Re: organization of internet material

Dwayne (
Mon, 29 Jun 1998 00:33:31 +1000

Eugene Leitl wrote:
> I think permanent connectivity is not a pipe dream anymore, even
> outside of California. Of course having a webcam, and NMEA feed from
> a GPS receiver is the logical next step. Relying on cellular is
> expensive, and radio modems are not ubiquitously available, not very
> cheap.

Not unless you build them yourself. I'm currently researching
radio modem plans with a view towards building a bundle of them
with about a dozen of my friends, and setting up a city-wide WAN.
The next step is to run this WAN into an internet feed. While
having a high-speed link would be nice, I'm more interested in a
permanent connection than a fast dial-up link. There are some
interestingly fast designs floating around, so hopefully I'll be
able to implement a 100k+ link. I'm in Melbourne, Australia,

If anyone knows of useful spread-spectrum radio designs, or have
any advice, please get in touch with me, and if people are
interested I'll let them know how this works out.

> Also, I don't understand why people do not turn fine-grain
> providers, linking up with neighbour's housenets, offering mutual
> router capabilities. One should think a (even diskless) i386/i486
> 8 MByte Linux box with several NICs is not so very expensive.

I wonder how much use the corel NC will be for this purpose? This
is basically my plan, I'd like to link up my neighbours, and link
these subnets with my friends' subnets. Economies of scale are
quite useful in this regard, and if I'll I'm providing is access
to the net it's a hell of a lot less hassle than running an ISP.

> I distrust robots, though I've never used one. I think I'll wait for
> learning neural nets which learn from looking over my shoulder. I
> think people are the best filters, and I'd wish more people would
> participate in the effort.

I've subscribed to this since it started, as far as I know. What
do you mean by the "effort"?