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.
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.
Drones are, in essence, flying autonomous vehicles. Pros and cons surrounding drones today might well foreshadow the debate over the development of self-driving cars. In the context of a strongly regulated aviation industry, "self-flying" drones pose a fresh challenge. How safe is it to fly drones in different environments? Should drones be required for visual line of sight – as are piloted airplanes? Join EE Times' Junko Yoshida as she moderates a panel of drone experts.