I don't know, but if I were in charge of the FCC, I'd purge most such rules and instead bask in the glow of true freedom.

Yes, true freedom, where no one can do anything because the entire situation is a melt-down mess!

literally 2.4GHz WiFi in any apartment complex or condo

but if there was no regulation we could increase the transmit power and have better signal!

Exactly, by actually taking advantage of advances in RF and information theory since the Communications Act of 1934. Which we can't do at the moment.

Uh, that is not what the comment you are relying to likely meant.

The issue in apartments is TOO much power, not too little.

I know that's not what he meant, but his thesis is wrong. The law is written to impose artificial restrictions on things like power, antenna gain, and symbol rates, and those restrictions are actively counterproductive.

Both amateur and commercial developers are forbidden from using the best available technology to use the RF spectrum as efficiently as possible.

Care to elaborate?

Edit: prior poster elaborated after I wrote this comment.

If an individual increases their TX power it would help them, but make others' experience worse. In a situation like an apartment block, if everyone increased their TX power then everyone would have a worse experience.

The point of this specific regulation is to prevent tragedy of the commons in a shared band -- if you want fewer restrictions go ahead and license your own spectrum; it wont be cheap.

If anything, it should be responding to new technology by encouraging their use to make use of shared bands more efficient, for example by reducing the power limit and restricting the use of inefficient modulation schemes.

edit: I know the article was about symbol rates, and I would agree that a symbol rate limit is silly, but you're responding to my comment which was just about the power limit.

Isn't that the point?

Have a listen to USA CB Channel 6 (27.015 MHz / 27105 KHz) if you'd like a taste of what true freedom is like. Best way to listen in without an actual receiver is a WebSDR, here's one[1] that can tune to it.

[1] - http://kiwisdr1.sdrutah.org:8073/

I'm 99% sure they meant no bandwidth restrictions per transmission within a band. You'd still have the rules about not causing interference etc.

They absolutely aren't considering letting amateur radio use all the spectrum.

It feels like there’s some confusion over the overloaded term “bandwidth” here. The bandwidth limit in place of the symbol rate is 2.8 kHz. As in, you can use any symbol rate you like as long as your emissions do not exceed 2.8 kHz of space in the band when measured from the 3 dB mark.

I feel like the intended use of the word “broadband” in this context was the more commonplace (but imprecise) “data rate” definition.

Late edit: s/broadband/bandwidth in the last sentence. That was a remnant from an unsubmitted edit, but I think my point got across.