approval from:
Noah Vail 
amigo_boy
| Hammers interfere with my celectronics What bugs me is that hammers scream inference from BPL. One of my neighbors broadcast over my stereo and computer speakers all the time and the FCC hasn't done anything about it. Double standard. |
|
 N3OGHYo Soy Col. "Bat" GuanoPremium
join:2003-11-11
Philly burbs
kudos:1 | said by confused_cit :
What bugs me is that hammers scream inference from BPL. One of my neighbors broadcast over my stereo and computer speakers all the time and the FCC hasn't done anything about it. Double standard.
Double standard, NOT.
Your stereo and computer speakers are almost certainly FCC part "15" Devices.
"(1)This device may not cause harmful interference, and (2) this device must accept interference received, including interference that may cause undesired operation."
Your computer speakers and stereo have, and most likely always will, take hind teet to Amateur radio operations.
Most of the devices in American homes today that use or generate RF radiation stand in line behind any and all licensed devices and/or operators. Just the nature of the Part 15 device.
In other words, unless you make nice with the guy who's lighting up your stereo speakers (and if I was that guy, I would be in your house installing RF chokes on stuff, just to be a good neighbor), you're shit out of luck.
But, from the sound of it, all you want to do is piss and moan, so I seriously doubt you've taken a technical approach to fixing your problems...
--
Petty people are disproportionally corrupted by petty power |
|
 TzaleProud Libertarian ConservativePremium
join:2004-01-06
NYC Metro | reply to confused_cit
said by confused_cit :
What bugs me is that hammers scream inference from BPL. One of my neighbors broadcast over my stereo and computer speakers all the time and the FCC hasn't done anything about it. Double standard.
I'm sorry but you need to accept interference from Amateur Radio operators who are LICENSED. We're not responsible for your faulty or inferior electronic equipment / infrastructure. The nice thing is that most of us are tech / electronics geeks and we'd be thrilled to help you fix the problem if you asked like a human being.
-Tzale
--
They who can give up essential liberty to obtain a little temporary safety, deserve neither liberty nor safety.
-:-
"I believe the very heart and soul of conservatism is libertarianism."~Ronald Reagan
-:-
www.freestateproject.org - LIVE LIBERTY |
|
|
|
 WiFiguruTo infinity... and beyondPremium
join:2005-06-21
Los Gatos, CA
 ·Verizon Online DSL
| said by Tzale:said by confused_cit :
What bugs me is that hammers scream inference from BPL. One of my neighbors broadcast over my stereo and computer speakers all the time and the FCC hasn't done anything about it. Double standard.
The nice thing is that most of us are tech / electronics geeks and we'd be thrilled to help you fix the problem if you asked like a human being. -Tzale AMEN! |
|
 GbcueAlmost P.E.Premium
join:2001-09-30
Santa Rosa, CA
kudos:8
 ·AT&T U-Verse
| reply to confused_cit
said by confused_cit :
What bugs me is that hammers scream inference from BPL. One of my neighbors broadcast over my stereo and computer speakers all the time and the FCC hasn't done anything about it. Double standard.
Laughing Out Loud.
--
My Blog 2.0 |
|
| reply to confused_cit
said by confused_cit :
What bugs me is that hammers scream inference from BPL. One of my neighbors broadcast over my stereo and computer speakers all the time and the FCC hasn't done anything about it. Double standard.
Before you cried to mommy (FCC) have you talked to the ham who you claim was causing interference?
Certainly if any of my neighbors complain to me I'll help them out. I'll even give them filters for free!
But if someone calls the FCC I'll tell them to go pound sand and deal with me via the FCC.
More bees with honey than vinegar. |
|
| reply to confused_cit
why are you complaining about ham radio operators? have you EVER placed your cell phone next to computer speakers? i've heard computer speakers emit some weird noise seconds before a call or message arrives and the phone rings. so why not go after the cell phone service providers? how about cell phone manufacturers (like apple.... it was an iphone when i heard the speaker emit the noise)??? |
|
 Jack_in_VAPremium
join:2007-11-26
Mathews, VA
kudos:1 | reply to N3OGH
said by N3OGH:said by confused_cit :
What bugs me is that hammers scream inference from BPL. One of my neighbors broadcast over my stereo and computer speakers all the time and the FCC hasn't done anything about it. Double standard.
Double standard, NOT. Your stereo and computer speakers are almost certainly FCC part "15" Devices. "(1)This device may not cause harmful interference, and (2) this device must accept interference received, including interference that may cause undesired operation." Your computer speakers and stereo have, and most likely always will, take hind teet to Amateur radio operations. Most of the devices in American homes today that use or generate RF radiation stand in line behind any and all licensed devices and/or operators. Just the nature of the Part 15 device. In other words, unless you make nice with the guy who's lighting up your stereo speakers (and if I was that guy, I would be in your house installing RF chokes on stuff, just to be a good neighbor), you're shit out of luck. But, from the sound of it, all you want to do is piss and moan, so I seriously doubt you've taken a technical approach to fixing your problems... Oh yeah I had one of the big ego Hams next door to me a few years ago who refused to even consider limiting his damage. I got me a 500 watt linear amp, a set of PDL beams, a D104 power mike turned all the way up and aimed it right at his antenna about 25 ft away. It didn't take long for him to get the message and call a truce. |
|
TzaleProud Libertarian ConservativePremium
join:2004-01-06
NYC Metro | said by Jack_in_VA:said by N3OGH:said by confused_cit :
What bugs me is that hammers scream inference from BPL. One of my neighbors broadcast over my stereo and computer speakers all the time and the FCC hasn't done anything about it. Double standard.
Double standard, NOT. Your stereo and computer speakers are almost certainly FCC part "15" Devices. "(1)This device may not cause harmful interference, and (2) this device must accept interference received, including interference that may cause undesired operation." Your computer speakers and stereo have, and most likely always will, take hind teet to Amateur radio operations. Most of the devices in American homes today that use or generate RF radiation stand in line behind any and all licensed devices and/or operators. Just the nature of the Part 15 device. In other words, unless you make nice with the guy who's lighting up your stereo speakers (and if I was that guy, I would be in your house installing RF chokes on stuff, just to be a good neighbor), you're shit out of luck. But, from the sound of it, all you want to do is piss and moan, so I seriously doubt you've taken a technical approach to fixing your problems... Oh yeah I had one of the big ego Hams next door to me a few years ago who refused to even consider limiting his damage. I got me a 500 watt linear amp, a set of PDL beams, a D104 power mike turned all the way up and aimed it right at his antenna about 25 ft away. It didn't take long for him to get the message and call a truce. Great. So you violated the law to get what you wanted.
Too bad the FCC didn't slap you with a $20,000+ fine. It's not that hard to prove when you're a ham.
-Tzale
--
They who can give up essential liberty to obtain a little temporary safety, deserve neither liberty nor safety.
-:-
"I believe the very heart and soul of conservatism is libertarianism."~Ronald Reagan
-:-
www.freestateproject.org - LIVE LIBERTY |
|
| reply to Jack_in_VA
said by Jack_in_VA:Oh yeah I had one of the big ego Hams next door to me a few years ago who refused to even consider limiting his damage. I got me a 500 watt linear amp, a set of PDL beams, a D104 power mike turned all the way up and aimed it right at his antenna about 25 ft away. It didn't take long for him to get the message and call a truce. What's his callsign? We'll get him to post his side of the story; somehow I get the feeling we're not getting all the facts. |
|
GbcueAlmost P.E.Premium
join:2001-09-30
Santa Rosa, CA
kudos:8 Reviews:
·AT&T U-Verse
| reply to Jack_in_VA
said by Jack_in_VA:said by N3OGH:said by confused_cit :
What bugs me is that hammers scream inference from BPL. One of my neighbors broadcast over my stereo and computer speakers all the time and the FCC hasn't done anything about it. Double standard.
Double standard, NOT. Your stereo and computer speakers are almost certainly FCC part "15" Devices. "(1)This device may not cause harmful interference, and (2) this device must accept interference received, including interference that may cause undesired operation." Your computer speakers and stereo have, and most likely always will, take hind teet to Amateur radio operations. Most of the devices in American homes today that use or generate RF radiation stand in line behind any and all licensed devices and/or operators. Just the nature of the Part 15 device. In other words, unless you make nice with the guy who's lighting up your stereo speakers (and if I was that guy, I would be in your house installing RF chokes on stuff, just to be a good neighbor), you're shit out of luck. But, from the sound of it, all you want to do is piss and moan, so I seriously doubt you've taken a technical approach to fixing your problems... Oh yeah I had one of the big ego Hams next door to me a few years ago who refused to even consider limiting his damage. I got me a 500 watt linear amp, a set of PDL beams, a D104 power mike turned all the way up and aimed it right at his antenna about 25 ft away. It didn't take long for him to get the message and call a truce. It would have been interesting if the ham cranked up to 1.5kW.
--
My Blog 2.0 |
|
| reply to Tzale
So a self-proclaimed proud libertarian conservative is hiding behind the FCC and it's ability to impose fines at the point of a gun? I suggest that you work on the consistency of your arguments.
--
My line monitoring tests for Qwest DSL in Denver:
»/testhistory/1714268/47aa7 |
|
TzaleProud Libertarian ConservativePremium
join:2004-01-06
NYC Metro | said by DenverGreg:So a self-proclaimed proud libertarian conservative is hiding behind the FCC and it's ability to impose fines at the point of a gun? I suggest that you work on the consistency of your arguments. It's the law. I don't call for people to break the law.
I'm not a fucking anarchist, so I'll chalk you up to being another anti-libertarian who doesn't know crap about the movement.
-Tzale
--
They who can give up essential liberty to obtain a little temporary safety, deserve neither liberty nor safety.
-:-
"I believe the very heart and soul of conservatism is libertarianism."~Ronald Reagan
-:-
www.freestateproject.org - LIVE LIBERTY |
|
GbcueAlmost P.E.Premium
join:2001-09-30
Santa Rosa, CA
kudos:8 Reviews:
·AT&T U-Verse
| said by Tzale:said by DenverGreg:So a self-proclaimed proud libertarian conservative is hiding behind the FCC and it's ability to impose fines at the point of a gun? I suggest that you work on the consistency of your arguments. It's the law. I don't call for people to break the law. I'm not a fucking anarchist, so I'll chalk you up to being another anti-libertarian who doesn't know crap about the movement. -Tzale Where did he say anything about you being an "anarchist"?
--
My Blog 2.0 |
|
TzaleProud Libertarian ConservativePremium
join:2004-01-06
NYC Metro | said by Gbcue:said by Tzale:said by DenverGreg:So a self-proclaimed proud libertarian conservative is hiding behind the FCC and it's ability to impose fines at the point of a gun? I suggest that you work on the consistency of your arguments. It's the law. I don't call for people to break the law. I'm not a fucking anarchist, so I'll chalk you up to being another anti-libertarian who doesn't know crap about the movement. -Tzale Where did he say anything about you being an "anarchist"? Anarchists are against all government. He seems to be implying that my support of FCC law is hypocritical considering my libertarian views. I am not against all Government. Due to the nature of the radio spectrum, some regulation is necessary. I'm a libertarian, not an anarchist...
-Tzale
--
They who can give up essential liberty to obtain a little temporary safety, deserve neither liberty nor safety.
-:-
"I believe the very heart and soul of conservatism is libertarianism."~Ronald Reagan
-:-
www.freestateproject.org - LIVE LIBERTY |
|
N3OGHYo Soy Col. "Bat" GuanoPremium
join:2003-11-11
Philly burbs
kudos:1 | reply to DenverGreg
said by DenverGreg:So a self-proclaimed proud libertarian conservative is hiding behind the FCC and it's ability to impose fines at the point of a gun? I suggest that you work on the consistency of your arguments. Funny, I never met anyone from the FCC who carried a gun.
Now the IRS, THAT'S another story.....
--
Petty people are disproportionally corrupted by petty power |
|
| reply to Jack_in_VA
Legally FCC only has jurisdiction over radio transmissions that cross state lines.
Although like most Federal agencies they have usurped illegal power to themselves. |
|
| said by Nick Tesla :
Legally FCC only has jurisdiction over radio transmissions that cross state lines.
Although like most Federal agencies they have usurped illegal power to themselves.
Wrong. That defense was tried recently with two pirate radio station busts in Texas, and several others before.... unsuccessfully. Read Section 301, they have jurisdiction. |
|
