| |
PA2AGA > HDDIG 23.09.99 05:58l 210 Lines 7379 Bytes #-9769 (0) @ EU
BID : HD_99_238G
Read: GUEST
Subj: HamDigitalDigest 99/238G
Path: DB0AAB<DB0FSG<DB0PV<DB0MAK<OK0PKL<OK0PPR<OK0PRG<OK0POK<OK0PAB<HA5OB<
HA3PG<SV1AAW<EA7URC<PE0MAR<PI8VNW
Sent: 990922/2341Z @:PI8VNW.#ZH2.NLD.EU #:1532 [HvHolland] FBB7.00g $:HD_99_238
From: PA2AGA@PI8VNW.#ZH2.NLD.EU
To : HDDIG@EU
Received: from pa2aga by pi1hvh with SMTP
id AA19567 ; Wed, 22 Sep 99 22:18:51 UTC
Received: from pa2aga by pa2aga (NET/Mac 2.3.67/7.5.3) with SMTP
id AA00015821 ; Wed, 22 Sep 99 21:24:08 MET
Date: Wed, 22 Sep 99 21:17:22 MET
Message-Id: <hd_99_238G>
From: pa2aga
To: hd_broadcast@pa2aga
Subject: HamDigitalDigest 99/238G
X-BBS-Msg-Type: B
protection from amateurs. I say let's ask the FCC to drop all of those
anachronistic Rules.
e.g. if you really want to try to bypass the InterExchange Carriers like
ATT/Sprint/MCI/WorldCom/QWest/IXC, etc and compete with their 10 cents or 5
cents a minute rates simply .. . by using a cheap, phone patch and a cheap
ham station, why we should just be allowed to go ahead and try it!
Similarily for any one who thinks they can compete with WNBC AM and FM using
ham radio, let em . . .
Face it. . . those guys no longer need protection from us hams. Which was
the real reason for the Rules in the first place. Hams never ever asked for
those Rules! The "commercials" had those Rules imposed upon us.
I say, we should petition the FCC to remove as many as the old Rules as
possible. Other than granting us frequency bands and power limits, we
should be free, free, free . . . to do what we want. DEREGULATE!
Peter AB4BC
Charles Brabham <n5pvl@texoma.net> wrote in message
news:7s7pgn$19ql@enews4.newsguy.com...
>
> Peter O. Brackett <ab4bc@ix.netcom.com> wrote in message
> news:7s6pdi$n0f@dfw-ixnews21.ix.netcom.com...
> > Folks:
> >
> > Charles:
> >
> > Maybe it's time for those old Rules governing ham radio which forbid
> > broadcasting and retransmission of commercial material and advertising
on
> > the air, to be recinded. Particularily in the case of digital
networking.
>
> Remember 6-8 months ago when I was ridiculed for suggesting that the tcpip
> types, almost certainly led by TAPR, would attempt to turn Amateur Radio
> into another CB Zoo, just to further the "Ham ISP" idiocy?
>
> Well, there you go, folks, right from the horse's mouth.
>
> What I do not understand is why these people do not just migrate off to
CB,
> if that's what they want.
>
> Notice how he thinks the rules should MOST PARTICULARLY be dropped for
> digital networking?
>
> Of course, we all know as hams that using Radio and following the rules
are
> not as important to us as when handling digital info as it is for analog
> info.
>
> As long as it's digital, anything goes, right? Ham Radio kiddie-porn,
> anybody?
>
> Sorry, but I consider anyone who would contemplate undermining the entire
> amateur radio service in order to facilitate a desire to get "freebee
> Internet access" as being somewhat less than human.
>
> At best, I might think of you as a self-absorbed, antisocial moron.
>
> Especially when you could get exactly what you claim to want on the CB
> frequencies, as the European LandLine Lids do.
>
> Gee, I sure would like the ARRL and FCC to wake up and smell the coffee on
> this issue. These idiots need to have their dream bubbles burst for them,
so
> they can move on to CB and hams can go back to doing ham radio.
>
> --
>
> Charles Brabham, N5PVL
> N5PVL @ N5PVL.#NTX.TX.USA.NOAM
> http://www.texoma.net/~n5pvl
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>.
------------------------------
Date: Tue, 21 Sep 1999 19:30:56 -0500
From: "Charles Brabham" <n5pvl@texoma.net>
Subject: The Aplication Mantra
Peter O. Brackett <ab4bc@ix.netcom.com> wrote in message
news:7s93n4$m57@dfw-ixnews11.ix.netcom.com...
> Charlie:
>
> I am not proposing having the Rules recinded or reduced just for Digital
> Networking but for all ham radio activities!
That experiment has already been tried with the CB bands. It didn't work
out.
If you think a lack of regulation is the way to go, check out the CB bands.
Let us know how it goes! That's the only place you are likely to see a
deregulated radio service. The FCC learned their lesson about that quite a
while back.
--
Charles Brabham, N5PVL
N5PVL @ N5PVL.#NTX.TX.USA.NOAM
http://www.texoma.net/~n5pvl
>.
------------------------------
Date: Wed, 22 Sep 1999 00:50:37 -0500
From: "Peter O. Brackett" <ab4bc@ix.netcom.com>
Subject: The Aplication Mantra
Charles:
Think about it . . . changing the Rules and deregulation is how good ole
packet radio got started in the first place!
I was just trying to get some "new think" going. Heh, heh. We will need it
for the next millenium!
Hey I'm an old timer too, but probably not as long as you though.
I'm licensed since 1957 (42 years), held four different calls, amateur
Extra, hold a couple of FCC commercial licenses, GROL & Commercial
Radiotelegraph, T2 both with Radar Endorsements. I'm a long time member of
ARRL, QCWA
(#21317, 40 year pin), FISTS (#5946).
And so I think I have paid my dues and I have a right to try and shake
things up! Heh, heh.
Ham packet radio got started by someone deregulating and changing the Rules.
Charlie you wouldn't even be operating on packet today if some pioneers had
not busted the regulators to change the Rules and reduce the Regulation of
our service!
Hey, I was in on amateur packet at the "start" in Montreal (VE2POB) &
Toronto (VE3DZK) back in the 70's, when Dr. John DeMercado, then the
Director General of the Canadian DOC (The chief Regulator!), which then
governed all Canadian Radio licencing, decided by himself to deregulate, to
allow packet on radio. (The FCC did not do this in the States for a long
time later! several years as I recall.).
Then Dr. John, the Chief Regulator created the world's first Morse Code Free
amateur license. More deregulation!
He created the Canadian Digital Amateur Radio Operators Certificate. Well
not many got that license, heh, heh! Talk about Morse Code tests keeping
out the unwashed. There was no Code in that test, heh, heh. Dr. John made
the exam for that certificate so tough, the questions and math on queueing
systems and packet routing algorithms were so tough that only computer
scientists or computer engineers could pass, heh, heh. BTW . . . Dr. John
had been a graduate student of Leonard Klienrock's at UCLA.
It turns out that Dr. John was indeed a Ph.D. Computer Scientist and he had
a DEC LSI PDP11 (On loan from the Canadian government?) in his basement and
he wanted to do packet radio without having to learn the code, himself.
Heh, heh.! I don't think that Dr. John even knew what bandwidth was, in
meetings that I attended in Ottawa where he spoke, he kept refering to
bandwidth in units of "characters per second"! Heh, heh. And . . . he was
regulating radio.
Then the Vancouver Canada VADC group developed the TNC1 to spread packet
wider in Canada.
Some time after that the FCC deregulated and legalized packet in the States
and some strange group in Tuscon, named TAPR picked it up created a TNC2 and
made the design available to Martin F. Jue at MFJ, and the rest is history.
... .
But Charlie. . . . I was there at the birth of ham packet radio, and I am
here to tell you that it was created by deregulation and changing of Rules.
Now the rest of the world is passing us all by!
We gotta do something to fix it, and I believe that changing the Rules,
which is what Dr. John did in Canada just to get it started in the first
place is the only way to fix the problems that you Charlie keep bitching
To be continued in digest: hd_99_238H
Read previous mail | Read next mail
| |
