Hinternetters Still Out to Kill the Hobby

[N5PVL]

I saw this today on the illinoisdigitalham (http://groups.yahoo.com/group/illinoisdigitalham/) Yahoo! group.

These idiots are still working to undermine the hobby with encrypted communications.

Apparently it's the less intelligent, "CB mentality" types who are getting into all the hinternet stuff these days. That mentality includes a disregard for the law and for other people that have traditionally made citizen's band a haven for mindless scumbags who have some interest in radio.

Now these uncivilized idiots have got 'hinternet' too, and are trying to use it as an excuse to CB-up amateur radio.

Where are all these CB-mentality idiots coming from, and why are they getting ham tickets?

A lot of them are cops, told to get a ham ticket so the county or city can suck up some of that DHS grant money.

These are 'hams' who don't know anything about the hobby and do not have any interest or intention to find out. They are there so the govt agencies will not have to deal with real hams as the DHS intended - and that's the one and only reason that they have a ham ticket.

Now they casually plan on undermining the hobby they don't care about, screwing the fellow hams they don't care about.

It has come down to the point where the amateur radio liscense is a formality you go through in order to obtain a federal handout. Ham Radio has been incorporated into the welfare system.

Personally, I am all for vigilante justice in this area, as there is no other recourse open to (genuine) hams.

Quote[/b] ]
> http://www.scribd.com/doc/246097/arrl
>
> Back in 1991 the same type of issues were in discussion.

Yep, I was involved in those early discussions, and the FCC *still*
hasn't acted on any of it.

From that link:

"But this latest blow from the FCC is making Part 15's complete absence
of licensing requirements, content and/or usage restrictions look mighty
attractive indeed - even though my primary intent is to use the network
for the kind of personal experimentation that has traditionally been
done in the amateur service. Are the FCC's rules really "protecting" the
amateur service if they scare off those who are most interested in
making technical contributions to the service?"

And here we are, getting close to 20 years later, and Part 15 users
still have regulatory backing to use any type of encryption they want,
and Amateurs are still restricted.

> The encryption issue should be dead until we get some numbers. I say
> if you want to use it within the states I don't believe it's a stop
> sign. It won't go over well with your peers until down the road, when
> trends chance so best not to discuss it. Just follow the old good
> amateur practice rule of thumb.

I contend that there are a number of us who won't put our licenses on
the line, nor waste our time, building things that we're not sure can
stay on the air. Chicken and egg. Or we'll build Part 15 systems.

Should someone take the time to build a full-up emergency communications
system, stemming from the usual Ham ethos of "build it and they will
come", with a regulatory cloud over their head? No. Should they even
be ASKED to? No. The regulations should keep up with the times. 20
years is long enough to "discuss" it.

And whether or not discussing it "goes over well with peers" is
irrelevant. It's time to fix it.

> An amendment made to Article 25.2A (1A) at the 2003 World radio
> Conference no longer specifically prohibits the use of encryption and
> other strong security measures on transmissions between Amateur Radio
> stations within the same jurisdiction.

This is exceedingly good news. Perhaps the FCC can spend a couple of
those billions they're going to receive in January on a couple of
meetings to discuss and fix Part 97 as it relates to encryption.

Nate WY0X

[n8yx]

Compression is one thing, but encryption is another matter entirely.

Can anyone come up with a valid reason for encrypting "amateur radio" communications traffic?

[kq9j]

Quote[/b] (n8yx @ Aug. 29 2007,05:15)]Compression is one thing, but encryption is another matter entirely.

Can anyone come up with a valid reason for encrypting "amateur radio" communications traffic?
No, there is none and encryption is the last thing we want. Next Question.

[w3wn]

Quote[/b] (N5PVL @ Aug. 29 2007,08:12)]I saw this today on the illinoisdigitalham (http://groups.yahoo.com/group/illinoisdigitalham/) Yahoo! group.
...which you can't read unless you're a member of the Yahoo group.

So unless someone responding is already a member of the group, and knows which message you're referring to (you didn't indicate, you just pointed to the group) there is no way to know what you're talking about.

And tell us, Charles. Outside of AX.25 Packet, is there any digital mode you do like?

73, ron w3wn
Quantum materiae materietur marmota monax si marmota monax materiam possit materiari?

[W5HTW]

I am not a digital mode fan, but am not specifically against it, either. I think there are two issues and they have to be separated.

The first is digital mode radio. If there are restrictions on automatic stations, interference, and bandwidth, then facing the fact that digital modes are here to stay isn't difficult. It just has to allow for legacy modes, as well as to allow more than a couple of digital signals per band. Some of this broadband stuff has zero place on the ham bands.

The other issue is linked with emcom. It is a separate issue from the above, or it should be, and it needs to be addressed separately. There is no place at all for encryption on the amateur radio frequencies. And it is the emcom supporters who feel it is necessary. They believe they should be handling highly restricted public safety traffic, and that just isn't true.

Either of these issues has the potential to turn amateur radio into professional radio, with its attendant restrictions. Combined, they are a real threat. But I believe, if we concentrated on getting the emcom types off the ham bands and into a service of their own, we then make the digital modes available for actual amateur radio use, without fear of corrupting the service into some sort of "government radio."

I have become a strong advocate of a new radio service that is NOT amateur radio, but that is dedicated to volunteer communicators who specialize in emergency communications support. I think such a service is sorely needed for several reasons.

I am not an activist. I do not have the expertise to write and present a proposal to the FCC seeking to establish such a service. I'm not even sure the FCC is where such a proposal should go. Perhaps it should go to congress.

I would think someone who has more experience in ethe legal issues of commercial (not amateur) radio would be suited to develop, write and push, such a proposal, in the proper place and with the proper language.

If we can split off the emcomers from the real amateur radio, much of this situation goes away. Not all of it, no, but it gives the emergency comm types a place to not only play, but to to valuable work, perform an occasionally needed real service.

There is talk of a non-amateur band of 148-150 mhz for this kind of service. Such a service could also be added in the areas of existing high-VHF tv channels (Channel 7 to 13). Ther eis room for this type of service.

We really need to get the emcomers out of amateur radio before they manage to turn it into public safety radio. Even in a separate service, perhaps a "subsidiary," if you will, of amateur radio, the ARRL could keep its fingers in the pie.

I would be happy to submit guidelines to anyone who is interested in organizing a movement in that direction. I simply lack the expertise to actually write the proposal, and the legal knowledge to know where to submit it!

We really need to save ham radio. I fear it is already too late, but we may stand a chance. Anyone with positive or at least logical comments, on this concept can email me at my W5HTW email address (see my listing on QRZ) or perhaps create a thread specifically geared toward that goal. We should get rid of the rhetoric, and actually do something constructive, but frankly, I don't know how to start.

Thoughts?

Ed

[kb2vxa]

Ed, wasn't your post here sufficient? Why did you start a new thread with a repost?

You have my comments, no point in reposting here.

[W3MIV]

HTW:

Quote[/b] ]...perhaps create a thread specifically geared toward that goal. We should get rid of the rhetoric...

States it quite clearly. This thread is based on a narrowly pejorative whine that will only lead to additional whining. A thread devoted to the issue that solicits information rather than knee-jerk applause for the narrow-minded lead on this one could serve a useful purpose.

Somehow, however, I think that the best laid plans, of mice and posters, will go quickly astray.

http://www.qrz.com/iB_html/non-cgi/emoticons/wink.gif

[wz9o]

Emcomm tards and digital freaks are everywhere!!!

It’s a plague!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

Time to call the “exterminator”!!

[ab0wr]

The truly sad part is that those people on the illinoisdigital forum advocating this have no understanding of how IP-Sec can provide all the security they need *without* encrypting the message.

There are two issues here folks.

1. Secure comm channels.
2. Privacy of communications

Issue 1 can be handled in any number of ways. If you don't want to implement ip networks using IP-Sec between communications nodes then do something as simple as using an encrypted identification attached to the message. By encrypting a sequence number and a coded sequence identifying the text as part of the identification you prevent all kinds of man-in-the-middle attacks as well as implementing authorization and data integrity.

Part 97 says:"messages encoded for the purpose of obscuring their meaning,", it doesn't say anything about encryted signatures on messages.

The second issue is encryption for privacy. This kind of operation has no business in ham radio. The very spirit of ham radio is based on open communications which allow self-policing.

There are two big excuses used by people advocating for privacy encryption on amateur radio: 1) Part 15 wifi users can do it and 2) As a common carrier serving customers in EMCOMM, amateur radio should be able to meet the demand of these customers for encrypted communications.

These are both farcical excuses. Part 15 wifi is a low-powered service dependent on the internet for interconnection (for the most part). Access for monitoring (by law enforcement, etc) this traffic is provided by current internet procedures. Such is not the case for Part 97 networks which can span continents let alone states, with no monitoring procedures available to anyone unless they happen to be in the right propagation zone.

As for excuse Nbr 2, amateur radio should not be in the business of satisfying the communication needs of "customers". If those customers can't live with what amateur radio can provide the answer is not to corrupt amateur radio but to move to commercial frequencies where such can be handled. It is nothing more than hubris on the part of emcomm amateurs in thinking that amateur radio should be the *only* solution and that it should therefore allow privacy encryption. They forget that amateurs should be willing to recommend the best tool for the job -- and that includes commercial communications when it fits.

tim ab0wr

[k5okc]

This is a non-issue.

http://members.cox.net/ssampson19/whine.jpg

[wd0ct]

"Where are all these CB-mentality idiots coming from, and why are they getting ham tickets?

A lot of them are cops, told to get a ham ticket so the county or city can suck up some of that DHS grant money."

Nothing worse than cber cop hinternet hammies. More useless than dauchunds.

[W3MIV]

Quote[/b] (wd0ct @ Aug. 30 2007,03:29)]More useless than dauchunds.
http://www.qrz.com/iB_html/non-cgi/emoticons/rock.gif

[VK2AKG]

Quote[/b] (W5HTW @ Aug. 29 2007,16:29)]I believe, if we concentrated on getting the emcom types off the ham bands and into a service of their own ...
there are at least two ways of achieving this - be careful.

[AG3Y]

I frankly do not understand the issue that Charles raises time and time again. Here in the good old state of Maryland, ( motto, "We LOVE to spend your tax dollars ! " ) the various public service agencies, Police, Fire and Rescue, as well as regular road maintenance facilities, etc. have be working diligently to tie together all communications equipment so that a "911" type of scenario would not happen here ( fire not being able to talk to police, etc. )

This is being accomplished at great expense to the taxpayer, and my understanding is that amateur radio volunteer efforts are being pushed further and further into the background!

I do believe that the day when the ham radio was the ONLY link to the outside world is fast becoming a fading dream in light of the reality of a post 911 world !

Maybe I do understand Charles' viewpoint better than I think I do. If this situation here in MD is occurring nationwide, then there truly is no place for Emcomm wannabees, and ham radio ought to revert to whatever it was before the ARRL started relaying all those radiograms around the country in Simulated Emergency Tests so many years ago!

Please, correct me if I am wrong! I love a good exchange of thoughts . 73, Jim

[K9MDJ]

One thing people are missing in this is that all of the money and preparation is being put into public safety emcomm. John Q Public is being left out of the picture, and if landlines are down and cell phone use is set to priority customers only, he has no way to get messages to friends or family. Maybe this is where amateur radio should concentrate its efforts, which is exactly what those radiograms are for.

Mike K9MDJ

[N5PVL]

Actually my weenier dog pulls her own wieght around the place, and is quite useful.

When she hears a car in the driveway, she barks and that gets the poodle in other end of the house excited, and that in turn lets me know that there's somebody stopping by, even if I am watching a movie or have the music cranked up.

On Topic: Hinternetters and whackers are two seperate problems that unfortunately compound one another.

Both groups are a serious threat to the hobby.

[kb9sxk]

Ed, What are you smoking?

Cops becoming hams do not in any shape or form = Homeland security $.

My 2 elmers are both retiered cops who have about 60 years of police and more of ham experiance.

Take off the tin foil hat.

[ky5u]

Amazing to look at the Winlink location map and see hundreds of obviously well heeled people in RVs or sailing around the world using Winlink.

[k5okc]

I'm thinking hard about this issue.

http://i203.photobucket.com/albums/aa262/okie_recardo/beta306.gif

[N5PVL]

What is that kid next to you thinking about? - The one with the headphones, the cigarette, and girl's shoes.

I wouldn't trust that kid, if I were you.

[G0GQK]

Isn't encryption of amateur radio communications against the law in the US ? As I am aware it is illegal in the UK and probably in the rest of Europe for all I know. Considering all the song and dance about homeland security, I would have considered any secret messaging to be suspect.
Could be that secret encrypted messages, black helicopters and aluminium foil headgear are all linked !
G0GQK http://www.qrz.com/iB_html/non-cgi/emoticons/biggrin.gif

[KC9JIQ]

Quote[/b] (n8yx @ Aug. 29 2007,05:15)]Compression is one thing, but encryption is another matter entirely.

Can anyone come up with a valid reason for encrypting "amateur radio" communications traffic?
Why yes there is, I heard a Skywarn net controller suggest that APRS be used to keep the general public from listening on scanners on weather reports....keep the public from panicing... he is a huge supporter of encryption. http://www.qrz.com/iB_html/non-cgi/emoticons/rock.gif

Another good use for encryption is for Autopatches, so the call can be kept private.

[k5okc]

Quote[/b] (G0GQK @ Sep. 03 2007,15:38)]Isn't encryption of amateur radio communications against the law in the US ?
Yes. So is speeding. No one ever breaks the law though...

[WA3KYY]

Quote[/b] (KC9JIQ @ Sep. 03 2007,16:43)]Quote[/b] (n8yx @ Aug. 29 2007,05:15)]Compression is one thing, but encryption is another matter entirely.

Can anyone come up with a valid reason for encrypting "amateur radio" communications traffic?
Why yes there is, I heard a Skywarn net controller suggest that APRS be used to keep the general public from listening on scanners on weather reports....keep the public from panicing... he is a huge supporter of encryption. http://www.qrz.com/iB_html/non-cgi/emoticons/rock.gif

Another good use for encryption is for Autopatches, so the call can be kept private.
Those are valid reasons not to use amateur radio for those communications.

[KC4RAN]

Quote[/b] (WA3KYY @ Sep. 03 2007,10:48)]Quote[/b] (KC9JIQ @ Sep. 03 2007,16:43)]Quote[/b] (n8yx @ Aug. 29 2007,05:15)]Compression is one thing, but encryption is another matter entirely.

Can anyone come up with a valid reason for encrypting "amateur radio" communications traffic?
Why yes there is, I heard a Skywarn net controller suggest that APRS be used to keep the general public from listening on scanners on weather reports....keep the public from panicing... he is a huge supporter of encryption. http://www.qrz.com/iB_html/non-cgi/emoticons/rock.gif

Another good use for encryption is for Autopatches, so the call can be kept private.
Those are valid reasons not to use amateur radio for those communications.
If it needs to be "secure" or "private", Amateur Radio frequencies are definitely the wrong place to transmit it.

Next they'll bring up something about 'secure remote control' or something similar. This is where the disconnect between 'authentication' and 'encryption' comes in.

[kb9sxk]

In what freaking way is weather spotter reports secret?

Those need to be open and monitorible by scanner land!

[KC4RAN]

Quote[/b] (kb9sxk @ Sep. 03 2007,12:20)]In what freaking way is weather spotter reports secret?

Those need to be open and monitorible by scanner land!
Sekret Tor-nay-does

[kc9kow]

I've read this all, and it is definitely about getting lined up with emcomm and getting that grant cash! One thing i'm suspect of in this scenario is that people who support encryption are up to no good.

Radio / airwaves were never intended for privacy. That's why those who are in radio services that allow encryption pay dearly for it.

Scanner listeners will always have their hobby, maybe under severe limitations, as I think they should be required to be licensed as we are, but without transmit privileges.

The reasons are obvious. Those who want privacy are in the wrong place, hell...even your telephone and computer aren't private, and they never have been. That's for another discussion though.

[KC9JIQ]

Quote[/b] ]Scanner listeners will always have their hobby, maybe under severe limitations, as I think they should be required to be licensed as we are, but without transmit privileges.


Huh, what basis do you even consider requiring a license to posses a scanner?

You know Digital modes will destroy the Scanner hobby, simply too difficult to program and the Scanners will be priced out of the market. Right now we just got APCO-25, and we cannot monitor the Cell phone sections of the airwaves.

My opinion is that anything a reciever can pickup over the air(re: DC to Daylight) it should be perfectly legal to monitor and most of it should have the ability to be descrambled and decrypted. Especially Cops and Emcomm, there needs to be some oversight by the citizenry.
In the days of party lines, people could listen to others talk, therefore I really don't see a problem with monitoring cell phone transmissions.

What should go over the air encrypted? WiFi, and military and Federal Government comms.

[n9lya]

Quote[/b] (KC9JIQ @ Sep. 03 2007,08:43)]Quote[/b] (n8yx @ Aug. 29 2007,05:15)]Compression is one thing, but encryption is another matter entirely.

Can anyone come up with a valid reason for encrypting "amateur radio" communications traffic?
Why yes there is, I heard a Skywarn net controller suggest that APRS be used to keep the general public from listening on scanners on weather reports....keep the public from panicing... he is a huge supporter of encryption. http://www.qrz.com/iB_html/non-cgi/emoticons/rock.gif

Another good use for encryption is for Autopatches, so the call can be kept private.
Gee get a business band radio if you want to encrypt information.. I wish you guiys would leave ham radio alone.. no need to encrypt ham radio...

Come on guys.. If you want to be cops go be a cop..
Besides APRS is simply ax25 Packet any TNC r sound card can decode it... DUH!!!

73 Jerry n9lya

[ky5u]

Quote[/b] (n9lya @ Sep. 07 2007,09:25)]Quote[/b] (KC9JIQ @ Sep. 03 2007,08:43)]Quote[/b] (n8yx @ Aug. 29 2007,05:15)]Compression is one thing, but encryption is another matter entirely.

Can anyone come up with a valid reason for encrypting "amateur radio" communications traffic?
Why yes there is, I heard a Skywarn net controller suggest that APRS be used to keep the general public from listening on scanners on weather reports....keep the public from panicing... he is a huge supporter of encryption. http://www.qrz.com/iB_html/non-cgi/emoticons/rock.gif

Another good use for encryption is for Autopatches, so the call can be kept private.
Gee get a business band radio if you want to encrypt information.. I wish you guiys would leave ham radio alone.. no need to encrypt ham radio...

Come on guys.. If you want to be cops go be a cop..
Besides APRS is simply ax25 Packet any TNC r sound card can decode it... DUH!!!

73 Jerry n9lya
You said it right.

[K1CJS]

The World Radio Conference amended the rules so encryption wasn't specifically prohibited? That opened the door--The Red Cross wants their health and welfare traffic NOT sent in the clear. Now who is going to pick up on that and bankroll a lobbying effort to amend part 97? You bet--the Red Cross already has somebody who may do just that. After all money talks--and we have to walk......

[W3MIV]

Quote[/b] (K1CJS @ Sep. 07 2007,18:24)]The World Radio Conference amended the rules so encryption wasn't specifically prohibited? #That opened the door--The Red Cross wants their health and welfare traffic NOT sent in the clear. #Now who is going to pick up on that and bankroll a lobbying effort to amend part 97? #You bet--the Red Cross already has somebody who may do just that. #After all money talks--and we have to walk......
And where, pray tell, is all of this money?

[N5PVL]

The DHS swills it out, and the ARRL is the biggest hog at the trough.

I thought everybody knew that!

[KC2PBJ]

Its just another Corn-spear-a-see against amateur radio espoused by zed members with too much time on their hands. There is a higher word count about this topic here than appears in any DHS grant information sites. At least the no-code diatribes were amusing. "Tempest in a teacup".

[W6GQ]

http://img337.imageshack.us/img337/7130/crybabyyg9.gif

[N3ATS]

One more time.

If you want to transmit mission critical comms. Use the public safety bands. FCC radio code PW.

If you are a legitimate public safety entity, file the 601 form, pay your $200 coordination fee and get yourself a public safety frequency.

Mission critical communications have no place on a hobby radio service.

[N3ATS]

Quote[/b] (k5okc @ Sep. 03 2007,04:53)]I'm thinking hard about this issue.

http://i203.photobucket.com/albums/aa262/okie_recardo/beta306.gif
A young Larry Craig? http://www.qrz.com/iB_html/non-cgi/emoticons/tounge.gif http://www.qrz.com/iB_html/non-cgi/emoticons/biggrin.gif

[N5PVL]

W6GQ pretty well wrapped up the hinternetter attitude.

Great illustration!

[KI4ITV]

Quote[/b] (K1CJS @ Sep. 07 2007,10:24)]The World Radio Conference amended the rules so encryption wasn't specifically prohibited? That opened the door--The Red Cross wants their health and welfare traffic NOT sent in the clear. Now who is going to pick up on that and bankroll a lobbying effort to amend part 97? You bet--the Red Cross already has somebody who may do just that. After all money talks--and we have to walk......
Ok, forgive me for being a slow learner here...
BUT, doesn't the Red Cross have its own assigned frequencies they could do this on without changing our regulations???
I guess only our amateur bands can be used when things go wrong. What exactly happens to the other frequencies when the weather is bad, the ground shakes, or the sky falls?

[kc2orw]

Well no doubt about it the pattern suggests that many interests would like to own the bands currently allocated to Amateur Radio. EM Comm and Winlink are two groups that have their eyes on them...

[N5PVL]

I think you are right about that. Hams have always had to watch out for groups trying to lobby us out of existence so they can snap up the amateur radio spectrum, but in recent years the problem seems to have gotten more widespread, more organized.

[W3MIV]

Quote[/b] (N5PVL @ Sep. 08 2007,10:27)]The DHS swills it out, and the ARRL is the biggest hog at the trough.

I thought everybody knew that!
Show me the evidence, Charles. Please post a single instance in which the ARRL received a federal grant other than money that was used to underwrite certain training programs.

Time and again, you have leveled this baseless charge without providing a hint of evidence. If you can provide that evidence, do so now, please. We would all benefit from the exposure.

[ky5u]

I would guess, Albert, that the ARRL would like nothing better than to have a source of funding outside the membership so they wouldn't even have to be polite to us.

[kc2orw]

Quote[/b] (AG4YO @ Sep. 09 2007,06:31)]I would guess, Albert, that the ARRL would like nothing better than to have a source of funding outside the membership so they wouldn't even have to be polite to us.
Who knows for sure... but there are patterns and movements afoot.

Some wonder what they add up to ultimately... it maybe what they add up to nothing...

1) Dropping of the code requirement.
2) Tests at all levels that only require memorization and seemingly no real knowledge
3) Attempts to legitimize Winlinks and other technologies wide bandwidth modem protocols over the airwaves.
4) Subtle attempts to circumvent or ignore the third party traffic rules.
5) Legitimizing encryption.
6) Increased licensing of EM Comms for the Amateur Bands so they can use the bands.

Do they add up to something or is it simply that the hobby is deteriorating? The bigger more important question is are they good for Amateur Radio regardless of intent...

[W3MIV]

Quote[/b] (AG4YO @ Sep. 09 2007,09:31)]I would guess, Albert, that the ARRL would like nothing better than to have a source of funding outside the membership so they wouldn't even have to be polite to us.
While I don't doubt that in the least, Charlie, the fact remains that no such honeypot has yet appeared, and, no less important, none seems just over the horizon.

My point is that Charles and others post the same false comment time and again, and it is a mere prevarication (to use the polite term), and is without foundation. There are surely enough areas of legitimate criticism of the current workings of the ARRL that we need not resort to blatant lies.

Let's put the effort into working to correct what is wrong, rather than inventing issues out of whole cloth just to satisfy the spite of a jilted digiteer.

[W3MIV]

Quote[/b] (kc2orw @ Sep. 09 2007,10:09)]Quote[/b] (AG4YO @ Sep. 09 2007,06:31)]I would guess, Albert, that the ARRL would like nothing better than to have a source of funding outside the membership so they wouldn't even have to be polite to us.
Who knows for sure... but there are patterns and movements afoot.

Some wonder what they add up to ultimately... it maybe what they add up to nothing...

1) Dropping of the code requirement.
2) Tests at all levels that only require memorization and seemingly no real knowledge
3) Attempts to legitimize Winlinks and other technologies wide bandwidth modem protocols over the airwaves.
4) Subtle attempts to circumvent or ignore the third party traffic rules.
5) Legitimizing encryption.
6) Increased licensing of EM Comms for the Amateur Bands so they can use the bands.

Do they add up to something or is it simply that the hobby is deteriorating? The bigger more important question is are they good for Amateur Radio regardless of intent...
And there are pipe dreams in the curls of smoke and the dim reflections of mental mirrors -- none of which add up to anything of merit.

[kc2orw]

I can do little about how you feel Albert that is just how you feel.
The thing is for everyone to simply ask themselves are they interested in radio as a hobby or computers as a hobby.
I happen to have a vested interest in computing having made a living off the technology. So I was a person highly susceptible to hinternetter aspirations. But I saw the light and realized that radio should be about radio first and that computing has to stay within the bounds of the rules existing for radio. Some however would prefer to change that situation. I think that there are other places to experiment with such ideas/technology that don't threaten the bands.

I think we should operate on this premise when considering what technology fits the radio hobby.

There should never be a special consideration for any type of transmission over another.

[ky5u]

Quote[/b] (kc2orw @ Sep. 09 2007,07:09)]Quote[/b] (AG4YO @ Sep. 09 2007,06:31)]I would guess, Albert, that the ARRL would like nothing better than to have a source of funding outside the membership so they wouldn't even have to be polite to us.
Who knows for sure... but there are patterns and movements afoot.

Some wonder what they add up to ultimately... it maybe what they add up to nothing...

1) Dropping of the code requirement.
2) Tests at all levels that only require memorization and seemingly no real knowledge
3) Attempts to legitimize Winlinks and other technologies wide bandwidth modem protocols over the airwaves.
4) Subtle attempts to circumvent or ignore the third party traffic rules.
5) Legitimizing encryption.
6) Increased licensing of EM Comms for the Amateur Bands so they can use the bands.

Do they add up to something or is it simply that the hobby is deteriorating? The bigger more important question is are they good for Amateur Radio regardless of intent...
Oh it adds up to something. It adds up to a handful of people trying to set the future of AR with a mode/application that has less than 1% popularity using bait and switch advertizing. "Digital is the Wave of the Future" to be honest should read, "The hope that the entire bandwidth on HF can be totally taken over so our applications can run at speeds worse than dial-up...is the Wave of the Future".

[kc2orw]

Well yes AG4YO, in effect I am "begging the question" by pointing out trends or movements that are actually occurring.

[kb9sxk]

Quote[/b] (W3MIV @ Sep. 09 2007,06:24)]Quote[/b] (N5PVL @ Sep. 08 2007,10:27)]The DHS swills it out, and the ARRL is the biggest hog at the trough.

I thought everybody knew that!
Show me the evidence, Charles. Please post a single instance in which the ARRL received a federal grant other than money that was used to underwrite certain training programs.

Time and again, you have leveled this baseless charge without providing a hint of evidence. If you can provide that evidence, do so now, please. We would all benefit from the exposure.
Thank you!

Paranoia runs deep....

[w3wn]

Quote[/b] (kc2orw @ Sep. 08 2007,23:18)]Well no doubt about it the pattern suggests that many interests would like to own the bands currently allocated to Amateur Radio. EM Comm and Winlink are two groups that have their eyes on them...
So what else is new?

Outside groups have been eyeing the Amateur bands for one reason or another since we were "banished" to 200 meters & down 95 years ago.

Just remember -- vigilance is one thing. Paranoia is another.

[w3wn]

Quote[/b] (N5PVL @ Sep. 08 2007,10:27)]The DHS swills it out, and the ARRL is the biggest hog at the trough.

I thought everybody knew that!
What money?

You can show us who is paying this money out, and exactly whom they are paying it too, can't you?

Oh, that's right. Quote[/b] ]everybody knew that Reminds me of something: Quote[/b] ]A thousand years ago everybody knew as a fact, that the earth was the center of the universe. Five hundred years ago, everybody knew that the Earth was flat, and fifteen minutes ago, you knew that humans were alone on it. Imagine what you'll know tomorrowAgent K, Men In Black, 1997

How about, for a change, we stick to facts, not what "everyone knows"

[KC4RAN]

Quote[/b] (W3MIV @ Sep. 08 2007,07:24)]Quote[/b] (N5PVL @ Sep. 08 2007,10:27)]The DHS swills it out, and the ARRL is the biggest hog at the trough.

I thought everybody knew that!
Show me the evidence, Charles. Please post a single instance in which the ARRL received a federal grant other than money that was used to underwrite certain training programs.

Time and again, you have leveled this baseless charge without providing a hint of evidence. If you can provide that evidence, do so now, please. We would all benefit from the exposure.
Link 1 (http://www.arrl.org/news/stories/2005/04/01/3/?nc=1)

"The Aiken County, South Carolina, Office of Emergency Management has received a $100,000 grant to fund a new Amateur Radio Emergency Services trailer. The US Department of Homeland Security grant was distributed via the South Carolina Law Enforcement Division’s Office of Homeland Security Grants Administration. The project will provide a state-of-the-art communications vehicle for ARES members to assist served agencies. ARRL South Carolina Section Manager Jim Boehner, N2ZZ, says the project was the brainchild of several radio amateurs, including ARRL members and Section leadership. "

...


"“A portable 2-meter repeater has been secured and will be available to provide on-scene communications as needed,” Boehner said. In addition, the vehicle be equipped with Winlink 2000 to enable Internet and e-mail via HF. The State Emergency Operations Center also will have Winlink 2000 capability. "





---------

Here's another interesting take, from Winlink's own site...
Link 2 (http://www.winlink.org/News/0507_EC_Newsletter.pdf)

"Also, documented NIMS and ICS training help make Wisconsin ARES/RACES eligible for grant monies from FEMA and the Department of Homeland Security. Grants are an important source of funds to support ARES/RACES initiatives like a statewide linked repeater system and WinLink 2000 deployment."

Using 'training' grant money to purchase equipment, like repeaters and Winlink deployments? I thought it was for 'training'?

[KC4RAN]

It seems even the ARRL's meeting minutes of some sections/divisons show the truth about the ARRL's intentions...

From the ARRL "New England Division Cabinet Meeting Minutes"

Link 1 (http://ema.arrl.org/article.php?op=Print&sid=453)

"10. some homeland security money is available, especially through states. Clubs should consider banding together to get access to this."





And some clubs were listening, as far back as 2004...
Link 2 (http://www.baltarc.com/news/2004/Nov04_spreads.pdf)



"Tap into DHS Funds to support EMCOMM Activities
1. Apply for DHS Grants
2. Acquire and outfit a BARC PSE/EMC Van"

[w3wn]

Quote[/b] (KC4RAN @ Sep. 10 2007,15:42)]"The Aiken County, South Carolina, Office of Emergency Management has received a $100,000 grant to fund a new Amateur Radio Emergency Services trailer. The US Department of Homeland Security grant was distributed via the South Carolina Law Enforcement Division’s Office of Homeland Security Grants Administration. The project will provide a state-of-the-art communications vehicle for ARES members to assist served agencies. ARRL South Carolina Section Manager Jim Boehner, N2ZZ, says the project was the brainchild of several radio amateurs, including ARRL members and Section leadership. "

...


"“A portable 2-meter repeater has been secured and will be available to provide on-scene communications as needed,” Boehner said. In addition, the vehicle be equipped with Winlink 2000 to enable Internet and e-mail via HF. The State Emergency Operations Center also will have Winlink 2000 capability. "





---------

Here's another interesting take, from Winlink's own site...
Link 2 (http://www.winlink.org/News/0507_EC_Newsletter.pdf)

"Also, documented NIMS and ICS training help make Wisconsin ARES/RACES eligible for grant monies from FEMA and the Department of Homeland Security. Grants are an important source of funds to support ARES/RACES initiatives like a statewide linked repeater system and WinLink 2000 deployment."

Using 'training' grant money to purchase equipment, like repeaters and Winlink deployments? I thought it was for 'training'?
(1) Did the Aiken County ARES group funnel any money into ARRL Hq, or was all of it spent locally for the local group to purchase a communications trailer & portable 2 meter repeater?

(2) Were any of the funds provided by FEMA & DHS to the Wisconsin ARES/RACES group sent to ARRL Hq, or was all of it spent locally for the local group for statewide repeater linking & WinLink development?

(3) Did they receive enough funds to accomplish the tasks at hand in the grants? Not enough? Too much? If not enough, how did they make up the difference. If too much, where did it go?

I have yet to see a direct connection of funds of these types sent to ARRL Hq to enrich their coffers. Wasn't that the primary allegation at hand?

Instead, I see local groups and statewide groups taking the initiative to secure funding for their own purposes. Now you may or may not agree with their choices, but none of this directly enriches ARRL Hq.

[w3wn]

Quote[/b] (KC4RAN @ Sep. 10 2007,15:53)]It seems even the ARRL's meeting minutes of some sections/divisons show the truth about the ARRL's intentions...

From the ARRL "New England Division Cabinet Meeting Minutes"

Link 1 (http://ema.arrl.org/article.php?op=Print&sid=453)

"10. some homeland security money is available, especially through states. Clubs should consider banding together to get access to this."

And some clubs were listening, as far back as 2004...
Link 2 (http://www.baltarc.com/news/2004/Nov04_spreads.pdf)

"Tap into DHS Funds to support EMCOMM Activities
1. Apply for DHS Grants
2. Acquire and outfit a BARC PSE/EMC Van"
Again... how does local clubs applying for funding for local emergency and prepardness activities translate to ARRL Hq "feeding at the trough"?

For all the claims that the League as a whole is getting enriched by all of these grant applications, you have yet to demonstrate that a single penny has travelled from the state or local level into the treasury at Newington.

[kb9sxk]

these funds are few and far between. Each state decides how to spend the federal $. Most states will not fund ham projects. Most specify P25, and leaves hammys out.

[KC4RAN]

Quote[/b] (w3wn @ Sep. 09 2007,14:34)]I have yet to see a direct connection of funds of these types sent to ARRL Hq to enrich their coffers. #Wasn't that the primary allegation at hand? #
DHS gives grants to ARRL and ARRL-affiliated clubs (oh yeah, forgot about that eh? Just because it's not Newington doesn't mean it's not ARRL-affiliated)... Those slurping up the DHS grant money spend it to turn amateur radio frequencies into "service" communications entities.

Instead of Amateur Radio, many people want this to be EMCOMM DHS Protect The Nation Whacker Elite Radio or something. All the while, the rest of us... those scum "hobbyist" hams... suffer by having QSOs crashed.

And oh how dare we question the system. It's perfect. It's harmonious. It never causes any problems. It's like God himself squatted down and the Holy Turd blossomed into Winlink and the EMCOMM "Saviors of Amateur Radio".

If it keeps going this way, amateur frequencies will be mostly used as just a means of transporting emails from EOC operators, sailors and RV jockeys... and the rest of us will be sitting wondering what the hell happened.

"Served Agencies"... bleh. The ARRL knows that the DHS dollars are there, they know that it brings in cash for any ham to prostitute themselves and the frequencies they are authorized to use for 3rd party use by anyone who will let the whacker in the door.

[kc2orw]

Quote[/b] (w3wn @ Sep. 10 2007,07:10)]Quote[/b] (kc2orw @ Sep. 08 2007,23:18)]Well no doubt about it the pattern suggests that many interests would like to own the bands currently allocated to Amateur Radio. EM Comm and Winlink are two groups that have their eyes on them...
So what else is new?

Outside groups have been eyeing the Amateur bands for one reason or another since we were "banished" to 200 meters & down 95 years ago.

Just remember -- vigilance is one thing. Paranoia is another.
So why are you so accepting of it then don't you wish to keep the bands?

[w3wn]

Quote[/b] (kc2orw @ Sep. 10 2007,16:50)]Quote[/b] (w3wn @ Sep. 10 2007,07:10)]Quote[/b] (kc2orw @ Sep. 08 2007,23:18)]Well no doubt about it the pattern suggests that many interests would like to own the bands currently allocated to Amateur Radio. EM Comm and Winlink are two groups that have their eyes on them...
So what else is new?

Outside groups have been eyeing the Amateur bands for one reason or another since we were "banished" to 200 meters & down 95 years ago.

Just remember -- vigilance is one thing. #Paranoia is another.
So why are you so accepting of it then don't you wish to keep the bands?
Who said I was accepting anything? Don't go putting words in my mouth!

This is nothing new. But instead of doing something about it, you guys are too busy shooting the messenger(s).

[kc2orw]

Really looks like we are working on it only you apparently oppose the effort... Not quite as good as we would like it to be but we are working on it http://www.qrz.com/iB_html/non-cgi/emoticons/biggrin.gif

[KE7NCS]

Quote[/b] (n8yx @ Aug. 29 2007,05:15)]Can anyone come up with a valid reason for encrypting "amateur radio" communications traffic?
Because we can? Fun? Freedom to tinker?

[KC9JIQ]

Quote[/b] (kc2orw @ Sep. 10 2007,15:34)]Really looks like we are working on it only you apparently oppose the effort... Not quite as good as we would like it to be but we are working on it #http://www.qrz.com/iB_html/non-cgi/emoticons/biggrin.gif
Well who wouldn't like free money? http://www.qrz.com/iB_html/non-cgi/emoticons/tounge.gif

[kc2orw]

Quote[/b] (KC9JIQ @ Sep. 10 2007,15:54)]Quote[/b] (kc2orw @ Sep. 10 2007,15:34)]Really looks like we are working on it only you apparently oppose the effort... Not quite as good as we would like it to be but we are working on it http://www.qrz.com/iB_html/non-cgi/emoticons/biggrin.gif
Well who wouldn't like free money? http://www.qrz.com/iB_html/non-cgi/emoticons/tounge.gif
Ain't no money here it's costing all of us and who knows it could exceed our ability to sustain the effort because of out of pocket expenses...

Nope no free or found money here, sorry.


PS: Don't want to sound like it is costing me a lot of money 99.9999999999999999999999999999999% of the cost is being carried by N5PVL (just wanted to make that clear)

[KC4RAN]

Quote[/b] (KE7NCS @ Sep. 09 2007,16:53)]Quote[/b] (n8yx @ Aug. 29 2007,05:15)]Can anyone come up with a valid reason for encrypting "amateur radio" communications traffic?
Because we can? #Fun? #Freedom to tinker?
There is no valid use for encryption on amateur radio (public) frequencies. Ever.

If you want to 'tinker' with encryption on RF, there's lots of space to do it other than amateur radio frequencies...

[KC9JIQ]

Quote[/b] (KC4RAN @ Sep. 10 2007,17:40)]Quote[/b] (KE7NCS @ Sep. 09 2007,16:53)]Quote[/b] (n8yx @ Aug. 29 2007,05:15)]Can anyone come up with a valid reason for encrypting "amateur radio" communications traffic?
Because we can? #Fun? #Freedom to tinker?
There is no valid use for encryption on amateur radio (public) frequencies. Ever.

If you want to 'tinker' with encryption on RF, there's lots of space to do it other than amateur radio frequencies...
Repeater autopatches, Emcomms, Skywarn, EOC ops.

[kc2orw]

Quote[/b] (KC9JIQ @ Sep. 10 2007,18:35)]Repeater autopatches, Emcomms, Skywarn, EOC ops.
Those are examples of what you want to encrypt not why they need to be encrypted.

Don't need it for phone patch plus phone patches are really there for emergencies and it shouldn't require encryption. Most people have cell phones so they are starting to disappear anyway.

I never seen all that much use for skywarn as noaa radio is pretty good don't really know if the information is different. They supposedly have Skywarn implemented locally but never heard it.

Some people don't want the police and fire departments to be encrypted so why should em comms be exempt.
Tell you what in a real emergency maybe... but not for the everyday usage or drills. But in a real emergency all bets are off anyway so it won't matter much then.

[KC4RAN]

Quote[/b] (KC9JIQ @ Sep. 09 2007,19:35)]autopatches, Emcomms, Skywarn, EOC ops.
No, No, No and No.

There are many reasons why the Federal government put the 'no obfuscation' rules in place in Part 97. One of which is to prevent non-amateur interests or users from 'taking over' amateur radio. Secondly, international agreements we have entered in to require us to prohibit message obfuscation.

Use Public Service frequencies. Use Commercial frequencies. That's what they're there for. Encryption is allowed there, according to the FCC.

Leave amateur radio alone. Regs are there to keep it 'in the clear'.

[kb9sxk]

Quote[/b] (KC4RAN @ Sep. 10 2007,13:49)]Quote[/b] (w3wn @ Sep. 09 2007,14:34)]I have yet to see a direct connection of funds of these types sent to ARRL Hq to enrich their coffers. #Wasn't that the primary allegation at hand? #
DHS gives grants to ARRL and ARRL-affiliated clubs (oh yeah, forgot about that eh? Just because it's not Newington doesn't mean it's not ARRL-affiliated)... Those slurping up the DHS grant money spend it to turn amateur radio frequencies into "service" communications entities.

Instead of Amateur Radio, many people want this to be EMCOMM DHS Protect The Nation Whacker Elite Radio or something. All the while, the rest of us... those scum "hobbyist" hams... suffer by having QSOs crashed.

And oh how dare we question the system. It's perfect. It's harmonious. It never causes any problems. It's like God himself squatted down and the Holy Turd blossomed into Winlink and the EMCOMM "Saviors of Amateur Radio".

If it keeps going this way, amateur frequencies will be mostly used as just a means of transporting emails from EOC operators, sailors and RV jockeys... and the rest of us will be sitting wondering what the hell happened.

"Served Agencies"... bleh. The ARRL knows that the DHS dollars are there, they know that it brings in cash for any ham to prostitute themselves and the frequencies they are authorized to use for 3rd party use by anyone who will let the whacker in the door.
You sir, are an idiot. http://www.qrz.com/iB_html/non-cgi/emoticons/tounge.gif

Try a hot cup of reality.

[KC4RAN]

Quote[/b] (kb9sxk @ Sep. 09 2007,23:03)]Quote[/b] (KC4RAN @ Sep. 10 2007,13:49)]Quote[/b] (w3wn @ Sep. 09 2007,14:34)]I have yet to see a direct connection of funds of these types sent to ARRL Hq to enrich their coffers. #Wasn't that the primary allegation at hand? #
DHS gives grants to ARRL and ARRL-affiliated clubs (oh yeah, forgot about that eh? Just because it's not Newington doesn't mean it's not ARRL-affiliated)... Those slurping up the DHS grant money spend it to turn amateur radio frequencies into "service" communications entities.

Instead of Amateur Radio, many people want this to be EMCOMM DHS Protect The Nation Whacker Elite Radio or something. All the while, the rest of us... those scum "hobbyist" hams... suffer by having QSOs crashed.

And oh how dare we question the system. It's perfect. It's harmonious. It never causes any problems. It's like God himself squatted down and the Holy Turd blossomed into Winlink and the EMCOMM "Saviors of Amateur Radio".

If it keeps going this way, amateur frequencies will be mostly used as just a means of transporting emails from EOC operators, sailors and RV jockeys... and the rest of us will be sitting wondering what the hell happened.

"Served Agencies"... bleh. The ARRL knows that the DHS dollars are there, they know that it brings in cash for any ham to prostitute themselves and the frequencies they are authorized to use for 3rd party use by anyone who will let the whacker in the door.
You sir, are an idiot. http://www.qrz.com/iB_html/non-cgi/emoticons/tounge.gif

Try a hot cup of reality.
When asked the following:

The topic is Emcomm, not someone else's licensing status. Back to the topic, i'd like to know more about what plans there are to move emcomm to it's own band.

KB9SXK replied:


Quote[/b] ]
None.

The question is "What plans do they have to put you on your own band?"

[w3wn]

Quote[/b] (kc2orw @ Sep. 10 2007,18:34)]Really looks like we are working on it only you apparently oppose the effort... Not quite as good as we would like it to be but we are working on it #http://www.qrz.com/iB_html/non-cgi/emoticons/biggrin.gif
Where did I say that I opposed the effort?

You're really determined to paint me as the antagonist here... and all because I pointed out that this is nothing new. That is not by any stretch saying that I'm opposed to the effort!

[kc2orw]

Oh just your various disparaging remarks towards a number of us who are against some of the current trends.
It isn't that likely I am going to take being obliquely referred to as paranoid all that well.

[w3wn]

Quote[/b] (KC4RAN @ Sep. 10 2007,16:49)]Quote[/b] (w3wn @ Sep. 09 2007,14:34)]I have yet to see a direct connection of funds of these types sent to ARRL Hq to enrich their coffers. #Wasn't that the primary allegation at hand? #
DHS gives grants to ARRL and ARRL-affiliated clubs (oh yeah, forgot about that eh? Just because it's not Newington doesn't mean it's not ARRL-affiliated)... Those slurping up the DHS grant money spend it to turn amateur radio frequencies into "service" communications entities.

Instead of Amateur Radio, many people want this to be EMCOMM DHS Protect The Nation Whacker Elite Radio or something. All the while, the rest of us... those scum "hobbyist" hams... suffer by having QSOs crashed.

And oh how dare we question the system. It's perfect. It's harmonious. It never causes any problems. It's like God himself squatted down and the Holy Turd blossomed into Winlink and the EMCOMM "Saviors of Amateur Radio".

If it keeps going this way, amateur frequencies will be mostly used as just a means of transporting emails from EOC operators, sailors and RV jockeys... and the rest of us will be sitting wondering what the hell happened.

"Served Agencies"... bleh. The ARRL knows that the DHS dollars are there, they know that it brings in cash for any ham to prostitute themselves and the frequencies they are authorized to use for 3rd party use by anyone who will let the whacker in the door.
You guys blast Newington for being hogs at the money trough. When the facts come out, that the money is not going to Newington but to the clubs and groups that are affiliated with the League... you continue to blast the League.

Do you have any idea what an "ARRL Affiliated" club is? Or does the mere fact that the four letters "ARRL" are present in the description imply to you some vast conspiracy controlled from the dark, once-smoke filled back rooms behind the W1AW operating platform?

You use a very broad brush to paint with here. It appears that the subtle differences escape you.

The fact that state and local groups have, either on their own or with encouragement to one degree or another, sought ought and sometimes gotten grant money for their projects does NOT translate to the ARRL Hq enriching themselves at the public trough.

Now you may or may not have a legit beef with the state & local groups, and without knowing all of the details and background of each local group, it's not possible to make a determination one way or another. But again, that doesn't translate to the acusations made.

Would you accuse the Boy Scouts of America of enriching themselves at the public trough if one of the troops in your town received a federal grant to perform some task? (And the BSA has more clout over the troops and troop councils than the ARRL has over the local clubs... after all, for example, a radio club can survive just fine if they choose to sever their ties -- if any -- with the League, but a Scout troop can't be a troop if BSA does the same)

[w3wn]

Quote[/b] (kc2orw @ Sep. 10 2007,16:50)]Quote[/b] (w3wn @ Sep. 10 2007,07:10)]Quote[/b] (kc2orw @ Sep. 08 2007,23:18)]Well no doubt about it the pattern suggests that many interests would like to own the bands currently allocated to Amateur Radio. EM Comm and Winlink are two groups that have their eyes on them...
So what else is new?

Outside groups have been eyeing the Amateur bands for one reason or another since we were "banished" to 200 meters & down 95 years ago.

Just remember -- vigilance is one thing. #Paranoia is another.
So why are you so accepting of it then don't you wish to keep the bands?
Where did I say that I'm accepting this?

Now you guys are accusing me of not wanting to keep our bands?

All I did was try to point out that you can be vigilant without the paranoia. How does THAT mean I don't want to keep our bands?

[N8ODF]

Quote[/b] (kc2orw @ Sep. 11 2007,06:43)]Oh just your various disparaging remarks towards a number of us who are against some of the current trends.
It isn't that likely I am going to take being obliquely referred to as paranoid all that well.
Trends...one has to wonder if you "experienced" operators know the difference between encryption & digital mode's of operation...true encryption is maintained by the NSA...ever here of them & there mission...they have say over anyone encrypting anything...amateur radio is not & will never be "encrypted".....digital modes will & can be used however as previously explained these type modes can be broke back down to analog with the proper device & viewed...some of you guys are "freak'n" nuts

[WA3KYY]

Quote[/b] (KC9JIQ @ Sep. 10 2007,21:35)]Quote[/b] (KC4RAN @ Sep. 10 2007,17:40)]Quote[/b] (KE7NCS @ Sep. 09 2007,16:53)]Quote[/b] (n8yx @ Aug. 29 2007,05:15)]Can anyone come up with a valid reason for encrypting "amateur radio" communications traffic?
Because we can? #Fun? #Freedom to tinker?
There is no valid use for encryption on amateur radio (public) frequencies. Ever.

If you want to 'tinker' with encryption on RF, there's lots of space to do it other than amateur radio frequencies...
Repeater autopatches, Emcomms, Skywarn, EOC ops.
If they are sent via amaterur frequencies, they do not need encryption. #If encryption is required, get them the H*** off amateur frequencies!!

[kc2orw]

Quote[/b] (N8ODF @ Sep. 11 2007,07:09)]Trends...one has to wonder if you "experienced" operators know the difference between encryption & digital mode's of operation...
Indeed we do but you would have had to have followed all the threads that are going in multiple topics here to know that we do.

[N8ODF]

Quote[/b] (kc2orw @ Sep. 11 2007,07:29)]Quote[/b] (N8ODF @ Sep. 11 2007,07:09)]Trends...one has to wonder if you "experienced" operators know the difference between encryption & digital mode's of operation...
Indeed we do but you would have had to have followed all the threads that are going in multiple topics here to know that we do.
If you do know what encryption is...then you need to go back & read your own post's to see how ridiculous you sound...because you make no sense in this thread or any other concerning encryption...your just trying to comment & pursue something you obviously know nothing about....

[kc2orw]

What can I say my remarks that you misunderstand were likely part of a side topic that occurred within this thread or worse it may have crossed over from another topic...

So obviously you are having problems following this thread, what kind of troll are you...

[KC4RAN]

Quote[/b] (w3wn @ Sep. 10 2007,07:44)]You guys blast Newington for being hogs at the money trough. #When the facts come out, that the money is not going to Newington but to the clubs and groups that are affiliated with the League... you continue to blast the League.

Do you have any idea what an "ARRL Affiliated" club is? #Or does the mere fact that the four letters "ARRL" are present in the description imply to you some vast conspiracy controlled from the dark, once-smoke filled back rooms behind the W1AW operating platform?

You use a very broad brush to paint with here. #It appears that the subtle differences escape you.

The fact that state and local groups have, either on their own or with encouragement to one degree or another, sought ought and sometimes gotten grant money for their projects does NOT translate to the ARRL Hq enriching themselves at the public trough. #

Now you may or may not have a legit beef with the state & local groups, and without knowing all of the details and background of each local group, it's not possible to make a determination one way or another. #But again, that doesn't translate to the acusations made.

Would you accuse the Boy Scouts of America of enriching themselves at the public trough if one of the troops in your town received a federal grant to perform some task? #(And the BSA has more clout over the troops and troop councils than the ARRL has over the local clubs... after all, for example, a radio club can survive just fine if they choose to sever their ties -- if any -- with the League, but a Scout troop can't be a troop if BSA does the same)
Newington does the lobbying at the Federal level, provides the 'direction' and either directly or indirectly reaps the benefits. The more money the local clubs receive via the FedHogHose, the more money comes in to Newington. Nearly every member will either just be an ARRL member ($), or take (strongly recommended or sometimes required) courses from the ARRL ($$), or sometimes be both a member and take the courses ($$$).

Speaking of the BSA, would you have a problem if the guys at BSA HQ started 'encouraging' local troops to become "Junior Police Officer Affiliates"? Start writing up in the troop newsletters how cool the police are, how needed they are. Then start offering "You can be a policeman too!" stuff at the jamborees and other events. Then they create a new set of badges, gold-trimmed to set them apart from all the rest, for proving your pursuits to the JPOA efforts? I mean, don't we always need more police? And then within a couple of years, the Junior Police topic turned out to be *THE* topic at every troop meeting, jamboree and event. All scripted from the top.


I don't know about you, but I wouldn't let my kid in that any more than I'd let them in the Hitler Youth program. The BSA was never intended to be a Junior Police program, and if it got skewed into something like that, I'd pull my kid out in a heartbeat.

The same thing is happening, has happened to Amateur Radio. The confluence of the Whacker Nation, 9/11 plus a big stream of money coming from Washington (regardless if it goes through the states, it's Federal money)... and all lobbied for by Newington.

Amateur Radio is no more of a Junior Department of Homeland Security than the Boy Scouts are a Junior Police Officer Affiliate. Why is Newington so damned determined to try to mold 'the hobby' into 'the service'?

I can think of a few million reasons...

[KC9JIQ]

Quote[/b] ]Amateur Radio is no more of a Junior Department of Homeland Security than the Boy Scouts are a Junior Police Officer Affiliate. Why is Newington so damned determined to try to mold 'the hobby' into 'the service'?


Good question, what the heck is the ARRL trying to do? http://www.qrz.com/iB_html/non-cgi/emoticons/rock.gif

When all else fails? http://www.qrz.com/iB_html/non-cgi/emoticons/tounge.gif

[KC4RAN]

Quote[/b] (N8ODF @ Sep. 10 2007,08:35)]Quote[/b] (kc2orw @ Sep. 11 2007,07:29)]Quote[/b] (N8ODF @ Sep. 11 2007,07:09)]Trends...one has to wonder if you "experienced" operators know the difference between encryption & digital mode's of operation...
Indeed we do but you would have had to have followed all the threads that are going in multiple topics here to know that we do.
If you do know what encryption is...then you need to go back & read your own post's to see how ridiculous you sound...because you make no sense in this thread or any other concerning encryption...your just trying to comment & pursue something you obviously know nothing about....
Using a code or cipher to cause data not to be 'publicly readable' without knowledge of that code or cipher.

In this case, it's either using something well-known, like DES or PGP to encrypt the data itself being transmitted by a well-known mode (anything from Morse Code to AX.25 to DRM inserts), or by utilizing a custom or closed protocol.

If you're not trying to hide the contents of the transmission, then there's no reason to be even talking about 'encryption', now is there?

[ab0wr]

Quote[/b] (KC4RAN @ Sep. 11 2007,21:06)]Quote[/b] (N8ODF @ Sep. 10 2007,08:35)]Quote[/b] (kc2orw @ Sep. 11 2007,07:29)]Quote[/b] (N8ODF @ Sep. 11 2007,07:09)]Trends...one has to wonder if you "experienced" operators know the difference between encryption & digital mode's of operation...
Indeed we do but you would have had to have followed all the threads that are going in multiple topics here to know that we do.
If you do know what encryption is...then you need to go back & read your own post's to see how ridiculous you sound...because you make no sense in this thread or any other concerning encryption...your just trying to comment & pursue something you obviously know nothing about....
Using a code or cipher to cause data not to be 'publicly readable' without knowledge of that code or cipher.

In this case, it's either using something well-known, like DES or PGP to encrypt the data itself being transmitted by a well-known mode (anything from Morse Code to AX.25 to DRM inserts), or by utilizing a custom or closed protocol.

If you're not trying to hide the contents of the transmission, then there's no reason to be even talking about 'encryption', now is there?
Good answer.

It's obvious that n8odf is just another troll -- who himself does not understand the difference between a digital protocol and encryption.

I would just ignore him in the future.

tim ab0wr

[kl7aj]

Quote[/b] (WA3KYY @ Sep. 11 2007,07:20)]Quote[/b] (KC9JIQ @ Sep. 10 2007,21:35)]Quote[/b] (KC4RAN @ Sep. 10 2007,17:40)]Quote[/b] (KE7NCS @ Sep. 09 2007,16:53)]Quote[/b] (n8yx @ Aug. 29 2007,05:15)]Can anyone come up with a valid reason for encrypting "amateur radio" communications traffic?
Because we can? #Fun? #Freedom to tinker?
There is no valid use for encryption on amateur radio (public) frequencies. Ever.

If you want to 'tinker' with encryption on RF, there's lots of space to do it other than amateur radio frequencies...
Repeater autopatches, Emcomms, Skywarn, EOC ops.
If they are sent via amaterur frequencies, they do not need encryption. #If encryption is required, get them the H*** off amateur frequencies!!
Yip...precisely

[KC4RAN]

Quote[/b] (ab0wr @ Sep. 11 2007,07:01)]Quote[/b] (KC4RAN @ Sep. 11 2007,21:06)]Quote[/b] (N8ODF @ Sep. 10 2007,08:35)]Quote[/b] (kc2orw @ Sep. 11 2007,07:29)]Quote[/b] (N8ODF @ Sep. 11 2007,07:09)]Trends...one has to wonder if you "experienced" operators know the difference between encryption & digital mode's of operation...
Indeed we do but you would have had to have followed all the threads that are going in multiple topics here to know that we do.
If you do know what encryption is...then you need to go back & read your own post's to see how ridiculous you sound...because you make no sense in this thread or any other concerning encryption...your just trying to comment & pursue something you obviously know nothing about....
Using a code or cipher to cause data not to be 'publicly readable' without knowledge of that code or cipher.

In this case, it's either using something well-known, like DES or PGP to encrypt the data itself being transmitted by a well-known mode (anything from Morse Code to AX.25 to DRM inserts), or by utilizing a custom or closed protocol.

If you're not trying to hide the contents of the transmission, then there's no reason to be even talking about 'encryption', now is there?
Good answer.

It's obvious that n8odf is just another troll -- who himself does not understand the difference between a digital protocol and encryption.

I would just ignore him in the future.

tim ab0wr
Guess so...

[ab8yy]

OK, I have read everything in this thread - maybe not everything in all the others related to this - but here is why I believe ARRL is behind this whole thing.

ARRL may not be getting the grants directly - as has been pointed out - BUT - if you read even the description of that Yahoo Group - you will see things listed that ARRL heavily supports. Winlink popped up real quick before my eyes. Winlink - this is an internet email system which IS "encrypted" by at least one definition - because we cannot decode it using a commonly known protocol. Yes, it is also a data mode, as defined by others here, who may be trolls, but any data mode used on amateur radio MUST have publicly available decoding information. Winlink, using Pactor III, does not. At least it doesn't have anything available which is legal to decode WITHOUT purchasing a proprietary modem. This modem, is directly supported by ARRL and I'm sure they receive money from the sales. This is not a fact which I have researched, but lets think about this for a minute. ARRL advertises this unit. Do you think for one minute that they would do this without some sort of charge? ARRL doesn't give anything away - not even to their own members - simple things like courses which are taken OVER THE INTERNET!

As for the emcomm BS. There is absolutely nothing wrong with hams assisting in comms during an emergency or with NOAA in the Skywarn program. BUT. When it becomes something which is way more than simply passing health and welfare messages in and out of the disaster area, then it becomes public safety communications. When a ham is assigned to follow a policeman around and relay messages, those messages need to conform to the current amateur radio rules.

As for ARES groups obtaining grant money. ARES IS ARRL. The ARRL almost INSISTS that all ARES members have to take those communications courses. It is suggested that FEMA courses such as ICS be taken. What on earth for? Incident Command is something that the public safety officials handle. Unless you are part of the police or fire department - you will NEVER be an incident commander at a disaster scene. Sorry it isn't going to happen. I used to be a firefighter, I know this for fact. A ham assigned to assist the IC officer, is one thing and is completely differnet than what the ICS course teaches you. I have taken the course, I know that as well.

It is not and should never be a ham radio operator that determines anything official during a hazmat incident. Ham radio operators are NOT trained for this and shouldn't be trained for it. That is not what we do and we shouldn't be doing it.

In most cases, the reason why public safety people have in the recent years cut back on using ham radio operators is because WE tend to attempt to get in the way and try to do things we aren't trained to do. Unless you have medical training, fire training, and some kind of law enforcement training - you should do what amateur radio operators are supposed to do. Assist with communications. Legally, personal information about "patients" is not to be given to anyone other than medical personell and law enforcement to begin with - so why on earth would it need to be encrypted by us? We shouldn't be given the information in the first place to pass along.

In summary - ARRL is pushing this move to complete digital on AR, and this isn't disputed by them. ARRL would not be doing it if it weren't for some kind of self-enrichment - especially since at least half thei rmembers don't want it. This is the reason for attempting all the recruitment of new hams with all the glitter like INTERNET connectibility and EMCOMMs and such. This helps to get new hams interested in radio - as well as getting them into the membership. If they can do this - then they will get a majority to follow their lead and be able to say that the majority of ham radio wants this.

ARRL needs to get back into the thinking of what the majority of ham s really want and not just their newly recruited members.

Winlink and encrypted ham radio will be the death of ham radio as we know it today. We need to fight this at all costs. And fight off all th eARRL supporters.

There is one way to kill ARRL efforts - that is for everyone to just cancel their ARRL membership. Then they will be at a great loss and may have to change their thinking once and for all.

Steve
AB8YY

[KC5CSG]

Quote[/b] (N8ODF @ Sep. 11 2007,07:09)]Quote[/b] (kc2orw @ Sep. 11 2007,06:43)]Oh just your various disparaging remarks towards a number of us who are against some of the current trends.
It isn't that likely I am going to take being obliquely referred to as paranoid all that well.
Trends...one has to wonder if you "experienced" operators know the difference between encryption & digital mode's of operation...true encryption is maintained by the NSA...ever here of them & there mission...they have say over anyone encrypting anything...amateur radio is not & will never be "encrypted".....digital modes will & can be used however as previously explained these type modes can be broke back down to analog with the proper device & viewed...some of you guys are "freak'n" #nuts
I have to agree. Right now I'm in the Army Signal Corps. My job is to intall long haul digital networks that are "truely" encrypted and secure. In order to make use of this encrypted material we need certain encryption keys that have to match perfectly. Now, getting these keys and distributing them is one of the hardest things to do in my job. Now, can you imagine that process repeated on the amateur bands? It would be a nightmare with the coordination needed.

My biggest concern is this. Why would you want to? Unless you're doing something that you really don't want people to hear why would you worry about encrypting it? If you want to pass information that is sensitive I think a cell phone or encrypted email would be a much better media to send it. Correct me if I'm wrong and I'm sure someone will but doesn't all radio transmissions here have to be interceptable by the FCC if they so choose to listen to you? That being the case, wouldn't it be illegal to transmitt in the amateur band hiding it from review from the FCC? If the FCC does have the ecryption key, then it isn't secure then right? Sort of defeats the purpose. Hey, I could be wrong but I just don't see the need for it even though it is an interesting concept.

73

KC5CSG

[N2RJ]

Quote[/b] (KC5CSG @ Sep. 12 2007,21:26)]Quote[/b] (N8ODF @ Sep. 11 2007,07:09)]Quote[/b] (kc2orw @ Sep. 11 2007,06:43)]Oh just your various disparaging remarks towards a number of us who are against some of the current trends.
It isn't that likely I am going to take being obliquely referred to as paranoid all that well.
Trends...one has to wonder if you "experienced" operators know the difference between encryption & digital mode's of operation...true encryption is maintained by the NSA...ever here of them & there mission...they have say over anyone encrypting anything...amateur radio is not & will never be "encrypted".....digital modes will & can be used however as previously explained these type modes can be broke back down to analog with the proper device & viewed...some of you guys are "freak'n" nuts
I have to agree. Right now I'm in the Army Signal Corps. My job is to intall long haul digital networks that are "truely" encrypted and secure. In order to make use of this encrypted material we need certain encryption keys that have to match perfectly. Now, getting these keys and distributing them is one of the hardest things to do in my job. Now, can you imagine that process repeated on the amateur bands? It would be a nightmare with the coordination needed.

My biggest concern is this. Why would you want to? Unless you're doing something that you really don't want people to hear why would you worry about encrypting it? If you want to pass information that is sensitive I think a cell phone or encrypted email would be a much better media to send it. Correct me if I'm wrong and I'm sure someone will but doesn't all radio transmissions here have to be interceptable by the FCC if they so choose to listen to you? That being the case, wouldn't it be illegal to transmitt in the amateur band hiding it from review from the FCC? If the FCC does have the ecryption key, then it isn't secure then right? Sort of defeats the purpose. Hey, I could be wrong but I just don't see the need for it even though it is an interesting concept.

73

KC5CSG
When I was in ARES in NYC, we bounced around the idea of encryption. I was told that encryption might be good to keep the press from recording us during an emergency and misquoting us.

It wasn't for any "whackerish" purpose. I thought the concern was genuine.

They could have accomplished the same thing with AX.25 packet anyway - security through obscurity would have been good enough in this case.

I don't like the idea of encryption on the ham bands. I feel that utility users (such as boaters who get a ham license for WinLink and nothing else) will be able to conduct commercial transactions over ham radio and not be subject to the scrutiny of anyone. That is probably why encryption is not allowed in the first place.

[N5PVL]

AB8YY:

Great post!

[KC5CSG]

Quote[/b] (N2RJ @ Sep. 12 2007,19:40)]Quote[/b] (KC5CSG @ Sep. 12 2007,21:26)]Quote[/b] (N8ODF @ Sep. 11 2007,07:09)]Quote[/b] (kc2orw @ Sep. 11 2007,06:43)]Oh just your various disparaging remarks towards a number of us who are against some of the current trends.
It isn't that likely I am going to take being obliquely referred to as paranoid all that well.
Trends...one has to wonder if you "experienced" operators know the difference between encryption & digital mode's of operation...true encryption is maintained by the NSA...ever here of them & there mission...they have say over anyone encrypting anything...amateur radio is not & will never be "encrypted".....digital modes will & can be used however as previously explained these type modes can be broke back down to analog with the proper device & viewed...some of you guys are "freak'n" #nuts
I have to agree. Right now I'm in the Army Signal Corps. My job is to intall long haul digital networks that are "truely" encrypted and secure. In order to make use of this encrypted material we need certain encryption keys that have to match perfectly. Now, getting these keys and distributing them is one of the hardest things to do in my job. Now, can you imagine that process repeated on the amateur bands? It would be a nightmare with the coordination needed.

My biggest concern is this. Why would you want to? Unless you're doing something that you really don't want people to hear why would you worry about encrypting it? If you want to pass information that is sensitive I think a cell phone or encrypted email would be a much better media to send it. Correct me if I'm wrong and I'm sure someone will but doesn't all radio transmissions here have to be interceptable by the FCC if they so choose to listen to you? That being the case, wouldn't it be illegal to transmitt in the amateur band hiding it from review from the FCC? If the FCC does have the ecryption key, then it isn't secure then right? Sort of defeats the purpose. Hey, I could be wrong but I just don't see the need for it even though it is an interesting concept.

73

KC5CSG
When I was in ARES in NYC, we bounced around the idea of encryption. #I was told that encryption might be good to keep the press from recording us during an emergency and misquoting us. #

It wasn't for any "whackerish" purpose. #I thought the concern was genuine. #

They could have accomplished the same thing with AX.25 packet anyway - security through obscurity would have been good enough in this case. #

I don't like the idea of encryption on the ham bands. #I feel that utility users (such as boaters who get a ham license for WinLink and nothing else) will be able to conduct commercial transactions over ham radio and not be subject to the scrutiny of anyone. #That is probably why encryption is not allowed in the first place.
Again I agree. I've always thought actually "encrypting" a signal and then broadcasting it in this country was illegal. Especially now since 9/11. Man, you couldn't pay me enough to try that now. Maybe in the future.

KC5CSG

[kc2orw]

Quote[/b] (N2RJ @ Sep. 12 2007,22:40)]When I was in ARES in NYC, we bounced around the idea of encryption. I was told that encryption might be good to keep the press from recording us during an emergency and misquoting us.

It wasn't for any "whackerish" purpose. I thought the concern was genuine.

They could have accomplished the same thing with AX.25 packet anyway - security through obscurity would have been good enough in this case.

I don't like the idea of encryption on the ham bands. I feel that utility users (such as boaters who get a ham license for WinLink and nothing else) will be able to conduct commercial transactions over ham radio and not be subject to the scrutiny of anyone. That is probably why encryption is not allowed in the first place.
At the very least it should not be allowed for general purpose usage. But I can well understand the concern in NYC with all the whackers, reporters, and stalkers, they have to deal with. But those are likely to be some unusual circumstances but again it is a bad idea for non emergency comms...