Hacker News Board Hacker News, browsed like a classic message board
Live data from Hacker News

House committee approves bill requiring new cars to have AM radio

theverge.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

11–20 of 57 posts

Re: House committee approves bill requiring new cars to have AM radio

#11

Post by b112 »

nis0s wrote: post #10

I am unconvinced that requiring AM radio in new cars is just “fan service” or outdated. Emergency scenarios often require a PSA (public service announcement), and it’s easy enough to envision a scenario where communications degrade in succession, such that you can get a PSA on how to use AM transmissions in case other communications go down. So if other networks are degraded, then at least people have AM to fall back…

Especially since the tech is already there, and everywhere. It's madness to lose a capability so easily kept.

Re: House committee approves bill requiring new cars to have AM radio

#12

Post by brewdad »

superkuh wrote: post #8
snakeyjake wrote: post #7

The public safety argument is bullshit. If lawmakers ACTUALLY cared about public safety, they would fund the distribution of hand-cranked AM radios that could be stored in emergency kits. This is just legislation purchased, incredibly cheaply, by iHeartMedia, Audacy, and the like cloaked in the delusion that people who failed to evacuate before a hurricane when all other infrastructure was operational will go out to…

Yes. It should be the FCC enforcing their regulatory duties against specific car models not the house legislating in general. The amount of interference on the low frequency bands that some electrical cars produce prevents reception of AM. And that was already very illegal. You can't do that but car manufacturers were/are too big to care. The public safety aspect of it is entirely secondary.

Didn't the Supreme Court basically say recently that the FCC and similar Executive Branch groups can't enforce such rules? They must come from the Legislature to have any hope of surviving review.

Re: House committee approves bill requiring new cars to have AM radio

#13

Post by cogman10 »

nis0s wrote: post #10

I am unconvinced that requiring AM radio in new cars is just “fan service” or outdated. Emergency scenarios often require a PSA (public service announcement), and it’s easy enough to envision a scenario where communications degrade in succession, such that you can get a PSA on how to use AM transmissions in case other communications go down. So if other networks are degraded, then at least people have AM to fall back…

This doesn't convince me.

For starters, FM broadcasting is hardly more complex than AM broadcasting and any vehicle built in the last 50 years with an AM radio also has an FM radio.

I can't imagine a scenario where FM broadcasting is somehow unavailable, but AM is. But further, if AM is the last line of communication, we are in a VERY bad situation indeed, like apocalyptic. One in which I doubt any survivors are listening to the radio in their cars.

But even further, in an emergency, it's highly likely that car drivers aren't even listening to the radio. Like, unless it's something that everyone is made aware of with communications other than through AM radio. But if those lines are open, then why wouldn't communication be broadcast through those lines?

You may as well argue that we should make sure all homes have land lines or telegraph lines. After all, that's also a line of communication that could be used in an emergency.

Re: House committee approves bill requiring new cars to have AM radio

#15

Post by cogman10 »

brewdad wrote: post #12
superkuh wrote: post #8

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Yes. It should be the FCC enforcing their regulatory duties against specific car models not the house legislating in general. The amount of interference on the low frequency bands that some electrical cars produce prevents reception of AM. And that was already very illegal. You can't do that but car manufacturers were/are too big to care. The public safety aspect of it is entirely secondary.

Didn't the Supreme Court basically say recently that the FCC and similar Executive Branch groups can't enforce such rules? They must come from the Legislature to have any hope of surviving review.

The way the ruling was made, it will be a case by case basis. If a republican FCC does it, that will be fine and normal but if a democrat does it, it's out of the legislative authority.

Either way, the 5th circuit will stop the rules from going into effect.

Re: House committee approves bill requiring new cars to have AM radio

#17

Post by dullcrisp »

snakeyjake wrote: post #7

The public safety argument is bullshit. If lawmakers ACTUALLY cared about public safety, they would fund the distribution of hand-cranked AM radios that could be stored in emergency kits. This is just legislation purchased, incredibly cheaply, by iHeartMedia, Audacy, and the like cloaked in the delusion that people who failed to evacuate before a hurricane when all other infrastructure was operational will go out to…

I’m not buying your argument. I doubt you can devise and pass legislation that’ll cause more people to have emergency kits with hand cranked AM radios than cars, even if you distributed them for free, and there are scenarios that require emergency communication that don’t involve all cars being destroyed.

That said I’m not saying that the public safety argument is genuine, but you can’t just propose something else you prefer to discredit it.

Re: House committee approves bill requiring new cars to have AM radio

#18

Post by JB_Dev »

xp84 wrote: post #6

[flagged]

In an actual emergency, cell towers may not function. AM has significantly further range too and is pretty easy to standup as a backup for an area.

It’s also incredibly common for road conditions to still be shared over AM - you see this a lot while driving with all the “advisory - tune to …. AM” signs everywhere.

Re: House committee approves bill requiring new cars to have AM radio

#19

Post by lupusreal »

I understand car manufacturers want to ditch AM radios to reduce their part count, or so they can cheap out and use noisier electronics in the rest of the car, or whatever.

What I find a bit odder is the vehemence with which some online commenters also want them gone. I don't use either radio in my car, but their presence doesn't get me hot under my collar either. People say AM radio is useless and obsolete, but the same could probably be said for FM too, since everybody pairs their phones for music anyway. Why does AM have a target painted on it when nobody online seems to have an axe to grind with the equally useless FM radio? Is it just because there are a lot of conservative talk shows on AM? Is that the angle here? The bill to keep AM radios evidently has bipartisan support in Congress, and yet for some reason these discussions usually have people complaining about Republicans.

Re: House committee approves bill requiring new cars to have AM radio

#20

Post by tcmart14 »

Due to safety concerns and the ability to get the message out, every home, building, bridge, mountain top, or structure must maintain a a pile of logs on top and a flame at the ready in the event of a national emergency so that way word or warning may be spread like beacons of Gondor.
Post reply on HN