What's the real scope of hardware openness?
luca.dionisi at gmail.com
Mon Aug 6 14:50:31 CEST 2007
On 8/6/07, Giles Jones <giles.jones at zen.co.uk> wrote:
> What you propose is illegal due to the restrictions on radio transmissions.
> The problem is you would be relying on someone near to you,
> Also, the power drain of having a radio transmitter (eg. Wifi) switched
> on all the time...
Ok, good points for sure. But similar points have not stopped an
incremental adoption of emule.
For the legal aspect, since our representatives have demonstrated
that they care about consumers' interests less than zero, I hope in
a movement starting from the base.
On 8/6/07, Sébastien Lorquet <squalyl at gmail.com> wrote:
> I feel that building a network architecture relying on others users to
> transmit critical data streams could raise a lot of security and speed
There are protocols for anonymity.
On 8/6/07, Mikko J Rauhala <mjrauhal at cc.helsinki.fi> wrote:
> What you can't do is use the GSM frequencies for this kind of thing,
> first because you don't have access to the GSM chip firmware, ...
Well, then it IS a matter of hardware openness too.
On 8/6/07, Torfinn Ingolfsen <tingox at gmail.com> wrote:
> Well, for the GSM network at least, the current devices simply cannot
> talk to each other directly, ech needs to talk to a base station.
Is this a existing limitation also for GPRS or UMTS?
More information about the community