It's unfortunate that this group is losing members because of a silly, off topic discussion. The group is DIGITALRADIO. There is a hint at the beginning of the topic name as to what this group is interested in.. If you don't care for digital modes...unsubscribe yourself, but don't pontificate about analog vs. digital here. It's really unfortunate that a few people stuck in their ways dating back to the 1960's have to chase people away that are looking to new and innovative ways to communicate. BTW - as a hobby, HAM radio is dying. The new people that may or may not decide to keep it alive are the people who can SMS and text with lightning speed and accuracy. This generation cares not about CW and little about 1200 bps packet on VHF. They care even less about voice. But there are a few who care about keeping the hobby alive. Don't chase them away. I have a 18 year old son who loves networking and can configure a Cisco router in his sleep. He looks at my radio gear, sighs and says wow. Kind of placating me.
RE: the people that are saying what we are doing mirrors the Internet....wow - you have a whole lot more confidence in the Internet that I do. AS qualification, I have built a few ISPs in my life as well as more than one satellite based service. The Internet is very vulnerable to natural and man made disasters, exactly the opposite of what DARPANet was intended to do.. Yes OC-3's and the like are more efficient at exchanging messages, but what happens when the OC-3 fails? What happens when the CO is under water? What happens when the power is lost to a significant region? We in California know what that is like as do the people who live in the South East. So please, If you have a beef with digital modes, this is probably not the best place to gripe. Flames automatically extinguished with the delete key. 73 Matt KI6NCU in Northern CA. KI6NCU-1 on 145.050 -----Original Message----- From: John Simon [mailto:jrsi...@ozemail.com.au] Sent: Sunday, March 08, 2009 8:09 PM To: digitalradio@yahoogroups.com Subject: Re: [digitalradio] Re: Anti-Digital Hams Well that's about done it for me. To all those Op's who at least tried, my thanks. This is my last msg. 73, John de VK2XGJ Sometimes I pretend to be normal, but it gets boring. So I go back to being me! ----- Original Message ----- From: "David Little" <dalit...@bellsouth.net> To: <digitalradio@yahoogroups.com> Sent: Monday, March 09, 2009 12:51 PM Subject: RE: [digitalradio] Re: Anti-Digital Hams > > -----Original Message----- > From: digitalradio@yahoogroups.com [mailto:digitalra...@yahoogroups.com] > On Behalf Of Christian Crayton > Sent: Sunday, March 08, 2009 9:05 PM > To: digitalradio@yahoogroups.com > Subject: [digitalradio] Re: Anti-Digital Hams > > > --- In digitalradio@yahoogroups.com, "Brent Gourley" <bg...@...> wrote: >> >> But humans provided the emcom traffic to the machines, and the > machines at >> the far end of the communication deliver it to humans. Without the > humans, >> there is no "communication." > > I agree. What I was referring to are store-and-forward links where HF > is used as a internet replacement, instead of a mode in which a human > operator relays a message to another human operator. > > ******************************* > > Efficient use of resources dictates that we use the mode efficient > transport layer and delivery system. Using a repeater to spell the > names phonetically of shelter occupants looking for family members in > another shelter hardly makes sense, if there are working fax machines > and telephone lines. This has nothing to do with the art of radio; it > addresses the concepts of common sense and efficient operations. We are > not only Amateur Radio Operators, we should be resourceful in our > utilization of the tools available. > > Also, it is hard to relay a multi-part form (IS-213) via voice, when a > binary format retains formatting... This is not in the realm of voice > operations; sitreps, on the ground intel, real-time info gathering that > fills the formatted form are the realm of voice ops. The two can > co-exist. > > WL2K is not a store and forward system like packet networks were in the > past. In the WL2K system, the traffic goes from point to central > repository (with redundant storage), where it is directly retrieved by > the addressee (or their assigned operator). > > The fear of more efficient transport layers will do more to destroy > amateur radio than being resourceful and making use of available > infrastructure. We are supposed to think on our feet; not fear > technology. > > ******************************************** > >> For genuine, this-is-no-drill emcom, we should use the most effective > mode >> possible. Effective being the balance between speed and required > accuracy. > > Again I agree. However, there is a distinction between this-is-no-drill > emcomm, and the other 99.95% of the time that these automated messaging > systems are just handling traffic that could be handled on the Internet. > Please don't misunderstand me, I am not suggesting that these systems be > shut down. I am not against email, Pactor or technology. > > I am concerned that the people who are creating the HF to Internet links > don't really understand Internet security issues to know what they are > doing. I am also concerned that these technologies will, if taken to > the extreme, do significant damage to the art of radio. My opinions > only, other opinions may vary. :) > > ************************************************************ > > The other 99.95% of the time is spent making sure the system is a > working piece of infrastructure during the .05% of time it is needed. > It is a time in which new operators come on line and learn to be a part > of the network, where system operators improve their system's > effectiveness, where new methods of more efficient operations are tested > and perfected, where the outgoing system operators are replaced by newer > ones, or more remote areas come on line; which further increases the > redundant appeal of the system. This is amateur radio; not Fear Factor. > Why should we be so afraid of using newer technology to enhance or value > to those we serve? > > I am primarily a voice operator. I spend time on the air improving my > technique, time off the air improving my skills and technical > understanding. I am certainly a long way off from understanding > everything, and the most important part of that statement is that I > understand this limitation. Having said that, I don't include fear of > emerging technology as a skill-set that is important to the continuation > of the Amateur Radio Service. > > I also try to use as many of the digital modes as I am able to try. An > emergency is no time to discover the inherit weaknesses of handling a > served agency's traffic in a manner usable by them; via voice.. Some > things just aren't compatible, and the quickest way to get uninvited > from a disaster party is to dictate how the hosts require their info to > be disseminated. > > We need to embrace the future, not fear it. It is the only way we will > remain relevant. > > David > KD4NUE > > > > > ------------------------------------ > > Announce your digital presence via our Interactive Sked Page at > http://www.obriensweb.com/sked > > > Recommended software: Winwarbler, FLDIGI, DM780, or Multipsk > > > > Yahoo! Groups Links > > > ---------------------------------------------------------- No virus found in this incoming message. Checked by AVG - www.avg.com Version: 8.0.237 / Virus Database: 270.11.9/1990 - Release Date: 03/08/09 17:17:00 No virus found in this outgoing message. Checked by AVG - www.avg.com Version: 8.0.237 / Virus Database: 270.11.9/1989 - Release Date: 03/08/09 17:17:00
