Email Robots are coming to RTTY and CW!

Discussion in 'Amateur Radio News' started by KH6TY, Mar 21, 2007.

Thread Status:
Not open for further replies.
ad: L-HROutlet
ad: l-rl
ad: Left-3
ad: Subscribe
ad: Left-2
ad: MessiPaoloni-1
ad: L-MFJ
  1. N5RFX

    N5RFX Ham Member QRZ Page

    I know that Steve Ford WB8IMY has made the same inquiries I have about listening to WinLink2000 transmissions. I will email him to see how it is going.

    73,
    Mark N5RFX
     
  2. KH6TY

    KH6TY Ham Member QRZ Page

    The regulations for emergencies are here: http://www.arrl.org/FandES/field/regulations/news/part97/

    According to K4CJX, it does not matter, Winlink can handle emergencies as normal traffic, "The only difference in any emergency is that the content changes. I suppose there may be more outbound third-party information, or more recipients per message, but really no user increases that are noticeable. Unlike other types of systems set up for Emcomm, this system is used with or without EmComm daily by 6384 Winlink users to approximately 81,000 e-mail recipients. It takes a HUGE difference to be noticeable."

    The only difference a HUGE increase in traffic makes is in the waiting time for a clear channel. Since it usually takes me 20 minutes to even connect, and an unknown amount of time until an Inbox is checked for email on the other end, the waiting time for a clear channel is insignificant in the overall picture, especially since P3 is a "fast on, fast-off" mode as claimed by Winlink.
     
  3. KC4RAN

    KC4RAN Ham Member QRZ Page

    Be interesting to see if the ARRL will be willing to assist in any monitoring efforts...
     
  4. N5RFX

    N5RFX Ham Member QRZ Page

    I contacted Steve and he said
    Nick N2QZ got back with me and sent me a PERL script and some suggestions. Nick told me the PERL script would need some work, and he is right. I am going to play around with it and see if I can learn anything.
    73,
    Mark N5RFX
     
  5. VE6WTF

    VE6WTF Ham Member QRZ Page

    Well we could get alot more active on the CW, and data part of the bands, and when the Pactor comes over the air, its possible it will just plow over all of us.
    We all make complaints about lawful interferance.
    And they get a nice little fine?
     
  6. KC4RAN

    KC4RAN Ham Member QRZ Page

    Unlikely... I have not heard of the Enforcement Bureau taking any action against any PMBO station for QRM.

    Ever.
     
  7. KC4RAN

    KC4RAN Ham Member QRZ Page

    AD4MG informed us of the following in another thread... possible ballot box stuffing by the Winlink crowd?

    Spend some time reading the comments, people. The system is open for a reason. If you don't agree with the viewpoint of the Winlink crowd, and you want to keep amateur radio free and open (translation: the RM possibly removes the prohibition on encryption)... take the time to file your comments.

    ---

     
  8. AB0WR

    AB0WR Ham Member QRZ Page

    Mark,

    I would appreciate getting a copy of that code as well. I don't know when I will get a chance to play with it but I used to do some programing in Perl. It would be nice to see if I can still read it and tell what is going on. I suspect some of the regular expression definitions will be the key to doing the decompression.

    tim ab0wr
     
  9. WA5BEN

    WA5BEN Ham Member QRZ Page

    When one person makes one INFORMED comment each, it is called DEMOCRACY. When people are "bussed in" and told how to vote, that is fraud.

    Very few people who are active in EMCOMM had made comments. Some of them are now commenting, as is their right. That is ethical, legal, moral, and commendable.

    BTW: The BS about removing the prohibition on encryption is just that.

    Nobody has "declared war", but many are awakening to the simple FACT that the half-truths and outright lies being spread by the "anti-everything not invented here" crowd are deeply harmful to ALL amateur radio operators EVERYWHERE. The FACT that many do not understand the provisions of the RM about which they are voicing rabid objections is very evident in their comments.

    TRUTHFULNESS on the part of some who are spreading KNOWN falsehoods would have prevented the issue, and would have allowed rational discussion. When the FCC sees immature and obviously uninformed "comments" such as some are posting, that hurts the reputations and credibility of ALL amateurs.

    Agree with me or disagree, but comment RATIONALLY to the FCC about REAL issues -- not about false "issues" from someone's carefully constructed smokescreen.
     
  10. WA5BEN

    WA5BEN Ham Member QRZ Page

    Because they operate LEGALLY. (What a concept !)
     
Thread Status:
Not open for further replies.

Share This Page