3 ms·
And this is why the FCC requirements make little sense. Such products are used all over the world. Forcefully limiting the freedom in one locale is catering to
by devereaux 10y ago
And this is why the FCC requirements make little sense. Such products are used all over the world. Forcefully limiting the freedom in one locale is catering to the lowest common denominator.
Instead, the ability to use spectrum should be controlled by the end user, through some hardware measure (ex: jumpers) that is done at the user own responsibility.
- colanderman 10y ago"The government should not regulate the shared limited resource of radio bandwidth because it is useful to work around restrictions on free speech" is nonsensical. If your government significantly curtails free speech, then it either is also so fascist that it doesn't care what you think about bandwidth regulation, or (as in the case of the GP) it is so technologically incompetent that it effectively does not regulate the airwaves. Either way your suggestion is useless.
- bhickey 10y agoYou're misrepresenting what the GP post said and being obnoxious about it. Given that there are different regulatory regimens, locking down hardware to a particular locale may be inappropriate. For example, Channel 14 is fine in Japan and 13 in the EU but not the US. Restricting the whole world to 11 channels to comply with US law would be silly.
- colanderman 10y agoYes, I misread his post. My mistake.