3 ms·

In my opinion one of the best ways of injecting some new life into the community would be to let people take their test online.

by hanoz 7y ago

melling 7y ago
He gave you the answer and you ignored it. Instead you reverted to the classic: "Let's make taking the test easier for people". I got my license 2 decades ago and never really use it. How about those modern use cases?
Jach 7y ago
Two better ways: remove the need for a test or license at all, at least at many more frequencies and below energy levels well above current limits (which say you can transmit around 2.4 Ghz for example up to some power license-free). Second is to remove any restrictions on what is transmitted, which lets you have purely digital frequency modulated end-to-end encrypted signals meant for amateur computers to decipher. But making the test online sounds a lot more feasible a change. I'm just skeptical of its effects. e.g. It wouldn't have made me any likelier to pursue amateur radar fun further.
- tlrobinson 7y ago
  As much as I'd love to have more people in amateur radio, and the ability to use encryption, I think both the licensing and prohibition on encryption are fairly critical to keeping things running smoothly. The test includes lots of useful information such as requirements to transmit your callsign and using minimum power necessary. The prohibition on encryption is pretty critical to enforce other rules such as only using it for non-commercial purposes. Encryption isn't actually necessary for any of the stated purposes of amateur radio (experimentation, recreation, training, contesting, emergency comms, etc). You can still use any digital mode, including digital signatures, but not encryption of the content. I might be in favor of creating a class lower than Technician, and allowing taking the test online, though. You should still be assigned a callsign that you are required to transmit.
  - 18pfsmt 7y ago
    My comments are limited to the US because these things are managed differently in different countries. Given how much the spectrum landscape is changing (i.e. 5G), I think we should rework how strictly we allocate spectrum, especially lower-power/ lower frequency stuff. I should be able to create a broadcast radio station with X mile radius pretty easily. Is X=30mi? I cannot say, but the intense regulations are onerous, and I think the recent decline in local journalism might be reversed by an increase in local broadcast radio.
  - jmwilson 7y ago
    > Encryption isn't actually necessary for any of the stated purposes of amateur radio (experimentation, recreation, training, contesting, emergency comms, etc) It is, or will be, needed for experimentation. Wireless security cannot be an afterthought anymore; communication modes and protocols need to be built with security in mind from day 1. There is one area where encryption is expressly permitted in amateur radio: satellite control, for obvious reasons. The future of amateur radio is not people talking to people over narrowband voice channels; it's going to be machines talking to other machines, and being able to control them. This is going to require encryption, or innovation will shift off the ham bands. And if the ARS is just ragchews, contesting, and doing things that have already been done instead of advancing communication, then there's not much defense when someone like Thales comes in and suggests reallocating bandwidth to something new and enterprising.
    - tlrobinson 7y ago
      A few points: Encryption isn't typically part of the physical or data link layers, which are the bread and butter of amateur radio. What you send on top of those isn't really the interesting part of amateur radio, from a technical perspective. The actual rule prohibits "messages encoded for the purpose of obscuring their meaning" which I think most people interpret to mean digital signatures for authentication and integrity are permitted, just not encrypted payloads. Many protocols have the ability to switch ciphers, including disabling encryption entirely while still performing authentication and integrity checking.
  - Jach 7y ago
WA9ACE 7y ago
Agreed, going to take a proctored test is such a huge barrier to entry.
- bwigfield 7y ago
  I think I'm going to disagree with that. Because I had to take the test in person I meet the guys in the local club. Their personal invite to club meeting and lent gear got me on the air quickly. If I just took the test online I would probably have just put my license up on the wall and moved onto something else. 73's KC3SOL

In my opinion one of the best ways of injecting some new life into the community would be to let people take their test online.

by hanoz 7y ago

In my opinion one of the best ways of injecting some new life into the community would be to let people take their test online.

melling 7y ago

He gave you the answer and you ignored it. Instead you reverted to the classic: "Let's make taking the test easier for people". I got my license 2 decades ago and never really use it. How about those modern use cases?

Jach 7y ago

Two better ways: remove the need for a test or license at all, at least at many more frequencies and below energy levels well above current limits (which say you can transmit around 2.4 Ghz for example up to some power license-free). Second is to remove any restrictions on what is transmitted, which lets you have purely digital frequency modulated end-to-end encrypted signals meant for amateur computers to decipher. But making the test online sounds a lot more feasible a change. I'm just skeptical of its effects. e.g. It wouldn't have made me any likelier to pursue amateur radar fun further.

tlrobinson 7y ago
As much as I'd love to have more people in amateur radio, and the ability to use encryption, I think both the licensing and prohibition on encryption are fairly critical to keeping things running smoothly. The test includes lots of useful information such as requirements to transmit your callsign and using minimum power necessary. The prohibition on encryption is pretty critical to enforce other rules such as only using it for non-commercial purposes. Encryption isn't actually necessary for any of the stated purposes of amateur radio (experimentation, recreation, training, contesting, emergency comms, etc). You can still use any digital mode, including digital signatures, but not encryption of the content. I might be in favor of creating a class lower than Technician, and allowing taking the test online, though. You should still be assigned a callsign that you are required to transmit.
- 18pfsmt 7y ago
  My comments are limited to the US because these things are managed differently in different countries. Given how much the spectrum landscape is changing (i.e. 5G), I think we should rework how strictly we allocate spectrum, especially lower-power/ lower frequency stuff. I should be able to create a broadcast radio station with X mile radius pretty easily. Is X=30mi? I cannot say, but the intense regulations are onerous, and I think the recent decline in local journalism might be reversed by an increase in local broadcast radio.
- jmwilson 7y ago
  > Encryption isn't actually necessary for any of the stated purposes of amateur radio (experimentation, recreation, training, contesting, emergency comms, etc) It is, or will be, needed for experimentation. Wireless security cannot be an afterthought anymore; communication modes and protocols need to be built with security in mind from day 1. There is one area where encryption is expressly permitted in amateur radio: satellite control, for obvious reasons. The future of amateur radio is not people talking to people over narrowband voice channels; it's going to be machines talking to other machines, and being able to control them. This is going to require encryption, or innovation will shift off the ham bands. And if the ARS is just ragchews, contesting, and doing things that have already been done instead of advancing communication, then there's not much defense when someone like Thales comes in and suggests reallocating bandwidth to something new and enterprising.
  - tlrobinson 7y ago
    A few points: Encryption isn't typically part of the physical or data link layers, which are the bread and butter of amateur radio. What you send on top of those isn't really the interesting part of amateur radio, from a technical perspective. The actual rule prohibits "messages encoded for the purpose of obscuring their meaning" which I think most people interpret to mean digital signatures for authentication and integrity are permitted, just not encrypted payloads. Many protocols have the ability to switch ciphers, including disabling encryption entirely while still performing authentication and integrity checking.
- Jach 7y ago

WA9ACE 7y ago

Agreed, going to take a proctored test is such a huge barrier to entry.

bwigfield 7y ago
I think I'm going to disagree with that. Because I had to take the test in person I meet the guys in the local club. Their personal invite to club meeting and lent gear got me on the air quickly. If I just took the test online I would probably have just put my license up on the wall and moved onto something else. 73's KC3SOL