>>>AA6YQ comments below
--- In digitalradio@yahoogroups.com,
"expeditionradio" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>> Dave, AA6YQ wrote,
>> The amateur radio's community rapidly adopted PSK31
>> once panoramic reception on soundcard-equipped
>> PCs became available.
>> When the dogs don't like the dogfood, its a mistake
>> to blame the dogs...
A more accurate "ham radio dogfood" analogy would go like this:
"I went to feed the puppies and a pack of old wolves attacked me
along the way. I ended up in the hospital, and the starving puppies
were eaten by the wolves."
>>>Most innovative new ideas are vigorously attacked, Bonnie --
unless they are so obviously flawed or irrelevant that they are just
ignored. In the domain of engineering, these attacks are an essential
part of the process by initial concepts become pragmatic solutions.
The successful innovator not only tolerates such criticism, he or she
actively solicits it. In today's web 2.0 speak, this is "the wisdom
of crowds"; 50 years ago, it was "if you can't stand the heat, get
out of the kitchen".
Let's face it, the majority of ham radio is still stuck in the mid
20th Century. Simply put, PSK31 is a flavor of RTTY: same
keyboarding concept, but weaker signals. Adding an esoteric feature
like your example of "panoramic reception" software to spice up an
old recipe is cute. But, it isn't a significantly different method of
operation... still RTTY :)
>>>This paragraph exposes a passel of personal prejudices, Bonnie. It
also contains a solid helping of guilt by association, reminiscent of
Professor Howard Hill's warning against the game of Pool "which
starts with P which rhymes with T which stands for Trouble". Just
because PSK31 offers real-time keyboard-to-keyboard QSOs doesn't mean
that its users are stuck in the 1950s any more than the use of
cellphones for real-time voice communication means that most of the
world's population is stuck in the 1920s.
>>>Your dismisal of panoramic reception as "cute" misses a critical
point. Peter G3PLX's initial PSK31 implementations -- the first of
which required special purpose hardware, and the second of which ran
on a PC but was difficult to use -- achieved little in the way of
adoption. It was the addition of panoramic reception that pushed
PSK31 past the tipping point of broadscale adoption. Would the
addition of panoramic reception to RTTY have pushed RTTY into broad
scale usage? Probably not (we can discuss this on another thread, if
there's interest). The non-linear positive results generated from an
effective implementation of just the right ideas are sought after in
many domains; the Douglas DC3 aircraft is a oft-cited example of the
same effect in aeronautics. Anyone interested in the acceptance of
innovative new ideas for broad acceptance by the amateur radio
community would be well served to understand this effect, rather than
write off an essential ingredient as "cute".
But, to see this as a mode or software creation issue, is missing
the point totally. The real issue is not what digital modes we
operate or bring out or what features are in the software we use, or
how existing hams are using modes.
The important thing is: How we can change what has heretofore been
considered socially acceptable in the ham community: bad public
attitudes toward creative new and useful technology paradigms.
>>>You mistake criticism of new ideas for bad attitude. The rapid
adoption of PSK31 by the amateur community proves that it presents no
impenetrable obstacles to the uptake of good ideas and useful
technologies when implemented in a useable manner. However, bad ideas
and flaws in good ideas will be mercilessly exposed, -- as they must
be if the process of innovation is to succeed.
A blatant example was what we saw with abolition of morse testing.
If the old morse test wasn't enough to scare away the first
generation of computer-raised youngsters, then the next generation of
web kids was turned off by the vitriol spewed by those who fought to
keep ham radio locked in the 19th Century.
>>>Yes, wistfullness can be a problem. Normally this dies off with
each generation of users, but licensing requirements can prolong the
agony by an extra generation. It means that new innovations must be
incrementally more useful and valuable to overcome generational
friction. PSK met this challenge, and SDR appears to be well on its
way. Hand-wringing over the fact that it isn't as easy as it ought to
be is a distraction from the work at hand.
After ham radio stupidly shot ourselves in that foot, we sat back and
allowed a huge and vicious attack on Winlink and Echolink. There went
the next wave of youngsters.
>>>WinLink was and is attacked on solid technical grounds: its
unattended stations transmit on frequencies already in use,
interfering with ongoing QSOs. The defense of WinLink has been a
perfect example of anti-innovative behavior -- rather than
acknowledge the problems and correct them, its advocates have
employed evasion and FUD. This approach never works long-term (though
Tesla loyalists may disagree -- and I'm referring to the inventor,
not the roadster).
This situation can only be changed by operators who are not afraid to
stand up to those who display such sour attitudes in public. Until
this kind of change happens, prospective new hams who are growing up
totally connected by RF with WiFi, webfones in their pockets and
Bluetooth in their ear, will see ham radio as a dead end or an
irrelevant "old folks pastime"... they WILL go elsewhere to be
creative or have fun or learn about RF technology.
>>>Inventors have no business whining about the public's negative
response to their progeny; that is the last example anyone should be
setting for the next generation of hams. If the dogs don't like your
dogfood, then go figure out why and keep improving the recipe until
they're gorging themselves silly. That's innovation -- and its
demonstrably feasible within amateur radio today.
73,
Dave, AA6YQ
