Lunar Broadband

On Saturday, April 25, 2015 at 8:01:52 PM UTC+12, Fred J. McCall wrote:
William Mook wrote:

On Friday, April 24, 2015 at 8:22:32 PM UTC-4, William Mook wrote:
Fred and friends have made nearly 20 posts of late, and in these posts have said that this sci.space.policy was Fred's and he asked me to get of his lawn.

Fred is obviously unaware of the concept of easement and the rights afforded users of public space.



And Willie is obviously unaware that "the concept of easement" doesn't
apply here.



Now I own my posts as all of you own your posts. This is a public forum where posts are invited. As a necessity any posts here are accessible to others through this forum and all here have ceded certain rights to be here, and all have rights of access to this public place as a consequence. Among these rights all those who post here have certain expectation to enjoy the benefits of this public place without torturous interference of others, even those who may have created the place initially and feel somehow because of that its their lawn.



Wrong.



These acts are not merely violations of etiquette. These acts are violations of civil rights. Especially where they involve appeal to inherited racial characteristics.



Wrong.



Now, I have a Dutch name that sounds a lot like a pejorative description of a monkey like person to the US Italian community in the 1950s where I lived. Many people in that society at that time thought my name was socially significant and behaved accordingly. This shaped my personality in many ways, not the least of which was a willingness to stand up for myself against unreasoning hatred and opposition, and overwhelming force, sometimes requiring violent response on my part, merely because of this racial characteristic of mine.



So you've had emotional control issues for most of your life.
Eventually you should seek treatment for that, as it seems to more and
more be affecting your quality of life.



Now, my name is not skin color. Yet, I was born with and inherited my name, which makes it a biological characteristic that has social significance. In short, I belong to the race of Dutch settlers in North America, known as Mook.



There is no such 'race'.



Any appeal to the pejorative use of this word in connection to me, any inference to that pejorative, whether openly stated or not, is a racial slur by definition and when done in a public place. When done with the purpose of eliciting violence from me, so that I may be excluded from this public place, that is a violation of law so egregious it is punishable by imprisonment.



Utter bull****. You being a whiny bitch with emotional control issues
doesn't create some new class of crime.



Now, I don't wish to see anyone in the dock. All I ask from Fred, or anyone here, is a measure of respect due anyone who is in a public place and for all to cease and desist from their racist remarks to me in the future..



Since no one has made any 'racist remarks' to you anywhere except in
your own paranoid delusions, you already have your wish. This sort of
blathering crap is why people treat you with derision in the first
place.


I created this thread "Lunar Broadband" with the intent to describe my program to put a lander on the moon and in the process leave at least one picosat swarm at Lagrange Point 1.


And it's a loony program. You claim a big piece of your initial
funding will be recovered by winning the Google X-Prize, which you are
not eligible to compete for. You use that claim to solicit funding,
which is fraud. And that's a REAL crime, not a made up one like the
one you put forward here with regard to 'racist comments'. You claim
to be wealthy but cannot fund this mad scheme of yours yourself to get
it to the point where you might actually display working hardware. I
don't claim to be wealthy but I could write a check today to fund
several stages where you're begging for funding (but I wouldn't do
that, because that would be loony) without having to liquidate much of
anything. You make outrageous claims for non-existent hardware.

THAT is why you are treated with derision. Your name is just a happy
happenstance.

snip loonspew

--
"Ordinarily he is insane. But he has lucid moments when he is
only stupid."
-- Heinrich Heine

Intellectual property is property. Public places occur online as well as in the physical world. Easement exists on line, rights exist on line, responsibilities not to incite violence, exist on line.

On Sat, 25 Apr 2015, Jeff Findley wrote to All:


JF In article ,
JF says...
This picosat swarm will constitute not only an optical broadband
data link from the launch center to the lander, it will also be
the first element of a Server Sky network, accessible by anyone
with an 8" telescope, attached to GPS guidance, and possessing
a USB linked laser/photo-detector attachment to replace the eye
piece.

JF You keep claiming this is somehow secure, but it seems awfully
JF easy to spy on communications since all it would take is "an 8"
JF telescope, attached to GPS guidance, and possessing a USB linked
JF laser/photo- detector attachment to replace the eye piece". The
JF feds are going to love this new network since it should be easy
JF to listen in on.

perhaps he's planning on using "broad spectrum" frequencies like cordless home telephones use? :lol:

the thing that i wonder about is why "optical frequencies" instead of higher frequencies... optical stuff is going to be hampered by atmospheric effects... can we say poor seeing, weather, winds... the same things that make the stars appear to flicker and
)\/(ark

--
| Remove .my.foot for email
| via Waldo's Place USA Fidonet-Internet Gateway Site
| Waldo's Place USA 919-774-5930 telnet://bbs.wpusa.dynip.com
| Standard disclaimer: The views of this user are strictly his own.

On Sunday, April 26, 2015 at 4:05:51 AM UTC+12, Jeff Findley wrote:
In article ,
says...
This picosat swarm will constitute not only an optical broadband
data link from the launch center to the lander, it will also be
the first element of a Server Sky network, accessible by anyone
with an 8" telescope, attached to GPS guidance, and possessing
a USB linked laser/photo-detector attachment to replace the eye
piece.


You keep claiming this is somehow secure, but it seems awfully easy to
spy on communications since all it would take is "an 8" telescope,
attached to GPS guidance, and possessing a USB linked laser/photo-
detector attachment to replace the eye piece". The feds are going to
love this new network since it should be easy to listen in on.

Anyone who sees the moon, can see the L1 array, certainly, which is an important factor for any communications link. Knowing that it is hovering above Sinus Medii aids early-adopters in finding it. Giving them access to the data set recovered by the lander(s) provides incentives for those early adopters. Providing discoverable services operating on the Server Sky net, makes the services 'sticky'.

Systems are secured by encryption codes that are tied to the geophysical location of the user. This is an extension of physical encryption technology, and the theory of how these two meld together is given in the following text book, which I recommend you read;

https://books.google.co.nz/books?id=...g e&q&f=false

To understand the core physical process of how we get keys from geophysical locations, we must first understand that the the satellite swarm, or array operates in the vacuum of space. So it operates near the Rayleigh Criterion for optics.

This formula gives us the divergence angle for a circular aperture which is given by;

sin(theta) = 1.22 * lambda / Diameter

and 'spot size' at a distance is give by

spot size = Distance * sin(theta)

So, in my swarm I have an EHF and optical systems operating side by side. This includes;

(1) a 4 km diameter array operating between 30 GHz to 330 GHz. The EHF frequencies which translate to wavelengths of 10 mm to 0.91 mm. Which has

30 GHz: sin(theta) = 1.22 * 0.01000 / 4000 = 0.00000305
330 GHz: sin(theta) = 1.22 * 0.00091 / 4000 = 2.7755E-007


(2) I also have multiple 200 mm diameter arrays operating between 1100 nm and 350 nm wavelength.

1100 nm: sin(theta) = 1.22 * 1100e-9/0.2 = 0.00000671
350 nm: sin(theta) = 1.22 * 350e-9/0.2 = 0.000002135

Now this gives a large number of channels which people may operate from. So, a spread spectrum approach is used. A spread-spectrum transmission offers three main advantages over a fixed-frequency transmission:

(1) Spread-spectrum signals are highly resistant to narrow band interference. The process of re-collecting a spread signal spreads out the interfering signal, causing it to recede into the background. This is especially true when operating off-world with extreme doppler shifts. (I have extensive knowledge of this due to my background in SETI at the OSU under Dr. Kraus)

(2) Spread-spectrum signals are difficult to intercept. A spread-spectrum signal may simply appear as an increase in the background noise to a narrowband receiver. An eavesdropper may have difficulty intercepting a transmission in real time if the pseudorandom sequence is not known. In this system the pseudorandom sequence is tied to geophysical location.

(3) Spread-spectrum transmissions can share a frequency band with many types of conventional transmissions with minimal interference. The spread-spectrum signals add minimal noise to the narrow-frequency communications, and vice versa. As a result, bandwidth can be used more efficiently.

The number of 'spots' that are possible is given by the 'spot size' and the apparent size of the Earth's surface from the picosat swarm.

The distances these swarms will operate vary from

(1) 384,400 km - Lagrange points 3,4,5 (1 is less, 2 is more)

30 GHz: 1.17 km
330 GHz: 0.11 km
1100 nm: 2.58 km
350 nm: 0.82 km

(2) 35,786 km - Geostationary orbit

30 GHz: 0.1091473 km
330 GHz: 0.0099324 km
1100 nm: 0.2401241 km
350 nm: 0.0764031 km

(3) 1,987 km - 2 hr Sun Synch Polar Orbit

30 GHz: 0.00606035 km
330 GHz: 0.00055149 km
1100 nm: 0.01333277 km
350 nm: 0.00424225 km


So, the 'spot sizes' for these two systems vary with frequency and distance.. However, each communication occurs at a specific location and that location enforces a specific direction between the array and the user, uniquely identifying that user by location.

The largest 'spot' from Lagrange Point One on the Earth's surface is around 3 km. This means that 18,012,655 unique codes are possible that vary by the user's position on the globe. For non-geostationary swarms, these vary by time of day and change on average every 15 seconds or so.

Now, precisely WHEN these codes change introduces a chaotic element, based on precise geophysics and is another source of information that can be used to further secure the spread spectrum system.

So, while someone communicating at 1100 nm from Earth to Lagrange Point One, might be able to spoof the system into thinking they're a user somewhere within 3.5 km of themselves, they cannot spoof the system into thinking they're at the *precise* location of the user they're attempting to spoof, because that user will change location consistently before or after they do. This slight variation occurring four times per minute, will allow the system to reject the spoof attempt in a few minutes, and result in their detection and approximate location.

Or is this simply "security by obscurity", like MacOS enjoyed for years
simply because it was far less popular than Windows?

This will certainly be a powerful factor early-on. But, it is not the core factor as I've explained.

Jeff
--
"the perennial claim that hypersonic airbreathing propulsion would
magically make space launch cheaper is nonsense -- LOX is much cheaper
than advanced airbreathing engines, and so are the tanks to put it in
and the extra thrust to carry it." - Henry Spencer

On Sunday, April 26, 2015 at 5:07:21 AM UTC+12, Greg (Strider) Moore wrote:
"Jeff Findley" wrote in message
...

In article ,
says...
This picosat swarm will constitute not only an optical broadband
data link from the launch center to the lander, it will also be
the first element of a Server Sky network, accessible by anyone
with an 8" telescope, attached to GPS guidance, and possessing
a USB linked laser/photo-detector attachment to replace the eye
piece.


You keep claiming this is somehow secure, but it seems awfully easy to
spy on communications since all it would take is "an 8" telescope,
attached to GPS guidance, and possessing a USB linked laser/photo-
detector attachment to replace the eye piece". The feds are going to
love this new network since it should be easy to listen in on.

Or is this simply "security by obscurity", like MacOS enjoyed for years
simply because it was far less popular than Windows?


Exactly. He's talked about using this in the middle of NYC. Given the size
of the footprint the downlink will have (especially from L1) it would be
trivial for a number of people to listen in on.

The one thing this doesn't have is physical security. So we're back to
encryption and there's nothing special that he does that can't also be done
on the ground.

You know, if he were simply proposing this as a mechanism to give some form
of broadband access to remote areas, then he MIGHT be on to something. But
of course he takes a fairly simple and basic idea (orbital communication
link) and greatly complicates it to the point where no one in his target
market would be interested.

I know a number of NGOs though that would love decent bandwidth in remote
areas on short notice.


Jeff

--
Greg D. Moore http://greenmountainsoftware.wordpress.com/
CEO QuiCR: Quick, Crowdsourced Responses. http://www.quicr.net

I've addressed this in another post. I refer you to that post for a detailed explanation.

On Sunday, April 26, 2015 at 8:30:09 AM UTC+12, Fred J. McCall wrote:
Jeff Findley wrote:

In article ,
says...
This picosat swarm will constitute not only an optical broadband
data link from the launch center to the lander, it will also be
the first element of a Server Sky network, accessible by anyone
with an 8" telescope, attached to GPS guidance, and possessing
a USB linked laser/photo-detector attachment to replace the eye
piece.


You keep claiming this is somehow secure, but it seems awfully easy to
spy on communications since all it would take is "an 8" telescope,
attached to GPS guidance, and possessing a USB linked laser/photo-
detector attachment to replace the eye piece". The feds are going to
love this new network since it should be easy to listen in on.

Or is this simply "security by obscurity", like MacOS enjoyed for years
simply because it was far less popular than Windows?


It's done anyway. He got a whopping �6,347 pledged out of the
�225,000 he needed for that first step. As Mr Mook put it:

"Well, barring a major funding source coming in and tipping us over
the fixed funding limit by the deadline, it looks like I was overly
ambitious in my fund raising goals, which is too damned bad I did down
load my pledgers list. I want to thank everyone for pledging "

So Mr Mook now has a list of 46 suckers he's going to hit up again.

"I did get some great feed back from lots of good vendors and I may be
back with a lower goal since it looks like I can get a MEMS rocket
array going for about USD$33,000 - so I might be back with that at an
appropriate time. I would like to build some more flight hardware over
the next few months and put videos of that up."

He's not interested in flying or any particular project. He's just
interested in putting up videos to stroke himself...

--
You are
What you do
When it counts.

You are mistaken if you think I am not proceeding with my First Lunar Efforts merely because this Startjoin effort failed to raise the money sought under the terms required by Startjoin.

As I mentioned, I have sufficient money to proceed with early stage development whether this effort succeeds or not.

Please note, I was asked to put this plea on Startjoin by one of the founders of Startjoin for a variety of reasons having nothing to do with my need for funds.

On Sunday, April 26, 2015 at 5:07:21 AM UTC+12, Greg (Strider) Moore wrote:
"Jeff Findley" wrote in message
...

In article ,
says...
This picosat swarm will constitute not only an optical broadband
data link from the launch center to the lander, it will also be
the first element of a Server Sky network, accessible by anyone
with an 8" telescope, attached to GPS guidance, and possessing
a USB linked laser/photo-detector attachment to replace the eye
piece.


You keep claiming this is somehow secure, but it seems awfully easy to
spy on communications since all it would take is "an 8" telescope,
attached to GPS guidance, and possessing a USB linked laser/photo-
detector attachment to replace the eye piece". The feds are going to
love this new network since it should be easy to listen in on.

Or is this simply "security by obscurity", like MacOS enjoyed for years
simply because it was far less popular than Windows?


Exactly. He's talked about using this in the middle of NYC. Given the size
of the footprint the downlink will have (especially from L1) it would be
trivial for a number of people to listen in on.

The one thing this doesn't have is physical security. So we're back to
encryption and there's nothing special that he does that can't also be done
on the ground.

You know, if he were simply proposing this as a mechanism to give some form
of broadband access to remote areas, then he MIGHT be on to something. But
of course he takes a fairly simple and basic idea (orbital communication
link) and greatly complicates it to the point where no one in his target
market would be interested.

I know a number of NGOs though that would love decent bandwidth in remote
areas on short notice.


Jeff

--
Greg D. Moore http://greenmountainsoftware.wordpress.com/
CEO QuiCR: Quick, Crowdsourced Responses. http://www.quicr.net

Needs of persons in remote locations and in NYC are not mutually exclusive. The reason one focuses on places like NYC is that is where the money is and the variety of needs sufficient to support a new technology.

The reason remote locations don't have infrastructure is because they don't have money. Getting NGOs who have limited money to adopt a new technology involves one in a significant political process which rightly tends to avoid new approaches in favor of proven approaches.

On Sunday, April 26, 2015 at 11:03:18 AM UTC+12, mark lewis wrote:
On Sat, 25 Apr 2015, Jeff Findley wrote to All:


JF In article ,
JF says...
This picosat swarm will constitute not only an optical broadband
data link from the launch center to the lander, it will also be
the first element of a Server Sky network, accessible by anyone
with an 8" telescope, attached to GPS guidance, and possessing
a USB linked laser/photo-detector attachment to replace the eye
piece.

JF You keep claiming this is somehow secure, but it seems awfully
JF easy to spy on communications since all it would take is "an 8"
JF telescope, attached to GPS guidance, and possessing a USB linked
JF laser/photo- detector attachment to replace the eye piece". The
JF feds are going to love this new network since it should be easy
JF to listen in on.

perhaps he's planning on using "broad spectrum" frequencies like cordless home telephones use? :lol:

the thing that i wonder about is why "optical frequencies" instead of higher frequencies... optical stuff is going to be hampered by atmospheric effects... can we say poor seeing, weather, winds... the same things that make the stars appear to flicker and
)\/(ark

--
| Remove .my.foot for email
| via Waldo's Place USA Fidonet-Internet Gateway Site
| Waldo's Place USA 919-774-5930 telnet://bbs.wpusa.dynip.com
| Standard disclaimer: The views of this user are strictly his own.

I've responded to many of these points in another post to this thread earlier.

The dispersion of signals in the atmosphere help provide for a higher density of users that reuse the same frequencies without interference.

Further, as I said elsewhere, the system uses a spread spectrum technique involvineg EHF (30 GHz to 330 GHz) and optical frequencies (1100 nm to 350 nm).

I cut off at 350 nm because the dispersion of the atmosphere is too great. Frequencies with wavelengths shorter than 350 nm are strongly absorbed by the ozone layer and are not used for that reason, even though the alkalai photomultiplier I use is sensitive to 200 nm.

http://www.globalwarmingart.com/imag...tion_Bands.png

http://scienceofdoom.files.wordpress...pacity-svg.png

In older communications satellites 44 GHz is used for uplink, 20 GHz is used for downlink. This is known as the K band.

Electronic countermeasures uses 60 GHz to 100 GHz and these frequencies are approved for a variety of unlicensed uses.

The EHF band is commonly used in radio astronomy and remote sensing.

The band from 38.6 - 40.0 GHz is used for licensed high-speed microwave data links, and the 60 GHz band is used for unlicensed data links.

The 71-76, 81-86 and 92-95 GHz bands are also used for point-to-point high-bandwidth unlicensed communication links.

These frequencies, as opposed to the 60 GHz frequency, do not suffer from the effects of oxygen absorption, but require a transmitting license in the US from the Federal Communications Commission (FCC) if broadcast over a large area. High directivity beams do not require licensing.

10 Gbit/s links use these frequencies.

In the case of the 92-95 GHz band, a small 100 MHz range has been reserved for space-borne radios, making this reserved range limited to a transmission rate of under a few gigabits per second.

The EHF band is essentially undeveloped and available for use in a broad range of new products and services, including high-speed, point-to-point wireless local area networks and broadband Internet access.

WirelessHD is another recent technology that operates near the 60 GHz range..

Highly directional, "pencil-beam" signal characteristics permit different systems to operate close to one another without causing interference allowing their unlicensed use.

Potential applications also include radar systems with very high resolution..

The upcoming Wi-Fi standard IEEE 802.11ad will run on the 60 GHz (V band) spectrum with data transfer rates of up to 7 Gbit/s.

Uses of the millimeter wave bands include point-to-point communications, intersatellite links, and point-to-multipoint communications.

Because of shorter wavelengths, the band permits the use of smaller antennas to achieve direction and high gain. The immediate consequence of this high direction, coupled with the high free space loss is the efficient use of the spectrum for point-to-multipoint applications.

Since a greater number of highly directive antennas can be placed in a given area than less directive antennas, the net result is higher reuse of the spectrum, and higher density of users, as compared to lower frequencies.

Furthermore, because one can place more voice channels or broadband information using a higher frequency to transmit the information, this spectrum is used as a supplement for free space optical communications.

On Sunday, April 26, 2015 at 11:32:00 AM UTC+12, William Mook wrote:
On Sunday, April 26, 2015 at 11:03:18 AM UTC+12, mark lewis wrote:
On Sat, 25 Apr 2015, Jeff Findley wrote to All:


JF In article ,
JF says...
This picosat swarm will constitute not only an optical broadband
data link from the launch center to the lander, it will also be
the first element of a Server Sky network, accessible by anyone
with an 8" telescope, attached to GPS guidance, and possessing
a USB linked laser/photo-detector attachment to replace the eye
piece.

JF You keep claiming this is somehow secure, but it seems awfully
JF easy to spy on communications since all it would take is "an 8"
JF telescope, attached to GPS guidance, and possessing a USB linked
JF laser/photo- detector attachment to replace the eye piece". The
JF feds are going to love this new network since it should be easy
JF to listen in on.

perhaps he's planning on using "broad spectrum" frequencies like cordless home telephones use? :lol:

the thing that i wonder about is why "optical frequencies" instead of higher frequencies... optical stuff is going to be hampered by atmospheric effects... can we say poor seeing, weather, winds... the same things that make the stars appear to flicker and
)\/(ark

--
| Remove .my.foot for email
| via Waldo's Place USA Fidonet-Internet Gateway Site
| Waldo's Place USA 919-774-5930 telnet://bbs.wpusa.dynip.com
| Standard disclaimer: The views of this user are strictly his own.

I've responded to many of these points in another post to this thread earlier.

The dispersion of signals in the atmosphere help provide for a higher density of users that reuse the same frequencies without interference.

Further, as I said elsewhere, the system uses a spread spectrum technique involvineg EHF (30 GHz to 330 GHz) and optical frequencies (1100 nm to 350 nm).

I cut off at 350 nm because the dispersion of the atmosphere is too great.. Frequencies with wavelengths shorter than 350 nm are strongly absorbed by the ozone layer and are not used for that reason, even though the alkalai photomultiplier I use is sensitive to 200 nm.

http://www.globalwarmingart.com/imag...tion_Bands.png

http://scienceofdoom.files.wordpress...pacity-svg.png

In older communications satellites 44 GHz is used for uplink, 20 GHz is used for downlink. This is known as the K band.

Electronic countermeasures uses 60 GHz to 100 GHz and these frequencies are approved for a variety of unlicensed uses.

The EHF band is commonly used in radio astronomy and remote sensing.

The band from 38.6 - 40.0 GHz is used for licensed high-speed microwave data links, and the 60 GHz band is used for unlicensed data links.

The 71-76, 81-86 and 92-95 GHz bands are also used for point-to-point high-bandwidth unlicensed communication links.

These frequencies, as opposed to the 60 GHz frequency, do not suffer from the effects of oxygen absorption, but require a transmitting license in the US from the Federal Communications Commission (FCC) if broadcast over a large area. High directivity beams do not require licensing.

10 Gbit/s links use these frequencies.

In the case of the 92-95 GHz band, a small 100 MHz range has been reserved for space-borne radios, making this reserved range limited to a transmission rate of under a few gigabits per second.

The EHF band is essentially undeveloped and available for use in a broad range of new products and services, including high-speed, point-to-point wireless local area networks and broadband Internet access.

WirelessHD is another recent technology that operates near the 60 GHz range.

Highly directional, "pencil-beam" signal characteristics permit different systems to operate close to one another without causing interference allowing their unlicensed use.

Potential applications also include radar systems with very high resolution.

The upcoming Wi-Fi standard IEEE 802.11ad will run on the 60 GHz (V band) spectrum with data transfer rates of up to 7 Gbit/s.

Uses of the millimeter wave bands include point-to-point communications, intersatellite links, and point-to-multipoint communications.

Because of shorter wavelengths, the band permits the use of smaller antennas to achieve direction and high gain. The immediate consequence of this high direction, coupled with the high free space loss is the efficient use of the spectrum for point-to-multipoint applications.

Since a greater number of highly directive antennas can be placed in a given area than less directive antennas, the net result is higher reuse of the spectrum, and higher density of users, as compared to lower frequencies.

Furthermore, because one can place more voice channels or broadband information using a higher frequency to transmit the information, this spectrum is used as a supplement for free space optical communications.

http://ijircce.com/upload/2013/march/18_Wide%20band.pdf

A set of LHCP helical antennae joined on the same mount with the 8" optical telescope provides the EHF linkage required for parallel EHF communications to supplement the open optical data link.

"Fred J. McCall" wrote in message
...

William Mook wrote:

On Sunday, April 26, 2015 at 5:07:21 AM UTC+12, Greg (Strider) Moore
wrote:
"Jeff Findley" wrote in message
...

In article ,
says...
This picosat swarm will constitute not only an optical broadband
data link from the launch center to the lander, it will also be
the first element of a Server Sky network, accessible by anyone
with an 8" telescope, attached to GPS guidance, and possessing
a USB linked laser/photo-detector attachment to replace the eye
piece.


You keep claiming this is somehow secure, but it seems awfully easy to
spy on communications since all it would take is "an 8" telescope,
attached to GPS guidance, and possessing a USB linked laser/photo-
detector attachment to replace the eye piece". The feds are going to
love this new network since it should be easy to listen in on.

Or is this simply "security by obscurity", like MacOS enjoyed for years
simply because it was far less popular than Windows?


Exactly. He's talked about using this in the middle of NYC. Given the
size
of the footprint the downlink will have (especially from L1) it would be
trivial for a number of people to listen in on.

The one thing this doesn't have is physical security. So we're back to
encryption and there's nothing special that he does that can't also be
done
on the ground.

You know, if he were simply proposing this as a mechanism to give some
form
of broadband access to remote areas, then he MIGHT be on to something.
But
of course he takes a fairly simple and basic idea (orbital communication
link) and greatly complicates it to the point where no one in his target
market would be interested.

I know a number of NGOs though that would love decent bandwidth in
remote
areas on short notice.


Needs of persons in remote locations and in NYC are not mutually
exclusive. The reason one focuses on places like NYC is that is where the
money is and the variety of needs sufficient to support a new technology.


But the places where there is money already have all the required
infrastructure, so your scheme has no chance.

Exactly.




The reason remote locations don't have infrastructure is because they
don't have money. Getting NGOs who have limited money to adopt a new
technology involves one in a significant political process which rightly
tends to avoid new approaches in favor of proven approaches.


It's the usual chicken-egg thing, but locations that lack
infrastructure are the only place where your application makes even a
little bit of sense.

But Mr. Mook, you claim how inexpensive your setup is, so it's perfect for
an NGO. In fact I know of an NGO that formed and went to Africa in the
middle of the Ebola crisis 3 months ago that could have used something like
this. If it's as cheap as you claim it would have been a no brainer for
them.




--
Greg D. Moore http://greenmountainsoftware.wordpress.com/
CEO QuiCR: Quick, Crowdsourced Responses. http://www.quicr.net

On Sunday, April 26, 2015 at 11:45:14 AM UTC+12, Fred J. McCall wrote:
William Mook wrote:

On Sunday, April 26, 2015 at 5:07:21 AM UTC+12, Greg (Strider) Moore wrote:
"Jeff Findley" wrote in message
...

In article ,
says...
This picosat swarm will constitute not only an optical broadband
data link from the launch center to the lander, it will also be
the first element of a Server Sky network, accessible by anyone
with an 8" telescope, attached to GPS guidance, and possessing
a USB linked laser/photo-detector attachment to replace the eye
piece.


You keep claiming this is somehow secure, but it seems awfully easy to
spy on communications since all it would take is "an 8" telescope,
attached to GPS guidance, and possessing a USB linked laser/photo-
detector attachment to replace the eye piece". The feds are going to
love this new network since it should be easy to listen in on.

Or is this simply "security by obscurity", like MacOS enjoyed for years
simply because it was far less popular than Windows?


Exactly. He's talked about using this in the middle of NYC. Given the size
of the footprint the downlink will have (especially from L1) it would be
trivial for a number of people to listen in on.

The one thing this doesn't have is physical security. So we're back to
encryption and there's nothing special that he does that can't also be done
on the ground.

You know, if he were simply proposing this as a mechanism to give some form
of broadband access to remote areas, then he MIGHT be on to something. But
of course he takes a fairly simple and basic idea (orbital communication
link) and greatly complicates it to the point where no one in his target
market would be interested.

I know a number of NGOs though that would love decent bandwidth in remote
areas on short notice.


Needs of persons in remote locations and in NYC are not mutually exclusive. The reason one focuses on places like NYC is that is where the money is and the variety of needs sufficient to support a new technology.


But the places where there is money already have all the required
infrastructure, so your scheme has no chance.

That's not what the experts in the field believe. They believe there is tremendous opportunity for new technologies to emerge.

https://www.whitehouse.gov/sites/def...port_final.pdf


The reason remote locations don't have infrastructure is because they don't have money. Getting NGOs who have limited money to adopt a new technology involves one in a significant political process which rightly tends to avoid new approaches in favor of proven approaches.


It's the usual chicken-egg thing, but locations that lack
infrastructure are the only place where your application makes even a
little bit of sense.

Again, I refer you to an overview document from the OSTP which summarizes the opportunities before us. It shows that your intuition is wrong on this subject.

--
"Some people get lost in thought because it's such unfamiliar
territory."
--G. Behn