3 ms·

To encourage hacking and innovation here in the US, it might be wise for the FCC to allow amateur radio to start using encryption and carrying private non-comme

To encourage hacking and innovation here in the US, it might be wise for the FCC to allow amateur radio to start using encryption and carrying private non-commercial traffic.

LegionMammal978 2y ago
How would they enforce non-commercial use?
nine_k 2y ago
How would it encourage innovation? If you need an encrypted channel, you can use the internet, including the mobile phone data access; GSM modems are not that expensive. If you need to have an encrypted radio channel far from mobile network coverage, without identifying yourself in any way, who are you hiding from? Because a communication channel to a remote weapon would look much like that. Note that you can still use cryptography to ensure the integrity of your messages, by signing them.
- mikewarot 2y ago
  >who are you hiding from? We expect privacy in everything else, why not telecoms? As far as ID goes, we're required to transmit our call signs (mine's KA9DGX), those could be in the clear. You're not likely to get a bunch of us old timers using it for much more than extending networks to the neighbor, barn, etc. If there happens to be an encrypted signal, let's say a connection to an HTTPS web site... that's encryption, and illegal to send via ham radio. If we're able to do such things, we could then look into all sorts of other uses, like monitoring crops in the fields, metropolitan scale community networking, etc.
  - nine_k 2y ago
    Encrypted but not anonymous is rather fine in my book. But it, importantly, would turn a public space (frequentcy range) into a private space. The payload could become commercial ("dirt-cheap IoT connectivity in remote locations!"), and that may soon crowd the space. Every transmitter would still represent a minuscule, fair share of the airtime / bandwidth, so there'd no one to ban. Same with CB: I'm fine with sending some digital data over it, as long as the format remains open, content unencrypted, and voice comm remains possible. Well, in a pinch, run an ssh session over it. But everybody will understand that your circumstances are extraordinary. We have few public spaces, and such reserved, commonly accessible areas should remain, if for nothing else then for maintaining an extra communication channel for extreme circumstances. Search and rescue operations, wildfire monitoring when the normal means of monitoring fail, reporting and coordination in disaster areas, things of such sort. I'm all for business and took part in running several small businesses. Still I think that not everything should be devoted to commerce; the common public spaces, like the ham radio bands, public parks, or public sidewalks, add resilience to the society. They are easy to lose, harder to reinstate.
mjevans 2y ago
That's the whole reason it can't be encrypted. Enforcement would be impossible.

To encourage hacking and innovation here in the US, it might be wise for the FCC to allow amateur radio to start using encryption and carrying private non-commercial traffic.

LegionMammal978 2y ago

How would they enforce non-commercial use?

nine_k 2y ago

How would it encourage innovation? If you need an encrypted channel, you can use the internet, including the mobile phone data access; GSM modems are not that expensive. If you need to have an encrypted radio channel far from mobile network coverage, without identifying yourself in any way, who are you hiding from? Because a communication channel to a remote weapon would look much like that. Note that you can still use cryptography to ensure the integrity of your messages, by signing them.

mikewarot 2y ago
>who are you hiding from? We expect privacy in everything else, why not telecoms? As far as ID goes, we're required to transmit our call signs (mine's KA9DGX), those could be in the clear. You're not likely to get a bunch of us old timers using it for much more than extending networks to the neighbor, barn, etc. If there happens to be an encrypted signal, let's say a connection to an HTTPS web site... that's encryption, and illegal to send via ham radio. If we're able to do such things, we could then look into all sorts of other uses, like monitoring crops in the fields, metropolitan scale community networking, etc.
- nine_k 2y ago
  Encrypted but not anonymous is rather fine in my book. But it, importantly, would turn a public space (frequentcy range) into a private space. The payload could become commercial ("dirt-cheap IoT connectivity in remote locations!"), and that may soon crowd the space. Every transmitter would still represent a minuscule, fair share of the airtime / bandwidth, so there'd no one to ban. Same with CB: I'm fine with sending some digital data over it, as long as the format remains open, content unencrypted, and voice comm remains possible. Well, in a pinch, run an ssh session over it. But everybody will understand that your circumstances are extraordinary. We have few public spaces, and such reserved, commonly accessible areas should remain, if for nothing else then for maintaining an extra communication channel for extreme circumstances. Search and rescue operations, wildfire monitoring when the normal means of monitoring fail, reporting and coordination in disaster areas, things of such sort. I'm all for business and took part in running several small businesses. Still I think that not everything should be devoted to commerce; the common public spaces, like the ham radio bands, public parks, or public sidewalks, add resilience to the society. They are easy to lose, harder to reinstate.

mjevans 2y ago

That's the whole reason it can't be encrypted. Enforcement would be impossible.