Wireless Net Access in Your Car 187
Alex writes "If this item is any indicator of the next big rage, then perhaps lawmakers may want to expand the limits on cell phone use in a moving automobile. Broadband2Wireless is about to launch a wireless MAN that would allow one to connect to the internet from anywhere in the city. While the service is not aimed at vehicles, the "company demo-mobile" is bound to attract copy-cats looking to be the first on their block with a network in their car. " 1.5mb for $50 a month? They don't plan to support
mobile users quite yet, but the article says they will when they have the coverage. It sure would be awesome.
Cool. (Score:1)
More trouble on the road. (Score:1)
Just because you can do something doesn't mean that you should.
Galactic Geek
Re:Is this a killer app for the car? (Score:2)
And run over how many people on the way? Or get someone to drive for you -- I can't afford that.
Mobiles are pretty dangerous, but computers???
The next traffic jam: (Score:1)
--
Re:cheaper than Ricochet? (Score:1)
On Tuesday my Broadband2Wireless [bb2w.com] (their service is now called Airora [airora.com]) connection gets installed. I'm hoping for the best after nearly 2 years of trying with the cable companies and the phone company.
Re:Is this a killer app for the car? (Score:1)
I'm curious about your bike ride. You have a place to take a shower when you get in?
I have to tell you, Atlanta has to to be one of THE MOST unfriendly places for bikers and pedestrians. Most suburbs don't even have sidewalks, and I'd never ride a bike on most of the roads (no gutters or sidewalks). You'd get a ticket on the interstate for trying to take your bike there. It really sucks. Guess I'm just venting. I actually have to put the bikes on my car rack to drive them five miles to the park where we can ride them.
We shouldn't be encouraging you (Score:1)
Then I saw this...
|*| Ask not what you country can do for you. Ask what you can do for your country. -- anonymous |*|
If you don't know who said this, please finish your American history homework before you go out to play kickball at recess and don't post to any newsgroups on your older brother's computer. Stupid opinions do count and should be given due respect, however, you are really pushing the limits.
Re:Not limited to cars! (Score:2)
My Novatel Wireless [novatelwireless.com] Merlin card and Ricochet [ricochet.com]subscription give my iPaq access to the entire internet at 128kbps anywhere I go at up to 70 m.p.h. in 14 major metro areas.
Think of the possibilities, indeed. This type of service already exists.
mroe proposals for surfing the web while driving (Score:1)
Re:Overrrated (Score:1)
It's when moderator N thinks moderators 0 through (N - 1) moderated your comment up too high. Sucks when you're at the auto-+1 stage (start at 2) and at max karma. If somebody thinks your comment is funny/informative/whatever, you gain no karma. If somebody then later disagrees with the first moderation(s), you _lose_ karma for the overated moderation. So this means that potential the math works like this: 50 + 3 - 1 = 49. Sucks. IMHO the overrated and underrated moderations should be removed, becuase their intent (discouraging unfair moderation) is aptly handled by meta-moderation.
--
News for geeks in Austin: www.geekaustin.org [geekaustin.org]
Re:Anyone want to start a Company? (Score:1)
So was I.
I've read up and down the posts, I've searched the net, but found no factual information about this. Is it UMTS ? Just wondering with the speed they're offering. The "usual" 802.11 is SUPPOSED to go to 11Mbps, but rarely gets more than 2 Mbps sustained while in motion.
I'm just wondering 'coz I tried to set up a wireless no-per-minutte-charges internet in Copenhagen a few years back, we got squished by the big telecomunications companies. I guess this wont be much of a problem anymore with flatrate internet access everywhere.
Still I'm intrested but apparently the only way to get more info is to subscribe to a mailing-list with no disclaimer, or privacy statement. Not very encouraging.
Oh.. And about Your idea of using the 2.4 GHz spectrum. Forget it... Have You noticed how much equipment is out there on the 2.4GHz unlicenced spectrum ? There was an article on slashdot [slashdot.org] a while ago. And I must say that the comments were right on the mark. You CANNOT buy a 2.4GHz product and expect it to work.
Re:another mindless, "one size fits all" law (Score:1)
Thats ridiculous. Of course pilots can do all of this. The space to the next plane is generally not a fraction of a second. There is much more time to react. The main obstacles are the ground and the other planes. On larger planes where the pilot is more taxed they have sophisticated devices to aid him. There are very few sharp corners in a flight. To compare the two is foolish.
It's NOT a traffic jam... (Score:4)
here comes -1
Re:What a smartie! (Score:1)
Micro is (mu).
Mega is M.
Bit is b.
Byte is B.
Little unit, little letter. Big unit, big letter.
Re:A F1r57 Post from the Interstate (Score:2)
And yes, if you want to do limo-LAN, I have a hub, a gateway, and an inverter that'll keep up to 4 laptops charged all the time.
So (yawn) I'm supposed to be impressed with some guy in Boston who has *one* laptop in a lowly stock Mercedes sedan?
- Robin
(for those who Slashdot readers who don't know, I have the "roblimo" nick because I have owned a limo service for many years.)
Re:First Cell phones, now... (Score:1)
We shouldn't be encouraging car use (Score:1)
Necessary? (Score:1)
I can see only limited necessity for such access. Okay, yes, it would mean you could take your laptop to the park so that while you're out exercising and enjoying some sunshine, you can keep up your constant reloading of slashdot. While on the train to work, you can check your email because something mission-critical might come across the wire in those 30 minutes, and that the principals wouldn't call you on your cell phone. Houses wouldn't need to have another signal running along the phone or cable to provide internet service.
I just don't get it. Maybe I'm burnt out, because I just don't see the need to have internet access everywhere I go. I don't have a PC with me everywhere I go, and I don't want one. Hells, I'm starting to need a knapsack to cart around the gadgetry I already carry: my knives, leatherman, leatherman adaptor, cell phone, PDA, pager, etc. When I'm not at home, or at work, I'm not concerned with what the latest news might be. It can wait until I go home. I'm not worried about whether Jim Otheruser got my email.
I'm not saying it's useless... wireless connectivity could provide great onboard mapping for vehicles, could aid in CBTC, and help other mobility-required systems stay hot. I just don't see much need for it as a utility for personal consumption and use.
just imagine ... (Score:1)
a trafic jam
Re:Great Idea! (Score:1)
Re:It's NOT a traffic jam... (Score:1)
This is not a funny comment, this is my phd research.
Re:Ubiquitous connectivity - how much is enough? (Score:2)
I argue, "Yes." I carry on a long-distance relationship with my girlfriend. Without telecommunications, this would be impossible. Is it possible to have relationships without telecommunications? Sure. But don't think for a minute that I care any less or am any less devoted to this individual just because she's 1200 miles away from me. I talk to my grandparents more on the telephone than I ever could in real life. (no, my grandmother is not the one I'm having the long distance relationship with. That's gross.)
As far as getting skeeved out by people talking on cell phones, I really don't get it. I mean, would it be any different if they were talking to a person in the pax seat (or worse, in the back seat!)? These are meatspace communications...are they somehow more valid or useful than telepresence ones? (pick your catchall term for "communicating with others using technology")
I dunno...I just don't get what's so magical about meatspace conversations. Well, that's not true...there are avenues of expression and communication that are not available via telecommunications that can happen IRL (heh heh), but at the same time telecommunications has its own advantages and disadvantages.
I don't believe that technology devalues face to face communications: it just changes the set of circumstances that make f2f necessary. (note that f2f can be awfully expensive, say if the faces are on different continents...) Bottom line is, it's not a zero-sum game. I'd rather talk to my girlfriend on the phone than have a beer at the local pub. That doesn't mean I don't like said beer...but the fact that one communique is real and the other is electronic does not bear on their value to me.
Re:Wireless internet available for free! (Score:1)
Re:Wireless vehicle... (Score:2)
More importantly.... (Score:1)
As for cellphone driving, it is not the same as drunk driving. For example, cellphone-driving's impacts are age-related, whereas drunk-driving is not age specific. As a person gets older, reaction times get higher, and thus the added distraction of talking on the phone becomes more important.
Re:Is this a killer app for the car? (Score:1)
In case you're wondering - the answer is "a suburb of Atlanta". And I'd agree with you for anyone who can reasonably take public transportation.
Oh boy (Score:1)
Don't forget... (Score:2)
5. Where to stop at an intersection. That line there means something, it's so that trucks and buses can turn the corner without driving over you. Extra fines for stopping in crosswalks, or blocking the intersection.
6. Set speeding fines by percentage over the limit, not mere numbers. 15 over in a 15 mph zone is a big relative reduction in your reaction time, unlike 15 over in a 65.
7. Retests cover four-way stops, and right-on-red rules. Don't forget to yield to pedestrians!
8. Forget about testing parallel parking. Who ever got killed because somebody couldn't parallel park? 'Sides, most suburbanites have long since lost their ability to || park, even if they ever had it.
9. Oh yeah, turn signals again. Retests must cover how far in advance of an intersection you must signal, and proper lane positioning before the turn (ie, as far to the appropriate side of the lane as practicable, just like the law says).
10. Hm. I can't think of 10, but there must be one. Oh, I've got it. Major fines for honking at, screaming, and making obscene gestures at other people. It's illegal, after all, and at least as offensive as cellphone use.
OK, who's with me?
just what i need.. (Score:1)
---
Re:Go after "distracted drivers" in general (Score:1)
The problem is the law... (Score:1)
All we need to do is enforce reckless driving laws. If someone's not paying attention, weaving, not signalling, tailgating - why don't they just get the ticket they deserve. We don't have to make any new laws, just enforce the old ones.
What I don't understand is why people want all this. I mean, obviously, there are useful things (traffic information, weather information (especially if you are on a long trip). But let's face facts, most people will be sifting through the spam and advertising trying to find out the joke of the day or some other nonsense. Looking up pornography in traffic jams, or posting crap like my posting to Slashdot.
Me, I don't even have a cellphone. And I don't want one. I still don't understand why anyone would.
Just like that Ronco handheld radio mic ad (Score:1)
"Hey, good looking -- I'll be back to subnet you later!"
not bad.... but (Score:1)
Also, the area they are talking about in Boston (Back Bay) has buildings with some of the worst wiring I've ever seen. When I lived there, whenever I turned on my computer, I could here the hum through my stereo speakers downstairs... This does not bode well for wireless communication.
"The company is based in a brand-new office building at the eastern tip of the Black Falcon Cruise Terminal, with spectacular views of the harbor and Logan Airport"
yah yah, right. I don't know if you've ever been there, but the bay and airport are the ugliest pieces of sh!t you could ever see in Boston.
Oh, I desperately hope not. (Score:1)
At least with a cell, there are hands-free kits and some limited voice-dialing functionality available; similar tech for computers, while it's been in the works for (it seems like) forever, just isn't up to the job yet. So you'll have Joe Public bending over to check the score of the hockey game from last night (or, worse, checking the porn he got in his e-mail last night *shudder*) and meeting a tree at 40 mph.
If they weren't so likely to take others along with them, I'd think it was a nice bit of auto-Darwination (pun not intended).
Ix
Wireless internet available for free! (Score:1)
It's true.
Most major cities have it - 802.11 networking.
People set up base stations (i.e. apple aironet base with and antenna) and share their internet access.
Pretty cool
Costs you about $150 for the PC card for your laptop, based on the premise that a users will set up a base station.
Z.z.z.z.
I have a shotgun, a shovel and 30 acres behind the barn.
Re:Necessary? (Score:1)
Re:Ubiquitous connectivity - how much is enough? (Score:2)
Your take on my thesis is almost right. I'd actually say it more like this: "At what point does ubiquitous communications stop enhancing peoples lives and start enslaving them?"
I've actually been trying to figure out why it is that I get so bothered by cell phone conversations in public spaces, and I think I've figured it out. For me at least, the biggest thing is that whomever you're communicating with via cell phone instantly becomes the most important person in your consciousness, eclipsing whomever is near you in meatspace. The cell phone becomes the default first priority means of communication, even above face to face. How many times have you seen someone sitting at dinner with a partner and talking to someone else on a cellphone?
It's not that I wanted you to be focusing on me in particular, of course. In fact, most of the time when I walk around downtown, I'm not specifically looking to have any form of predetermined contact with anyone else. But I like being open to the possibility of having a conversation with someone, or interacting with someone in a way that is non-planned, non-efficient. When I look around and see people walking along the sidewalk talking on their cell phones, they seem to be in their own little bubbles, isolating themselves from the world they're moving through. That's entirely their perogative, and again, I certainly don't want that option taken away from anyone. But use of technology is always a choice, though I'm not sure most people understand that when they elect to be in constant communication with the world electronically.
I spend most of my time in an office every day, trying to be as efficient as possible, juggling many tasks, and there's something liberating about being able to go out into the "real world" of random meatspace.
Something about ubiquitous communication makes me feel that there is no escape. When I'm with a group of people, odds are one of them has a cell phone. It's usually impossible to just say "I'm out of reach - I'll be out all night somewhere and you won't be able to contact me," because one of my friends will have a cell phone. Anyone who knows this will be able to reach me. My ability to maintain my freedom from ubiquitous communication has just been eradicated.
In any case, Moofie, you don't seem like the kind of person who would let a cell phone get between you and those around you in meatspace. I suppose I just don't think most people are that aware.
I am on the Web all day, I use email whenever I'm at a computer, but I like being able to walk away from it. Sooner or later I'll have to get a cell phone, because businesspeople no longer accept "I don't have a cell" as an excuse for not being reachable during commuting hours or on vacations. As usual, technology marches on, and society changes as technology is adopted.
I just wanted to point out the direction these great technologies are taking us. The benefits are clear and numerous, but there are some pitfalls. If we recognize them, maybe we won't continue our ongoing slide further and further away from actual in-person communication, with all its nuance, challenges, and subtleties.
This isn't a first!!!! (Score:1)
Thats good, but... (Score:1)
We have a similar setup... (Score:1)
to think that some good might actually come from those pigs.
Re:Oh boy (Score:1)
Let me see, I believe I said "I have seen". I know that these were cell phone related because I saw the cell phone still held to the driver's (I use the term driver very loosely) head. Or the one that I heard this phrase as the driver was stepping out of their vehicle: "I gotta go, I just ran into someone." She then hung up the cell phone.
I am not a professional statistician, but I HAVE SEEN bad situations caused by cell phones while driving happen atleast six times that I can easily recall.
Your link cites FATALIES only. How many more fender-benders are caused by cell phone use? Who knows. I agree, more research is needed. IMHO using anything that distracts you from the task at hand (that task being safely guiding a potentially hazardous vehicle) is a case of bad judgement.
dslreports.com (Score:1)
Hype (Score:3)
Wireless MAN (Score:4)
o/~ Wireless Man, Wireless Man
Doin' the things that your wireless can
What's the latency, it's not important
Wireless Man
Is he bluetooth? Is his IP spoofed?
Do potholes set his data aloof?
Or do his checksums always tell us the truth?
Nobody knows
Wireless Man o/~
another mindless, "one size fits all" law (Score:5)
While most drivers have had to maneuver in extremis to avoid some bozo who isn't paying attention to his or her driving, I heartly oppose any simple-minded "no cellphone use while driving" law.
The problem isn't the use of the cellphone (or shaving, eating, applying makeup, talking to a passenger, etc.) -- the real problem is Driver Judgement (or lack thereof). The government gives minimal training to new drivers, tests them to absurdly simple standards, then gives them a license to drive a two-ton death machine. Any biped with a pulse can get a license. So why would anyone expect said biped to have a clue?
Refuting the claim that "cellphone use is as dangerous as drunk driving" is easy -- just ask any pilot. Pilots navigate in three space, keep the greasy side down, listen and respond to the radio, listen to other people's conversations (and determine if they are affected -- "where is that Learjet who just called in?", for example), and visualize other traffic and topology. They manage to do all these tasks safely and quickly.
The way pilots can handle this kind of workload is simple -- they prioritize their tasks. Aviate, navigate, then communicate. We're trained to say "stand by" to a controller if we're busy with an aircraft control task.
While in a car, I do the same thing. If I'm in heavy traffic, I won't pick up the phone if it rings. However, on a lightly travelled freeway, I will pick up, and increase my following distance. If conditions change (traffic incrases, or it starts raining), I might say "I'll have to call you back". Judgement is the key here.
So, I say we should determine driver judgement by results. Specifically:
1. no mindless "you can't do X while driving" laws.
2. a $10000 fine for any at fault accident, and a 90 day license suspension. You screw up, you pay.
3. Mandatory driver retests every two years. Retests cover freeway driving (how to merge, how to use turn signals, no camping in the passing lane) and emergency procedures (lane change, spin recovery, etc.)
OK, who's with me?
Re:Not only that.... (Score:1)
Ummm...I surely hope you don't drive 80mph in a residential zone. I think those speeds are reserved for expressways (where there are no "defenseless people". Besides, my car goes 150.
I can see it now... (Score:1)
Innovations like this make me want to run into a server closet with a battle axe.
Re:Is this a killer app for the car? (Score:2)
Ix
Re:Now you can get spammed everywhere. (Score:1)
--
Ubiquitous connectivity - how much is enough? (Score:2)
Re:We shouldn't be encouraging car use (Score:3)
And it would not make sense to put busses in because there are not enough people to ride them.
Megacar (Score:1)
There's a car already in production (well, built to order) which features a 150kb/s link. It uses a multiplexed system of GSM phones. And it's rather nice
More details at megacar.com [megacar.com].
JavaScript Junk (Score:1)
Re:We shouldn't be encouraging car use (Score:1)
Re:Ubiquitous connectivity - how much is enough? (Score:2)
Wonderful (Score:1)
Next step: In-car virtual reality. My neck hurts already.
-Puk
Re:Wireless internet available for free! (Score:1)
you're saying that the pc card is plugged in on the isa card?
(am I reading you correctly?)
fuck... that would save me some $...
I have a shotgun, a shovel and 30 acres behind the barn.
Re:Ubiquitous connectivity - how much is enough? (Score:2)
I dunno, if one of my friends is yapping on a phone for half an hour when I'm trying to have a conversation with them, I razz them good natured-ly. So long as I feel they're not being purposely rude (hey, maybe this is an important conversation they're having...none of my business, but it's not for me to dictate, right?) I don't sweat it.
So again, I don't feel the issue is technology. The issue is etiquette. If one is a courteous and thoughtful individual, no amount of technology is going to change that. If one is not, then one oughtn't be surprised that nobody wants to hang out with one.
Bottom line: my phone (I don't have a cell, but I've conditioned myself to ignore my landline if it's not convenient for me to answer it) doesn't become my master until I let it. Which I don't, so it doesn't. And no, I'm not going to let 'em implant one in my brain stem, thanks for askin'. : )
Re:Is this a killer app for the car? (Score:1)
Frankly, I like riding my bike better than either the car or public transportation if the distance is less than 30 miles each way. You arrive to work ready to kick some serious butt and you get home with no more stress from the things that went on at work.
It's been done. (Score:1)
Shameless Plug: www.skyburst.net
Re:We shouldn't be encouraging car use (Score:1)
So the kiddies can be downloading pr0n instead of learning to read?
and giving laptops to the homeless so they can get the skills necessary to seek proper employment before we concentrate on such a silly endeavor as this.
Maybe we should also give the homeless a place to plug the laptops in to recharge?
Re:another mindless, "one size fits all" law (Score:1)
Do you have a better option of legislating driver judgement?
2. a $10000 fine for any at fault accident, and a 90 day license suspension. You screw up, you pay.
Who determines who is at fault. Ever been screwed by someone pulling out with about 20 feet to spare, when you are going 55 in a 55? I have. I hit the car. I got the blame. It wasn't mine to take. Stopping without skidding I had no chance of missing the car. The passing lane was filled, the emergency lane was a ditch. So now I have to pay $10,000 and find some way to get around now that my license is suspended for 90 days. Umm.. No. I'm suprised you have a problem with the no cell phone blanket law but like an idea of this blanket law.
3. Mandatory driver retests every two years. Retests cover freeway driving (how to merge, how to use turn signals, no camping in the passing lane) and emergency procedures (lane change, spin recovery, etc.)
No problem with this. Who pays for the costs of the tests? I assume they would get amortized into your registration/licensing fees.
why Silicon Valley is 'ignored' (Score:1)
I wonder why San Francisco area (aka Bay area or Silicon Valley) is not on the list. This is not the first thing, several things come to bay area late. DSL, cable...etc.
Does any one know why 'mecca if hightech' is the last to adopt new stuff?
LinuxLover
Re:The problem is the law... (Score:1)
Problem:
At least in Colorado, Careless Driving is a $56 ticket and four points on the license, and consists of driving "without due regard to conditions, such as road surface, traffic, pedestrians, light, visibility, weather, wildlife, and others."
Reckless Driving is driving "with a wanton and willful disregard of a known risk," eight points, and theoretically worth up to a year in jail. You just have to convince some senile jackass in a black muumuu to actually put the hammer on a reckless driver.
Where those things become a problem is, both are misdemeanor traffic offenses, rather than civil infractions. Therefore, the defendant has a right to a jury trial, and it's not easy to convince a jury that cellphone use, by itself, is wanton and willful disregard.
That being said, most of my stops end up with a verbal warning only. But if the driver did a moving violation while on a cellphone, I'm going to give him a very hard time.
Re:another mindless, "one size fits all" law (Score:1)
until i moved cross country to school, i had heard of the mythical passing lane, but not really seen one....
the joys of living in southern california
Re:Ubiquitous connectivity - how much is enough? (Score:2)
I don't mean to imply that somehow people shouldn't be *allowed* to use ubiquitous connectivity. The thrust of my question was that more and more your right to communicate at any time and place interferes with my right to NOT communicate at any time and place.
Let's face it - one-way conversations in the background are disconcerting. They're distracting. When someone's cell phone rings in the middle of me eating my dinner at a restaruant, their communications device is impinging on my dining experience. People are also far likelier in my experience to shout on cell phones than they are in casual conversation in meatspace.
Personally I get freaked out when I see people in front of me, to my left and to my right, and behind me, driving while engaged in a discussion on their cell phone. One hand on the cell phone and the other on the wheel to me indicates a fundamental lack of respect for the fact that they should be in full control of an automobile, because people who don't pay attention tend to cause deadly accidents. I've seen more than enough close calls with cell phone drivers to realize that most of the time they don't even know how many times they've created dangerous situations for other drivers.
I don't care if you play Everquest Online Gold SE in your car (if someone else is driving), but it's not about individual technology advances. It's really about the collective effect of all these technologies being put to use in a society where nobody seems to value face to face communication and actually just being in the same physical space with someone and communicating like human beings, with our own, somewhat passe, built-in communications tools.
Re:Mobile office (Score:2)
But who's to say that people might not turn away from the flash, shockwave, and heavy, slow websites and towards a lightweight, text oriented, rapid delivery system?
People already turned away from a "lightweight, text oriented, rapid delivery system" that the web was and "chosen" the "flash, shockwave, and heavy, slow websites". I quote chosen because the consumer didn't really choose. Look at the most popular sites on the web (Yahoo, Amazon), they are fast and plain HTML (more or less). It's the designers and creators who want the latest whiz-bang gadgets and magazine-like designs to hide their lack of taste/talent/content who are to blame for the current sorry state of the WWW.
Maybe mobile devices will change this trend and restore the web to it's natural state of platform independence and end-user display choices.
I do not find in orthodox Christianity one redeeming feature.
Last night's Futurama... (Score:2)
Man: "Oh my God, they must be using a cell phone!"
Personally I think cell phones are a godsend. They finally let us easily identify and avoid the idiot drivers that have existed since the invention of the automobile...
Re:The problem is the law... (Score:2)
I agree, enforce the laws we have. Driving without paying attention is wrong, and it doesn't matter if you are on a cell phone, computer, or just staring at scenery.
As for why I want one? That is easy. I move often, but my cell phone doesn't change numbers. (At least it not so long as I don't move far) The phone is for my convience, and for those few people I want to contact me it is easier if they can call me. Having it on the road is a bonus.
For a computer I want one because mapquest and the like give better driving directions in most cases then anything else. Sometimes the day is too nice to workinside, but I don't want to use vacation. Sitting on a shady park bench and working is much better then in a dark office. Or maybe it ins't a park bench it is on the lake waiting for a fish to bite.
work/data sites Re:Mobile office (Score:2)
Well, the majority of work data pulled from the intra/inter-net via the web probably has a pretty plain interface to begin with. I mean, how fat does a web2ldap address book need to be? (this is not to say some idiot hasn't done it with a big Flash movie calling data URLs, but hopefully that doesn't happen often). Similarly, news clippings (like for the journalist), stock quotes / business documents, scientific data (interfaces to a LIMS), etc. are all pretty simple, mostly textual data. Even if you tart it up a bit with a few pictures that doesn't change the inherently textual and thus fundamentally low bandwidth nature of the data.
And of course if you're using the wireless bandwidth for a terminal interface (shell access to data, company mail or news, company internal IRC network, etc.), it's probably 28.8 kbps at a max. (of course if you're a looooooong way from the transceiver the lag would be a bitch ;-) (rsh'ing from the moon would suck...))
--
News for geeks in Austin: www.geekaustin.org [geekaustin.org]
Re:Oh boy (Score:2)
----
Go after "distracted drivers" in general (Score:2)
could be Re:Is this really a good thing? (Score:2)
Well, hopefully the terminal would be on the passenger side and be engineered such that (s)he couldn't reach the keyboard or easily see the screen. Yes, the only damn thing you should be doing if you're in the driver's seat is driving. :-)
Now if you have a passenger, I can see this as being a good thing. The web term would keep them from bugging you while you keep yout eyes on the road (hey, ideal world), and if you forgot a map, they can still play navigator for you using a map website. And if you have a kid up there they can be kept from asking the Dread Question (namely: "while(1) { printf("Are we there yet?!\n");}") by giving them some URLS to pr0n... ;-)
--
News for geeks in Austin: www.geekaustin.org [geekaustin.org]
Re:Wireless vehicle... (Score:2)
For the _car_? (Score:2)
Wireless Man (Score:2)
CowboyNeal? I always thought that it was just a joke when he was on the polls. I never knew it was real! Where do I sign up? Now that I look at the polls, this is not new technology -- wireless men serve as things such as household appliances, and much more. He seems to be a very popular poll choice. Where do I get one??
________________________________________________
train Re:Is this a killer app for the car? (Score:2)
As long as your train is mostly above-ground it'd be easy to mount a transceiver on the train, and then have a LAN on the train (data port on every seat or something, or in special "commuters who like to work" cars that cost a few bucks extra to defer the cost of the modification). Short tunnels could be fixed with rebroadcasters, longer ones with beefier ones. If the tunnel is through something like a mountain you'd probably need a rebroadcaster on the opposite-from-MAN side anyway.
It would be especially nice if they included a three-pronger AC outlet with each ethernet port. Gotta figure, a few dozen laptops would be a negligible power drain compared to an electric turbine powerful enough to move n tons of train + people + cargo... If you're using a gas/diesel turbine you probably have power to spare to run a small generator anyway (and probably are already doing so for the electrical subsystem on the train).
--
News for geeks in Austin: www.geekaustin.org [geekaustin.org]
Not limited to cars! (Score:2)
I want this technology on my handheld device. I want this technology to give me net access in an apartment building that only allows one ISP to wire the building (making it that ISP or nothing)
THIS TECHNOLOGY WILL BREAK MONOPOLIES!
I have long awaited a way to get a better net connection at home and to be able to have a palmtop computer that streams mp3s from my multi-gig collection at home. My ideal portable computer fits in my pocket, has color, doubles as a wireless phone, streams mp3s, and streams other information (such as the internet). This is now all possible.
Think of it; 32 or 64 megs of RAM suddenly loses all meaning when you have a fast connection to a hundred gigs! Put this technology on an iPaq and just see what happens!
Re:not just the car (Score:2)
I'll grant you, Ricochet costs about $75.00/mo. But it has a lot that this system doesn't.:
Here's a new idea for an in-car activity... (Score:5)
Is this really a good thing? (Score:3)
Mobile office (Score:4)
We do not need to clog up our infrastructures anymore by locating the offices in the few widely dispersed areas with the high bandwith..
we can decentralize these operations, saving space, energy, commute time, the air, preventing sprawl.
As a journalist I would love to be able to step into my car and have all my databases, research and editing tools at my fingertips.
I am aware this will come with an accompanying loss of speed. It's not my fat university T-1. But who's to say that people might not turn away from the flash, shockwave, and heavy, slow websites and towards a lightweight, text oriented, rapid delivery system? A fast-downloading site will become marketable again if its market is wireless.
We should all SLOW THE HELL DOWN for a bit, anyway.
Is this a killer app for the car? (Score:2)
Re:Last night's Futurama... (Score:2)
Re:Content is what counts (function over form) (Score:2)
Actually, I do write to the webmasters... I lately wrote to guinness.com about their flash-laden site that would not let me browse with Navigator 4.x on FreeBSD.
It's a simple thing for the "web designer" (read: overpaid shmuck, by my experience) to put in a text only page that will appear when the user-agent cannot load their default page.
I do not find in orthodox Christianity one redeeming feature.
Good for maps and OnStar-like services... (Score:4)
Seriously, depending on the range of this kind of WAN, assuming it's going to run something like cellular or PCS, this could be a serious boon to those who like the in-car navigation systems or services like OnStar. Since OnStar is supposed to be able to do things like unlock your car doors, I'd want a data-firewall to go along with my engine firewall to keep some l33t script-kiddies from haxxoring my car and going for joy-rides.
The idea of being able to play EQ (I think Q3 or Unreal Tournament wouldn't be able to hack the lag) as a *passenger* during a long commute or roadtrip would be a pretty damn nifty.
"Billy, you stop downloading porn back there or I'm turning this car right back around!"
Research so far... (Score:3)
Re:Wireless vehicle... (Score:2)
Cops want you.
Cops log on to yourpage.com
Cops put your 2o out on the radio
your busted
Be very carfull what you wish for.
Been there, done that ... (Score:2)
Re:Wireless vehicle... (Score:3)
You could already do this I suppose using the already-extant satellite internet access systems. But why would you want to if you live in range of the MAN? Yes, the bandwidth is about the same, but your latency will be MUCH less than to a satellite transceiver (the difference it take an EM wave to travel from car to city 10 miles distant and back (way shorter than you'd notice) compared to from your car to orbital bird and back (quarter second and up depending on altitude)). Wouldn't matter for email and web surfing probably but net games and remote shelling would really be feeling the difference.
--
News for geeks in Austin: www.geekaustin.org [geekaustin.org]
Cell phone user / drunk drivers (Score:3)
It turns out (the reason they're doing it) that cell phone users cause just as many accidents as drunks!
Now I Have a Reason to Buy a Unimog (Score:2)
Great. As if cel phones aren't a big enough distraction for drivers. I've about had it with cel phone implanted yuppies in sport UTs running me off the road. Now this. Just wonderful. Its Mad Max time.
A F1r57 Post from the Interstate (Score:3)
could earn you a Darwin Award
Wireless vehicle... (Score:2)
Walk outside
"Oh darn. Someone stole my truck."
Walk back inside.
Log on to Internet. Go to http://www.mywebpage.com.
Looky there! My truck keeps updating my webserver with its position. Call authorities. Explain situation, and give location of felons. Smile widely knowing that I will have my vehicle back in about 20 minutes.
Re:Ubiquitous connectivity - how much is enough? (Score:2)
It's not that someone having a loud conversation on their cell phone in a restaurant next to me is trying to be rude, it's that they may not even be aware that they're being rude.
If people are cognizant of how their use of ubiquitous communication affects others, I'm fine with that. However, I'm just not convinced that most people are actually making a conscious choice most of the time. ("Oh, my cell is ringing, do I answer it? Oh, wait, I'm in this environment where others might not appreciate my phone call. Better not answer it.")
So, while you're aware of etiquette, most people in my opinion, aren't prepared to make that challenging decision about whether cell phone use is appropriate in a given situation. I mean, movie theaters have to put messages on screen telling patrons to turn off their cell phones.
Fundamentally, my point is this: Let the user rule the technology, not vice-versa. I think we could both agree on that.
Safety Features (Score:2)
I mean, how many things can I do at one time that require 100% of my attention?
no, wait, maybe my GF might want to download some pr0n for me for when we get back to the house...
. . . right.
internet radio (Score:3)
live365.com
now all the small timers and indie rockers will be on equal footing with CBS Radio.
All of a sudden, the RIAA's marketing monopoly just got a punch in the gut. We have a better distribution system. Soon we'll have control over what songs get beamed to our cars and radios....at least get to pick the station our friends set up with all the new, local, cool stuff.
Now all we need is a live365 type thing for music videos.
Internet killed the video star!!!
I can see the headlines now (Score:2)
--
Re:Oh boy (Score:2)
Swell (Score:2)