While I never had it I did see it many times on usenet I think?
From a link in the article to the original trial - just to get what the actual charge was.
Lincolnshire Police said John had first come to the attention of counter-terrorism officers in 2018 after he wrote a letter entitled Eternal Front - Lincolnshire Fascist Underground.
He was arrested in January 2020, and later charged with offences under the Terrorism Act, including possessing documents on combat, homemade weapons and explosives.
The force said John had become part of the Extreme Right Wing (XRW) online - a term for activists who commit criminal activity motivated by a political or cultural view, such as racism or extreme nationalism.
He amassed 67,788 documents in bulk downloads onto hard drives, which contained a wealth of white supremacist and anti-Semitic material.
One of the hard drives was found hidden inside a sock when police searched his home, officers said.
He was convicted by a jury of one count of possessing information likely to be useful to a terrorist and cleared of six other counts of the same offence.
He sounds like a total tool - is he a potential Anders Breivik who knows?
There’s a whole lot of stuff that could be useful to a terrorist … getting rid of all my recipe books just in case.
Absurd to think that the burden of this should be on the FAA and the airlines. The burden should be on the FCC and the 5g operators to solve this issue to the FAA’s satisfaction. The FAA raised these concerns at the time of the auction.
This seems like an almost entirely political problem.
The FAA’s concerns as described in the general media seem pretty handwavy. On the technical issue, if it really is going to come down to what if any filters are necessary, this from @spidercrab’s post, seems questionable.
The F.A.A.’s argument is that it couldn’t issue a new standard for radar altimeters without knowing in detail the design of the 5G equipment.
Seems reasonable to me, how could you design and test the filters without that information? In any case, the people paying for the filter design and implementation should obviously be the 5g carriers.
Yeah, that’s nonsense. You have an assigned frequency range. Put a sharp filter at the borders of that assigned range. Test the resulting product. Done.
Start by taking it to be a black box producing a signal with a certain power spectrum. A filter can be pretty generic; I doubt they need to start from scratch. If they needed more information, they could have specified what they needed and why. It’s not surprising “detailed design” is sensitive; they should expect some give and take. This looks like a turf war, not some fancy technical issue.
The communications companies did pay to compensate the people who previously occupied the spectrum. If the airlines didn’t get a share and their issue is really about money, let them say that.
I don’t want to be too dismissive in case my microwaves professor is looking over my shoulder but it does sound like they’re using this to scare people. Ideally an adult would quickly settle an FAA v FCC dispute but if Kudlow had any real power in this situation then we’re probably lucky it’s not worse.
It sounds like the airlines were relying on there being no usage of spectrum that wasn’t licensed to them, which doesn’t seem all that reasonable. Isn’t the whole point of the FCC to let people not worry about interference as long as they operate within their licenses?
RE: edgy teenagers reading fringy books, did anyone else get the Paladin Press catalogue when they were young? I bought a bunch of books from them about paper-chasing, lock picking, and assorted other stuff that I never did.
Not really, the problem is that the 5g carriers are maybe going to bleed into the spectrum the airlines have a license for. If the 5g carriers impose a cost on the airlines by bleeding onto that spectrum then of course they should be liable for the mitigation of the costs of the 5g spectrum going from largely unused to heavily used.