Want to read Slashdot from your mobile device? Point it at m.slashdot.org and keep reading!

 


Forgot your password?
Close
typodupeerror
×
Google The Internet Businesses Networking IT

Google Invests in Power-Line Broadband 328

Posted by Zonk from the branching-out dept.
fsterman writes "ZDNet reports that Current Communications Group has received investment money from Google, Hearst, and Goldman Sachs for their internet over broadband ventures. The Wall Street Journal reports that the three companies invested roughly $100 million in the start-up. Current Communications and Cinergy Broadband said they will create one joint venture to bundle broadband and voice services for Cinergy's 1.5 million customers. Current also has plans to use the new investment money to expand its broadband over power line deployments in the U.S. and overseas."
This discussion has been archived. No new comments can be posted.

Google Invests in Power-Line Broadband More

Google Invests in Power-Line Broadband

Comments Filter:

  • Wow (Score:2, Funny)

    by Anonymous Coward
    That gets me electrified!

  • Whew! (Score:5, Funny)

    by lucabrasi999 ( 585141 ) on Thursday July 07, 2005 @12:59PM (#13005669) Journal
    I was getting worried. It was already past noon local time and I hadn't seen a /. submission on Google.

  • Why? (Score:5, Informative)

    by Rei ( 128717 ) on Thursday July 07, 2005 @01:00PM (#13005677) Homepage
    I thought that internet-over-power lines was pretty much a dead concept - not simply due to the fact that you had to largely redo your power infrastructure anyways so that it doesn't filter out your data, but because by the very nature of modulating a signal on a high power wire, you're building the world's largest radio transmitter network, and flooding everything with radio interference.

    • Re:Why? (Score:5, Interesting)

      by MightyMartian ( 840721 ) on Thursday July 07, 2005 @01:08PM (#13005784) Journal
      I can't see it ever happening. It would knock out emergency bands, and pretty much fsck up commercial radio. It was an idea that should have been abandoned years ago.

      • Re:Why? (Score:2, Informative)

        by Geshiggity ( 897983 )
        I wouldn't worry so much about it knocking out other forms of communications as much as I would worry about other communications knocking _it_ out. Power lines are extremely susceptible to electromagnetic interference (EMI). Also, thermal noise may be an issue at transformers. There will just need to be some good signal processing to make this work.

        The airwaves are already ridiculously cluttered, which is why the FCC licenses frequency bands and regulates the power allowed to be transmitted on those fre

        • It works both ways (Score:4, Informative)

          by Bruce Perens ( 3872 ) <bruce@perens.com> on Thursday July 07, 2005 @03:21PM (#13007326) Homepage Journal
          Unfortunately, BPL has already proven to be a very obnoxious radiator of energy into in-use communication bands. The problem is that when you put energy into a wire, that wire is always also an antenna radiating that energy. Power lines make excellent transmitting antennas, and a single installation can take out many forms of communications for at least a mile arond the wire, and because of ionospheric "skip", the interference from a single installation can have a global impact.

          Sure, signals can get into the wire when a strong station is close by, but they always get out.

          Bruce

      • Re:Why? (Score:2, Insightful)

        by moultano ( 714440 )
        Um, it's already happening . . . My mom is using their service. She likes it.
    • My first response to this article was a quote from P.T. Barnum:

      "There's a sucker born every minute!"

      Now there may be some breakthrough that I'm unaware of, but it strikes me that someone is probably selling a bridge to Google on this one. Goldman Sachs I can understand (speculation and all), but Google? My only guess is that they may be hedging their bets "just in case".

    • Re:Why? (Score:4, Funny)

      by LodCrappo ( 705968 ) on Thursday July 07, 2005 @01:18PM (#13005900)
      When will people quit whining about RF interference from powerline broadband? Who cares. RF is a dead technology that noone born in this century still finds cool. Radio is dead dead dead. I say fsck any and all wavelengths unless they're using em to bring me faster internet. All you hams should get a computer and learn to use email instead of tieing up valuable spectrum with your silly talking. If you really want to you can still use morse code over IP. Screw the radio, screw broadcast TV, screw emergency services. They should all be using broadband.
      • And when the firetrucks and ambulances can't communicate, I hope you enjoy your first heart attack or house fire.

      • Re:Why? (Score:5, Funny)

        by Spectre ( 1685 ) on Thursday July 07, 2005 @01:27PM (#13006009)
        RF is a dead technology that noone born in this century still finds cool.

        Since when are we going to let a bunch of 4-year-olds decide what is cool?

      • Re:Why? (Score:3, Funny)

        by Aggrazel ( 13616 )
        "noone born in this century still finds cool"

        So you're saying we should base our opinions on what 4 year olds like?

        In that case, I think we should use magic pinwheels to distrubute data like the teletubbies do, cause thats what most people born in this century like.
      • So ... you don't have a cell phone? No Wi-Fi?
      • Perhaps it would do you good to realize that when you say RF you also mean all Wifi, all Bluetooth, and that RF being thrown off from a high-power line could possibly knock out nearby electronics.

        My guess is that they're already dealing with some of these problems, but even then I would wonder how good for your electronics could it be that part of the constant flow of energy fluctuates a bit.

      • Re:Why? (Score:5, Informative)

        by scoove ( 71173 ) on Thursday July 07, 2005 @02:59PM (#13007096)
        All you hams should get a computer and learn to use email instead of tieing up valuable spectrum with your silly talking.

        Normally it isn't prudent to respond to humor masqueraded as flamebait, but I thought I'd add some perspective for those who might be curious about the reality of such criticisms. Here are a few thoughts:

        Many of the carrier network CCIEs I work with are "hams" - licensed amateur radio operators. I'm only a lowly CCIP in process (actually with a CISSP and CISA, with a management/finance background, worked with Linux since Linus had it on two floppies (ala "pre distribution"), build a mean kernel and program in Python). I'm a general license ham and work with microwave communications over MPLS networks daily.

        There is considerable innovation done in modulation schemes, such as PSK, which increasingly gets integrated in the commercial wireless broadband world. I've constructed IPv6 over mesh protocol networks in amateur frequencies, and the best thing about the extensive range of amateur bands is that there's certain to be one for your open source project. One of my projects that needs more attention is my Python software repeater that controls a Piexx.com Motorola VHF-L, VHF-H or UHF radio from Linux.

        Amateur radio is very much open source radio, where broadband over powerline is closed source. If you're interested in open source and radiofrequency, amateur radio is where you go to get the open tools to experiment. Care to understand what really is happening in your 802.11? The theory is all contained in amateur radio. You'd be shocked how much you learn when you compile in AX.25 into your kernel, build the tools, and construct a whopping 56 kbps network on UHF (or even better, 1200 on some old Kantronics TNCs). You can keep up with Ethereal on a saturated network at those speeds, and suddenly basic IP and lower layer fundamentals click. Some of the best wireless security people I've met are hams. Just as a real kernel hacker is a better OS security person, a knowledgable ham is going to beat a "user" of 802.11 any day (anyone who claims to be a wireless security expert that simply knows how to click on an icon in NetStumbler is a joke).

        The BPL initiatives are unfortunately highly destructive to a very wide band of RF - not just HF. Low VHF frequencies are seriously degraded as well. BPL is a property grab no different than abusive software patents. It is theft of a third of the public radiofrequency commons for no reason other than corporate profit.

        The best analogy I can give a non-radio person on BPL is to imagine if Microsoft Longhorn would cause a 60% to 70% consumption in IP networks by having uncontrolled, sustained blasts of ICMP, TCP and UDP traffic. Microsoft's explanation that this just "had to happen because there is a demand for Longhorn" wouldn't pass with the rest of us who know there are better solutions. Forcing it if it doesn't fix is never a good approach.

        BPL suffers problems due to RF theory, not implementation. Just as I had to work around 1-2 second latencies in international satellite voice network engineering (no "negative latency inducer" could bail me out), transmission and distribution power systems are designed to radiate energy based on the RF injected (hence the 60 Hz hum one often hears). They are big antennas, but fortunately most electronics has worked around the awareness that 60 Hz is noisy and blankets the environment. Now induce HF to VHF and you've destroyed RF (and we're not factoring for harmonics and other higher band interference which is certain to occur).

        Incidentally, regarding this amusing comment:

        If you really want to you can still use morse code over IP. . Screw the radio, screw broadcast TV, screw emergency services. They should all be using broadband.

        Someone needs to learn the OSI model. He might be surprised to learn that his IP is riding over VHF, HF, or another frequency blasted by BPL. Our weather network in western Iowa uses mobile IP (IPv4oAX25) on lower VHF frequencies to monitor storms for the National Weather Service. Given BPL interference, you might be well served telling people they just have to die for their BPL since emergency service and amateur spectrum isn't important.

    • I thought that internet-over-power lines was pretty much a dead concept - not simply due to the fact that you had to largely redo your power infrastructure anyways so that it doesn't filter out your data, but because by the very nature of modulating a signal on a high power wire, you're building the world's largest radio transmitter network, and flooding everything with radio interference.

      Why can't they can't just put a shield around the power wires, then ground the shield (a la coax)? shouldn't the Far

      • Re:Why? (Score:3, Informative)

        by Rei ( 128717 )
        The whole point of broadband over power lines is to make use of existing infrastructure. If you're going to make all new infrastructure, you might as well make it something designed to carry large amounts of data, like fiber bundles.
        • While a fiber infrastructure and the bandwidth it allows makes me all creamy, what happens to power lines? Can you somehow merge the two, replace the latter with a modded former? The argument for having power line broadband is kind of like why people like having their internet, phone and cable bill in one envelope from one company. They want to simplify things by not adding another set of wires in your home, so to speak.

          However, the greatest fear I have for power line broadband is what happens when your li

          • Re:Why? (Score:2)

            by Rei ( 128717 )
            If power lines get replaced by anything, it's not going to be net-friendly. It'd probably be something like superconducting lines (either room-temperature if such get developed, or highly cooled otherwise). Power and networking have different requirements; networking is about carrying rapidly changing, easy to switch, discrete signals. Power is about shoving as many electrons into as small of a wire as you can.
      • I'll wager that, for the cost of shielding (if that works at all), you could probably bring fiber to the door, or, for much cheaper, set up WiFi networks on proven technology that at least has the benefit of being constrained to small, discrete parts of the spectrum.
      • It's pretty prohibitive. Many power lines aren't even insulated, much less caged. Among other things, the weight of the cage would mean more towers to support them, and that's big-time money.
      • It's prohibitive. Ignore the costs of shielding the cable for a moment (though they're technically difficult and hardly insignificant). Consider just the cost of stringing up new wire EVERYWHERE.

        In effect you'd have to do almost as much work as it took to build the grid in the first place.

        The whole technology behind BPL was flawed to begin with. I'm surpised anyone a Google thinks it's worth their money.

    • Re:Why? (Score:5, Interesting)

      by jarich ( 733129 ) on Thursday July 07, 2005 @01:22PM (#13005949) Homepage Journal
      First, there is a huge existing infrastructure. The existing power lines go everywhere.

      Second, coupled with voice over IP, this puts Google (potentially) in the ISP business and the telecom business.

      Lastly, this would catapult Google from the tenuous position of search engine king (just like Yahoo used to be) and into the dominant ISP, teleco, search engine, etc company.

      In other words, AOL, Microsoft and Ma Bell all rolled into one!

      • Re:Why? (Score:3, Interesting)

        by garcia ( 6573 ) *
        From this [thestandard.com] article:

        While BPL has the potential to serve 13 million U.S. households in the next three to five years, interference problems and a reluctance from many electric companies to offer new services may slow its development, said Barry Goodstadt, vice president at market research firm Harris Interactive Inc.

        13 million homes are a "potential" in 3 to 5 years. Comcast has 21.5 million "potential" subscribers right now. I have a feeling that telcos have several million more "potential" subscribers.
      • can we not put google together in the same sentence with AOL, MS and AT&T/bell labs?

        google...
        1. does not have slow crappy service (AOL)
        2. goes through some form of beta test before releasing their software (MS)
        3. never has increased prices to customers since their gain as the #1 search engine (AT&T)

      • Comment removed based on user account deletion
        • I liked the asphalt comment. I've been saying for years that with everyone jumping on the bandwagon that internet over water lines was bound to come.

          Only downside is that if you start downloading/serving a massive bittorrent someone taking a shower is liable to get a blast of cold water.

          There is someone doing it over gas lines. They're running RF contained in the line.
          http://www.engadget.com/entry/1234000230043258/ [engadget.com]

          A few years back someone else was running fibre via sewer pipes.
    • While I can certainly understand those complications, one would assume that there would be some way to circumvent or remedy the radio signal issue. Although here's some fun food for thought:

      We're pretty long overdue for a power grid restructuring. Does anyone remember that nearly week long blackout in upper New York, eastern Pennsylvania and surrounding areas a few summers back? I certainly do (due to proximity of effects). A major reason that a lot of our blackouts in America can be so crippling is becaus
      • If you're going to go through all that expense, why not use something that's designed for data in the first place, like fiber. You can cram a lot more bandwidth down a fiber connection than you can a copper one.

        -Jesse

  • Not Evil? (Score:5, Insightful)

    by cayenne8 ( 626475 ) on Thursday July 07, 2005 @01:01PM (#13005687) Homepage Journal
    I thought Google pledged to not do anything 'evil'.

    Hasn't this tech been show to be damaging to Ham radios? Something that is usually very helpful in times of emergency, when phones and sometimes power is even out?

    • Re:Not Evil? (Score:2, Insightful)

      by yellowbkpk ( 890493 ) *
      So when the power is out, the IP over PowerLines will go down too, thus enabling them to coordinate their efforts and HAM it up. ...unless it's only a brownout and you're still broadcasting interference on the other side of the street.

      • Re:Not Evil? (Score:4, Insightful)

        by sgant ( 178166 ) on Thursday July 07, 2005 @01:12PM (#13005827) Homepage Journal
        I see, so how is one going to practice this? Guess keep the equipment and the antennas up and invest 1000s of dollars into a hobby on the off chance that maybe you'll be able to help one day...but until that day it just sits there unused.

        Cool...guess you solved it!

        • Re:Not Evil? (Score:3, Informative)

          by keraneuology ( 760918 )
          Amateur radio is used daily in many public service capacities:

          Many, if not most SKYWARN groups use amateur radio to coordinate severe weather verification with the national weather service.

          Here in Michigan amateur radios operators are used to verify that the tornado sirens work.

          All hospitals are being equipped with shortwave radios for use during states of general emergency. During the big blackout the cell phone networks were a) overloaded then b) dead as the reserve power units ran out of juice.

          Ama

          • Not to mention the Hurricane Watch Net, which just activated today because of Dennis's approach

            ARRL [arrl.org] story, HWN [hwn.org] homepage.
          • BPL is most of a risk to weak signal work in the HF bands. But things like SKYWARN are maninly VHF or UHF.

            The emergency value of HF is even in question these days with the rapidly dropping cost of satellite communications. I can pick up an Iridium or Inmarsat phone [123-satell...rental.com] and have a connection right away, no phone patch needed on the remote side. Small uplink dishes [swe-dish.com] now fit into suitcases, providing enough bandwidth for hundreds of phone calls or even video, and will have even more gain with the new Ka-band sa
      • The problem is (and many people share the same idea and position), yes if the power goes out there will be no interference in that area. However, let's say that BPL were to cover the entire CONUS. Blackout in NYC, no phones no lights no motorcars, and no BPL blocking signals. However, I can't hear squat here in NJ because I still have BPL interference. Granted, the local area's interference is alleviated, but that does no good if anyone that could help can't hear you calling.

        After the first few BPL pos

    • Re:Not Evil? (Score:5, Interesting)

      by sgant ( 178166 ) on Thursday July 07, 2005 @01:09PM (#13005794) Homepage Journal
      Don't go there...if you look at the history of Slashdot they're anti-Ham radio for the most part. Their reasoning is why stop progress for something that only 600,000 people in the country do. You know, the needs of the many outway the needs of the few.

      Ham is very useful, but try telling that here. Expect to be flooded with people with these sentiments, and I hope I'm wrong about that.

      There is so many other ways to get broadband to even the most remote people that over the powerlines doesn't even need to be. Got a phone line? You should be able to get broadband. If not, do you REALLY think that BB over powerlines will be in your area instead?

      Oh well, it will be a major nail in the coffin that was the great and wonderful world of Ham radio. 100 years down the drain.
      • Oh well, it will be a major nail in the coffin that was the great and wonderful world of Ham radio. 100 years down the drain.

        I respect Ham radio operators. I think that they provide a great service to the community when they are called upon. Problem I have is with your comment that it is a "great and wonderful world"... Ham radio is only "great and wonderful" because the community is small and the technology was never intended for mass consumption.

        The FCC has cleared the way for this technology (I don
        • It's not just the HAM operators, it's also the risk to emergency bands. Nothing is worth the risk to the general populace. All for what? So that some power companies can sell Internet?
      • I used to think Ham radio was no longer all that useful. Two hurricanes changed my mind. Cells where down. Phone was down. Power was down. BB over power lines seem to be a bad trade off. However if they can make it so that it DOES NOT INTERFERE with the radio bands then I do not have that big of an issue with it. Frankly I would rather have fiber.
      • I wonder what the slashdotters would say if BPL interfered with or reduced the range of their WiFi. I'm not saying that it would or could happen, but most people argue from a standpoint of what they see benefits them the most.

        Supposedly BPL doesn't interfere as much as some people say it does, I am trying to think of where to dig up that quote by a pro-HAM leader that said this, based on actual experience.

      • Don't go there...if you look at the history of Slashdot they're anti-Ham radio for the most part

        I call troll. I don't know which Slashdot your reading. If your take a look at the past articles on broadband over power lines (like this one [slashdot.org]m the vast majority of people have been for HAM radios, talking about what a bad idea BPL is.

        Their reasoning is why stop progress for something that only 600,000 people in the country do.

        You forget that HAMs are basically the original geeks. Slashdotters suppor

    • It gets even better... (Score:3, Informative)

      by OmniGeek ( 72743 )
      BPL *also* interferes with public emergency service radios. So when there's an emergency, ALL the emergency responders can potentially be interfered with. What a great idea, eh?
    • I think that if the power is out, the broadband over the power lines would likely be out as well. Don't you think?
      • I think that if the power is out, the broadband over the power lines would likely be out well.

        Right. So you're taking generally useful infrastructure, making it useful only in times of emergencies that kill the power, and further removing the incentive for folks to actually get involved in investing their time and money into that infrastructure. (Who's going to build a nice ham setup if it's only usable when the power's out? Further, what if the power isn't out in the location where the help you're tryin
    • I thought Google made a pledge to make Search their primary function? WTF does broadband over powerlines have to do with search?
    • I thought Google pledged to not do anything 'evil'.

      They haven't - so everyone stop whining.

      They're investing in R&D, not deploying anything yet. Google just said "hey, let's see what can be done" and you guys have already convicted them.

      Just because data-over-powerlines has some problems with radio interference now doesn't mean Google won't fund solving that problem in sync with their "do no evil" policy.

      Powerlines run friggin' everywhere - let's see what can be done to improve their usefulness.
      Th
    • Hasn't this tech been show to be damaging to Ham radios? Something that is usually very helpful in times of emergency, when phones and sometimes power is even out?

      Ham radio? Hell, I'm worried about aircraft radio. You lose that and you've created an emergency.

    • Not just Ham radio, also potentially emergency, aircraft, and military frequencies.

      I'm really rather at a loss to describe how unremittingly STUPID an idea BPL is...

  • Great.... (Score:4, Funny)

    by Brad1138 ( 590148 ) <brad1138@yahoo.com> on Thursday July 07, 2005 @01:01PM (#13005690)
    Now Godzilla will be taking my internet down as well.
    • I look forward to hearing voices communicating every time I walk past power lines. Really, we're just begging for God of the net to start messing with us through our Navis.

  • self install kits? (Score:3, Funny)

    by Nerftoe ( 74385 ) on Thursday July 07, 2005 @01:01PM (#13005692)
    I wonder if power-line internet service offerings will feature "install yourself" kits? Perhaps this is one of the things keeping power-line internet from taking off - the installation procedure could be a bit tricky?

  • I was worried... (Score:3, Funny)

    by Karl Cocknozzle ( 514413 ) <kcocknozzleNO@SPAMhotmail.com> on Thursday July 07, 2005 @01:02PM (#13005696) Homepage
    for their internet over broadband ventures.
    ...For a second, I thought Google was acting all ".com bubbly" by throwing good money after bad with "Internet over Power Lines." Glad to see it is not that, but rather a wise investment in something known as "Internet over broadband."

    Next, you're going to tell me that have that intraweb on cell-phones, too...

  • Its about time.... (Score:4, Informative)

    by eldawg ( 769959 ) on Thursday July 07, 2005 @01:02PM (#13005698)
    Even though the technology may still need some polishing, it is already being pursued in Europe [pctalk.org].

  • BPL...not good (Score:3, Insightful)

    by VAXcat ( 674775 ) on Thursday July 07, 2005 @01:02PM (#13005699)
    It's unfortunate that a company that wants to do no evil is investing in activity that will earn it the emnity of most every amateur radio operator in the country...

  • Broadband (Score:4, Funny)

    by verloren ( 523497 ) on Thursday July 07, 2005 @01:03PM (#13005710)
    "their internet over broadband ventures"

    Internet over broadband? Hmm, I could see that catching on...

  • Google? Powerlines? (Score:4, Funny)

    by FrontalLobe ( 897758 ) on Thursday July 07, 2005 @01:03PM (#13005715)
    Wait... Does this mean I can search the web from my toaster finally?

  • Classic Homer simpson reloaded (Score:2, Funny)

    by Anonymous Coward
    They've got the internet over broadband now?

  • Disturbing (Score:2, Interesting)

    by PacketScan ( 797299 )
    This is quite disturbing.. Well it's obvious google doesn't care if yout radio doesn't work or your Over the air tv signals are no longer viewable. Anyone tried to watch tv with someone sitting just 5 feet from a nextel i7xx series phone? you can hear the tick tick tick of the timing signal. This can't be much better
    • It's not just Nextel phones that do this, and most common speakers will exhibit this (occasionally, I hear it on the speaker in the phone). One of my friends is with Cingular, and his does the same thing to nearby speakers.

  • Wireless (Score:5, Insightful)

    by loomis ( 141922 ) on Thursday July 07, 2005 @01:08PM (#13005775)
    I find it interesting that in this day and age of moving towards transmitting signals without wires, no one was ever able to safely transmit power wirelessly ala Tesla's ideas. Without power lines, to latch on to, perhaps see more efforts focused on long-distance wireless internet?

    Loomis

    • Re: (Score:3, Funny)

      by account_deleted ( 4530225 )
      Comment removed based on user account deletion
  • for their internet over broadband ventures

    Well, I'm glad someone's finally doing it!

    </sarcasm>

  • Cinergy serves Cincinnati which already has fierce competition between Cincinnati Bell's Zoomtown service (which I use at home) and Time Warner's Roadrunner service (which I use at work). The price has settled at about $45/mo (less with bundling). Now they compete on speed (3Mbps download 768 Kbps upload vs ~5Mbps max download and ? upload). It'll be fun to see what a third competitor will do to price and speed.

  • Follow SOP... (Score:3, Funny)

    by w0lver ( 755034 ) on Thursday July 07, 2005 @01:08PM (#13005785) Homepage
    Let hope they follow the same plan as their other new products and have a looong free beta period... Somebody send me an invite!

  • Power line a poor choice for better avialabbily (Score:5, Interesting)

    by Eravnrekaree ( 467752 ) on Thursday July 07, 2005 @01:29PM (#13006039)
    Power line technology has various problems, such as the fact that power lines were not designed to carry high frequency transmissions and tend to turn into giant antenna systems when they are used in such a manner, disrupting accessibility to radio services such as shortwave radio and amatuer radio. It also turns out to be a rather expensive technology to implement as well as being problematic, since transformers tend to absorb and block RF signals on the power lines, requiring expensive solutions to bypass them. It is to the point where it will be so expensive to implement that it would be better to just implement a fiber optic network, which would provide better bandwidth anyway.

    I think a much better and more effective, as well as higher quality solution for both bandwidth broadband avialability and the choice, and for maximum capacity, is to construct a shared fiber optic networks which could be used to carry telephone, cable tv, and internet. These systems should be owned and operated by local governments (who could contract out maintanence and construction to independant contractors if they wish) who would charge an access fee to fund the operatation the networks, and which would be open to all information service providers to provide their information services over them, such as multiple cable tv, phone and internent providers, giving people perhaps dozens more choices, assuring competition and choice for the consumer. This also would seperate the operation of the physical infrastructure from the information services, so one entity isnt controlling both the information services and infrastructure, which allows that entity to have a monopoly over the information services provided over the physical infrastructure. Instead access to the physical infrastructure would be avialable to all information services, like phone, internet and cable, and all of the information services and consumers would pool their resources to build one communications system which tends to be more efficient than every information service having to have its own information service, and it would make it eisier for smaller companies to enter the market and provide additional choices for the consumer since they do not have to fund the construction of another communications system for their exclusive use.
  • What kinds of speeds can they run with the broadband over power lines? I mean... if it's competitive with cable, fiber, etc... bring it on! It's just laying out availability for poorer areas to have access.

    That, and the technology being invested in can also be used across the world in poorer nations that don't have the infrastructure to support the kind coverage that developed nations have.

  • Why BPL is bad for radio transmissions (Score:4, Informative)

    by lugar ( 561993 ) on Thursday July 07, 2005 @01:44PM (#13006204)
    For those who are looking for data on BPL and its effects on radio transmissions, this is a good place to start:

    http://www.arrl.org/tis/info/HTML/plc/aud-vid.html [arrl.org]
  • There are lots of posts here saying how IPoPower will never work because of this or that. Google isn't mad of dummies - maybe the are investing in a company that has solved these issues? My bet is that its a solution for a small area - like reading power meters.
    • So since when have they altered the laws of physics? This is just BPL with a new name. No matter how much money you throw at it, BPL will still be BPL, it's a kludge at best. But I'm sure Google has the money to blow on a dead end project such as this.

  • Bad technology (Score:2, Interesting)

    by Peter Simpson ( 112887 )
    It's similar to DSL. Only it radiates far more garbage into the 2 to 30 MHz spectrum, because it's not being sent over twisted pair. It's also much more susceptible to incoming interference from HF radio transmissions.

    I should say that I'm an amateur radio licensee, and the amateur community is against this technology because of the interference it causes.

    As to BPL having been tested in Europe, I think you'll find that the tests in the UK ended with BPL being discontinued. The tests in the US have been
  • My parents still live in what can be considered a "rural" area (only 4 miles from the city, but unreachable by DSL and the cable company has been too lazy). We're frustrated by the lack of broadband options, but recently we ran across the following article.

    Frequency grab may air out internet wars [jsonline.com]

    Basically, the guy plans on running a big WiFi transmitter on the unlicensed 2.4 GHz spectrum. How he can run a transmitter at that kind of power (7 mile range) and avoid the FCC is beyond me, but more power
    • Basically, the guy plans on running a big WiFi transmitter on the unlicensed 2.4 GHz spectrum. How he can run a transmitter at that kind of power (7 mile range) and avoid the FCC is beyond me, but more power to him if he can (no pun intended)

      When you run in the unlicensed spectrum, you agree not to provide any interference on licenced frequencies.

  • So Far So Good in Cincinnati (Score:3, Interesting)

    by Anonymous Coward on Thursday July 07, 2005 @02:08PM (#13006510)
    I've been using Current Communications' service in Cincinnati since last November. The lowest tier of service (which I have) is 1Kbps (up and down) @ $26.99/mo., which I find adequate for casual internet use.

    I am also a beta tester for their VOIP service, which seems to work fine.

    Before signing up, I had read quite a bit about the RF interference issues, and I thought I'd give the service a try to gain a first-hand perspective.

    Based on my experience so far, I have not encountered any interference on the AM band on several radios I use regularly. I am not a regular shortwave listener, but I do have a small shortwave radio, and I can't really tell a difference since Current started up here.

    I really don't know if Current is doing anything different from other deployments of BPL technology, but I suspect they must be doing something to mitigate interference, or I would think I would have noticed it, or noticed some coverage in the local media.

  • ZDNet reports that Current Communications Group has received investment money from Google, Hearst, and Goldman Sachs for theirinternet over broadband ventures.

    Internet over broadband. I never would have thought of that. They never cease to amaze me.
  • ...to the first person to send me a virus I can use to explode the pigeons above my driveway that crap on my friggen convertible. Of course exploded pigeon may be harder to clean off the upholstery.

Slashdot Top Deals

Hackers are just a migratory lifeform with a tropism for computers.

Close