OT - Is this computer for real?

[James Knott]

Jamon Camisso wrote:
> James Knott wrote:
>> I think you'll find it's not quite transparent, if you look close
>> enough.  There will be some shielding material, either as a fine screen
>> or very thin layer.  Those clear acrylic cases, that some people like,
>> are not shielded.  While it's not illegal to make, import or sell those
>> cases, a computer built with one would be illegal.
> 
> I've always wondered, if a computer/device cannot create any electronic
> interference but must accept any given, where is the magical device that
> is creating said given interference in the first place if it too cannot
> (by writ of the omnipresent silver FCC sticker of course) create any
> interference?
> 
> Plain silliness, I know -- but I rather detest those little stickers.

Any licensed radio transmitter generates a signal that may cause
interference to a device that's not supposed to be sensitive to such
signals.  For example many of the cable TV channels are on frequencies
used by various radio services.  It is the responsibility of the cable
company, to ensure that they don't interfere with those services.  They
also have to accept any interference to their services, caused by those
transmitters or find a way to block them.  Fortunately, steps taken to
prevent signal leakage work both ways.

In the case of devices such as cordless phones, WiFi cards, Bluetooth
etc., the fundamental understanding is that they operate in potentially
polluted spectrum and can expect no legal recourse for any resulting
interference.  Also, some of that spectrum is shared with licenced users
and the unlicenced devices are legally bound to do what's required,
including cease operations, in order to avoid interference to the
licenced service.

--
The Toronto Linux Users Group.      Meetings: http://tlug.ss.org
TLUG requests: Linux topics, No HTML, wrap text below 80 columns
How to UNSUBSCRIBE: http://tlug.ss.org/subscribe.shtml