Note that the FCC still hasn't stopped manufacturers from using RP-SMA connectors on their routers, despite ruling that they are "commonly available" in 2000.
Can you elaborate on why the FCC would ban a commonly used antenna connector?
The FCC Might Ban Specific Operating Systems
31–40 of 140 posts
Re: The FCC Might Ban Specific Operating Systems
#32Earlier quoted context omitted.
> they aren't prohibiting operating systems, they _might_ be prohibiting installation of operating systems that are not approved on certain types of devices that ... "prohibit installation" means to ban. "operating systems that are not approved on certain types of devices that ..." means specific operating systems. So, the FCC "might ban specific operating systems"; you've paraphrased what the title says.
I disagree - saying they might ban operating systems, with no context, leaves out the fact they're only talking about modular radio systems or software defined radio systems. Edit: also to be clear, as another comment pointed out, this doesn't have any impact on test/kit equipment that is not compliant with FCC regulations anyway and requires a separate license to use - this is targeting consumer equipment. So I stil…
It's a title. Of course it's lacking context. If you want context, you read the rest of the essay, which explains everything you're doing much better than you are, and makes a solid case for why the FCC is, indeed, banning certain operating systems.
Re: The FCC Might Ban Specific Operating Systems
#33This is like banning guns cause people sometimes use them illegally to kill other people. Not very American.
Just go after people who are causing illegal interference and leave the people who 'might be able to' alone.
Re: The FCC Might Ban Specific Operating Systems
#34Earlier quoted context omitted.
> This is already present insofar as hardware requirements in radios - radios cannot be permitted to listen on frequencies reserved for cell phones, and must not be restricted in such way as they can be easily modified to enable it (e.g., a header/jumper). This really just extends this requirement that it is non-trivial to enable illegal broadcasting or reception on software defined radios. Cough, cough, HackRF( http…
As I recall, they got around this by not being FCC licensed - in other words, HackRF is classified as a kit/developer component, and is not legal to operate unless you hold an independent license from FCC (e.g.: if you're a Ham you can use it on Ham frequencies you are licensed for). Read the disclaimer at bottom > HackRF One is test equipment for RF systems. It has not been tested for compliance with regulations gov…
I doubt the possibility of detection is very high if you're only receiving.
Re: The FCC Might Ban Specific Operating Systems
#35This title is kind of click-bait - they aren't prohibiting operating systems, they _might_ be prohibiting installation of operating systems that are not approved on certain types of devices that allow software defined radio - that is, transceivers that can be tweaked easily by software. That is not at all the same thing as banning an operating system. This is already present insofar as hardware requirements in radios…
radios cannot be permitted to listen on frequencies reserved for cell phones Is this true ? I've never heard of the FCC restricting receivers before. You don't need a license to buy or operate a HAM receiver.
> You don't need a license to buy or operate a HAM receiver.
Why have you capitalised ham? What are you under the impression it stands for? Are you also one of those people that capitalises JAVA? What goes through the heads of people like you?
Re: The FCC Might Ban Specific Operating Systems
#36What I don't get it is, why make the software enforce certain frequencies? If the hardware should never be able to broadcast on a certain frequency, why not build the hardware with that limitation?
In the past that's exactly what they've tried to do, and this usually ends up clobbering the law-abiding users in the process. Most of these bands are pretty close to each other - the 10M HF band is right next to the CB band, the 2M band is right next to the emergency services bands and pretty close to both the aviation bands and the weather radio bands, and so on. Gear from one will pretty much just work on the near…
> There are radios and amps that use a frequency analyzer to automatically cut out when operated out of their intended bands, they're just very expensive compared to most of the gear that's out there.
Why is that expensive? It obviously can't require fancy hardware if it can also be done in software.
Re: The FCC Might Ban Specific Operating Systems
#37This title is kind of click-bait - they aren't prohibiting operating systems, they _might_ be prohibiting installation of operating systems that are not approved on certain types of devices that allow software defined radio - that is, transceivers that can be tweaked easily by software. That is not at all the same thing as banning an operating system. This is already present insofar as hardware requirements in radios…
radios cannot be permitted to listen on frequencies reserved for cell phones Is this true ? I've never heard of the FCC restricting receivers before. You don't need a license to buy or operate a HAM receiver.
Depends on the licensing/certification of the device - for consumer equipment (particularly scanners) it's required, for certain experimental and test equipment it is not.
EDIT: I think this happened in 1994 - google "cell blocked" scanner and you'll find stuff on it.
Edit Again: Here's a QRZ thread on it: http://forums.qrz.com/index.php?threads/why-are-ham-radios-s...
Re: The FCC Might Ban Specific Operating Systems
#38Nasty. The last thing we need is FCC mandating DRM by law.
Re: The FCC Might Ban Specific Operating Systems
#39What I don't get it is, why make the software enforce certain frequencies? If the hardware should never be able to broadcast on a certain frequency, why not build the hardware with that limitation?
This is because this is entirely intended for software defined radio and modular radio - around which the entire point is the RF component does not contain as much signal processing logic, and that is done in software. Restricting software defined radios to specific frequencies in hardware would take away the entire point of modular/software defined radio.
Did you miss the conversation about how this fucks over people who want to install custom firmware on their routers for legitimate administration and traffic-shaping? There are plenty of uses for radio software that don't involve going outside approved frequencies.
Re: The FCC Might Ban Specific Operating Systems
#40This title is kind of click-bait - they aren't prohibiting operating systems, they _might_ be prohibiting installation of operating systems that are not approved on certain types of devices that allow software defined radio - that is, transceivers that can be tweaked easily by software. That is not at all the same thing as banning an operating system. This is already present insofar as hardware requirements in radios…
radios cannot be permitted to listen on frequencies reserved for cell phones Is this true ? I've never heard of the FCC restricting receivers before. You don't need a license to buy or operate a HAM receiver.
I don't know if it is true, but I think that many commercial receivers that you can buy nowadays don't allow you to listen to those frequencies