknfjkzxbcvkoiqwueraskfzxcbk / /nlkwejrasoidjfxzlknvlkwjeroiasudflknzxlkbjeoiru / /slkdjfzxnmvkljdfawienzxveoriuaskdfjzxcmbnkseuri / /kfjlznxcvksjroeijasdklzjfowierqouasdhfzxncbkjhd / /jsdfljkweoriuasdfkjzxmcnvlkjdowuieraksdflkzxjbo / /werklasdnfmzxclkjewoijasdlfknzlkjwoeirqpweoiasd / /kjzxjvwperaksdjfxzweirjaslkdfzxnclvkjweroiasufd / /zxclkjeworijasdflknzlbkoiwuraksjflknxblkwjerois / /jfweknasdkfjzoxijkenraksjdfoizxjvlknwerlkajsdfo / /erhasdfzxncvkjdfyiuzxcnvsikirkajeajsbdfkzxbuyef / /rahsdjbzcvxmnvcuweyriausdnfzxbcvkwueyrajnbvkjxg / /iwueyajdfkzxjcnbkeyriaushdfkjbzbuowrnasdkfbhuie / /asjmfnkkbyiurnakjsndfkzjbhiuwerajsknfkzbyhweiua / /dkfjbzkxvbjywekrjaskjnvzxjcweruiasdhfkzjxnsjkld / /fasoidfjalskdfasklhfxjdnmenrqoiuozxcopjgneaksjo / /nzxdkfajlsdfkljsdfoiasdfasndflzxkcvozixucoqweiu / /pwoeiruzxmncvoutyqwerizxnvmxmcnvoweurqmznxmbouw / /rmnzbkhuyrtjghanzxcvbkhgjweyriaudfbznbkweruyabz / /bcvnkdhityqhagsdfjglsieurakfsdnfbvfdsajkbiuyqwe / /kweorjasdknfbkjsdoifuzxbcmfgsltjewioahsdfnbzxcb / /heoiroaisjdfzbxckjksrhiuehadsfbzkxjcbhkeuryaksj / /fzbxcvkxlkcnvmndskfjwehaiursdfzjxnbjkdfhskdflas / /yroausdfzxmncvskeyiqozsjhfasdfoiwueranmcnzbkjhd / /ueafhksjfwheuirasdjhbzxiuewjhasmdnkfzxciurhaskj / /roiquwermcvkhiruhasdkjfnzxkjyeiuahsdbzxckjvopwe / /uqweuirjhvxzckjhweriuasydfoiqurnmxckvhweruiahdj / /znkxcvjhwierahsfzkxhhidufhsakjbzxjchiwueryqagsd / /kjhaksdfnbakwreyhaisknfjkzxbcvkoiqwueraskfzxcbk / /nlkwejrasoidjfxzlknvlkwjeroiasudflknzxlkbjeoiru / /slkdjfzxnmvkljdfawienzxveoriuaskdfjzxcmbnkseuri / /kfjlznxcvksjroeijasdklzjfowierqouasdhfzxncbkjhd / /jsdfljkweoriuasdfkjzxmcnvlkjdowuieraksdflkzxjbo / /werklasdnfmzxclkjewoijasdlfknzlkjwoeirqpweoiasd / /kjzxjvwperaksdjfxzweirjaslkdfzxnclvkjweroiasufd / /zxclkjeworijasdflknzlbkoiwuraksjflknxblkwjerois / /jfweknasdkfjzoxijkenraksjdfoizxjvlknwerlkajsdfo / /yroausdfzxmncvskeyiqozsjhfasdfoiwueranmcnzbkjhd / /ueafhksjfwheuirasdjhbzxiuewjhasmdnkfzxciurhaskj / /roiquwermcvkhiruhasdkjfnzxkjyeiuahsdbzxckjvopwe / /uqweuirjhvxzckjhweriuasydfoiqurnmxckvhweruiahdj / /znkxcvjhwiera [goatse.cx]

Well, it ain't wide (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 11 years ago | (#3653646)

Well, it ain't wide in Netscape 4.7, but it sure is long and stupid looking.

This is good news(great if you're in the sticks)! (3, Interesting)

dlur (518696) | more than 11 years ago | (#3653383)

My house is encircled and enshrouded by a dense cover of mature mapple and walnut trees, such that I'm unable to mooch off my company's wireless internet because there is no line of sight and the trees degrade the connection so badly that it's not even worth trying if there were.

Once this comes down in price(I'm guessing it's still semi-expensive since it's newer technology) it will be great for all the rural areas out here in the sticks.

A friend that owns an ISP in this area already has plans in the works to create a 802.11x grid in the areas surrounding my town in order to provide high-speed access to the farmers and very small towns(less than 50 people) that don't have any form of cable or dsl. So far the only hang-up has been the construction of towers in the void areas where there are no grain bins or elevators tall enough out in the areas where an access point and repeater is needed. Judging by the information provided in this article he may be able to skip out on some of these towers due to the greater distance provided by the NLOS technology.

Re:This is good news(great if you're in the sticks (2)

PD (9577) | more than 11 years ago | (#3653542)

I hadn't thought of that. Compensate for insecure WEP with a bunch of maple trees. Restrict the signal to your yard.

Re:This is good news(great if you're in the sticks (1)

dlur (518696) | more than 11 years ago | (#3653556)

I hadn't thought of that. Compensate for insecure WEP with a bunch of maple trees. Restrict the signal to your yard.

Yes, I like to call it "Security through shrubery"

You want into my network? NIT!

would work even in urban areas (1)

frankmu (68782) | more than 11 years ago | (#3653400)

i sure would like this for my parents. they live in the middle of Honolulu, yet they are too far from the nearest DSLAM, and we would need to dig a trench to bring cable from the sidewalk to the house. no wires can simplify things a great deal.

the article didn't mention the speed, but compared it to Bluetooth. would that be fast enough for video and voice?

non-line of sight? (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 11 years ago | (#3653413)

Does this mean it is "outta sight"?

Note: post people under 40 will have no idea wat that refrence means.

Packet Sniffers (1)

Salden (571264) | more than 11 years ago | (#3653423)

man, if 802.11b is already out of control, this is just going to be rediculous. So much data flying through the air. I just need an antenna, a NLOS NIC and a nice packet sniffer. I could rule the world!

Re:Packet Sniffers (1)

boto (145530) | more than 11 years ago | (#3653529)

> I just need an antenna, a NLOS NIC and a nice packet sniffer. I could rule the world!

...and I just need to encrypt my data.
Have you ever heard of encryption? :)
Transmitting non-encrypted data over the air is stupid.
Well, but there is a lot of people that do stupid things, out there ;)

I've had this for 4 years (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 11 years ago | (#3653429)

My provider calls Non Line of Sight Broadband "ADSL". And my neighbor has it also, thought it's called "Cable".

How large are the units? (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 11 years ago | (#3653450)

If the units are to scale in the photo listed, who cares if it is NLOS? The photo makes them seem HUGE! I would want to be able to bring my wireless connection with me everywhere I went.

Do they have any smaller devices?

Re:How large are the units? (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 11 years ago | (#3653532)

Nokia's site [nokia.com] says:
Measuring less than 30" in height, the unit includes a versatile mount to attach to a variety of surfaces.

This unit [ipwireless.com] looks more portable.

TV (3, Insightful)

wowbagger (69688) | more than 11 years ago | (#3653461)

Excuse me, but TV is non-line of sight, and moves a lot of data (precious little INFORMATION, but that's another rant).

Re:TV (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 11 years ago | (#3653517)

over the air TV is LOS.... maybe this poster has cable - and that (obviously) isn't LOS. So many of the postings here are from folks that are clueless about RF. Why do you think TV towers are so bloody tall - and why the TV transmitters take up whole buildings (high power is needed because the gain/bandwidth needs to be so blasted big)...

THE S/N (or Eb/No for the true digiteri) on /. is getting poorer and poorer because so many postings are from stupid people who think they know something - but really don't....

Re:TV (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 11 years ago | (#3653586)

If TV is LOS then how come I can watch my TV inside my house with the curtains drawn?

Re:TV (1)

larry bagina (561269) | more than 11 years ago | (#3653553)

Excuse me, but TV is non-line of sight, and moves a lot of data (precious little INFORMATION, but that's another rant).

Yes, but TV is a one-way street (ie - shouting at it doesn't do you any good)

LINUX SUCKS! (-1, Offtopic)

Anonymous Coward | more than 11 years ago | (#3653478)

If you AGREE, then moderate this to -1.
IF you DISAGREE, then moderate this to 5, INFORMATIVE!


Well, that depends on your definiton of broadband. (1)

PrimeWaveZ (513534) | more than 11 years ago | (#3653492)

Many wireless providers using 3G networks outside of the US provide fast data access through their non-LOS devices, and I agree with the other poster that TV and now Digital TV move large amounts of data through non line of sight methods as well. My Apple WAP does non-LOS, albeit at a relatively slow rate and shorter distance.

And it depends on your definition of "substantial" (2)

Mulletproof (513805) | more than 11 years ago | (#3653507)

"maintaining an adequate signal-to-noise ratio would require a service provider to install a transceiver base station every 50 meters, a proposition that would appear to be prohibitively expensive"

50 meters? Hmmm...

WTF? (3, Interesting)

uslinux.net (152591) | more than 11 years ago | (#3653512)

The February 2002 FCC report also cited a survey from the Strategis Group (Washington, D.C.) that found that only 12 percent of on-line customers were willing to pay $40 per month for high-speed access, a number that rose to only 30 percent when the price was dropped to $25 per month.

Huh? I pay $21.95 for 40Kbps dialup access and $22/month for a second phone line. I'd sure as hell pay $40 a month for HIGH SPEED access. In fact, I'd pay double that without blinking. Right now I'm looking into frame and 802.11 solutions, but I have trouble stomaching $550/month for T-1 speeds, and I've had only minimal luck finding people who are interested in $50/month colo (hey, if you're interested, e-mail me). All I want is high speed, no restrictions on running VPNs, and low latency (so I can use ssh).

And frankly, it seems MARKETING is the real problem. If you offered $20/month dialup users access which was 2.5 times their existing speed for the same cost, they'd be crazy not to take it. So, MARKET it at 128kbps for $20/month, $30/month for 256kbps, $40 for 512kbps, etc. Bandwidth is like a drug - once you realize what you can do with it, you always want more. Maybe people aren't interested in paying $40/month when they spend $20 and use a computer 30 minutes each week, but if you get them in the habit of sitting down whenever they want to look something up, find a recipe, phone number, etc, they will soon *realize* what benefits a permanent, high speed connection have. Heck, think how many trees the phone company would save if everyone used the internet to look up phone numbers, and they stopped printing phone books.

1 \/\/@5 H@X0R30 B7 @ 37337 5CRip+ k1d133 (-1, Offtopic)

Anonymous Coward | more than 11 years ago | (#3653535)

[root@localhost run]# ./john -users=ian passwd.1
Loaded 1 password (Standard DES [24/32 4K])
guesses: 0 time: 0:00:00:05 (3) c/s: 21074 trying: spird! - stuplie
guesses: 0 time: 0:00:17:07 (3) c/s: 33153 trying: Mynsalf - Muggssy
guesses: 0 time: 0:00:17:08 (3) c/s: 33155 trying: Mebred1 - Matelm1
guesses: 0 time: 0:00:17:10 (3) c/s: 33159 trying: Mclp162 - MogBag1
guesses: 0 time: 0:00:17:16 (3) c/s: 33173 trying: Myctrd! - Mulkuac
guesses: 0 time: 0:00:17:19 (3) c/s: 33179 trying: Messazo - Max1926
guesses: 0 time: 0:00:17:30 (3) c/s: 33204 trying: Mynsh98 - Muggy93
guesses: 0 time: 0:00:17:32 (3) c/s: 33206 trying: l069l - gul1h
guesses: 0 time: 0:00:17:33 (3) c/s: 33207 trying: Brur4 - sleb5
guesses: 0 time: 0:00:17:34 (3) c/s: 33198 trying: arlb5 - pyzlh
guesses: 0 time: 0:00:17:36 (3) c/s: 33150 trying: buf4n - cyd2t
guesses: 0 time: 0:00:17:37 (3) c/s: 33186 trying: egaye - nli9l
guesses: 0 time: 0:00:17:43 (3) c/s: 33197 trying: pyb080 - hyvtma
guesses: 0 time: 0:00:17:44 (3) c/s: 33199 trying: a1sk99 - joe8is
guesses: 0 time: 0:00:17:46 (3) c/s: 33170 trying: Moma73 - pct5ll
guesses: 0 time: 0:00:17:49 (3) c/s: 33177 trying: Scuwls - BRacst
guesses: 0 time: 0:00:17:50 (3) c/s: 33212 trying: cpcl28 - rhuiu1
guesses: 0 time: 0:00:17:51 (3) c/s: 33215 trying: mbfrng - 1118m3
guesses: 0 time: 0:00:17:52 (3) c/s: 33216 trying: adopun - jazd04
guesses: 0 time: 0:00:17:53 (3) c/s: 33218 trying: BUEs14 - crbc1a
guesses: 0 time: 0:00:18:25 (3) c/s: 33301 trying: scpedava - chwndis2
guesses: 0 time: 0:00:18:27 (3) c/s: 33305 trying: saveleos - copscons
guesses: 0 time: 0:00:18:28 (3) c/s: 33307 trying: abowfrth - tayakis2
guesses: 0 time: 0:00:18:38 (3) c/s: 33300 trying: bevRLEAX - almbeck.
guesses: 0 time: 0:00:21:24 (3) c/s: 33216 trying: bulthent - anarmome
guesses: 0 time: 0:00:21:36 (3) c/s: 33156 trying: cumagdus - megrruom
guesses: 0 time: 0:00:21:40 (3) c/s: 33146 trying: mooka045 - phcapniu
guesses: 0 time: 0:00:21:42 (3) c/s: 33140 trying: betdffre - aleesce2
guesses: 0 time: 0:00:21:44 (3) c/s: 33139 trying: artrlo14 - tecocalk
guesses: 0 time: 0:00:21:46 (3) c/s: 33113 trying: pryporn8 - bobopok1
guesses: 0 time: 0:00:21:46 (3) c/s: 33132 trying: sapticts - conn0lt!
guesses: 0 time: 0:00:21:47 (3) c/s: 33131 trying: mansoGra - pitrlJis
guesses: 0 time: 0:00:21:48 (3) c/s: 33130 trying: curiphot - medethes
guesses: 0 time: 0:00:21:49 (3) c/s: 33126 trying: trotsisa - stonshes
guesses: 0 time: 0:00:21:50 (3) c/s: 33123 trying: chriphu4 - mcfamce8
guesses: 0 time: 0:00:21:51 (3) c/s: 33118 trying: telegrtz - spoonik.
guesses: 0 time: 0:00:21:52 (3) c/s: 33115 trying: cuthmbda - meanel99
guesses: 0 time: 0:00:21:53 (3) c/s: 33112 trying: mettanas - palielip
guesses: 0 time: 0:00:21:54 (3) c/s: 33108 trying: blinnySR - aphrsoly
guesses: 0 time: 0:00:21:55 (3) c/s: 33107 trying: tacknrs0 - suguutag
guesses: 0 time: 0:00:21:58 (3) c/s: 33102 trying: albentom - topputig
guesses: 0 time: 0:00:21:59 (3) c/s: 33101 trying: plyemyse - brommbl1
guesses: 0 time: 0:00:22:00 (3) c/s: 33101 trying: blppuanc - apoick1d
guesses: 0 time: 0:00:22:01 (3) c/s: 33100 trying: amcncrs4 - thurdeto
guesses: 0 time: 0:00:22:02 (3) c/s: 33098 trying: pacdllco - bullbu29
guesses: 0 time: 0:00:22:03 (3) c/s: 33096 trying: gj0k - 0zlg
guesses: 0 time: 0:00:22:04 (3) c/s: 33091 trying: amarkbal - thankroo
guesses: 0 time: 0:00:22:05 (3) c/s: 33091 trying: pelifton - biggymer
guesses: 0 time: 0:00:22:07 (3) c/s: 33090 trying: bresclds - abrutlta
guesses: 0 time: 0:00:22:18 (3) c/s: 33073 trying: stabrtop - cria won
guesses: 0 time: 0:00:23:49 (3) c/s: 32750 trying: glufta - gckboa
guesses: 0 time: 0:00:25:24 (3) c/s: 32265 trying: sochamie - csbrioni
guesses: 0 time: 0:00:29:05 (3) c/s: 31977 trying: locivg - MECh4s
guesses: 0 time: 0:00:29:09 (3) c/s: 31985 trying: loos9? - MESCfc
guesses: 0 time: 0:00:29:10 (3) c/s: 31985 trying: wuIRD - k7gre
guesses: 0 time: 0:00:29:11 (3) c/s: 31987 trying: cyvks - BAly4
guesses: 0 time: 0:00:29:12 (3) c/s: 31989 trying: riwt1 - 15g27
guesses: 0 time: 0:00:29:13 (3) c/s: 31991 trying: wAllm - kRvig
guesses: 0 time: 0:00:29:14 (3) c/s: 31993 trying: ph13r - bcA9s
guesses: 0 time: 0:00:29:16 (3) c/s: 31998 trying: n9tkp - ggp8i
guesses: 0 time: 0:00:30:27 (3) c/s: 31913 trying: av623r - brrryB
guesses: 0 time: 0:00:30:33 (3) c/s: 31905 trying: av6eyc - brrvbk
guesses: 0 time: 0:00:30:35 (3) c/s: 31899 trying: TIdth - TARdy
guesses: 0 time: 0:00:30:39 (3) c/s: 31913 trying: Tgtni - Ttksu
guesses: 0 time: 0:00:37:00 (3) c/s: 32294 trying: tmyJh1 - lubrfy
guesses: 0 time: 0:00:44:22 (3) c/s: 32091 trying: jp0d? - gfyt9
guesses: 0 time: 0:00:50:23 (3) c/s: 32077 trying: battHaus - papatomo
guesses: 0 time: 0:00:56:42 (3) c/s: 31608 trying: klpt3w - kwcl9b
guesses: 0 time: 0:00:56:47 (3) c/s: 31609 trying: krik9e - kbceot
guesses: 0 time: 0:01:01:12 (3) c/s: 31016 trying: rric86 - b29354
guesses: 0 time: 0:01:02:39 (3) c/s: 31051 trying: rhnyd4 - Byrc1n
guesses: 0 time: 0:01:04:05 (3) c/s: 31067 trying: mhabrn - Mut1bc
guesses: 0 time: 0:01:47:44 (3) c/s: 32299 trying: aupirsal - toliary2
guesses: 0 time: 0:01:58:09 (3) c/s: 32273 trying: mal7r - 190zr
guesses: 0 time: 0:02:00:22 (3) c/s: 32293 trying: t19tm2 - 1mrwdt
guesses: 0 time: 0:02:02:32 (3) c/s: 32266 trying: ddegh24 - ausin05
guesses: 0 time: 0:02:11:49 (3) c/s: 31484 trying: twEG2n - 1blrpr
guesses: 0 time: 0:02:24:35 (3) c/s: 31490 trying: pektem99 - bbcompig
guesses: 0 time: 0:02:28:48 (3) c/s: 31505 trying: fOGMIUM - frdgght
guesses: 0 time: 0:02:35:01 (3) c/s: 31447 trying: bcevyay - seyni64
guesses: 0 time: 0:02:46:38 (3) c/s: 31355 trying: TuyJp6 - TOY14k
guesses: 0 time: 0:02:47:54 (3) c/s: 31339 trying: MEAGr12 - Suzef11
guesses: 0 time: 0:03:05:42 (3) c/s: 30993 trying: rupelaiN - roshu108
guesses: 0 time: 0:03:08:49 (3) c/s: 30966 trying: ranh1en - fmivue2
guesses: 0 time: 0:03:18:57 (3) c/s: 30972 trying: sav15462 - cispoksa
guesses: 0 time: 0:03:33:32 (3) c/s: 30770 trying: Skyal81 - bblcabs

I posted this a while ago... (2)

cnkeller (181482) | more than 11 years ago | (#3653607)

We're [beamreachnetworks.com]well along with our product. We'll be Virginia doing field trials with Verizon next month.

The highlights: non-line of sight, near symmetric T1 speeds to the home user, VOIP, low latency, and adaptive beam-forming. If you're too far for DSL or cable, check us out.

Most broadband is non-line of sight... (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 11 years ago | (#3653684)

...well it is - I can't see my ISP. Can you?
Load More Comments
Slashdot Account

Need an Account?

Forgot your password?

Don't worry, we never post anything without your permission.

Submission Text Formatting Tips

We support a small subset of HTML, namely these tags:

  • b
  • i
  • p
  • br
  • a
  • ol
  • ul
  • li
  • dl
  • dt
  • dd
  • em
  • strong
  • tt
  • blockquote
  • div
  • quote
  • ecode

"ecode" can be used for code snippets, for example:

<ecode>    while(1) { do_something(); } </ecode>
Sign up for Slashdot Newsletters
Create a Slashdot Account