| |
PA2AGA > TCPDIG 28.02.97 22:34l 179 Lines 6824 Bytes #-10705 (0) @ EU
BID : TCP_97_26B
Read: DG7DAH GUEST
Subj: TCP-Group Digest 97/26B
Path: DB0AAB<DB0AHO<DB0MWS<DB0RBS<DB0SEL<DB0ZDF<DB0AIS<DB0NDK<DB0ACH<DB0ACC<
DB0OBK<PI8DAZ<PI8GCB<PI8HGL<PI8VNW
Sent: 970228/1330Z @:PI8VNW.#ZH2.NLD.EU #:50852 [Hoek v Holland] FBB5.15c
From: PA2AGA@PI8VNW.#ZH2.NLD.EU
To : TCPDIG@EU
Received: from pa2aga by pi1hvh with SMTP
id AA30239 ; Fri, 28 Feb 97 12:33:45 UTC
Received: from pa2aga by pa2aga (NET/Mac 2.3.62/7.1) with SMTP
id AA00001795 ; Fri, 28 Feb 97 12:03:24 MET
Received: from pa2aga-1 by pa2aga with SMTP
id AA00001788 ; Fri, 28 Feb 97 12:01:37 MET
Received: from pa2aga-1 by pa2aga-1 (NET/Mac 2.3.62/7.6) with SMTP
id AA00009203 ; Fri, 28 Feb 97 12:01:35 MET
Date: Fri, 28 Feb 97 11:56:05 MET
Message-Id: <tcp_97_26B>
From: pa2aga
To: tcp_broadcast@pa2aga-1
Subject: TCP-Group Digest 97/26B
X-BBS-Msg-Type: B
From: Joerg Reuter <jreuter@lykos.oche.de>
Subject: Benefits of AMPR IP encapsulation gateways.
> I spent ages trying to get people interested and involved. They don't care.
> In the UK amateur radio is mostly the preserve of the over 40's. The
> packet radio folk are fed up of being unable to develop anything clever,
> fed up with the 1200 baud folk who refuse to give them any channels and
> have mostly moved onto the internet instead. The screwed up third party
> message passing rules in the UK don't help one jot either.
The same here in Germany. Our average OM Waldheini (aka Joe Ham) is
52 years old. The few people really interested in developing something
new are either fed up or busy with battles against the ATV, phone
repeater and telegraphy people.
> 1.2kbit would be fine if the low level protocols worked better. If I try
> and get folks playing with Phil's stuff at 1200 using it over SB16 cards and
> the linux soundmodem I get moaned at by every local packet operator for
> putting funny shit on their frequency etc
We will try Phil´s stuff as soon as the rest of our local amateur radio
group gets their sound cards up & running. I have yet some additional
ideas, but... Well, my *ideas* and the things I actually *do* are
two entirely different things. However I´m fed up with the packet radio
stuff to a degree that I´m pretty much annoyed.
> > or Phil Karn who says that all that has been accomplished by hams with
> > amateur packet radio is "a waste of spectrum". We don't need people like
Right. Just read the crap distributed in the BBS network, especially
DEBATE (or the German equivalent MEINUNG). It is worse than the worst
usenet newsgroup. That is not in the spirit of hamradio anymore.
> Phil is right. Amateur packet radio mostly stopped progressing about 1986.
It stopped right after the development of G3RUH´s FSK modem.
> In twenty years amateur radio will be a tiny fringe hobby with a lot less
> users, a lot less frequencies and probably few new ideas, killed by the
> internet, by the pressure for frequency allocations [..]
At least if we continue to go on as if nothing had happend. A lot of
radio amateurs here just do not _want_ to see the threats. They want
their DXCC, they want to win HF contests, want expensive DXpeditions
with even more expensive commercial equipment. But I still have the
hope that we will wake up before we die like the dinosaurs.
Joerg Reuter ampr-net: dl1bke@db0pra.ampr.org
AX-25 : DL1BKE @ DB0ACH.#NRW.DEU.EU
Internet: jreuter@lykos.oche.de
I used to be a werewolf but I'm better now--ooooooooow! ;-)
------------------------------
Date: Wed, 26 Feb 1997 08:16:22 -0500
From: Gwyn Reedy <gwyn@paccomm.com>
Subject: Change
Doug;
I'm sure that there will be lots of things for hams to do, but they will
probably not include as much digital stuff over RF, or not in the fashion
currently practiced. Is that ok, or is it an awful happening?
Change is usually hard to deal with. Brings to mind the Amish people of
your state and their method of dealing with the automobile. That is fine
with me, and I respect those people deeply for their commitment to their
beliefs, but there are obvious drawbacks or limitations associated with
their behavior.
I choose to view change as a positive thing even though it outdates the old
ways. I think I'm being fair-minded in this matter since I earn my living
by selling 1200 baud AX.25 TNCs (the horse and buggy of the digital world)
yet am not opposing the changes which are occuring (which are likely
inevitable anyway.)
Gwyn Reedy, W1BEL
PacComm Packet Radio Systems
gwyn@paccomm.com
http://www.paccomm.com
----------
From: Doug Crompton[SMTP:wa3dsp@marconi.crompton.com]
Sent: Tuesday, February 25, 1997 7:14 PM
To: Brian Kantor
Cc: gateways-l@lava.net; tcp-group@ucsd.edu
Subject: Re: Benefits of AMPR IP encapsulation gateways.
TEXT DELETED
I hope that is true but I suspect it will be for another reason. They
(gateways) may decrease because at some point every home will have
internet access like they have phones today. So why bother with a radio.
I see where ATT is proposing PCS boxes at every home allowing you to rove
anywhere with your phone. They are speculating a $10/month charge for
this go anywhere phone. This bypasses the baby bells and their antiquated
copper. Time frame 2 years.
I guess the argument of 'HAMS' being in the forefront of technology was
once true. At the rate of advance at the moment I kinda doubt it. Not
saying I like. So in a few years when nearly every home is PCS wired for
voice and data, technology that is in the lab today, what will the hams
have to do?
Doug
------------------------------
Date: Wed, 26 Feb 1997 16:20:20 -0400
From: keown@piccari.com
Subject: Change
Robert Keown@COMMCOR
02/26/97 04:20 PM
What happens when it breaks down? The system I mean. We have an increase in
complexity and an increase in reliance on all of these technologies. Ham
radio fits in somewhere. While I too see the hobby changing in some
disturbing ways is it any different than wide-area telephone service was in
the 30's and 40's?
Maybe we should concentrate on SETI. After all, we might contact some
closeby race that hasn't discovered the Internet yet and loves CW and 1200
bps packet<grin>.
Rob Keown WA3QJU
------------------------------
Date: Thu, 27 Feb 1997 10:16:02 +1100
From: John Day <dayj@ozemail.com.au>
Subject: Change
At 08:16 AM 26-02-97 -0500, Gwyn Reedy wrote:
>Doug;
>
>I'm sure that there will be lots of things for hams to do, but they will
>probably not include as much digital stuff over RF, or not in the fashion
>currently practiced. Is that ok, or is it an awful happening?
>
>Change is usually hard to deal with. Brings to mind the Amish people of
>your state and their method of dealing with the automobile. That is fine
>with me, and I respect those people deeply for their commitment to their
>beliefs, but there are obvious drawbacks or limitations associated with
>their behavior.
>
>I choose to view change as a positive thing even though it outdates the old
>ways. I think I'm being fair-minded in this matter since I earn my living
To be continued in digest: tcp_97_26C
Read previous mail | Read next mail
| |
