5 ms·

maybe because they can be used for many nefarious purposes?

by throw082 8y ago

dTal 8y ago
So can wheels. You shouldn't ban general purpose technology because of particular bad uses.
- patrickaljord 8y ago
  I agree with you, but for anyone following EU rules and regulations, this ship has sailed a long time ago. Drugs, guns, radio are just part of a huge long list of "general purpose technology" that have been regulated out of existence.
  - SZJX 8y ago
    That sounds like a hot take. I'm pretty sure most EU residents are very satisfied that they don't have to fea for their safety for gun violence when they walk home late at night or just in general.
    - presscast 8y ago
      >don't have to fea for their safety for gun violence when they walk home late at night or just in general. Neither do "most US residents". More to the point, your focus on guns is missing the larger point. There is very real and immediate dissatisfaction with the EU regulatory landscape. See: Brexit.
- the_mitsuhiko 8y ago
  A lot of general purpose technologies are restricted to safe use.
  - Dylan16807 8y ago
    Restricting it to safe use is what the preexisting law does.
- ben_w 8y ago
  “Regulate” != “Ban” And in this case, the proposed regulation is: “””[R]adio equipment [shall support] certain features in order to ensure that software can only be loaded into the radio equipment where the compliance of the combination of the radio equipment and software has been demonstrated.””” Now I don’t think that’s a well written rule, but my problem is the specifics rather than the general idea. I think that either all broadcasts should be digitally signed, or it should not be possible for hackers to remotely modify many other people’s radios to broadcast false signals. (One-on-one modifications I don’t care about so much, but how do you write/pass such rules, given the difficulty getting people to care about or believe the scale difference between automated and manual hacking?)
  - xondono 8y ago
    The problem is that we already have regulations to avoid broadcasting on restricted/licensed bands. In general, current regulation makes the owner of the equipment responsible for the broadcast. This new regulation will just stifle development on SDR technologies
    - the_mitsuhiko 8y ago
      And the current regulations are impossible to enforce. If they would work we wouldn’t be in this situation.
      - gray_-_wolf 8y ago
        > If they would work we wouldn’t be in this situation. What situation? What crisis is happening I'm completely missing?
  - Dylan16807 8y ago
    > “Regulate” != “Ban” Imagine how ridiculous it would be to have a regulation on wheels that they must try to prevent being installed on non-approved devices.
- deleted 8y ago
  [deleted]
presscast 8y ago
Like what? I'm not being flippant here, I'm really in the dark. What harm can one do with an SDR, and how does the potential for abuse compare to e.g. a cell phone?

maybe because they can be used for many nefarious purposes?

dTal 8y ago

So can wheels. You shouldn't ban general purpose technology because of particular bad uses.

patrickaljord 8y ago
I agree with you, but for anyone following EU rules and regulations, this ship has sailed a long time ago. Drugs, guns, radio are just part of a huge long list of "general purpose technology" that have been regulated out of existence.
- SZJX 8y ago
  That sounds like a hot take. I'm pretty sure most EU residents are very satisfied that they don't have to fea for their safety for gun violence when they walk home late at night or just in general.
  - presscast 8y ago
    >don't have to fea for their safety for gun violence when they walk home late at night or just in general. Neither do "most US residents". More to the point, your focus on guns is missing the larger point. There is very real and immediate dissatisfaction with the EU regulatory landscape. See: Brexit.
the_mitsuhiko 8y ago
A lot of general purpose technologies are restricted to safe use.
- Dylan16807 8y ago
  Restricting it to safe use is what the preexisting law does.
ben_w 8y ago
“Regulate” != “Ban” And in this case, the proposed regulation is: “””[R]adio equipment [shall support] certain features in order to ensure that software can only be loaded into the radio equipment where the compliance of the combination of the radio equipment and software has been demonstrated.””” Now I don’t think that’s a well written rule, but my problem is the specifics rather than the general idea. I think that either all broadcasts should be digitally signed, or it should not be possible for hackers to remotely modify many other people’s radios to broadcast false signals. (One-on-one modifications I don’t care about so much, but how do you write/pass such rules, given the difficulty getting people to care about or believe the scale difference between automated and manual hacking?)
- xondono 8y ago
  The problem is that we already have regulations to avoid broadcasting on restricted/licensed bands. In general, current regulation makes the owner of the equipment responsible for the broadcast. This new regulation will just stifle development on SDR technologies
  - the_mitsuhiko 8y ago
    And the current regulations are impossible to enforce. If they would work we wouldn’t be in this situation.
    - gray_-_wolf 8y ago
      > If they would work we wouldn’t be in this situation. What situation? What crisis is happening I'm completely missing?
- Dylan16807 8y ago
  > “Regulate” != “Ban” Imagine how ridiculous it would be to have a regulation on wheels that they must try to prevent being installed on non-approved devices.
deleted 8y ago
[deleted]

presscast 8y ago

Like what? I'm not being flippant here, I'm really in the dark. What harm can one do with an SDR, and how does the potential for abuse compare to e.g. a cell phone?