3 ms·

It also immediately invalidates FCC modular component compliance, and may be illegal if operating on dual-use bands like 5G wifi. Remember the rules limits use

It also immediately invalidates FCC modular component compliance, and may be illegal if operating on dual-use bands like 5G wifi. Remember the rules limits use the ERP, and EEs may have added a crappy antenna on purpose to meet the legal limits. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Effective_radiated_power https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Effective_radiated_power There are also medical radiofrequency exposure guidelines, and they mitigate deep tissue burns or "G5 Mind control beams" concerns. lol =3 https://www.canada.ca/en/health-canada/services/health-risks-safety/radiation/occupational-exposure-regulations/safety-code-6-radiofrequency-exposure-guidelines.html https://www.canada.ca/en/health-canada/services/health-risks...

vkdelta 3mo ago
Exactly… they would have added crappy antenna as they likely meet emission, spurious or harmonics requirements.. Engineer might be messing with other 2.4GHz devices by doing this
- tylerflick 3mo ago
  2.4GHz is already incredibly crowded and prone to interference (in urban environments). I remember once picking up emissions on a Bluetooth headset from a leaky microwave oven.
- dgacmu 3mo ago
  This seems very unlikely compared to the obvious answer that they added a crappy antenna to keep their BoM and assembly costs low. The radios on these are weak and adding an Omni antenna is exceptionally unlikely to violate EIRP. Could this design accidentally radiate something it's picking up from the board outside of 2.4ghz? Sure. But practically it's quite unlikely to in this context.
- sscaryterry 3mo ago
  That isn't how this works. There is no change in emission power, the antenna doesn't add power.
  - BenjiWiebe 3mo ago
    Well mostly true. You can replace an inefficient (turns power into heat) antenna with a more efficient antenna which will then radiate more. And some frequencies are regulated by effective radiated power, where they basically care about the strength of the signal in the strongest location, so a more directional antenna could push you over the limit.
spacedoutman 3mo ago
You can just ignore the FCC. They are completely toothless.
- chemeril 3mo ago
  As an individual this is mostly true unless you're touching broadcasting proper. As a business this is absolutely not true and noncompliance is a ticking time bomb that will bankrupt you.
- deleted 3mo ago
  [deleted]
- bikezen 3mo ago
  As someone in Southern California who uses HAM, this is both true and not true. There's an older gentleman who has already spent time in jail for sitting on frequencies without a license repeatedly. After he got out, he jumped right back on it. He's got tens of thousands if not more in unpaid fines, but as far as I'm aware they cant get blood from a stone. Another anecdote, dozen or more years ago a friend had a fault cable modem that was spitting out radio traffic I assume on some important frequencies in a dense area. They got a knock on the door from an FCC team who were tracking the interference down.
  - ikidd 3mo ago
    HAM-is-not-ham And your example must be one of those weirdos on 80m. What a pack of crazies.
- jubilanti 3mo ago
  The author is German and lists German contact information. They're a lot stricter in the EU about this.

vkdelta 3mo ago

Exactly… they would have added crappy antenna as they likely meet emission, spurious or harmonics requirements.. Engineer might be messing with other 2.4GHz devices by doing this

tylerflick 3mo ago
2.4GHz is already incredibly crowded and prone to interference (in urban environments). I remember once picking up emissions on a Bluetooth headset from a leaky microwave oven.
dgacmu 3mo ago
This seems very unlikely compared to the obvious answer that they added a crappy antenna to keep their BoM and assembly costs low. The radios on these are weak and adding an Omni antenna is exceptionally unlikely to violate EIRP. Could this design accidentally radiate something it's picking up from the board outside of 2.4ghz? Sure. But practically it's quite unlikely to in this context.
sscaryterry 3mo ago
That isn't how this works. There is no change in emission power, the antenna doesn't add power.
- BenjiWiebe 3mo ago
  Well mostly true. You can replace an inefficient (turns power into heat) antenna with a more efficient antenna which will then radiate more. And some frequencies are regulated by effective radiated power, where they basically care about the strength of the signal in the strongest location, so a more directional antenna could push you over the limit.

spacedoutman 3mo ago

You can just ignore the FCC. They are completely toothless.

chemeril 3mo ago
As an individual this is mostly true unless you're touching broadcasting proper. As a business this is absolutely not true and noncompliance is a ticking time bomb that will bankrupt you.
deleted 3mo ago
[deleted]
bikezen 3mo ago
As someone in Southern California who uses HAM, this is both true and not true. There's an older gentleman who has already spent time in jail for sitting on frequencies without a license repeatedly. After he got out, he jumped right back on it. He's got tens of thousands if not more in unpaid fines, but as far as I'm aware they cant get blood from a stone. Another anecdote, dozen or more years ago a friend had a fault cable modem that was spitting out radio traffic I assume on some important frequencies in a dense area. They got a knock on the door from an FCC team who were tracking the interference down.
- ikidd 3mo ago
  HAM-is-not-ham And your example must be one of those weirdos on 80m. What a pack of crazies.
jubilanti 3mo ago
The author is German and lists German contact information. They're a lot stricter in the EU about this.