| |
PA2AGA > HDDIG 20.09.99 23:43l 203 Lines 7305 Bytes #-9772 (0) @ EU
BID : HD_99_236D
Read: GUEST
Subj: HamDigitalDigest 99/236D
Path: DB0AAB<DB0PV<OE2XOM<OE5XBL<DB0RGB<OK0PPL<OK0POK<9A0YRB<PP5BLU<IW9EXL<
SV1AAW<SV1AAW<EA7URC<PE0MAR<PI8VNW
Sent: 990920/1801Z @:PI8VNW.#ZH2.NLD.EU #:410 [HvHolland] FBB7.00g $:HD_99_236D
From: PA2AGA@PI8VNW.#ZH2.NLD.EU
To : HDDIG@EU
Received: from pa2aga by pi1hvh with SMTP
id AA19360 ; Mon, 20 Sep 99 17:32:23 UTC
Received: from pa2aga by pa2aga (NET/Mac 2.3.67/7.5.3) with SMTP
id AA00015727 ; Mon, 20 Sep 99 18:19:19 MET
Date: Mon, 20 Sep 99 18:11:24 MET
Message-Id: <hd_99_236D>
From: pa2aga
To: hd_broadcast@pa2aga
Subject: HamDigitalDigest 99/236D
X-BBS-Msg-Type: B
meters - or worldwide via telnet - to have any chance of working dx, so
they claim. Take away the pure "non-radio" support aspects and modern
dxpeditions would probably fail.
All this is such a far cry from the dxing that I grew up on - and I mean
that literally since I started working DX at age 16 on 20 cw when there
was no Novice class to get you started. I have a hard time identifying
with the present scene - maybe that is why I seldom participate much
anymore with the chase.
Again, you have "done good" as we say in Texas. A refreshing paper from a
refreshing point of view done in a refreshing style. Let's have more!
;^)
72/73, George AMA 98452 R/C since 1964
Amateur Radio W5YR, in the 54th year and it just keeps getting better!
AutoPOWER Systems, Fairview, TX (30 mi NE Dallas) Collin County
QRP-L QRP-ARCI FISTS NORCAL ZOMBIE ARS 10-X 33.2 N 96.6 W EM13RE
Charles Brabham wrote:
>
> Having trouble getting those last few contacts for your DXCC? Use the
> Telephone!
>
> It's easy! It's fast! It costs less! It requires no
> knowledge or ability whatsoever!
>
> Still can't talk to those rare and distant countries on 10
> meters, even with an expensive new tribander?
> Use the Telephone!
>
> Do you have NTS Health 'n Welfare traffic which must be moved to a
> recipient several hundred miles away? Use the Telephone!
>
> Want to build an Amateur Radio Digital Network? Use the Telephone!
>
> Want to reliably communicate with distant Hams while radiating
> a minimum of RF? Use the Telephone!
>
> For some strange reason, in every aspect of Amateur Radio
> except Packet, it is widely recognized that using the Telephone is not an
> appropriate response to the challenges we face as Ham Radio operators.
> Everywhere else, there is an unspoken understanding that as Hams, we are
> expected to be clever in our use of Radio and in the process of
> overcoming those challenges, advance the art and better ourselves as
> persons.
>
> Why is it, I wonder, that the type of information we transmit
> (Digital as opposed to Analog) makes any difference in this matter? Why is
> it "OK" to bypass and undermine the use of Radio by Hams who want to
> transmit Digital info, but not "OK" to do so for Analog stuff?
>
> Is there a particular reason why advancing the art of Amateur Radio in
> respect to moving Digital info is deemed to be of less importance to us as
> Hams? Is there any logic behind the widely-held perception that
> as long as you are handling Digital info, it doesn't really matter (As a
> Ham) whether you use Radio to communicate or not?
>
> In places where the regs specify that non-ham means of
> communication not be allowed within the Amateur Radio Digital Net, there has
> been unchecked progress and advancement over the last decade.
> In those places where the use of Packet/Internet gateways have not been
> regulated though, the opposite has happened and Network
> infrastructure has been severely compromised while Hams have lost interest
> and heart in large numbers. This is what has happened to the USA, Australia,
> and other places where "packet hackers" have been given a free hand to do as
> they wish.
>
> I have read about FlexNet nodes in Europe which regularly handle 10
> Megabytes per hour and more of traffic. That represents a high level of both
> physical and technical development and advancement, along with a high level
> of interest and enjoyment among the individual Packet ops there.
>
> The difference is infrastructure. Use the Telephone instead of
> Radio, and infrastructure is what you give up. Sure, it's a challenge to
> build a digital network; It's expensive, difficult, frustrating, and
> sometimes appears to be impossible. The alternative though, is the
> mediocrity which follows those who prefer to cop out, cheat, and
> cheapen themselves while they undercut others.
>
> I just don't see why our response to the challenges we face as Hams should
> be different when wanting to move Digital as opposed to Analog information.
>
> I do not see why Hams using Radio is treated as being less important in the
> US than it is in Europe.
>
> --
>
> 73 DE Charles Brabham, N5PVL
> N5PVL @ N5PVL.#NTX.TX.USA.NOAM
> http://www.texoma.net/~n5pvl
>.
------------------------------
Date: Mon, 20 Sep 1999 01:07:52 GMT
From: steve_sampson@my-deja.com
Subject: Ham tcpip network = pipedream
> I do not see why Hams using Radio is treated as being less important
> in the US than it is in Europe.
I don't see the facts. You say Europe (and that covers quite a few
square miles) is wired, and the US is not. Please provide us with the
facts:
1. How many 9.6 kbps and greater speed nodes are there?
2. Of those nodes, what is the average bytes per day transported
over 20 miles?
3. Of those nodes, what is the average bytes per month transported
over 20 miles?
4. How many 1.2 kbps and less speed nodes are there?
Give us the facts, not what you think. Did you just make a visit there?
If Europe was a great place to live, several million American men and
women wouldn't have died in brutal warfare for the last 90 years. Two
more just recently came home from Kosovo in body bags. Packet Radio
is the least of their problems, or successes.
Steve
Sent via Deja.com http://www.deja.com/
Share what you know. Learn what you don't.
>.
------------------------------
Date: Mon, 20 Sep 1999 05:10:22 -0500
From: "Charles Brabham" <n5pvl@texoma.net>
Subject: Ham tcpip network = pipedream
Hank Oredson <horedson@att.net> wrote in message
news:7s4idc$156$1@bgtnsc02.worldnet.att.net...
..
>
> > Give us the facts, not what you think. Did you just make a visit there?
>
> There they are. Do you wish to argue with them?
> You could have done the research yourself.
> The node lists etc. are all published on the net.
Well, I'm glad that *somebody* knew where to look for that info! I didn't
have the slightest idea about that.
I'll venture a guess that Steve didn't really want any of that info
though... He was just playing his role as the petulant, bitter loser of a
debate, lacking the stones to admit it to himself or others.
--
73 DE Charles Brabham, N5PVL
N5PVL @ N5PVL.#NTX.TX.USA.NOAM
http://www.texoma.net/~n5pvl
>.
------------------------------
Date: Sun, 19 Sep 1999 12:17:24 -0500
From: "George T. Baker" <w5yr@swbell.net>
Subject: Help: Shutdown Fault with "Logger"
Roger, I have run Logger in all versions on this 300 MHz PII system and
Logger 6.09 on a PIII 500 MHz system. Both have 128 meg RAM. I have seen
none of the shut-down problems that you mention. I *do* notice that
Logger takes several seconds on even the 500 MHz system to finally clear
itself.
You might try the Ctrl-Alt-Delete to bring up the list of running
programs to see if that sheds any light. But, if you are already seeing
To be continued in digest: hd_99_236E
Read previous mail | Read next mail
| |
