7 ms·

Internet Archive has begun gathering content for the Digital Library of Amateur Radio and Communications (DLARC), which will be a massive online library of mate

by savetz 4y ago

Internet Archive has begun gathering content for the Digital Library of Amateur Radio and Communications (DLARC), which will be a massive online library of materials and collections related to amateur radio and early digital communications. The DLARC project is looking for contributors with troves of ham radio, amateur radio, and early digital communications related books, magazines, documents, catalogs, manuals, videos, software, personal archives, and other historical records collections, no matter how big or small. In addition to physical material to digitize, we are looking for podcasts, newsletters, video channels, and other digital content that can enrich the DLARC collections.

altilunium 4y ago
Onno W. Purbo hosted his own Amateur Radio personal wiki [1]. He's also uploaded his talks on Youtube [2]. [1] https://lms.onnocenter.or.id/wiki/index.php?search=Amatir&title=Special%3ASearch&go=Go https://lms.onnocenter.or.id/wiki/index.php?search=Amatir&ti... [2] https://youtube.com/c/OnnoCenter https://youtube.com/c/OnnoCenter
nidnogg 4y ago
Does it have to be strictly historical radio content? I have a radio app I used to showcase some of my compositions but I'm not sure it'd qualify.
- ale42 4y ago
  It should be related to amateur radio, so if it is about broadcast radio probably not.
bretbernhoft 4y ago
Outstanding context, thank you! This is a wonderful partnership to learn about. I hope that Internet Archive is successful here.
curiousfab 4y ago
This is a mammoth task but an important one. I wonder if there's a way to collaborate with existing collections of historical Amateur radio data, such as the famous "QSL Collection" from Vienna: https://www.dokufunk.org/index.php?lang=EN https://www.dokufunk.org/index.php?lang=EN I think they have more material than probably anyone else in the world, but much of it is "offline" (partly digitized but not web accessible). Another huge collection of historic QSL cards, bios of deceased radio amateurs and other stuff: http://hamgallery.com/ http://hamgallery.com/
jimnotgym 4y ago
> software Amatuer radio seems full of little software tools to do calculations that are closed source. I hope the authors can be encouraged to publish source, or it will die with them.
- anilakar 4y ago
  Not just closed source but a completely black box, like the ROS and Pactor 4 digimodes. (To be fair, the latter is a commercial product so the blame is on ham radio operators, not the company who designed it.)
  - throw0101a 4y ago
    > Pactor 4 digimodes. I've always been curious as to how they "got away" with being proprietary: encryption isn't allowed on amateur bands, but given its black box nature, the codec (?) might as well be a cipher. * https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/PACTOR https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/PACTOR Has anyone reverse engineered it? It is possible to create a third-party implementation, either in hardware or SDR? * https://www.sigidwiki.com/wiki/PACTOR_IV https://www.sigidwiki.com/wiki/PACTOR_IV
    - sidewndr46 4y ago
      At least in the US, the FCC largely ignores amateur radio and related services. Unless they start causing interference with other services. In general an amateur digital mode cannot have encryption (there are a few exceptions). A digital mode must have a published specification as well. PACTOR is not published to my knowledge. The ARRL petitioned for an increase to the symbol rate on the HF bands almost a decade ago. The FCC never formally did anything with it. It was a few years back, but at one point the FCC issued a 200+ kw license for a transmitter right at the top of the 20m band. Why? I have no clue. It isn't like the operator couldn't afford a commercial license. The FCC barely does anything about interference coming from equipment that affects amateurs. I've had substantially more luck contacting manufacturers and constructors directly. Just google "solaredge RFI" if you want more info about this. It took a commercial radio manufacturer years of professional lobbying to convince the FCC that the CB radio spectrum could in fact be with FM. The FCC is about 50 years behind on regulation for the CB radio. There is a huge amount of very valuable spectrum that could be used for citizen radio purposes with type accepted equipment very cheaply. But the FCC does not allow it. The FCC approved DFS for Wi-Fi, but didn't actually specify what the equipment was supposed to do when it must mitigate interference. All the equipment I've seen just switches the AP to the first 5 ghz channel and leaves it there. Forever. Likewise the FCC approved a new 5 ghz band for WiFi and similar services and puts power limits on emissions, as they should. But none of the chosen channels have a power limit of something very low like 0dbmw or similar. I have neighbors who find it fit to run an AP on every single available channel in the WiFi spectrum. I would just like one I can use in my house comfortably without getting interference. If we're going to have all this spectrum, why not take one channel and put a very low power limit on it? That way residential customers could use it in their house knowing they aren't receiving interference or generating it. The FCC regulation is almost always lagging behind reality for spectrum they aren't paid for. Cellular and stuff gets all the attention, since that is where the money is. The transition to ATSC from NTSC for broadcast television would be a good example. That happened quickly and without endless debate as to the merit of it.
JKCalhoun 4y ago
I have been loving this site for old radio/electronics magazines: https://worldradiohistory.com/ https://worldradiohistory.com/ I would assume archive.org would just ask permission to hoover (mirror) it.
- Johnythree 4y ago
  > I have been loving this site for old radio/electronics magazines: And many hundreds of books.
bityard 4y ago
They are in luck, then, because hams are famous for never throwing anything out, ask me how I know.

by savetz 4y ago

altilunium 4y ago

Onno W. Purbo hosted his own Amateur Radio personal wiki [1]. He's also uploaded his talks on Youtube [2]. [1] https://lms.onnocenter.or.id/wiki/index.php?search=Amatir&title=Special%3ASearch&go=Go https://lms.onnocenter.or.id/wiki/index.php?search=Amatir&ti... [2] https://youtube.com/c/OnnoCenter https://youtube.com/c/OnnoCenter

nidnogg 4y ago

Does it have to be strictly historical radio content? I have a radio app I used to showcase some of my compositions but I'm not sure it'd qualify.

ale42 4y ago
It should be related to amateur radio, so if it is about broadcast radio probably not.

bretbernhoft 4y ago

Outstanding context, thank you! This is a wonderful partnership to learn about. I hope that Internet Archive is successful here.

curiousfab 4y ago

This is a mammoth task but an important one. I wonder if there's a way to collaborate with existing collections of historical Amateur radio data, such as the famous "QSL Collection" from Vienna: https://www.dokufunk.org/index.php?lang=EN https://www.dokufunk.org/index.php?lang=EN I think they have more material than probably anyone else in the world, but much of it is "offline" (partly digitized but not web accessible). Another huge collection of historic QSL cards, bios of deceased radio amateurs and other stuff: http://hamgallery.com/ http://hamgallery.com/

jimnotgym 4y ago

> software Amatuer radio seems full of little software tools to do calculations that are closed source. I hope the authors can be encouraged to publish source, or it will die with them.

anilakar 4y ago
Not just closed source but a completely black box, like the ROS and Pactor 4 digimodes. (To be fair, the latter is a commercial product so the blame is on ham radio operators, not the company who designed it.)
- throw0101a 4y ago
  > Pactor 4 digimodes. I've always been curious as to how they "got away" with being proprietary: encryption isn't allowed on amateur bands, but given its black box nature, the codec (?) might as well be a cipher. * https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/PACTOR https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/PACTOR Has anyone reverse engineered it? It is possible to create a third-party implementation, either in hardware or SDR? * https://www.sigidwiki.com/wiki/PACTOR_IV https://www.sigidwiki.com/wiki/PACTOR_IV
  - sidewndr46 4y ago
    At least in the US, the FCC largely ignores amateur radio and related services. Unless they start causing interference with other services. In general an amateur digital mode cannot have encryption (there are a few exceptions). A digital mode must have a published specification as well. PACTOR is not published to my knowledge. The ARRL petitioned for an increase to the symbol rate on the HF bands almost a decade ago. The FCC never formally did anything with it. It was a few years back, but at one point the FCC issued a 200+ kw license for a transmitter right at the top of the 20m band. Why? I have no clue. It isn't like the operator couldn't afford a commercial license. The FCC barely does anything about interference coming from equipment that affects amateurs. I've had substantially more luck contacting manufacturers and constructors directly. Just google "solaredge RFI" if you want more info about this. It took a commercial radio manufacturer years of professional lobbying to convince the FCC that the CB radio spectrum could in fact be with FM. The FCC is about 50 years behind on regulation for the CB radio. There is a huge amount of very valuable spectrum that could be used for citizen radio purposes with type accepted equipment very cheaply. But the FCC does not allow it. The FCC approved DFS for Wi-Fi, but didn't actually specify what the equipment was supposed to do when it must mitigate interference. All the equipment I've seen just switches the AP to the first 5 ghz channel and leaves it there. Forever. Likewise the FCC approved a new 5 ghz band for WiFi and similar services and puts power limits on emissions, as they should. But none of the chosen channels have a power limit of something very low like 0dbmw or similar. I have neighbors who find it fit to run an AP on every single available channel in the WiFi spectrum. I would just like one I can use in my house comfortably without getting interference. If we're going to have all this spectrum, why not take one channel and put a very low power limit on it? That way residential customers could use it in their house knowing they aren't receiving interference or generating it. The FCC regulation is almost always lagging behind reality for spectrum they aren't paid for. Cellular and stuff gets all the attention, since that is where the money is. The transition to ATSC from NTSC for broadcast television would be a good example. That happened quickly and without endless debate as to the merit of it.

JKCalhoun 4y ago

I have been loving this site for old radio/electronics magazines: https://worldradiohistory.com/ https://worldradiohistory.com/ I would assume archive.org would just ask permission to hoover (mirror) it.

Johnythree 4y ago
> I have been loving this site for old radio/electronics magazines: And many hundreds of books.

bityard 4y ago

They are in luck, then, because hams are famous for never throwing anything out, ask me how I know.