7 ms·

You are pretending such things I mention don't happen but they happened all the time before the FCC came into being and happened often during the CB craze. In f

You are pretending such things I mention don't happen but they happened all the time before the FCC came into being and happened often during the CB craze. In fact, I still occasionally hear of such things. Imagine there were no regulations. Such things would be rampant as they were in the past.

PhasmaFelis 11y ago
All of the things you're worried about are already illegal. Pointing out that they were legal sometime in the past, and it sucked, is a non sequitur.
kazinator 11y ago
I've played with the transmitter power in my Wi-Fi router to get better coverage in a distant room. Thank goodnes for open source.
- Sanddancer 11y ago
  Yes, and have you checked to see what the end result of the emissions are on the main harmonics. If you're overdriving your amplifier, there's a good chance the distortion harmonics are sending into the 7.3 ghz band and 12 ghz band, which are both used by satellites, and can cause interference due to the sensitivity of communications.. This is one of the many problems with these modifications, and why the FCC is making enforcement; driving circuitry outside of its range can and does cause problems more severe than annoying your neighbor by making their connections a bit worse.
  - kazinator 11y ago
    > Yes, and have you checked to see what the end result of the emissions are on the main harmonics. Let me think, no. > If you're overdriving your amplifier, ... distortion harmonics RF amplifiers are not linear at any amplitude! RF is not audio.
    - Sanddancer 11y ago
      Even with nonlinear amplifiers, you can still drive it too much, you can still have distortion, and you're still going to have to test with a scope regardless. There's plenty of guidelines out there describing how to minimize harmonics, like this one http://www.tek.com/support/faqs/what-fft-fast-fourier-transform-math-function-oscilloscope-useful http://www.tek.com/support/faqs/what-fft-fast-fourier-transf..., or this one http://www.mpdigest.com/issue/Articles/2009/feb/CEL/Default.asp http://www.mpdigest.com/issue/Articles/2009/feb/CEL/Default.... or this one http://www.evaluationengineering.com/articles/200611/rf-measurement-basics-for-non-rf-test-engineers.php http://www.evaluationengineering.com/articles/200611/rf-meas... . This is one of the reasons the FCC is proposing rules like this, people don't realize the unintended consequences.
      - kazinator 11y ago
        If the hardware register being in range causes the circuit to be out of its range, that's a hardware problem. It's not my problem. The FCC should take that up with the hardware designer. I don't supply the input signal to that amplifier; it's all within the router. The hardware should know the amplitude of the input signal and what maximum gain can be applied to it before these detrimental effects set in. It should not permit higher gains than that. I trust that it doesn't, and don't give a shit beyond that. I'm not going get a multi-gigahertz-capable scope costing tens of thousands of dollars just to tweak my home router.
        Sanddancer 11y ago
        Your attitude towards the problem is exactly why the FCC is making these rules. Enough people not caring about the rules is why the FCC is putting their foot down and saying that hardware makers have to make their devices a black box.
        kazinator 11y ago
        I care about the rules and I assume that the hardware takes care of them. The hardware is FCC certified and legal for sale to consumers. I don't think that the hardware has to be a black box to be compliant; it just has to disallow combinations of parameters that are outside of the legal (or technically correct) area. If the chips themselves enforce this, then we can still have a device on which you can run OSS firmware. And anyway, that's the right way to do it! If the hardware doesn't enforce the rules, and you're relying on the black box combination of hardware and software, that is less safe. Maybe exploits can be found to get around the software, and then -- wee -- let's crank that amplifier until it glows, and use illegal channels, etc.
Turing_Machine 11y ago
Your example of the CB craze ignores the fact that there were plenty of regulations at that time -- there were actually more then than there are now. They were totally ignored. For instance, back then you were required to have an FCC license to operate a CB radio, but not one user out of a thousand bothered to get one. Regulations and laws aren't magic.
- gopowerranger 11y ago
  I'm not ignoring it at all. It's my point that, if those CBers couldn't modify their equipment, many of those issues would not have come up. Being an illegal operator is a different story unrelated to this topic.

PhasmaFelis 11y ago

All of the things you're worried about are already illegal. Pointing out that they were legal sometime in the past, and it sucked, is a non sequitur.

kazinator 11y ago

I've played with the transmitter power in my Wi-Fi router to get better coverage in a distant room. Thank goodnes for open source.

Sanddancer 11y ago
Yes, and have you checked to see what the end result of the emissions are on the main harmonics. If you're overdriving your amplifier, there's a good chance the distortion harmonics are sending into the 7.3 ghz band and 12 ghz band, which are both used by satellites, and can cause interference due to the sensitivity of communications.. This is one of the many problems with these modifications, and why the FCC is making enforcement; driving circuitry outside of its range can and does cause problems more severe than annoying your neighbor by making their connections a bit worse.
- kazinator 11y ago
  > Yes, and have you checked to see what the end result of the emissions are on the main harmonics. Let me think, no. > If you're overdriving your amplifier, ... distortion harmonics RF amplifiers are not linear at any amplitude! RF is not audio.
  - Sanddancer 11y ago
    Even with nonlinear amplifiers, you can still drive it too much, you can still have distortion, and you're still going to have to test with a scope regardless. There's plenty of guidelines out there describing how to minimize harmonics, like this one http://www.tek.com/support/faqs/what-fft-fast-fourier-transform-math-function-oscilloscope-useful http://www.tek.com/support/faqs/what-fft-fast-fourier-transf..., or this one http://www.mpdigest.com/issue/Articles/2009/feb/CEL/Default.asp http://www.mpdigest.com/issue/Articles/2009/feb/CEL/Default.... or this one http://www.evaluationengineering.com/articles/200611/rf-measurement-basics-for-non-rf-test-engineers.php http://www.evaluationengineering.com/articles/200611/rf-meas... . This is one of the reasons the FCC is proposing rules like this, people don't realize the unintended consequences.
    - kazinator 11y ago
      If the hardware register being in range causes the circuit to be out of its range, that's a hardware problem. It's not my problem. The FCC should take that up with the hardware designer. I don't supply the input signal to that amplifier; it's all within the router. The hardware should know the amplitude of the input signal and what maximum gain can be applied to it before these detrimental effects set in. It should not permit higher gains than that. I trust that it doesn't, and don't give a shit beyond that. I'm not going get a multi-gigahertz-capable scope costing tens of thousands of dollars just to tweak my home router.
      - Sanddancer 11y ago
        Your attitude towards the problem is exactly why the FCC is making these rules. Enough people not caring about the rules is why the FCC is putting their foot down and saying that hardware makers have to make their devices a black box.
        kazinator 11y ago
        I care about the rules and I assume that the hardware takes care of them. The hardware is FCC certified and legal for sale to consumers. I don't think that the hardware has to be a black box to be compliant; it just has to disallow combinations of parameters that are outside of the legal (or technically correct) area. If the chips themselves enforce this, then we can still have a device on which you can run OSS firmware. And anyway, that's the right way to do it! If the hardware doesn't enforce the rules, and you're relying on the black box combination of hardware and software, that is less safe. Maybe exploits can be found to get around the software, and then -- wee -- let's crank that amplifier until it glows, and use illegal channels, etc.

Turing_Machine 11y ago

Your example of the CB craze ignores the fact that there were plenty of regulations at that time -- there were actually more then than there are now. They were totally ignored. For instance, back then you were required to have an FCC license to operate a CB radio, but not one user out of a thousand bothered to get one. Regulations and laws aren't magic.

gopowerranger 11y ago
I'm not ignoring it at all. It's my point that, if those CBers couldn't modify their equipment, many of those issues would not have come up. Being an illegal operator is a different story unrelated to this topic.