61–67 of 67 posts
Earlier quoted context omitted.
Interesting, is speaking in a language that nobody else understands counts as "encrypted transmission"?
That’s what I mean. Isn’t any data the same as speech in general?
Earlier quoted context omitted.
Apologies if this has some sort of referral in it. I copied straight from the Amazon app. https://a.co/d/gEGW5gr
wow, that's dirt cheap! Definitely a impulse purchase territory lol. Is this the best cheap one to plug into PC?
The answer depends on what you want to do or explore. You have many different options, including RTL-SDR type USB dongles for use with software like SDR# and gqrx.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
Seriously. People really need to understand that CTCSS and DCS aren't actually privacy features, but convenience features for filtering out _other_ people's transmissions a user isn't interested in. It's the exact opposite of privacy. I guess the marketing as "privacy codes" worsens the situation.
What prevents people from transmitting encrypted information? Isn’t that just like speech that might travel over the airwaves?
but you can't legally send encrypted over the radio, since those protocols are restricted by the FCC.
You won't catch a charge for what you said, but you might get fined for misuse of the radio band. its the same way you can't spray paint a slogan on the front of someone's business -- the content is fine, but the medium is not.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
"squelch codes" probably conveys the meaning more correctly. people understand the idiom that just because your radio has squelch set (too high, perhaps) that it doesn't mean someone else can't hear it. otherwise, CTCSS codes works fine, that's the technical description of what it is. and actually they call them "squelch tones" there. it's only motorola that branded them as "private lines", that's their trademark for…
I submit that most non-technical people have no clue what “squelch” means. It’s not a commonly used word outside of electronics. And it makes it sound like your radio’s output is being suppressed, which is inaccurate in this case. I think some more appropriate terms could be “party”, “group”, “topic”, “line”, or “room”.
let’s give users at least a little bit of agency here
Earlier quoted context omitted.
You dont have to provide detailed specifics of your business use case, usually just a sentence is fine. But 90.35 does not allow for individuals to be licensed for personal communications. My guess is that if a ham club is offering this to members, it is doing so as an educational institution, or a public safety organization. If the license is granted that way, using it for personal communications would be impermissi…
I doubt that there are requirements on the number of members of a ham club, you could probably have a 1- or 2-member "club" for the adults in your household, right?
Could you get the FCC to grant you a license you if you say you have a 2 person organization in your house? Maybe, I'd even say its likely if you spent a few minutes to get an EIN before getting your FRN.
Does that make it legal to use a commercial license for personal use? No.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
Seriously. People really need to understand that CTCSS and DCS aren't actually privacy features, but convenience features for filtering out _other_ people's transmissions a user isn't interested in. It's the exact opposite of privacy. I guess the marketing as "privacy codes" worsens the situation.
What would you call them, then? “Isolation codes” or “subchannels”, maybe? I’ve seen some use of the former, but both are imperfect terms. I’ve yet to hear a suggestion that’s particularly better. A term that’s only slightly better won’t gain any traction.
Still looking for a cheaper alternative. All I need is a cheap portable SDR I can program. No need for a fancy enclosure or UI.