Earlier quoted context omitted.
That's pretty much the way an awful lot of communication happens on the Internet, too.
...no? I can't read your HTTP communication merely by being with propagation distance. I have to actually have control over the communication channel. Which I don't.
Ham radio operators are saving Puerto Rico (2017)
81–90 of 92 posts
Re: Ham radio operators are saving Puerto Rico (2017)
#82Earlier quoted context omitted.
Its one of the things that has kept me away from amateur radion. I'm interested in decentralized/emergency communications and have a good understanding of RF, I've even picked up a couple of Baofeng handheld units to listen in on things and get more familiar with that part of the spectrum but the other people involved in the hobby aren't exactly the kind of folks I want to hang around enough to learn from.
I'm a ham and I agree with you but you're missing the fact that the people you may hear locally aren't indicative of the broader hobby. Yes there are a lot of grumpy old elitists chatting up the airwaves every day, but there are also people who rarely if ever talk but still do things with the hobby (like myself). There are so many sub-genres in the hobby that someone can always find something they enjoy. If anything…
Re: Ham radio operators are saving Puerto Rico (2017)
#83Earlier quoted context omitted.
That's the desired outcome, not a downside.
Desired by... the same people as the ones communicating? In the majority of cases or in the minority?
Ham Radio's "Self Policing" aspect is a huge asset to both the Users and the Regulatory authorities. It's what makes Ham Radio work.
However Self Policing relies totally on user self-identification.
If we allowed anonymity, Ham Radio would become as unusable as CB radio has.
To put it another way, if you want anonymity, use CB radio.
Re: Ham radio operators are saving Puerto Rico (2017)
#84Earlier quoted context omitted.
I just saw your latest replies in this thread. Can I offer you another way to look at this? Amateur radio is what it is. It has certain freedoms and certain restrictions. The restrictions include no commercial use and no encrypted communication, along with licensing tests, frequency and power limits, etc. But the freedoms can be pretty great. You can help in emergencies. You can have a backup radio in case you get in…
I agree with you on all counts—I feel like you guys are massively misunderstanding my comment and somehow taking it as an attack on the notion of ham radio, as if somehow I feel like it's some kind of evil. I don't. I never did. It can be a great, useful, awesome thing. Where did I deny this? All I was saying was that "no downsides except the equipment cost" is emphatically not an accurate picture—and I feel accurate…
> What about the fact that everyone in the world who can receive your signal will hear and understand what you're saying?
The replies to that comment merely pointed out that this is how amateur radio works, that it is by design public communication. I don't see any indication that anyone interpreted your comment to mean "Ham radio utterly sucks, I hate it, and it needs to stop existing."
A long time ago I took a course in effective communication. I don't think of myself as a great communicator, and I don't remember much of the course. But one thing stuck in my mind: If you feel that people are failing to understand what you are trying to say, don't blame them for misunderstanding you. Instead, look to see how you can communicate more clearly so you will not be misunderstood.
Re: Ham radio operators are saving Puerto Rico (2017)
#85Earlier quoted context omitted.
I agree with you on all counts—I feel like you guys are massively misunderstanding my comment and somehow taking it as an attack on the notion of ham radio, as if somehow I feel like it's some kind of evil. I don't. I never did. It can be a great, useful, awesome thing. Where did I deny this? All I was saying was that "no downsides except the equipment cost" is emphatically not an accurate picture—and I feel accurate…
I'm pretty sure you are reading a lot more into the replies than anyone intended. Your reply to me has a lot of nuance that wasn't in your original comment, where all you said was: > What about the fact that everyone in the world who can receive your signal will hear and understand what you're saying? The replies to that comment merely pointed out that this is how amateur radio works, that it is by design public comm…
Case in point for all of these was here: I was trying to replying to was "there is no downside to X but Y", and I replied with "what about Z?". A logical response could have ranged anywhere from "Yes, Z is also a downside that is worth mentioning" to "I'm not sure, because $reasons", to "No, Z is not really a downside because it would cause problem W". But instead people just went out of their ways to just ignore the actual point and provide replies ranging from "if you don't like it don't use it" (this was you, defending ham radio, as if me pointing out 1 downside is an attack on the entire concept) to "feature, !bug" (as if I somehow thought Z was an accident, or as if something being intentional automatically implies it must be an upside) to "that's how V behaves too" (which is wrong because, no, V doesn't force Z to happen, and even when Z does happen, it's far harder to exploit... and which, even if correct, would also be irrelevant to the point in the first place).
It's not that I can't, it's just that it honestly sucks all energy out of me (and the time out of my day) to try to preempt all these kinds of misinterpretations or topic changes from my comment. Not just that, but even when I do find the time and energy to do this, I just find that others come along who just cherry-pick the one sentence they disagree with and ignore all the rest of the comment explaining the nuances behind that one sentence. When I'm writing an article or a paper where the stakes are higher, I do find it worthwhile to try to do that (and it's still not easy). But over here, I just kind of always have this glimmer of hope that people will not go out of their way to start an uphill battle for me when non ever existed in the first place.
Re: Ham radio operators are saving Puerto Rico (2017)
#86Earlier quoted context omitted.
I'm a ham and I agree with you but you're missing the fact that the people you may hear locally aren't indicative of the broader hobby. Yes there are a lot of grumpy old elitists chatting up the airwaves every day, but there are also people who rarely if ever talk but still do things with the hobby (like myself). There are so many sub-genres in the hobby that someone can always find something they enjoy. If anything…
I like it for the electronics and hacking - like I said I've got an Amateur Extra class license and a 2x1 call sign, and I have literally NEVER keyed up - not even once.
Re: Ham radio operators are saving Puerto Rico (2017)
#87Earlier quoted context omitted.
Ham radio does not necessarily mean expensive equipment. It tends to get expensive, but with some knowledge about electronics, you can build transceivers and antennas very cheaply too - and after all, being allowed to do that is the main, unique perk of a ham radio license. And yes, you can still do long-distance connections that's your goal. Yes, while using repeaters is one of the less interesting aspects of the ho…
Baofeng radios are only marginally useful on the receive end, and generally terrible on the transmit end. A decent Yaesu is $165+, but will last for many years and actually fulfill its role if you need it to. Look up tests of Baofeng radios and you'll see how poorly they carry out their intended function.
The menu system is MUCH harder to use and MUCH more inconsistent. Drives me nuts that when you find a menu, spin the selector to make a selection, to select you hit the PTT, sometimes you hit f, sometimes you hit V/M. Worse is often the manual doesn't even mention that part.
Re: Ham radio operators are saving Puerto Rico (2017)
#88Earlier quoted context omitted.
Except on 7.255Mhz. Stay away from those lids
As a non-ham can you explain 7.255Mhz? I saw some youtube recordings of 7.255Mhz and it seemed like wacky people talking. What is the reason that frequency has a bad reputation?
> This stupid WAR has been raging since late 1968.
Re: Ham radio operators are saving Puerto Rico (2017)
#89Earlier quoted context omitted.
That's pretty much the way an awful lot of communication happens on the Internet, too.
...no? I can't read your HTTP communication merely by being with propagation distance. I have to actually have control over the communication channel. Which I don't.
Re: Ham radio operators are saving Puerto Rico (2017)
#90Earlier quoted context omitted.
I like it for the electronics and hacking - like I said I've got an Amateur Extra class license and a 2x1 call sign, and I have literally NEVER keyed up - not even once.
Can you share some of the things you do in the hobby? It seems so much of it revolves around voice due to restrictions on traffic (encryption)