Joho the Blog
|
|
|
January 20, 2003
Getting good reaction to the FAQ on Open Spectrum I wrote with content from Dewayne Hendricks, David Reed and Jock Gill. So far, it's been blogged by Cory Doctorow, Dan Gillmor, Eric Norlin, and Dave Winer. And I haven't checked this morning's blogiverse yet. Open Spectrum is important and not on enough radar screens yet. Spread the meme! Posted
by D. Weinberger at January 20, 2003 11:00 AM
TrackBackListed below are links to weblogs that reference Open Spectrum FAQ, 2:
» Learning about Open Spectrum from McGee's Musings Tracked on February 4, 2004 12:15 PM |
Comments
David, your trackback function is broken. When I try to ping you, I get a 500 Internal Server Error message, and I get much the same if I try to click on one of the Trackback links on your home page.
If you're interested in a skeptical look at your FAQ and article, you can find one on my site.
Posted by: ralph | January 21, 2003 02:16 AM
David Weinberger-
I must apologize, I read your original post two days ago and since that time your FAQ has been sitting in my bookmarks, waiting for me to read it. Tonight I finally found the time to read through both the FAQ and the essay 'Why Open Spectrum Matters'. I also got around to blogging it, hopefully getting my few sporadic readers interested in this important issue. Also, I have tried my hand at refuting part of what some naysayers have said on the discussion board. I hope the little I have said sparks some thinking for you and others, and I wait with batted breath to hear yours and other's further views on Open Spectrum.
-Grant M. Henninger
[ dram.teamslack.net ]
PS: It would be nice to get a better name for it than Open Spectrum, we are starting to get far to many different abbreviations that OS could stand for.
Posted by: Grant M. Henninger | January 21, 2003 05:18 AM
Ralph: Thanks for the reply at your site. Nicely put. I will pass the url along to some folks who, unlike me, actually know stuff. But my fwiw response is: Open Spectrum is a policy initiative that would enable the development of devices and applications that take advantage of it. The development would follow the path and pace marked by market demand (within the bounds of physics and technology, of course).
As for the trackback: Damn! I'll try to fix it. Thanks for letting me know.
Grant, thank you for the comments. As for coming up with a new name: yeah, we've kicked it around. "Wireless commons" isn't quite right. I hope you can come up with something better.
Posted by: David Weinberger | January 21, 2003 10:13 AM
David, are you and the co-conspirators reading the comments discussion on the Greater Democracy site? There are some good skeptical questions that bear answering.
- Adina
Posted by: Adina Levin | January 21, 2003 07:35 PM
Adina, Jock is certainly following the discussion there. I keep up, too, but David Reed and Dewayne Hendricks are the best to address these issues.
Posted by: David Weinberger | January 21, 2003 10:59 PM