FCC ISSUES SIGNIFICANT RULE CHANGES

Discussion in 'Amateur Radio News' started by AA7BQ, Oct 11, 2006.

Thread Status:
Not open for further replies.
ad: L-HROutlet
ad: l-rl
ad: L-MFJ
ad: Subscribe
ad: Left-2
ad: Left-3
ad: MessiPaoloni-1
  1. AE6IP

    AE6IP Ham Member QRZ Page

    So now we can add "not stopping when he says he's going to" to the list of Larry's easy to disprove "FACT's.

    Even third world governments don't grant security clearances to foreign nationals, Larry. (Remind me to tell you the funny story Werner Von Braun used to tell about Paperclip and not being able to read his own writings, some day.)

    By the way, if you had ever held US DOD security clearances, one of the documents you swore you read when you filled out the FS174 tells you to never admit to having any security clearances. No one will try to steal secrets they don't know you have.

    Your reply here is a good example of the sort of self agrandisement that your posts are full of. If I don't talk about some business deal, it's because of an NDA, and that's sufficient reason. All you have to say is that you're under non-disclosure. But that didn't satisfy you, so you had to make up something about clearances that you never had and that if you did would probably not have prohibited you from mentioning the names of heads of states you'd met with.

    Which say a lot about your level of accuracy. No doubt you say LAX when you're flying into DFW, as well.

    Kahn's "essential" work doesn't talk about any crypto more modern than the early 70s, making or breaking. It's also aimed at laymen and has a very small amount of information about the actual technology of code breaking. It is far from "very complete." It's a popular treatment of the subject. It's like calling "Dancing Wu-Li Masters" the bible of particle physics.

    I'm gonna go out on a limb here Larry, based on all of the mistakes in your comments, and guess you've never even heard of the orange book, let alone have any idea how telecommunications security has worked since the mid 80s.
    (HINT: When you google for it, it's not the one at the FDA.)

    We laugh at you Larry, because you're still caught up in the mid 1970s; don't even really know what the grades of encrypted communication were since the 80s; and have no idea of what's actually going on in cryptography. We know this because you're still using DES as your comparison standard, you use jargon that's not been used in the industry in at least that time and you think Kahn is a 'bible'.

    (By the way, Larry, back in the days when you were playing around on the edge of the field, the EuroCrypt conference proceedings would have been considered the "bible" in crypto.)
     
  2. AE6IP

    AE6IP Ham Member QRZ Page

    I'm sorry, Larry, but the web site says that the 220 is up but that the others aren't.

    Given what I know about your tendencies, I'm gonna go with the web site.
     
  3. WB3DJL

    WB3DJL Ham Member QRZ Page

    How do the new changes affect a Tech with code as to upgrading to General Is the theory test still required?
     
  4. WB3DJL

    WB3DJL Ham Member QRZ Page

    Boy! It looks like I put that question in the wrong spot. I should have checked out the previous ones first.Sure am sorry if I messed up the ongoing Battle Of The Super HAMS by asking such an assine question.
     
  5. K4JF

    K4JF Ham Member QRZ Page

    Yes, the General written is still required and that, according to the FCC, is not going to change.
     
  6. WA5BEN

    WA5BEN Ham Member QRZ Page

    Obviously, there is a problem with reading plain English. The web site does NOT say, state, or even imply that any repeaters are down.

    It says that (in September) a controller issue was being worked (though not on which repeater), that the 220 MHz machine was up, and that the 900 MHz machine would be up shortly.

    You are caught in you own trap again :)
     
  7. WA5BEN

    WA5BEN Ham Member QRZ Page

    Comparing Network and/or file and/or computer "security" and the related PRIVACY programs to Strategic and Diplomatic level cryptography is like comparing a small town bank with a 100 year-old vault and the local sheriff's brother as a "guard" to Fort Knox. Though they both have the same basic elements, there is a SLIGHT difference in the effort required to break into them.

    I am truly sorry that some lack the ability to understand the difference. Perhaps that is one reason why the trade secrets of many U.S. businesses are so readily available to domestic and foreign industrial espionage. When you "protect" the transmission, but miserable fail to protect the physical environment, you have wasted the time and money spent on "telecommunications security". It is much easier to steal the information than to break even the "Privacy" programs.

    Because of poor implementation of the REQUIRED physical security and access controls, most "telecommunications security" offers (to quote the title of my article, which was also the title of my presentation at the NASA-sponsored Technology for Information Security Conference) only An Illusion of Secrecy .
     
  8. WB3DJL

    WB3DJL Ham Member QRZ Page

    [​IMG] Thanks Jim, K4JF. Guess I better get the study material out and get busy.
     
  9. KC9GUZ

    KC9GUZ QRZ Member

    I cetainly hope and pray that the CW test is never eliminated. Yes it helps keeps the rif raff off of the HF bands but I must say one thing. if they do eliminate the requirement i dont see the bands turning into a big CB band. For one thing most of the die hard CB ops i know wouldnt give a guy .002 cents to be a ham! They just dont like ham radio and hams. Most of the CBers i know that did get their tech ticket dont even get on the air! And most if not all of them have ZERO interest in learning CW and passing the test.

    I was a CBer for 15 years and back in 2004 i took the tech test and passed it with one take as well as the written general a year later and the CW test this summer all in one take. I studied for several months prior to taking the CW test and found it to be a breeze at 5 WPM. IMHO i think it needs to be higher like 10 wpm but thats JMHO. 5 WPM is too slow. As far as CB is concerned ive never gone back to 11 meters and i dont forsee it ever happening.
     
  10. K4JF

    K4JF Ham Member QRZ Page

    Good for you. And, by the way, you will find that it is worth the effort.
     
Thread Status:
Not open for further replies.

Share This Page