Public Gain from DTV Transition? : More channels, YES -- Better Public Service communications networks, NO (ARE YOU DREAMING?)

In the US there is the obvious gain of more channels.
That part of the argument is solved.

Will public safety improve, via public safety networks being interoperable?
No, I really doubt that.
In the US the nepotism and favoritism is so raft in the public sector --
such that no police / fire / ambulance / etc ... networks can be purchased
without a kickback (or someone's relative being hired). This begs for
non-interoperable public safety radio networks from day zero. The US Federal
Government can do nothing about this, as it is bloated with people who got
jobs in it via favoritism and nepotism. One level of bureaucracy must
protect the other, so expect total inaction on usable public safety
networks.

The moral: expect Americans to continue to get fat, but don't expect these
fat people to be rescued by the public sector in any kind of actual
emergency.

"The 9/11 Commission recommended we do this for emergency
responders' interoperability," he said, as freeing up
spectrum space will allow police and fire departments to
better communicate. It also "frees up a lot of spectrum for
companies to innovate and come out with new wireless
devices, which is a boost to the economy and innovation."

On Aug 8, 3:35*am, "Max Power" wrote:
In the US there is the obvious gain of more channels.
That part of the argument is solved.

Will public safety improve, via public safety networks being interoperable?
No, I really doubt that.
In the US the nepotism and favoritism is so raft in the public sector -- *
such that no police / fire / ambulance / etc ... networks can be purchased
without a kickback (or someone's relative being hired). This begs for
non-interoperable public safety radio networks from day zero. The US Federal
Government can do nothing about this, as it is bloated with people who got
jobs in it via favoritism and nepotism. One level of bureaucracy must
protect the other, so expect total inaction on usable public safety
networks.

The moral: expect Americans to continue to get fat, but don't expect these
fat people to be rescued by the public sector in any kind of actual
emergency.



"The 9/11 Commission recommended we do this for emergency
responders' interoperability," he said, as freeing up
spectrum space will allow police and fire departments to
better communicate. It also "frees up a lot of spectrum for
companies to innovate and come out with new wireless
devices, which is a boost to the economy and innovation."- Hide quoted text -

- Show quoted text -

Wow. Sweeping generalities. Off topic attacks. Inflamatory claims.
You've degenerated into complete trolling.

Dan (Woj...)

"dmaster" wrote in message
...
On Aug 8, 3:35 am, "Max Power" wrote:
In the US there is the obvious gain of more channels.
That part of the argument is solved.

Will public safety improve, via public safety networks being
interoperable?
No, I really doubt that.
In the US the nepotism and favoritism is so raft in the public sector --
such that no police / fire / ambulance / etc ... networks can be purchased
without a kickback (or someone's relative being hired). This begs for
non-interoperable public safety radio networks from day zero. The US
Federal
Government can do nothing about this, as it is bloated with people who got
jobs in it via favoritism and nepotism. One level of bureaucracy must
protect the other, so expect total inaction on usable public safety
networks.

The moral: expect Americans to continue to get fat, but don't expect these
fat people to be rescued by the public sector in any kind of actual
emergency.



"The 9/11 Commission recommended we do this for emergency
responders' interoperability," he said, as freeing up
spectrum space will allow police and fire departments to
better communicate. It also "frees up a lot of spectrum for
companies to innovate and come out with new wireless
devices, which is a boost to the economy and innovation."- Hide quoted
text -

- Show quoted text -

Wow. Sweeping generalities. Off topic attacks. Inflamatory claims.
You've degenerated into complete trolling.

Dan (Woj...)

What do you expect from someone calling themselves the lamest name Homer
Simpson could come up with.

Homer:"I thought about it while looking at a hair dryer" (or something like
that)