We have wifimax in our city, so i get the idea,..,but you cant make a
wifi-max-envelope the planet surface...,again how would a signal cross an
ocean (or any typical place where you cant settup a mesh like that).


On Sun, Feb 16, 2014 at 2:48 PM, Drak <drak@???> wrote:

> I'd not like to get into a long debate about this. You are referring to
> ISM bands. There are a lot of whitespace bands. Probably we are talking
> about cross purposes. I am talking about meshness using adhoc networks
> using white space. Wifi networks are the first good example on a wide-scale
> and they very much are encrypted, and there are efforts by governments to
> free up more and more white space for short distance transmission devices.
> Devices cannot interfere with ranges that are already allocated for other
> purposes, that is a given, and some bands are forbidden entirely, but this
> does not stop meshnets using space that is legally allocated for short
> distance transmissions, aka, whitespace.
>
> Drak
>
>
> On 16 February 2014 13:34, Jacob <jacobusbogers@???> wrote:
>
>> USA is the biggest economy, so not neglecting it,..,FCC forbids any
>> encryption on "packet radio" this extends to the application layer. I
>> don't see how oversees transmissions are possible with ISM . without long
>> wavelength transmissions. Continents are divided by oceans, there are no
>> ocean faring cities yet.
>>
>>
>> On Sun, Feb 16, 2014 at 2:23 PM, Drak <drak@???> wrote:
>>
>>> Maybe in the USA, but the USA is not the rest of the world, and in any
>>> case this simply talks about encryption of the transmission. Ad hoc
>>> networks are allowed in the USA, there is whitespace to place with for
>>> short distances and the ruling only seems to apply to the transport layer.
>>> You cant apply that to protocols that might setup outside of the transport,
>>> above layers 2 and 3. The ruling also only applied to HAM frequencies, and
>>> we are not talking about HAM radio, but about using whitespace for adhoc
>>> networks.
>>>
>>> Drak
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>> On 16 February 2014 13:14, Jacob <jacobusbogers@???> wrote:
>>>
>>>> "Actually not, there are open frequencies"
>>>> No Link provided?
>>>> The FCC ruling is quite clear, no encryption on the transmission of
>>>> radio packets.
>>>> http://www.arrl.org/news/fcc-dismisses-encryption-petition
>>>>
>>>>
>>>> On Sun, Feb 16, 2014 at 1:53 PM, Drak <drak@???> wrote:
>>>>
>>>>> Actually not, there are open frequencies. YMMV and there is also this
>>>>> coming along: http://bitcoincard.org/ from the Mycelium guys, watch
>>>>> the video, it's pretty impressive.
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>> On 16 February 2014 12:30, Jacob <jacobusbogers@???> wrote:
>>>>>
>>>>>> Never seen it before, but just to be clear, transmissions of
>>>>>> encrypted data over HAM radio frequencies is a violation of FCC rules and
>>>>>> brings criminal prosecution....
>>>>>> So it seem we will be needing our own satalites,..., anyone has a
>>>>>> phone nr of Elen Musk?)
>>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>>> On Sun, Feb 16, 2014 at 1:26 PM, Drak <drak@???> wrote:
>>>>>>
>>>>>>> Have you see this? http://www.openlibernet.org/
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> On 16 February 2014 12:18, dávid <chaser@???> wrote:
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> It's time to set up wireless mesh networks.
>>>>>>>> How long till Bitcoin packet filtering kicks in? Is it possible to
>>>>>>>> identify and block those packets on an ISP-level? Or to block node
>>>>>>>> discovery? Afaik, it's not end-to-end encrypted (or encrypted at all).
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> On 2/16/2014 12:33, Amir Taaki wrote:
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>> http://www.techdirt.com/articles/20140211/19014226192/
>>>>>>>>> uk-govt-goes-extraterritorial-to-clean-up-web-ministers-
>>>>>>>>> looking-to-block-extremist-videos-foreign-websites.shtml
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>> this makes me sad how predictable this all is. it's really
>>>>>>>>> happening.
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>> _______________________________________________
>>>>>>>>> unSYSTEM mailing list: http://unsystem.net
>>>>>>>>> https://mailinglists.dyne.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/unsystem
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> _______________________________________________
>>>>>>>> unSYSTEM mailing list: http://unsystem.net
>>>>>>>> https://mailinglists.dyne.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/unsystem
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> _______________________________________________
>>>>>>> unSYSTEM mailing list: http://unsystem.net
>>>>>>> https://mailinglists.dyne.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/unsystem
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>>> _______________________________________________
>>>>>> unSYSTEM mailing list: http://unsystem.net
>>>>>> https://mailinglists.dyne.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/unsystem
>>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>> _______________________________________________
>>>>> unSYSTEM mailing list: http://unsystem.net
>>>>> https://mailinglists.dyne.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/unsystem
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>
>>>> _______________________________________________
>>>> unSYSTEM mailing list: http://unsystem.net
>>>> https://mailinglists.dyne.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/unsystem
>>>>
>>>>
>>>
>>> _______________________________________________
>>> unSYSTEM mailing list: http://unsystem.net
>>> https://mailinglists.dyne.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/unsystem
>>>
>>>
>>
>> _______________________________________________
>> unSYSTEM mailing list: http://unsystem.net
>> https://mailinglists.dyne.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/unsystem
>>
>>
>
> _______________________________________________
> unSYSTEM mailing list: http://unsystem.net
> https://mailinglists.dyne.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/unsystem
>
>