 TzaleProud Libertarian ConservativePremium
join:2004-01-06
NYC Metro
1 edit | reply to dynodb
Re: Fcc listening? said by dynodb:said by Tzale:There isn't anything cooler than being able to chat with someone around the world, at random, never knowing who you will get... Um... you just described the Internet  Sorry, just jerking your chain; I don't get the whole ham radio thing, but whatever makes you happy. Still, one does have to question how much new broadband technology should be limited because it has a minor impact on a handfull of hobbyists in a given area. The internet uses land based technology.. You're missing the point... There are no wires or millions of dollars of equipment between me and the other operator. It is simply amazing and that is why it works so well during emergencies, such as Katrina and the Tsunami, where in some places HF Ham Radio was the ONLY way to communicate for months.
I had a QSO with an op in Minnesota last week. The guy was out in the woods, far away from any big cities. There were no "wires" in between us, and he was only running 20 watts, I was running 100 watts. We chatted for over an hour, free and with our "own" infrastructure. If the infrastructure crumbled around us, we'd still be able to talk, provided we ran on battery power. That is the major plus behind Amateur Radio. MOST people have no knowledge of radio or how it works. Most people who work for radio stations don't even understand it today, it is the enthusiast, the hobbyist that understands it. For example, I read about a state police radio repeater that went down during a hurricane in Florida. Ham ops jerry-rigged the repeater back together, so the cops could communicate. HAM ops. are enthusiastic about learning electronics and radio communications and they KNOW how to fix them when they break. Many times, during an emergency the government doesn't have these people within their own ranks, except for maybe the Office of Emergency Management, which often includes an Amateur Radio station and operators.
-Tzale |
|
dynodbPremium,VIP
join:2004-04-21
Minneapolis, MN | Don't get me wrong; I'm not knocking your hobby... just saying I don't get it. I LIVE in Minnesota and don't want to talk to strangers here in person, thus don't have a desire to talk to them on the radio 
Seriously, the ham radio people have a point... but so do the PBL people. The latter will serve more people, but the ham folks were there first. |
|
RadioDoc58ef2c0Premium,ExMod 2000-03
join:2000-05-11 | BPL will serve more people? By what measure? BPL is not supposed to be a radiated service. If they could keep it where it belongs they could serve anyone they want. They can't seem to accomplish that.
--
Toolmaster of La Grange.
For "Pompous Jackass", see 419381 |
|
| reply to dynodb
said by dynodb:Don't get me wrong; I'm not knocking your hobby... just saying I don't get it. I LIVE in Minnesota and don't want to talk to strangers here in person, thus don't have a desire to talk to them on the radio Seriously, the ham radio people have a point... but so do the PBL people. The latter will serve more people, but the ham folks were there first. If BPL actually used the spectrum, they would perhaps have a valid claim to the frequencies. The kicker is they don't use the frequencies, they merely radiate into wireless spectrum as a byproduct of the service. |
|
Reviews:
 ·Bright House
| reply to dynodb
said by dynodb:I LIVE in Minnesota and don't want to talk to strangers here in person, thus don't have a desire to talk to them on the radio So you posted because????.... You're talking to a bunch of unknown people right now. The people on the Ham radios will likely share that point with you, which is why HF interference is vital. You can't hear on the other end, you have no-one to talk to. HF travels very far and uses minimal power, so you'd likely find another state or country before you'd be talking to your neighbor. Your point is not very well made. You're on a broadband forum talking about how much you don't get why people want to talk to unknowns. How about this, get a radio with data capability, and scan the band. You'll find some people allow internet access THRU the ham radio. The Ham radio could be nice enough to redeem itself by allowing people to share internet access on repeaters, but I doubt operators want to foot the bill for anonymous internet access.
--
SIPPhone/Gizmo # 17476200648 / PIMPNET Chatline / Ran by Asterisk & Slackware 10.1. |
|
|
|
 JDC69Premium
join:2003-03-21
Oakridge, OR
1 edit | reply to Tzale
I understand both sides of this argument and it is not an easy one to resolve. My father was a ham radio operator and as a result I used to go with him to some of the meetings held by the club he was a member of. The ham operators at those meetings were some of the most technically adept individuals I have ever met. Good god those guys could mod any damn thing it seemed like to fit their purposes. My father actually took a regular old 40 channel cb and added a few project boxes that housed some switches and other components (purchased from Radio Shack back when it was a ham operator geared store) and made it into a sideband rig that he used in his work truck. I must say that I applaud the knowledge and ingenuity shown by most ham operators.
The internet community needs to attempt to model itself after the hams. More internet users need to educate themselves about the current technologies and what is and is not possible. Start holding ISP's accountable for their shoddy service and in the case of BPL do away with the companies who are producing inferior equipment that is in turn creating issues for the ham community.
If there are deployments of BPL that are not causing interference or effecting ham operators then these need to be the standard for future roll outs. As consumers we do have the ability to affect whether products and manufacturers succeed in the marketplace. So instead of arguing about this why don't we try working together on a solution? Request that BPL technology be fully tested and certified by an independent entity before it is allowed to reach consumers. This would put an end to the manufacturing of half assed BPL equipment which in the long run would be a win/win situation for all.
The ham operators do have a significant place as part of the communication infrastructure in our nation and they really are some of the smartest people you will ever encounter. If my understanding of what they are saying is correct then there are ways to deploy BPL with minimum impact on them. I am all for new technology and I do like the thought of something like BPL where it can reach the masses who have little other chance of ever seeing a broadband connection. So if there is a way to do that without screwing over the ham ops why not get together and make a push for that?
Sorry about the lack of formatting before, I was pressed for time when I originally posted. Hope this edit works out better for you.  |
|
 MattAll noise, no signal.Premium
join:2003-07-20
Jamestown, NC
kudos:12 | said by JDC69:I understand both sides of this arguement and it is not an easy one to resolve. My father was a ham radio operator and as a result I used to go with him to some of the meetings held by the club he was a member of. The ham operators at those meetings were some of the most technically adept individuals I have ever met. Good god those guys could mod any damn thing it seemed like to fit their purposes. My father actually took a regular old 40 channel cb and added a few project boxes that housed some switches and other components (purchased from Radio Shack back when it was a ham operator geared store) and made it into a sideband rig that he used in his work truck. I must say that I appluad the knowledge and ingenuity shown by most ham operators. The internet community needs to attempt to model itself after the hams. More internet users need to educate themselfs about the current technologies and what is and is not possible. Start holding ISP's accountable for their shotty service and in the case of BPL do away with the companies who are producing trash equipment that is messing with the ham community. If there are deployments of BPL that do not interfere with the ham operators go with the same equipment in future roll outs. As consumers we do have the power to affect things like this as if no one suppots an emerging technology from a manufacturer it is sure to be short lived. So instead of argueing about this why don't we try working together on a solution. Put an end to the companies manufaturing half assed BPL equipment by simply refusing to purchase or use it. The ham operators do have a significant place as part of the communication infrastructure in our nation and they really are some of the smartest people you will ever encounter. If my understanding of what they are saying is correct then there are ways to deploy BPL with minimum impact on them. I am all for new technology and I do like the thought of something like BPL where it can reach the masses who have little other chance of ever seeing a broadband connection. So if there is a way to do that without screwing over the ham ops why not get together and make a push for that? Please repost what you just said ... only ... please use paragraphs.
--
Use the OS tool for the job. |
|
| said by Matt:said by JDC69:I understand both sides of this arguement and it is not an easy one to resolve. Please repost what you just said ... only ... please use paragraphs. Can't debate the information, attack the grammar.
Pointless is right. What is your point? |
|
 ThalerPremium
join:2004-02-02
Los Angeles, CA
kudos:3
 ·DSL EXTREME
| said by rf_engineer:Can't debate the information, attack the grammar. No...it's just that the logic train is really hard to follow when it's buried in a clump of text. Just at a glance, trying to read and comprehend your message begins to start a headache.
It's easier to read and follow, that's all. |
|
| said by Thaler:said by rf_engineer:Can't debate the information, attack the grammar. No...it's just that the logic train is really hard to follow when it's buried in a clump of text. Just at a glance, trying to read and comprehend your message begins to start a headache. It's easier to read and follow, that's all. It wasn't my message. Yea, it could use same paragraphs, but I can follow it. |
|
ThalerPremium
join:2004-02-02
Los Angeles, CA
kudos:3 Reviews:
·DSL EXTREME
| said by rf_engineer:It wasn't my message. Yea, it could use same paragraphs, but I can follow it. True, for you. Me on the other hand, I just find myself re-reading a lot because the train of thought gets derailed in its formatting. |
|
