Google Groups no longer supports new Usenet posts or subscriptions. Historical content remains viewable.
Dismiss
Re: Just curious how far your Wi-Fi access point is from your desktop computer
10 views
Skip to first unread message
Arlen _G_ Holder
Oct 18, 2019, 5:43:51 PM10/18/19
to
On Thu, 17 Oct 2019 23:19:27 -0700, Johann Beretta wrote:
> It's not the same. A ski mask is for skiing. You can't accidentally use
> it to rob a bank.
Hi Johann,
Let's focus our insight on helping people do what we do all the time, OK?
o We throw WiFi easily for a dozen miles, without blinking, Johann
They can certainly paint an RV with WiFi when it's only a mere mile away!
o Let's focus our insight on helping people do what we do all the time, OK?
My point is that when pjp asks for help in throwing WiFi a mile from his
house to his RV, I don't endlessly harp on what there is zero evidence for
- which is that I feel it's suspicious that his RV is parked a kilometer
away from his house. I'm not like "Good Guy" who pulls that childish crap.
Good Guy, or Rene Lamontagne, or Char Jackson, all of those worthless
posters, THEY would think that it's suspicous - becaues they all prove to
own the minds of children - where then they endlesslessly harp on why THEY
think it's suspicious that pjp parks his RV a mile from his home.
You'd get guys like Mayayana, William Unruh or Dan Purgert even, who
sometimes post as adults, latch onto this highly suspicious scenario where
the RV is a mile from the home - so - instead of helping the guy - they
endlessly harp on WHY pjp parks his RV a kilometer way from the house.
o Maybe he's parking his RV a kilometer from his house to break the law!
You think that way, and that's OK.
o But I just think the guy wants to paint the RV with Internet.
We think differently, Johann.
o I'm more trusting than you Johann. More innocent.
o I'm always purposefully helpful.
Which is why it bothers me that the common trolls who infest this newsgroup
are the opposite of me, which is that nothing they posts adds any value
whatsoever - and - even ignorning them - doesn't stop them from infesting
the USenet potluck (just look at what the trolls wrote in this thread).
> An uneducated person can buy a powerbeam, intend to use it for wifi, and
> accidentally (because they don't know better) choose the wrong option in
> the configuration, and break the law.
I think differently than the trolls (e.g., I never troll).
o I think differently than the "semantic expert" (e.g., I add value).
And, I think differently than anyone who harranges us on "legal" issues
o When there is zero evidence that pjp is attempting to break the law
It doesn't even occur to me to think the way you think.
o Since you clearly think that way - all you have to do is say it once.
And then we can get back to adding value on Usenet.
o Deal?
The guy needs advice on how to throw his WiFi a kilometer
o From his house to his RV
o Where there is only a "hole" in the trees back at the RV
o And where the RV has generator power.
One place you can help advise pjp (and the rest of us as a result) is how
you'd recommend he "power" the tree radio at the RV.
For example, would you recommend just mooching off the RV battery?
> It's a drop down menu. It can be clicked on accidentally. These devices
> are not, and have never been, meant for the general public. The rockets
> are even worse.
Let's stop harranging on the legality issue.
o You said it once; we agreed ... can we move on to helping people?
Another question you can help advise pjp on, and, in the process, the rest
of us learn from your advice, is how much power loss is calculatable for
penetrating less-than-dense foliage a distance of a kilometer.
I documented in this post just now a case where someone went about 500 feet
through what appears from the pictures to be all foliage, where I'm curious
what you think, from your experience, is possible to penetate with typical
Ubiquiti equipment such as that described in this post just now:
<https://groups.google.com/d/msg/sci.electronics.repair/mfFaPuRWHmg/6TZUzxc1CAAJ>
--
The whole point of Usenet is for adults to helpfully share on-topic value.
> It's not the same. A ski mask is for skiing. You can't accidentally use
> it to rob a bank.
Hi Johann,
Let's focus our insight on helping people do what we do all the time, OK?
o We throw WiFi easily for a dozen miles, without blinking, Johann
They can certainly paint an RV with WiFi when it's only a mere mile away!
o Let's focus our insight on helping people do what we do all the time, OK?
My point is that when pjp asks for help in throwing WiFi a mile from his
house to his RV, I don't endlessly harp on what there is zero evidence for
- which is that I feel it's suspicious that his RV is parked a kilometer
away from his house. I'm not like "Good Guy" who pulls that childish crap.
Good Guy, or Rene Lamontagne, or Char Jackson, all of those worthless
posters, THEY would think that it's suspicous - becaues they all prove to
own the minds of children - where then they endlesslessly harp on why THEY
think it's suspicious that pjp parks his RV a mile from his home.
You'd get guys like Mayayana, William Unruh or Dan Purgert even, who
sometimes post as adults, latch onto this highly suspicious scenario where
the RV is a mile from the home - so - instead of helping the guy - they
endlessly harp on WHY pjp parks his RV a kilometer way from the house.
o Maybe he's parking his RV a kilometer from his house to break the law!
You think that way, and that's OK.
o But I just think the guy wants to paint the RV with Internet.
We think differently, Johann.
o I'm more trusting than you Johann. More innocent.
o I'm always purposefully helpful.
Which is why it bothers me that the common trolls who infest this newsgroup
are the opposite of me, which is that nothing they posts adds any value
whatsoever - and - even ignorning them - doesn't stop them from infesting
the USenet potluck (just look at what the trolls wrote in this thread).
> An uneducated person can buy a powerbeam, intend to use it for wifi, and
> accidentally (because they don't know better) choose the wrong option in
> the configuration, and break the law.
I think differently than the trolls (e.g., I never troll).
o I think differently than the "semantic expert" (e.g., I add value).
And, I think differently than anyone who harranges us on "legal" issues
o When there is zero evidence that pjp is attempting to break the law
It doesn't even occur to me to think the way you think.
o Since you clearly think that way - all you have to do is say it once.
And then we can get back to adding value on Usenet.
o Deal?
The guy needs advice on how to throw his WiFi a kilometer
o From his house to his RV
o Where there is only a "hole" in the trees back at the RV
o And where the RV has generator power.
One place you can help advise pjp (and the rest of us as a result) is how
you'd recommend he "power" the tree radio at the RV.
For example, would you recommend just mooching off the RV battery?
> It's a drop down menu. It can be clicked on accidentally. These devices
> are not, and have never been, meant for the general public. The rockets
> are even worse.
Let's stop harranging on the legality issue.
o You said it once; we agreed ... can we move on to helping people?
Another question you can help advise pjp on, and, in the process, the rest
of us learn from your advice, is how much power loss is calculatable for
penetrating less-than-dense foliage a distance of a kilometer.
I documented in this post just now a case where someone went about 500 feet
through what appears from the pictures to be all foliage, where I'm curious
what you think, from your experience, is possible to penetate with typical
Ubiquiti equipment such as that described in this post just now:
<https://groups.google.com/d/msg/sci.electronics.repair/mfFaPuRWHmg/6TZUzxc1CAAJ>
--
The whole point of Usenet is for adults to helpfully share on-topic value.
Dan Purgert
Oct 18, 2019, 7:52:07 PM10/18/19
to
-----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-----
Hash: SHA256
Arlen _G_ Holder wrote:
> On Thu, 17 Oct 2019 23:19:27 -0700, Johann Beretta wrote:
>
>> It's not the same. A ski mask is for skiing. You can't accidentally use
>> it to rob a bank.
>
> Hi Johann,
> [...]
only posts I've made quoting regulations (in the US) have been to your
posts that do not clarify that the power levels you are quoting are, in
fact, bound by laws that restrict the allowable power levels.
pjp's scenario is PTP, and therefore would qualify for those power
levels you have so often quoted (assuming, of course, he is in the US).
>[...]
have the power to mislead people who don't know any better.
> [...]
temperature, to humidity, to precipitation, to wind, to the type of
trees ...
Or, you can make it easy and aim for a clear shot.
>
> I documented in this post just now a case where someone went about 500 feet
> through what appears from the pictures to be all foliage, where I'm curious
> what you think, from your experience, is possible to penetate with typical
> Ubiquiti equipment such as that described in this post just now:
><https://groups.google.com/d/msg/sci.electronics.repair/mfFaPuRWHmg/6TZUzxc1CAAJ>
>
Thats gonna be a hell of a nightmare shot if he's actually going through
the foliage. The whole discussion though is based on 900MHz, which
given that scenario will have pushed somewhere in the 20s to 30s of
mbps; maybe a bit faster, depending on how bad the leaves encroached.
That being said, 900MHz is about 2x better at punching through
obstructions as than 2.4 GHz (likewise, 2.4 GHz is about 2x better than
5 GHz in that regard).
-----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE-----
iQEzBAEBCAAdFiEEBcqaUD8uEzVNxUrujhHd8xJ5ooEFAl2qUBQACgkQjhHd8xJ5
ooFT5Af+NjdTToXNTvnk+4TvWqqWDr6oLkDqTVKzZUlnV4Ad+AJoakzkJFpaoUC7
QCruMwCV9d7nKZlJmTPVsIdw4WBTfAmY7VzObJlh3N7uxiNfVA/+vTafp8K2w7SQ
0G7yvALtYQc6OgmZVKVVqWLqNX0giT+O0n3+dYmZneVQXn24fQBautwfJw0fTz/Q
unmkRSW3wTUByCfaPDnag5xRj7KZloBAC5ZI870Q0oeGNGOhwK3XpsNEGAGajBsW
mx69r1mYdS9lxQr4IM0TNNJrQHWOLSg0drHQ1ilFl5PnZoyMewjJUP0hFn+ROmPu
cBRvEGsEOHFIHezH8V8hlpjispFy5A==
=3DKM
-----END PGP SIGNATURE-----
--
|_|O|_|
|_|_|O| Github: https://github.com/dpurgert
|O|O|O| PGP: 05CA 9A50 3F2E 1335 4DC5 4AEE 8E11 DDF3 1279 A281
Hash: SHA256
Arlen _G_ Holder wrote:
> On Thu, 17 Oct 2019 23:19:27 -0700, Johann Beretta wrote:
>
>> It's not the same. A ski mask is for skiing. You can't accidentally use
>> it to rob a bank.
>
> Hi Johann,
> You'd get guys like Mayayana, William Unruh or Dan Purgert even, who
> sometimes post as adults, latch onto this highly suspicious scenario where
> the RV is a mile from the home - so - instead of helping the guy - they
> endlessly harp on WHY pjp parks his RV a kilometer way from the house.
You must not actually have read my responses to his questions; as the
> sometimes post as adults, latch onto this highly suspicious scenario where
> the RV is a mile from the home - so - instead of helping the guy - they
> endlessly harp on WHY pjp parks his RV a kilometer way from the house.
only posts I've made quoting regulations (in the US) have been to your
posts that do not clarify that the power levels you are quoting are, in
fact, bound by laws that restrict the allowable power levels.
pjp's scenario is PTP, and therefore would qualify for those power
levels you have so often quoted (assuming, of course, he is in the US).
>[...]
>> An uneducated person can buy a powerbeam, intend to use it for wifi, and
>> accidentally (because they don't know better) choose the wrong option in
>> the configuration, and break the law.
>
>> accidentally (because they don't know better) choose the wrong option in
>> the configuration, and break the law.
>
> It doesn't even occur to me to think the way you think.
That is actually pretty shit of you to not even consider that your words
have the power to mislead people who don't know any better.
> [...]
>> It's a drop down menu. It can be clicked on accidentally. These devices
>> are not, and have never been, meant for the general public. The rockets
>> are even worse.
>
>> are not, and have never been, meant for the general public. The rockets
>> are even worse.
>
> Another question you can help advise pjp on, and, in the process, the rest
> of us learn from your advice, is how much power loss is calculatable for
> penetrating less-than-dense foliage a distance of a kilometer.
"It depends". There are ever-changing variables in that question, from
> of us learn from your advice, is how much power loss is calculatable for
> penetrating less-than-dense foliage a distance of a kilometer.
temperature, to humidity, to precipitation, to wind, to the type of
trees ...
Or, you can make it easy and aim for a clear shot.
>
> I documented in this post just now a case where someone went about 500 feet
> through what appears from the pictures to be all foliage, where I'm curious
> what you think, from your experience, is possible to penetate with typical
> Ubiquiti equipment such as that described in this post just now:
><https://groups.google.com/d/msg/sci.electronics.repair/mfFaPuRWHmg/6TZUzxc1CAAJ>
>
the foliage. The whole discussion though is based on 900MHz, which
given that scenario will have pushed somewhere in the 20s to 30s of
mbps; maybe a bit faster, depending on how bad the leaves encroached.
That being said, 900MHz is about 2x better at punching through
obstructions as than 2.4 GHz (likewise, 2.4 GHz is about 2x better than
5 GHz in that regard).
-----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE-----
iQEzBAEBCAAdFiEEBcqaUD8uEzVNxUrujhHd8xJ5ooEFAl2qUBQACgkQjhHd8xJ5
ooFT5Af+NjdTToXNTvnk+4TvWqqWDr6oLkDqTVKzZUlnV4Ad+AJoakzkJFpaoUC7
QCruMwCV9d7nKZlJmTPVsIdw4WBTfAmY7VzObJlh3N7uxiNfVA/+vTafp8K2w7SQ
0G7yvALtYQc6OgmZVKVVqWLqNX0giT+O0n3+dYmZneVQXn24fQBautwfJw0fTz/Q
unmkRSW3wTUByCfaPDnag5xRj7KZloBAC5ZI870Q0oeGNGOhwK3XpsNEGAGajBsW
mx69r1mYdS9lxQr4IM0TNNJrQHWOLSg0drHQ1ilFl5PnZoyMewjJUP0hFn+ROmPu
cBRvEGsEOHFIHezH8V8hlpjispFy5A==
=3DKM
-----END PGP SIGNATURE-----
--
|_|O|_|
|_|_|O| Github: https://github.com/dpurgert
|O|O|O| PGP: 05CA 9A50 3F2E 1335 4DC5 4AEE 8E11 DDF3 1279 A281
Alan Baker
Oct 18, 2019, 8:04:17 PM10/18/19
to
On 2019-10-18 2:43 p.m., Arlen _G_ Holder wrote:
> On Thu, 17 Oct 2019 23:19:27 -0700, Johann Beretta wrote:
>
>> It's not the same. A ski mask is for skiing. You can't accidentally use
>> it to rob a bank.
>
> Hi Johann,
>
> Let's focus our insight on helping people do what we do all the time, OK?
> o We throw WiFi easily for a dozen miles, without blinking, Johann
When you say "we"...
> On Thu, 17 Oct 2019 23:19:27 -0700, Johann Beretta wrote:
>
>> It's not the same. A ski mask is for skiing. You can't accidentally use
>> it to rob a bank.
>
> Hi Johann,
>
> Let's focus our insight on helping people do what we do all the time, OK?
> o We throw WiFi easily for a dozen miles, without blinking, Johann
...you really mean other people who actually understand this stuff...
...and not actually you...
...right?
>
> They can certainly paint an RV with WiFi when it's only a mere mile away!
> o Let's focus our insight on helping people do what we do all the time, OK?
>
> My point is that when pjp asks for help in throwing WiFi a mile from his
> house to his RV, I don't endlessly harp on what there is zero evidence for
> - which is that I feel it's suspicious that his RV is parked a kilometer
> away from his house. I'm not like "Good Guy" who pulls that childish crap.
>
> Good Guy, or Rene Lamontagne, or Char Jackson, all of those worthless
> posters, THEY would think that it's suspicous - becaues they all prove to
> own the minds of children - where then they endlesslessly harp on why THEY
> think it's suspicious that pjp parks his RV a mile from his home.
>
> You'd get guys like Mayayana, William Unruh or Dan Purgert even, who
> sometimes post as adults, latch onto this highly suspicious scenario where
> the RV is a mile from the home - so - instead of helping the guy - they
> endlessly harp on WHY pjp parks his RV a kilometer way from the house.
> o Maybe he's parking his RV a kilometer from his house to break the law!
>
> You think that way, and that's OK.
> o But I just think the guy wants to paint the RV with Internet.
He was pointing out that your analogy was nonsense...
...because it was.
>
> We think differently, Johann.
> o I'm more trusting than you Johann. More innocent.
> o I'm always purposefully helpful.
>
> Which is why it bothers me that the common trolls who infest this newsgroup
> are the opposite of me, which is that nothing they posts adds any value
> whatsoever - and - even ignorning them - doesn't stop them from infesting
> the USenet potluck (just look at what the trolls wrote in this thread).
>
>> An uneducated person can buy a powerbeam, intend to use it for wifi, and
>> accidentally (because they don't know better) choose the wrong option in
>> the configuration, and break the law.
>
> I think differently than the trolls (e.g., I never troll).
> o I think differently than the "semantic expert" (e.g., I add value).
>
> And, I think differently than anyone who harranges us on "legal" issues
> o When there is zero evidence that pjp is attempting to break the law
>
> It doesn't even occur to me to think the way you think.
> o Since you clearly think that way - all you have to do is say it once.
>
> And then we can get back to adding value on Usenet.
> o Deal?
>
> The guy needs advice on how to throw his WiFi a kilometer
> o From his house to his RV
> o Where there is only a "hole" in the trees back at the RV
> o And where the RV has generator power.
>
> One place you can help advise pjp (and the rest of us as a result) is how
> you'd recommend he "power" the tree radio at the RV.
>
> For example, would you recommend just mooching off the RV battery?
>
>> It's a drop down menu. It can be clicked on accidentally. These devices
>> are not, and have never been, meant for the general public. The rockets
>> are even worse.
>
> Let's stop harranging on the legality issue.
> o You said it once; we agreed ... can we move on to helping people?
>
> Another question you can help advise pjp on, and, in the process, the rest
> of us learn from your advice, is how much power loss is calculatable for
> penetrating less-than-dense foliage a distance of a kilometer.
>
> I documented in this post just now a case where someone went about 500 feet
> through what appears from the pictures to be all foliage, where I'm curious
> what you think, from your experience, is possible to penetate with typical
> Ubiquiti equipment such as that described in this post just now:
> <https://groups.google.com/d/msg/sci.electronics.repair/mfFaPuRWHmg/6TZUzxc1CAAJ>
>
'This area full of oaks and fir trees. ...
...However through some gaps I can see the top of the barn, '
^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^
So not THROUGH the trees at all.
Arlen Holder
Nov 27, 2020, 1:57:06 PM11/27/20
to
Update:
See also this recent tutorial, which allows you to easily transfer files
and/or folders (at the touch of a button) between your phone and your
non-Wi-Fi non-bluetooth Ethernet-only desktop (MacOS, Linux, Windows) even
when that desktop could be (as mine is) hundreds of feet away from your
SOHO router (e.g., in a shop or barn or pool or roadside mailbox).
o Tutorial NitroShare FOSS cross-platform file & folder transfer over Wi-Fi between any desktop & Android
<https://groups.google.com/g/comp.mobile.android/c/mbOyLNcrCK4>
--
As always, so all benefit from every action, saved on dejagoogle archives.
See also this recent tutorial, which allows you to easily transfer files
and/or folders (at the touch of a button) between your phone and your
non-Wi-Fi non-bluetooth Ethernet-only desktop (MacOS, Linux, Windows) even
when that desktop could be (as mine is) hundreds of feet away from your
SOHO router (e.g., in a shop or barn or pool or roadside mailbox).
o Tutorial NitroShare FOSS cross-platform file & folder transfer over Wi-Fi between any desktop & Android
<https://groups.google.com/g/comp.mobile.android/c/mbOyLNcrCK4>
--
As always, so all benefit from every action, saved on dejagoogle archives.
0 new messages