Comment: Honestly, it's not that

(See in situ)

In reply to comment: Great article- (see in situ)

Honestly, it's not that

Honestly, it's not that simple. Like I said elsewhere, there were literally tens, if not hundreds of people voicing the exact same concerns (and probably many of them before this guy was). This whole deal was contingent on tests by Light Squared and those in the government and industry showing that Light Squared would not interfere with GPS. Tests by government and industry indicated otherwise, so the plan was scrapped.

There is a very strong incentive both within government and industry to preserve the integrity of GPS. GPS is part of the national infrastructure, and without it (or a degraded/unusable version of it), many things in modern day society would simply cease to function (e.g., cell phone base towers, smart grid power distribution, timing for financial transactions, etc.).

With that said, I think this issue is a bit different than Solyndra, etc. I don't think there's anything wrong with asking a company to prove its service doesn't interfere with another service (in this case, GPS) as long as their analysis is indeed correct. That's why it's important to have all stakeholders perform their own independent studies to come to the correct conclusion (and that was what was done in the end). End result: Light Squared, no more.