RE: [digitalradio] New question
Just picked this up from HamSpots: Due to increased abuse of the Cluster Network by spam auto-spots generated by the ROS software. HamSpots will no longer provide a Local Spot & Chat facility for the promotion of the ROS mode. HamSpots will no longer report a consolidated view of ROS Cluster spots. All ROS Cluster spots have been removed from other HamSpots pages. Effective: 16-July-2010, 2100utc Wonder what this software is really up to? From: digitalradio@yahoogroups.com [mailto:digitalra...@yahoogroups.com] On Behalf Of W2XJ Sent: Thursday, July 15, 2010 8:36 PM To: digitalradio@yahoogroups.com Subject: Re: [digitalradio] New question Andy You make a lot more sense than some of the children in this group who want to just whine to the FCC and ARRL. On 7/15/10 6:15 PM, "Andy obrien" wrote: The comment in parenthesis in number 8 are the comments that reflect my view of why this fine software and mode are not worth the hassle. Andy K3UK On Thu, Jul 15, 2010 at 5:22 PM, Jim, N1SZ wrote: Dave & All, No, I was thinking the same thing. Let's take a look at some significant "red flags" with the ROS software: 1.)Special code added in apparent anger to keep critics from using the software (although reportedly removed in recent versions) 2.)Won't make the source code open for public inspection (not that it is 100% required, but it would allay a lot of concerns about the software) 3.)Requires Gmail e-mail account and password - (giving such things away would make any IT security professional lose their mind). is this still the case? 4.)PDF literature provided by Jose had PDF file signatures and "Authored by" signature of another well know digital mode author in Jose's own work... I wonder how that happened? 5.)Automatically sends messages to a hard coded list of servers. and possibly other places? 6.)Apparently sends bogus callsigns and spots to various reflectors 7.)Gives users little if any control over the software's spotting to the internet 8.)Now, after "going away" for a short time, has a new version that if you try and defeat the automatic spotting with a firewall, it automatically shuts down. (Sounds like a child's temper tantrum to me.) Well, I've make it known that I've been suspicious of Jose's intentions all along, but if this all seems "Normal" to you and doesn't bother you.. I say good luck and press on with your use of ROS. But from my limited interactions in the world of IT security, it sure sets off a lot of alarms and warning signs to me. Jim N1SZ
RE: [digitalradio] Random data vs Spread Spectrum
Hi Skip! Well said. Now let's see how many people in the group really pay attention to what they read. From: digitalradio@yahoogroups.com [mailto:digitalra...@yahoogroups.com] On Behalf Of KH6TY Sent: Monday, July 12, 2010 1:28 PM To: digitalradio@yahoogroups.com Subject: Re: [digitalradio] Random data vs Spread Spectrum Lester, The "inventor" has shown over and over that he is not to be trusted, and so his block diagram would not be believed either. I suggested months ago to him to just send his code in confidence to the FCC, which they would keep private, and be done with it. He replied that, arrogantly, "The FCC would have to purchase the code from him". To me, that suggests that he is unwilling to disclose the code because it would prove once and for all that it was spread spectrum, and instead, he tried to bluff his way to approval, even by changing his original description of the code as spread spectrum, which obviously did not work. ROS's best advantage, IMHO, is for EME, and it is legal there for US hams for 432 and 1296 EME. I only wish it were legal on 2M also and I could use it for EME on that band. Yes, it should be open-source, and that would end the discussion, but he has (for perhaps devious or commercial) personal reasons for refusing to do so. That is just not going to happen, so let's end the discussion on that note and get on the air instead! 73, Skip KH6TY On 7/12/2010 1:14 PM, Lester Veenstra wrote: Skip: Spectral analysis cannot differentiate between a high rate FEC operating after, as it invariably must, a randomizer, and a true spread spectrum system. And a spread spectrum system does not need to employ frequency hopping. And a signal that "frequency hops" is not necessarily a spread spectrum signal. I refer you to the old favorite of the UK Diplomatic service, the Piccolo. As I advocated in an earlier post, the way to end this endless discussion would be for the "inventor" to disclose the block diagram of the various steps in his encoding/modulation system. In fact I was rash enough to suggest that IMHO, all of these systems being played with by hams, should be open sourced, so that, the end user can have some confidence in what he is using, and the state of the art can be mutually advanced. We started with this philosophy with the TTL MAINLINER-II, and continue it today with many of the DSPR systems out there, including the primary commercial company. Their disclosure does not seem to have slowed them down at all. Thanks 73 Les
Re: [digitalradio] Re: ARQ sound card modes
Hi Jose!!! You hit the nail right on the head. people also need to remember that, when the power, land line and cell phone towers along with the internet fail due to a catastrophe "Ham Radio will always be there and be able to get through". 73, Greg, W8GCD [EMAIL PROTECTED] No trees were killed in the transmission of this message but, several million electrons were inconvienced. - Original Message - From: Jose Amador To: digitalradio@yahoogroups.com Sent: Monday, September 11, 2006 2:45 PM Subject: Re: [digitalradio] Re: ARQ sound card modes --- Joel Kolstad <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > If Pactor, packet Amtor, etc. all died because of > the need for a $300 TNC, > I think amateur radio as a hobby really is dying! > $300 in today's money is > nothing compared to what many amateurs paid for > their HF rigs years ago. I believe that remembering the 80's and 90's would be good. You cannot use the same yardstick in every country, there are specificities you cannot ignore. While in North America the hams used TNC's, in Germany a group of hams, precursors of the Baycom Group invented the Digicom and the Digicom modem. Even before, when the americans rode Cadillacs and Buicks, the germans used their VW beetles and the french their Citroens... I also feel a decline in ham radio. Many reasons can be invoked. A friend once told me that - "nowadays, with the Internet and cell phones, there is no need to torture yourself with learning electronics and the Morse code. Ham radio is for romantics" Lucky us that there are still romantics writing code and homebrewing equipment! 73 de Jose, CO2JA __ Do You Yahoo!? Tired of spam? Yahoo! Mail has the best spam protection around http://mail.yahoo.com [Non-text portions of this message have been removed] Need a Digital mode QSO? Connect to Telnet://cluster.dynalias.org Other areas of interest: The MixW Reflector : http://groups.yahoo.com/group/themixwgroup/ DigiPol: http://groups.yahoo.com/group/Digipol (band plan policy discussion) Yahoo! Groups Links <*> To visit your group on the web, go to: http://groups.yahoo.com/group/digitalradio/ <*> To unsubscribe from this group, send an email to: [EMAIL PROTECTED] <*> Your use of Yahoo! Groups is subject to: http://docs.yahoo.com/info/terms/
Re: [digitalradio] new operator question - I did not find an FAQ
Hi Peter! I am also new to digital radio but have done a lot of digging about hardware and software. First; The computer with the correct software installed MixW, MMTTY and several others have taken the place of the TNC. With that said. Second; you need a sound card interface between your computer and radio equipment. West Mountain Radio, MFJ and others make these. You might even venture if so inclined to build your own. just Google on digital sound card interface as well as digital mode software. Hope this along with others in the groups input helps. Hope to QSO with you on RTTY sometime. 73, Greg DeChant, W8GCD [EMAIL PROTECTED] No trees were killed in the transmission of this message but, several million electrons were inconvienced. - Original Message - From: "pcooke2002" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> To: Sent: Tuesday, August 15, 2006 1:33 PM Subject: [digitalradio] new operator question - I did not find an FAQ > Hello - > Eventhough I have had my tech license for a couple of years. I am > finnally getting the courage and $ to adventure in ham. > > looking at the files with this group I noticed there was no FAQ > oriented towards novices. Lets start with the Hardware and Software. > > Please correct me if wrong. For digital radio I need a: TNC, radio, > computer, and some software. > > > Where can I find a feature comparason of the various hardware and > software used in digital radio. > > Any suggestions on the best bang for the buck? > > Peter Cooke > KG6OUE > > > > > > > Need a Digital mode QSO? Connect to Telnet://cluster.dynalias.org > > Other areas of interest: > > The MixW Reflector : http://groups.yahoo.com/group/themixwgroup/ > DigiPol: http://groups.yahoo.com/group/Digipol (band plan policy > discussion) > > > Yahoo! Groups Links > > > > > > Need a Digital mode QSO? Connect to Telnet://cluster.dynalias.org Other areas of interest: The MixW Reflector : http://groups.yahoo.com/group/themixwgroup/ DigiPol: http://groups.yahoo.com/group/Digipol (band plan policy discussion) Yahoo! Groups Links <*> To visit your group on the web, go to: http://groups.yahoo.com/group/digitalradio/ <*> To unsubscribe from this group, send an email to: [EMAIL PROTECTED] <*> Your use of Yahoo! Groups is subject to: http://docs.yahoo.com/info/terms/
