As does the flat Earth

Great mind-opening post by David Reed:

  …the policy issue is that such systems for multiplexing such EM fields don’t fit the “law of the land” regarding sharing the medium. So, like UWB and spread spectrum underlay, and white spaces, all that capacity will evaporate in attempting to fit the technology into the procrustean bed of the FCC’s “property rights in spectrum” legal framework.

  The “property rights” model of spectrum allocation and radio regulation is based on physics-by-analogy, ignoring the reality of propagation. It’s time to end the ignorance of economists and lawyers, and replace physics-by-analogy with better physical analysis.

My concern is that it will be, like the Net as well, analogous to nothing we know — and in the meantime we’ll be stuck with the notion of spectrum as property, for the simple reason that most of us understand the model, and it works.

Bonus link.

2 comments

  1. Tomas’s avatar

    Interesting. I’ve always wanted to go to Harvard. Unfortunately I’m not smart enough. And the country I live in is to stupid in general to have a school like Harvard. All classrooms would be empty he he.

  2. Doc Searls’s avatar

    Tomas, I wasn’t good enough as a student to even think about getting into Harvard. fwiw.

    What country are you in?

    And the link at your name… is that not a splog? Not sure. Looks kinda that way to me.

Comments are now closed.