4 ms·

It also completely prevents any interesting radio experimentation. There isn't anything left on that frontier that couldn't be conflated with encryption.

• jmwilson 5y ago
  As someone who once believed this, this statement is simply not true. Experimentation in ham radio is largely about the physical layer, with maybe some layer 2-4 work when it comes to building low-scale communications infrastructure. Encryption is not implemented at this level, and the limitations on encrypted content do not impede research into new digital modes or actual radio science. I think it is worth asking why modern digital radio standards (e.g. P25, DMR, LTE, 5G) were largely developed outside the ham community. My survey level understanding is they came from the communication needs of their users and are not a natural evolution of something that hams would build, with or without encryption. When I was researching DMR, there's a lot of stuff that is unnecessarily clunky when considering the use case of a ham QSO. Conversely, the business users of DMR want more structure than what's provided with amateur-designed digital modes. With 5G, I think there are some real technical and capital barriers, i.e., very few amateurs have access to the grade of test equipment needed to engineer and experiment with systems at those frequencies.
  • thereddaikon 5y ago
    To your first point I think you are missing their meaning a bit. There is actual encryption, like AES. And then there are communications methods that aren't open by default. The way in which the FCC regulations are penned means Ham transmissions can't be private in any way. So no just actual encryption but pretty much anyone with a compatible transceiver should be able to listen in to what you are saying at any time. That level of permissiveness can be problematic because some technologies are by their nature not compliant. FHSS comes to mind. Its not encrypted but if you don't know know the sequence it might as well be. WiFi, bluetooth and most cell protocols use FHSS. So if you wanted to experiment with digital data transfer and make it in any way robust in a congested area you could not do so as a Ham. Its implicitly illegal. To your second point I agree. DMR, P25, TETRA etc were developed with police departments and such in mind. To get the full use out of them requires a heavy investment infrastructure for trunking systems. And their programming models assume a set it and leave it use case where the operators are not trained or even savvy to RF comms. This makes them at best clunky for Hams. DMR has caught on not because its the best, but I think because its easier and cheaper for radio makers to license it. In Europe Type 1 is also allowed unlicensed which gives the market momentum.
• detaro 5y ago
  What's more conflated with encryption than e.g. the level of encoding you find in DVB-S or FT-8?
  • genewitch 5y ago
    Ft-8, jt-9, jt-65, and wspr all break the rules when on 60 meters. No one cares... You're only allowed to transmit square on center of the allotted channels, and, this is the important bit, one person at a time. All the modes that JT invented flat out ignore both rules for 60 meter transmissions. I don't care, but I get sick of people telling me that my pactor modem is "illegal".
    • detaro 5y ago
      60m in the US I guess, where it's a very restricted secondary use of a military band. That's quite a special case. Also these modes being ok or not on 60m has nothing to do with the question I asked?
      • genewitch 5y ago
        FT-8 has issues beyond what is or is not encoding that could be argued (and is) to be in violation of certain rules.