Design Con 2015
Breaking News
News & Analysis

FCC ignoring danger?

4/12/2013 06:36 PM EDT
12 comments
NO RATINGS
More Related Links
View Comments: Newest First | Oldest First | Threaded View
<<   <   Page 2 / 2
Bert22306
User Rank
CEO
re: FCC ignoring danger?
Bert22306   4/12/2013 8:20:23 PM
NO RATINGS
I have somewhat mixed feelings about this. On the one hand, the FCC does seem to be clueless many times, about things they should be expert at understanding. Examples such as the LightSquared fiasco, and the TV "white space" impending fiasco, are obvious examples. On the other hand, I'm not sure just how much of an issue this 6X over limit measurement really is. I assume they're talking about those clustered cellular base stations we see on top of buildings. Inside the building, where people work, I'm not sure whether the levels are any higher than at home, with WiFi and cordless phones, or on the train, where every Tom, Dick, and Harry sitting close by is mindlessly texting or otherwise busy transmitting low power RF just inches or feet from you. The inverse square law is what applies to point sources such as these. Power density drops off quite rapidly as distance increases. Use of the term "600 percent" seems tailor-made for engendering that "ooooh aaaaah" reaction.

EREBUS0
User Rank
Rookie
re: FCC ignoring danger?
EREBUS0   4/12/2013 7:57:32 PM
NO RATINGS
Yes, another government agency that services the abusers of the system and abandons the average citizen to the unknown risks of EM levels. I thought these agencies were set up for the public safety! Another example on how the government no longer serves a purpose in our modern society. Just my opinion.

<<   <   Page 2 / 2
Radio
LATEST ARCHIVED BROADCAST
EE Times Senior Technical Editor Martin Rowe will interview EMC engineer Kenneth Wyatt.
Top Comments of the Week
Like Us on Facebook

Datasheets.com Parts Search

185 million searchable parts
(please enter a part number or hit search to begin)
EE Times on Twitter
EE Times Twitter Feed
Flash Poll