Slashdot Mirror


Hams Complain about Powerline Broadband

dwm writes "Think broadband over power lines (BPL) would be wonderful? There might be some collateral damage. The American Radio Relay League (your friendly neighborhood ham radio operators) have documented dramatic HF radio interference in areas where BPL is being tested (Check out the video of actual interference)."

597 comments

  1. Yes, post a "video" link in the story!!! by CoyoteGuy · · Score: 3, Funny


    That is one of the best ways to slashdot a site!! haha Very good technique grasshopper, but you are no match for my slashdot skill!!!

    --
    Slashdot.. Land of nerds, trolls, and FlameBait..
    1. Re:Yes, post a "video" link in the story!!! by cygnus · · Score: 1
      That is one of the best ways to slashdot a site!!

      now there's 2 reasons why Ham radio operators don't like power line broadband:

      1. it interferes with their broadcasts,
      2. it can be used to slashdot their Web sites.
      --
      Just raise the taxes on crack.
  2. Well... by mindsuck · · Score: 0, Troll

    They should just ditch those radios and move on to VoIP. ;)

    --
    --- I w00t, therefore I'm l33t.
    1. Re:Well... by mindsuck · · Score: 0

      I didn't mean to be a Troll here, just wanted to say that there are more modern technologies available nowadays.

      --
      --- I w00t, therefore I'm l33t.
    2. Re:Well... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Hams have been doing Voice over IP (AX.25 actually) for a long time, probably longer than you have been alive.

  3. Right ON! by zapod4 · · Score: 0, Troll

    Way to go hams!! Lets sacrifice modern and accessable communication in favor of bouncing radio waves off the atmosphere!

    1. Re:Right ON! by Goldberg's+Pants · · Score: 2, Insightful

      Troll!!!

      I'm sure I'm not the only one that finds bouncing radio waves off the atmosphere a ton more interesting and impressive than sending some packets over the internet.

      I'm only into shortwave, I'm not a ham, but I can pick them up.

      Picking up someone in Ecuador for example is a LOT cooler than getting an email from someone in Ecuador.

      The RFID tags are being increased in power as well, which will interfere with amateur radio too possibly. Not sure on the techie details as I'm relatively new to this.

    2. Re:Right ON! by Anonvmous+Coward · · Score: 1

      "Way to go hams!! Lets sacrifice modern and accessable communication in favor of bouncing radio waves off the atmosphere!"

      How exactly is one 'sacrificing modern and accessible communication' by saying "too much interference"? Let's point out a few problems with your comment:

      - The existence of broadband internet over powerlilnes is not the issue, it is simply the interference. This is an engineering problem, not a "no you can't have this" problem. Therefore, there is no sacrifice.

      - If it interferes with Ham Radio, it also (potentially) interferes with radios used by people you may thank one day, such as firefighters, abulance drivers, police, etc...

      - Ham Radio is valuable. Like it or not, it is a freedom that a lot of people enjoy. Incidentally, many lives have been saved by Ham Radio Operators. I personally know a guy who recieved an award for getting paramedics to a guy who needed help. (This was before cell phones became a household item, weigh that as you wish.)

      - Powerlines are only 1 method to get internet to the home.

      I don't think you were being a troll, but I do think you could have put a few more thought cycles into what you were thinking. I believe the term is knee-jerk reaction.

    3. Re:Right ON! by John+Miles · · Score: 4, Insightful

      I'm a ham, and I don't think this is a troll. It brings up a very valid point about the relative merits of two different communications paradigms.

      HF ("short wave") communications certainly lacks the strategic and commercial importance it once had. It's always been a relatively-noisy, unreliable, and bandwidth-constrained way to communicate, and nowadays, HF is used primarily as a backup for satellite and long-haul microwave circuits. We could live without if we had to.

      If, by sacrificing the entire HF radio spectrum, we could actually wire every home in the USA for economical broadband Internet access, I honestly wouldn't oppose it. Amateur Radio operators and commercial/military/governmental HF operators alike should realize the truth: we can't shy away from the technological, economic, and social potential of universal broadband Internet connectivity because of the lamentations of a few modern-day buggy-whip manufacturers.

      Now, as a disclaimer, I will say that I don't believe that power-line distribution makes sense for broadband Internet. The power companies have spent the last hundred years optimizing their network to ship 60-Hz sine waves around, and trying to shovel data through a network like that is bound to be more trouble than, say, running fiber to every curb in America.

      --
      Dahlmann tightly grips the knife, which he may have no idea how to use, and steps out into the plain.
    4. Re:Right ON! by ScrewMaster · · Score: 1

      Well, put it this way: when a disaster strikes (natural or manmade, take your pick) the first people that get called to get the word out and organize rescue efforts are the hams. The good news is that when a disaster strikes (natural or manmade, take your pick) line power is usually the first to go so interference with ham radio probably won't be an issue.

      --
      The higher the technology, the sharper that two-edged sword.
    5. Re:Right ON! by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Disaster communications also don't happen on HF. When a modern-day Titanic sinks, the SOS calls go out over satellite links.

    6. Re:Right ON! by akb · · Score: 1

      Your views are pretty typical of Hams that I've encountered, putting the narrow interest of thousands over the interests of millions. Its pretty sad.

    7. Re:Right ON! by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      I suggest you check your facts. Most of the time when HAM's get involved, there are HF, VHF, and UHF frequencies in use for various reasons. Sure, with a ship you are largely correct. However, with localized emergencies that need more regional/national communications, HF is what gets used.

    8. Re:Right ON! by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Satellites are expensive and I'm sure there a number of countries right now with the technology to zap any of them out of the sky at any time. Not exactly something I want to rely on for emergencies.

    9. Re:Right ON! by ChuckleBug · · Score: 1

      Your views are pretty typical of Hams that I've encountered, putting the narrow interest of thousands over the interests of millions. Its pretty sad.

      Like all the hams that have repeatedly offered emergency communications when phone networks have gone down? Give me a break.

      It isn't like this is just affecting ham radio. All the shortwave broadcasters, military, government, and commerical users of HF will be affected. We hams use about 3.4 Mhz of HF spectrum. BPL would render unusable 78 MHz of bandwidth. So there's a lot more at stake than the 700,000 US Hams.

      BTW, BPL has been tried and rejected in Finland and Japan. It sounds great, but it sucks.

    10. Re:Right ON! by John+Miles · · Score: 1

      Fine. When they start shooting down satellites, we can turn off the BPL service.

      --
      Dahlmann tightly grips the knife, which he may have no idea how to use, and steps out into the plain.
    11. Re:Right ON! by diersing · · Score: 1

      There was a ham radio guy in my old neighborhood, his damn antenna tower was 4 times taller then any of the poles carrying the hard lines. I'm not into it so I can't say how bad the interference is, but logically - wouldn't it only be near the surface around the poles. If their antenna were tall enough would they not escape the interference?

    12. Re:Right ON! by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Again, HF does nothing that can't be done better and (yes) more reliably via satellite.

    13. Re:Right ON! by ChuckleBug · · Score: 1

      The good news is that when a disaster strikes (natural or manmade, take your pick) line power is usually the first to go so interference with ham radio probably won't be an issue.

      The problem is that if hams can't use their radios, they won't keep their stations in working order. Part of the reason the Amateur service exists is to keep a pool of trained and prepared radio operators at the ready. If the bands only work during an emergency, you won't have that.

    14. Re:Right ON! by windows · · Score: 2, Insightful

      I feel the need to point out to you that many people benefit from Ham radio. I'll probably get modded down for this, but I may as well burn some karma.

      Many people appreciate the services provided by the National Weather Service. How many lives are saved by issuing severe thunderstorm and tornado warnings? While I don't know the answer, I'd be willing to bet it's a somewhat large number.

      Do you know that the National Weather Service relies on storm spotters to provide them with information about severe weather? That's right, there's some things doppler radar just can't tell you. And do you know how much of that information gets from spotters to the NWS? That's right, it gets there by Ham radio.

      And also, consider that many places just don't have internet connectivity. You don't think about it because you live in a wealthy country and you live a good life. But what about South America? What about Africa? What about Asia? It's much less expensive to build a Ham radio than it is to buy the parts for a computer.

      Some radio signals reach to every corner of the planet, something the internet and broadband just won't do. It's not the most modern method of communication, but it's still one of the most useful and important.

      And I won't even mention that Ham radio is often the first communication link to an area that's been hit by a disaster. Hams often help provide communications in the case of an emergency.

      Hopefully you don't still think that only an elite few need or benefit from Ham radio. That's simply not true. In fact, complaining that it's so unfair that you won't have broadband over your powerlines because of Ham radio is far more elitist than any of the pro-Ham comments I've read so far.

    15. Re:Right ON! by ScrewMaster · · Score: 1

      Oh I agree. I was just being facetious.

      --
      The higher the technology, the sharper that two-edged sword.
    16. Re:Right ON! by NanoGator · · Score: 1

      "Again, HF does nothing that can't be done better and (yes) more reliably via satellite. "

      Peer to Peer communication.

      --
      "Derp de derp."
    17. Re:Right ON! by ttfkam · · Score: 1

      If it's an emergency and existing utilities are down, there won't be any BPL interference will there?

      --

      - I don't need to go outside, my CRT tan'll do me just fine.
    18. Re:Right ON! by ChuckleBug · · Score: 1

      See my previous reply to this lame observation.

    19. Re:Right ON! by wass · · Score: 1
      But HF is also useful for talking around the world, especially on relatively low power. Or contacting people in the boonies.

      My uncle would occasionally sail from California to Hawaii on his sailboat, and would 'call' us form the middle of the Pacific. He did this establishing an HF connection to any HAM in the USA he could find who would set up a phone patch (patch the audio through the phone line), and call my house collect. Thus, me and my father, neither of us HAMS at the time, could talk to him.

      Your idea of connections to all houses in the USA leaves out the utility of HF in the boonies, utility of HF in all other countries, and also the importance of low-power communications, including even the possible need to rig a CW transmitter a la Gilligan's Island for real emergencies, etc.

      --

      make world, not war

    20. Re:Right ON! by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      I disagree. One, the power lines are only one solution to the "last mile" problem, and not necessarily the best. How about all the good work that is being done by hams and non-hams alike with 802.11? Two, the lower HF bands have the useful quality of "skip", or following the curvature of the Earth. Why trash this whole segment of the spectrum just to solve a problem that is better served by other methods? Three, you already have the telcos and the cable tv industry fixing rates and limiting competition. Why bring in the real pros, the power companies, to screw us over again?

      Damn! Too late to be relevant!

    21. Re:Right ON! by mulvane · · Score: 1

      Well, you are right. But how useful will HAM be since the area's you will more than likely be trying to reach will still have BPL in working order and HAM will not work there. Your point is moot and ignorant to the point of pure idiocy and lack of any thought.

    22. Re:Right ON! by shaitand · · Score: 1

      he could have just as easily done this with a sat link hooked to the internet. Remember, especially with the last mile bridged by this technology over power lines, the internet blows radio away in terms of being able to send and recieve quality communications over long distance.

    23. Re:Right ON! by shaitand · · Score: 1

      802.11 doesn't reach anywhere nearly as far as it would have to solve the last mile problem! BPL uses existing infrastructure that is already in place over the last mile. Without that your solution has what? THE LAST MILE PROBLEM..

    24. Re:Right ON! by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      THE LAST MILE, you say?

      http://home.earthlink.net/~wifi-shootout/

    25. Re:Right ON! by shaitand · · Score: 1

      Despite the world record, readily available technologies start struggling at the 15-30mile range and require line of site. In a tree surrounded valley? No internet for you then.

    26. Re:Right ON! by n9hmg · · Score: 1

      If their antenna were tall enough would they not escape the interference?
      That's the problem. Localized interference is a fact of life, and one all services deal with. In America, the relevant set of regulations is "Part 15", a section designed to govern and allow low power, non-licensed users of spectrum. 802.11 is a prime example for this group. Among others are the little 49Mhz walkie talkies, wireless microphones that transmit to an FM radio, AM transmitter kits, garage door openers, baby monitors, cordless (as opposed to "wireless"... is a cord not a wire? Anyway...), RF satellite remote controls, X10 video... Ok, that's enough examples. All of these are required to avoid interfering with licensed services ("Primary and the multitudinous "Secondary" allocations), and to accept any interference recieved from the licensed services, so that the users are aware that they are in some sort of conflict with the rightful users of the spectrum. Part of this involves strict limits on electrical field strength created by the unlicensed device. The power companies want to have these limits lifted, because the losses from and reception of outside interference to their transmission lines are so high that the system won't work if it is held to a reasonable power level. Ethernet on twisted pairs runs at extremely low power, using the same frequencies the power companies intend to usurp. It's on fairly-evenly-spaced conductors, and stays there, and the twist helps it not to act as an antenna. While my network creates a lot of hash in my shack, 20 feet away, I can't hear it. Power lines are fairly efficient transmission lines at 60 Hz. At 100MHz, they are extremely good antennae, yet the power companies want to use them for transmission lines.
      The example most meaningful to me relates to the common moronic complaint about getting out of the way for modernity... Astronomy. Many are afraid of the dark, and some refuse to face their fears, ruining the night for everyone and everything. The BPL controversy differs from this, though, in that light does in fact have some benefits for the individuals it shines on.
      A better example might be restricting open-source software on the grounds that most people use commercial software anyway (see SCO). Take away the rights of the minority in deference to the majority. Let's put all ways of communicating over long distances in the hands of the corporations. That way, when the governments who want to control who knows what, and when, need something stopped, they have one-stop shopping, and when they want something said, that's the only thing that gets heard. While we're at it, let's repeal the second ammendment to the US constitution, turning the citizens of the United States of America into "subjects", just like...(flamebait filter encountered, 92 country-long list deleted).
      Besides... BPL will be only another choice among the existing broadband solutions, and only in the same areas where those solutions are already available anyway. It's not like everybody who has power will have broadband available. This is a cost-intensive solution, and works only over very short ranges, requiring repeaters, amplifiers, cross-voltage shunts, and other things to work around the unsuitability of this infrastructure for this purpose.
      My dad, out in rural east-central Indiana, is not going to finally have broadband available because of this. They're going to deploy it in the same places already served by DSL, cablemodem, and WISPs. They don't want to bring broadband to all. They want a piece of the high-yield pie. Any statement to the contrary is a lie, or at best, proof of ignorance. On the other hand, I would almost certainly be able to use this, as I am in an area that grew very quickly, so the phone company ran one line for about every 16 houses and multiplexed us into "local subscriber loops". There are still many slots on those loops available, so ord

    27. Re:Right ON! by Micro$will · · Score: 2, Insightful

      - If it interferes with Ham Radio, it also (potentially) interferes with radios used by people you may thank one day, such as firefighters, abulance drivers, police, etc...

      Most emergency services are moving to the UHF frequencies AFAIK. In fact, most if not all in the NYC area are already, and I'm sure most other large urban areas have already switched. They're also using FM, which eliminates most interference.

      Will the FCC care? Probably not. As long as everyone can get EyeWitless News and Clearchannel they're not concerned. Sure, it interferes with shortwave, but since VOA stopped broadcasting to North America, there's nothing on SW for Americans to listen to anyway (the FCC's hypothetical opinion, not mine).

    28. Re:Right ON! by n9hmg · · Score: 1

      Excellent. And then, we can ask people to build their own HF radios, or maybe ask manufacturers to design and build them, then wait for people to buy them, then wait for them to learn to use them, then wait for them to build decent antenna systems, then wait for them to form networks for the purpose of passing information. 11 years after they shoot down the satellites, we'll be good to go, buffoon.

    29. Re:Right ON! by Goldberg's+Pants · · Score: 1

      HAMS were responsible for a lot of the emergency communications on September 11th when the rest of the networks were down.

      To think this is just a few people screwing over millions is short sighted at best, and outright moronic at worst.

      I'm sure you'd change your tune if a tornado hit your area and injured you and the emergency network was amateur radio. But if this powerline stupidity goes through, there will BE no hams to help you, and you'll die, which will be no sad loss.

    30. Re:Right ON! by diersing · · Score: 1
      I'm torn between saying

      1. Mod parent up as insightful

      or

      2. So no matter how tall the antenna, they'll still get interfernce...... gotcha, thanks.

    31. Re:Right ON! by jxs2151 · · Score: 1
      Most emergency services are moving to the UHF frequencies AFAIK. In fact, most if not all in the NYC area are already...

      And we all heard how well that worked on 9/11/01 huh?

    32. Re:Right ON! by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Still, plenty of other, better solutions.

      http://www.aerovironment.com/area-aircraft/unman ne d.html

    33. Re:Right ON! by Crusty+Oldman · · Score: 1

      Maybe this is a little more to the point:
      http://www.skytowerglobal.com/

    34. Re:Right ON! by akb · · Score: 1

      I have no problem with the Ham service existing. But for Hams to refuse to budge on any spectrum because its cool to send messages to Ecuador (read up the comment tree) with the result that mass scale services are held back is unacceptable.

      and you'll die, which will be no sad loss

      People who express views different than yours should die? If you truly think like that that's amazingly pathetic. I imagine you're a very backward person socially, I hope you never come out of your basement.

    35. Re:Right ON! by Micro$will · · Score: 1

      The problem was with new radios, not new frequencies, as told here. The police had no problems with their radios, aside from some issues in the subways.

    36. Re:Right ON! by Dun+Malg · · Score: 1
      If it's an emergency and existing utilities are down, there won't be any BPL interference will there?

      The idea is to contact someone outside the disaster area where the utilities are still working. If BPL is in operation at either end communication will be affected.

      --
      If a job's not worth doing, it's not worth doing right.
    37. Re:Right ON! by jxs2151 · · Score: 1
      ...aside from some issues in the subways.


      Yeah, aside from a few people getting hit with stray rounds, the police's firearms worked suprisingly well.

    38. Re:Right ON! by JoeShmoe950 · · Score: 0

      Notice how people can go to the store and buy a rifle but instead build a potato cannon. Its the fact that it takes skill. Its something called a hobby. For example, some programmers program a program for fun when they could just download an open source version anyway. Think about it...

    39. Re:Right ON! by tom246 · · Score: 1

      After the blackout in the northeast and 9/11 I would hope that people would realize the valuable use of amateur radio. I am both an amateur radio operator, and I will someday have a job working on computer networks.

      My personal opinion is to keep the amateur ops happy on this issue because they can be so important in a time of need. During times of emergency there can be no power, no phone lines, and no wires between amateur ops and they can still communicate. An article mentioned how helpful the local operators were during the northeast blackout because amateurs were setting up at hospitals, police departments, fire departments, and emergency operations centers providing vital and potentially life saving communications.

      However this new technology would offer people like me with faster access because frankly 24.0 kbps dial-up sucks. But I think a good emergency communications system is more important. With new technology and current technology being improved I think we can either reduce or eliminate (with time) the interference created to amateurs, or come up with something new to replace BPL.

    40. Re:Right ON! by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      HF is used primarily as a backup for satellite and long-haul microwave circuits. We could live without if we had to.

      really? ok eliminate sattelites, fibre,microwave,etc with something silly like ...oh a natural disaster...

      nahhh we dont need no stinking HF.

      think a bit before you talk next time.

    41. Re:Right ON! by Wanderer1 · · Score: 1

      As you obviously know nothing of satellite communication and it's limitations, kindly step OFF the technology ship, avoid participating in politics, and give up your computer - a shiny webTV is waiting for you at your local retailer.

      For the record, satellite communications suffer from a number of problems making them a convenience: Heavy cloud cover obstructs communication, many satellite phones can only speak to a small number of services, and satellites involve using another infrastructure subject to outages or few points-of-failure.

      HF involves no infrastructure, only a radio, a radiator, a power supply and someone on the other end to receive and act upon the transmission.

      Thus, this basic form of radio offers distributed, redundant communications subject only to the whim of the atmosphere.

      Bill

    42. Re:Right ON! by plcurechax · · Score: 1

      start shooting down satellites

      You mean like the Ronald Regan's failed "Star Wars" the National Missile Defense (NMD) that planned to put weapons, and start the arms race in space.

      Or maybe George W Bush's "Son of Star Wars?" Which is the same thing only scaled down.

    43. Re:Right ON! by plcurechax · · Score: 1

      If, by sacrificing the entire HF radio spectrum, we could actually wire every home in the USA for economical broadband Internet access, I honestly wouldn't oppose it.

      While this might be sensible if all that was affected was amateur radio hobbyists I might agree too. But since HF is still an important backup and emergency communications infrastructure I do not agree with such an idea. Sure it has lots of downsides compared to other high-tech solutions. But those high tech solutions are expensive and require extensive infrastructure to be work. But you start cutting trans-atlantic or trans-pacific cables, how quickly and how well can satellite communications scale to handle the increase traffic load? Space weather affect satellite communications, or did you forget about
      Galaxy IV malfunction as well as countless other satellite problems (e.g. AO-40).

      I will say that I don't believe that power-line distribution makes sense for broadband Internet.

      I think you are right, this will be more important than HF users (especially amateur radio operators) complaints. I doubt there is little to no advantage of BPL over other broadband methods, such as various DSL technologies (such as G.lite), cable modems, and DSS like DirectPC.

    44. Re:Right ON! by bugg · · Score: 1
      ...hoping this thread is rekindled after being featured again- missed it the first time.

      Hams use only a small portion of the spectrum. As for mass scale services, don't pretend this is the only way to get people internet. Fiber optic lines have been and continue to be, by far, the best way to move large amounts of digital data and RF interference is simply not an issue. Hams may keep their skills in tune by just communicating with Ecuador, but in the event of any sort of civil emergency in which the lines go down they may very well be the only method of communication still reliably working.

      If you compare truly wireless services (which are good for civil defense purposes) to services involving wires (which are not), runing the entire HF band because we want to use a wired communication method doesn't make a whole lot of sense, does it?

      And as a minor nitpick, he said it'd be no sad loss if they died, not that they wanted the person to die. There's a slight difference.

      --
      -bugg
    45. Re:Right ON! by rick57 · · Score: 1

      Disclaimer: I'm a licensed amateur radio operator, WD8KEL. Non-Disclaimer: I'm also responsible for the use of ALL wireless communications systems at several hospitals in the Boston, MA area. This includes cell phone, 802.11FH, .11a, .11b, .11g, some old 900 mHz FH gear, and the 610 MHz medical telemetry, to name a few. BPL, in my PROFESSIONAL opinion, is NOT a good thing for the patients in the hospitals where I work. We have NUMEROUS life-critical systems that stand to be disrupted by the broadband nature of the emissions from these systems. These include diagnostic systems, theraputing systems, monitoring systems, and our wireless IT infrastructure. For the non-hams out there, there is also the prospect that BPL won't work due to interference TO BPL from outside sources. There is an interesting phenomenon called reciprocity in which anything that radiates a signal will also receive it as well. There are already enough signal sources to cause me to doubt the ability of BPL to provide me with a usable connection. Be careful what you wish for... you just might get it! But, for me, the bottom line is not that BPL will interfere with my amateur radio activities (though it does cause me concern) but that it may cost the life of one of our patients. Hospitals across the country are having real problems because of this stuff. So far though, no one has lost their life over it, thank goodnes. For the time being, I'm content to have a life other than in front of computer and I'm happy to keep my cable/DSL/dial-up lines and the signals INSIDE THEM. Rick Hampton, WD8KEL Wireless Communications Manager Parnters Healthcare Systems Boston, MA

  4. Ham radio users by trippinonbsd · · Score: 4, Interesting

    How many people still rely on ham radio? Why havent they moved over to something a little more modern? Does ham radio have any advantages over current technology?

    1. Re:Ham radio users by mrjive · · Score: 2, Insightful

      It's more of a hobby than a necessity

      --
      If you can't beat them, arrange to have them beaten. -George Carlin
    2. Re:Ham radio users by Directrix1 · · Score: 5, Informative

      It can go around the world without the need of a network. That is all.

      --
      Occam's razor is the blind faith in the natural selection of least resistance and in universal oversimplification. -- EF
    3. Re:Ham radio users by AKnightCowboy · · Score: 2, Insightful
      How many people still rely on ham radio? Why havent they moved over to something a little more modern? Does ham radio have any advantages over current technology?

      Other than it beinng completely free and open for anyone to use regardless of how much money they have? Ham radio is the one communications medium where everyone is on equal footing. Well, except for those old farking hams with their advanced licenses who think they are farking god because they can do morse code and you're stuck with a god damn no-code tech license. Bah.

    4. Re:Ham radio users by Brobock · · Score: 1

      Yes, they were indispensible when hurricanes (i.e. Flordia) and other disasters knock out other "modern" communication systems.

    5. Re:Ham radio users by jawtheshark · · Score: 1

      So what about TCP/IP over HAM? You get the best of the two worlds... ;-)

      --
      Ahhh...the great dumpster continuum. Many a free computer will be found there. -- sowth (748135)
    6. Re:Ham radio users by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Heh, regardless of cash to a point. Price out a new Icom lately? Someday...someday....well, someday I'll get a license and start operating and such, but also with the nice radio.

    7. Re:Ham radio users by trippinonbsd · · Score: 1

      Does such a thing exist as tcp/ip over ham?

    8. Re:Ham radio users by ForestGrump · · Score: 5, Interesting

      Being a ham myself...
      Ever go camping and think..
      "I'll bring my cell phone and if an emergency happens, I can call for help."

      Well welcome to the world of "modern technology". Cell phones are great. I admit it. My mother can find me pratically any place, anywhere. Car breaks down in the middle of the highway, I can call AAA for a tow truck. Etc.

      However, cell phones magically don't work when there is no network.

      So if you went camping in the mountains, or your on a remote strip of road and there is no cell network, GOOD LUCK!
      A ham radio, not being network dependent, you can put out a call for help (and hope that someone is listening on the other end.) Atleast with a HAM, your chances of finding help infinately higher.

      Now what else can ham radios do?
      -Ham radios have great range. using something like 0.5 watts of power, I can talk to a friend a mile away. (go to same high school) Using 5 watts of power (typical for a hand heald), I can talk to someone else 10-15 miles away without trouble.

      Also, I can drive around in a car, talk to someone when I'm driving to and from work without running a fatty cell phone bill.

      So yes. I, being a HAM op, have moved to something more modern (cell phone), however, I still prefer to use the ham in the car (saves cell phone mins).

      HOpe this post helps.
      -Grump.

      --
      Is it true that more people vote for the winner of American Idol, than vote for the president? -Ali G.
    9. Re:Ham radio users by Cramer · · Score: 1

      See Also: AX.25

    10. Re:Ham radio users by Tsu+Dho+Nimh · · Score: 5, Informative
      "Does ham radio have any advantages over current technology?"

      Yes. It is a distributed network of independent nodes, most of which have generators and battery backups, whose primary reason for existing is for emergency communications. In case of massive disruption of power and other transmissions ... they can keep broadcasting. It's low-tech, cheap, and easy. Can even be mobile. And in the intervals between emergencies, you can chat.

      After the big Mexico City earthquake, all the microwave towers had to be realigned, the phones were out until lines and power to switching equipment could be restored, and none of the TV stations could reach their satellites - one TV building collapsed. For the critical first few hours, the hams in Mexico City (civilian, military and diplomatic nodes) were the sole source of contact between the city and the rest of the world ... much of it through New Zealand hams who then relayed the information to North America because of an odd bounce in the transmissions.

      After things settled down a bit, I spent hours at a local tech college's ham setup with other bilingual persons, recieving and transcribing "we're OK" messages, while other students relayed the messages to the closest ham station they could reach that might be able to get the message through. On the Mexican end, mobile ham units were relaying messages, neighborhood by neighborhood. (most of those neighborhoods don't have running water, let alone cable for boradband).

    11. Re:Ham radio users by CycleMan · · Score: 2, Insightful
      Ham Radio is current technology, and is useful for far more than just old (or young) fogeys typing in Morse code. When you have broadband access on the moon and on the International Space Station, please let me know.

      Ham Radio does not get spammed, does not receive DDOS attacks, was instrumental in coordinating rescue volunteers at the World Trade Center after 9/11, is Internet-compatible (google for IRLP), doesn't have to cost a penny after you buy your radio, and Ham operators are not being sued by SCO or the RIAA, or monitored by the FBI or DOJ.

      On the other hand, ham radio does not have major pr0n sites or warez traders.

      Take your pick.

    12. Re:Ham radio users by nacturation · · Score: 2, Funny

      Does such a thing exist as tcp/ip over ham?

      Actually, you got it backwards. It's ham over tcp/ip and I get it all the time in my inbox, usually in the form of a viagra or other penis-enhancing spam.

      --
      Want to improve your Karma? Instead of "Post Anonymously", try the "Post Humously" option.
    13. Re:Ham radio users by the_argent · · Score: 5, Informative

      I realize you are trolling....
      But I'll bite. Recently here in NE Ohio, we were hit by some pretty bad storms that caused some pretty destructive flash flooding. Hams reporting weather conditions and flood reports over the SKYWARN system were able to get realtime info to both the national weather service and to the local Red Cross branch so that they could get shelters set up in trouble areas before they were needed. In particular, an apartment complex had two of their buildings cut off when the little 12" stream that ran in front of their building rose to 12 feet. This also knocked out power to that area, so we had roughly 100+ people isolated (the only way out was a good 40 min hike though some rough terrain even if it hadn't been pouring down rain for 8 hours already) on the other side of a now major river. Two ham's (sorry guys, forget your calls) hopped in a 4WD vehicle and went there and did an onsite assesment even before the already overtaxed police showed up on site. That is what ham radio is really set up for. The band allocation that we get to play with is meant for emergency communications. Sure, we use it for rag chews mostly, but when the crap hits the fan, I'm glad I have a 2M HT that can get me communications when I need it. The major trouble with the BPL thing is that it already creates interference on the bands, and they lobbiests want to increase the wattage they push, which will worsen the situation exponentially.
      And besides, what good will a cell phone do if your towers go down like they did when the WTC fell? Ham radio had comms flowing in and out of ground zero in under 3 hours then.
      Ham radio still fills a very vital role in todays world when a disaster strikes.

      73 KC8SNS

    14. Re:Ham radio users by Directrix1 · · Score: 0, Troll

      No, but people do transmit data over it already. At least I hope there isn't any instances of tcp/ip over ham. Seeing as how radio is an unroutable beast. Now you can assign IPs to the endpoints and that would be good.

      --
      Occam's razor is the blind faith in the natural selection of least resistance and in universal oversimplification. -- EF
    15. Re:Ham radio users by PhxBlue · · Score: 1

      Why should they have to "move over to something a little more modern"? Is broadband over power lines so critical a need that the Hammers have to lose their hobbies and see their thousands of dollars of radio equipment turned into doorstops and paperweights?

      There are existing ways of getting broadband to almost anyone, from cable to DSL to satellite access. The few places that are too remote for any of this may benefit from broadband over power lines, since population density would be low enough that the transmissions probably wouldn't interfere with Ham radio. But the other 94% of the broadband-equipped world can suck it up.

      --
      !#@%*)anks for hanging up the phone, dear.
    16. Re:Ham radio users by dj2fast · · Score: 3, Insightful

      I am a rather new ham radio operator, and I cannot believe the way the slashdot community is responding to this. With even a quick evaluation it should be clear that the benefits of amateur radio are more important than bpl. To me, the primary difference is that ham radio can be a challenge, and the internet is simple point and click. Try being 50 miles from a Utility plug, with a 8w 6meter radio. and have fantasitic comunications with people all over the states. try doing that with the internet. And you will see just how valuable ham radio is

    17. Re:Ham radio users by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1, Interesting

      Of course. Packet Radio has been linking computers via radio nearly as long as modems have been. Ham Radio has a lot of restrictions, but there are an awful lot of really cool things you can do with it... everything from broadcasting video signals to running computer networks. Of course, everyone using it has to be licensed, and no swearing, commercial use, etc.

    18. Re:Ham radio users by Directrix1 · · Score: 1

      I was not devaluing ham radio usage. I think ham radios are fascinating, but the only thing it can do that the internet cannot is provide long distance communication without the need of a network. Am I wrong?

      --
      Occam's razor is the blind faith in the natural selection of least resistance and in universal oversimplification. -- EF
    19. Re:Ham radio users by geekoid · · Score: 1

      If you are ever in a disaster, you will thank God for HAMS.

      --
      The Kruger Dunning explains most post on /. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Dunning%E2%80%93Kruger_effect
    20. Re:Ham radio users by Nonillion · · Score: 3, Informative

      When the Internet and your cell phone go down the only thing left is Ham Radio. The power companys dream of providing internet access is going to do nothing but DEVISTATE the HF bands with RF pollution. Hams are not the only ones using the HF bands, the military, broadcasters and others have alot to be concernd about. Not to mention that you WILL be able to sniff packets since a great deal of the energy WILL radiate (how is the DMCA going to be enforced? ban all radios??). Power lines were built to one thing and one thing only, deliver power not deliver broad band internet services. Ham radio is still very much alive and kicking, I get on HF all the time and there is too much RF pollution there already (consumer electronics e.g. TVs, DSL modems, hubs, switches, computers etc).

      --
      "I bow to no man" - Riddick
    21. Re:Ham radio users by Alien+Being · · Score: 4, Insightful

      "Am I wrong?"

      The importance of ham radio becomes apparent during wartime and other emergency situations. Battery, antenna, and radio and you're "online". There are too many things (and people) that can happen to the average person's IP connectivity.

    22. Re:Ham radio users by suwain_2 · · Score: 5, Informative

      That's really naive. Why do we still rely on cars? They're over 100 years old; haven't we moved to something more modern?

      To suggest that ham radio hasn't evolved is completely ignorant. Modern ham radios sport LCDs, top-quality DSP filters to pull out signals you might not otherwise here, advanced speech compression, etc. Modern repeaters are Internet-linked; a local repeater might be linked with one in a foreign country over the Internet. It's hardly the radio Marconi knew.

      Futhermore, hams are constantly coming up with new ideas. 'Back in the day,' it was a ham who invented cordless phones. (Which eventually evolved into cell phones.) Hams are constantly innovating; while some hams love nothing more than Morse code on an 'antique' radio, quite a few are also pioneering new technologies -- PSK31, for example, a remarkable digital technology usable on the HF (worldwide) bands, that uses very little bandwidth and is able to work well even with heavy interference.

      Yet another factor you overlook is the role hams play in emergency communications. A TON of hams are actively involved in emergency communications. I'm hundreds of miles from New York City; on September 12th, 2001, several local hams flew out to NYC to help with emergency communications. In a testament to how many hams help, they were turned away due to the fact that they already had too many volunteers providing emergency communications.

      I have a cell phone and a high-speed Internet connection. But what happens when there's an Earthquake, and the local phone lines (which the cell towers are connected to) and Internet lines are taken down? Hams have a history -- that lives on -- of providing emergency communications.

      --
      ________________________________________________
      suwain_2 :: quality slashdot p
    23. Re:Ham radio users by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      I love my modified IC-T8A. I think that it was a prototype or something because it can broadcast almost anywhere from 50 MHz all the way up to 999.995 MHz. Just about the only place that it doesn't have transmit capability is in the commercial FM radio band. Being an Extra, I can actually use all of those frequencies, too. Fun stuff.

      73 AC5ZH

    24. Re:Ham radio users by Autolycus · · Score: 0

      Because when the power & telephone go out, Ham radio is a life saver.

    25. Re:Ham radio users by stick-boy · · Score: 5, Insightful
      According to this website, there are "736577 active Amateur licenses" as of August 8, 2003.

      Why don't they move over to something more modern? Do they have to? Maybe because of the challenge of making a contact over hundreds of miles using very low watt transcievers, or experimenting with Earth-Moon-Earth communications, or slow-scan TV. Just because they can pick up a phone and call someone the same distance away isn't the point. I can easily install windoze on a computer and make it work, but that doesn't mean I have to. I prefer a challenge, which is why I started playing with Linux and use it on most of my computers. How many of you installed Linux the first time, just for the challenge? Maybe it wasn't the easiest system to use, and people might say, "why don't you just use windoze?" I'm just trying to make the slashdot audience understand where hams are coming from, although the analogy may be bad.

      I'm torn about the BPL issue, though. I applied for and got my first ham license 2 months ago, and I got my first "rig" a couple weeks ago. I'm excited to start a new hobby, and I'm studying to upgrade to a General class license. On the other hand, BPL would allow my parents to have broadband. They live 3 miles from a small town, and currently use Wi-Fi which sometimes works. I'd like to see more people get broadband, but does it have to be at the cost of losing a hobby that's been around for 100 years?

      ~jason
      KC0QHQ

    26. Re:Ham radio users by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0
      Yeah, uh, because... Ham radios are so much superior to oh.. I dunno... a Satelite phone?

      I don't begrude your hobby, but don't try to tell me Ham's are useful.



      You're pissing on my back and saying its raining.

    27. Re:Ham radio users by ttfkam · · Score: 0

      Because in areas that have BPL, speeds are generally much higher, prices for customers are lower, and latencies are much lower than satellite (which by the way are horrible).

      Note: I'm not necessarily advocating that HAM operators be left in the cold. While I am not one myself, I know too many to believe they don't exist in sufficient numbers.

      On the other hand -- devil's advocate -- if HAM is indeed targetted toward emergencies, when an emergency strikes, the BPL will probably be down and no longer interfering. Let's be clear here: HAM operators are asserting their rights to broadcast during non-emergency situations.

      Your "see their thousands of dollars of radio equipment" argument doesn't hold much water though. Let's say a particular region is known for a stupendous radio station. It's so great, residents over a huge area buy specialized, amplified antennas and supporting equipment to grab the signal clearly over long distances. Now supposed the radio station changes its content to something dramatically different. Is the radio station now liable for the thousands of dollars people spent to get a clear signal? I myself have a DSL modem from a previous carrier that in my current locale is basically a paperweight. You put down the money, you take your chances.

      The situation does suck though. No doubt about it.

      --

      - I don't need to go outside, my CRT tan'll do me just fine.
    28. Re:Ham radio users by stephanruby · · Score: 1

      Satellite phones are still pretty expensive and those networks are controlled by the US government.

    29. Re:Ham radio users by gujo-odori · · Score: 2, Funny

      Foreskins were indispensable when hurricanes struck Florida???

    30. Re:Ham radio users by Goody · · Score: 5, Insightful

      It's more of a hobby than a necessity

      Is broadband pr0n a necessity ? Don't answer that :-)

      Ham radio may just be a hobby, but it is an important one. We provide emergency communications when celular, telco, and power are dead. It promotes international goodwill. It allows many people to learn RF engineering and become great engineers. For the nerds, you can play with high power RF, pass data, send video, bounce signals off the moon, use sattelites, and much more....

      --
      Tired of being "punished" by the Slashdot $rtbl since 2002. I'm now over at http://soylentnews.org/ .
    31. Re:Ham radio users by OverlordQ · · Score: 1

      If this is 'insightful' obviously you haven't read THIS. NOW tell me it's not a necessity.

      --
      Your hair look like poop, Bob! - Wanker.
    32. Re:Ham radio users by NanoGator · · Score: 3, Funny

      "Is broadband pr0n a necessity ?"

      Well it did take the wind out of her "I'm withholding sex from you" threats. Come to think of it, it might have caused some of those too...

      --
      "Derp de derp."
    33. Re:Ham radio users by NanoGator · · Score: 4, Funny

      "The importance of ham radio becomes apparent during wartime and other emergency situations. Battery, antenna, and radio and you're "online". There are too many things (and people) that can happen to the average person's IP connectivity. "

      It's true. When the war started, that's how John Connor was able to make contact with the resistance fighters.

      --
      "Derp de derp."
    34. Re:Ham radio users by Eosha · · Score: 5, Informative

      "It's more of a hobby than a necessity"

      As a strike team leader for a mountain search and rescue team, I'll tell you that without HAM radio, our job would be just plain impossible in many situations. There simply is no other option currently in existence. HAM radio is not only a hobby, but in my line of work it's a critical life-support resource, more so than any other technology we use (except maybe a flashlight). Tell the thousands of people whose lives have been saved through S&R or any of the other emergency situations that depend on HAM capabilities that it's not really a necessity.

      KD5SMV

      --
      I have a girlfriend whose name doesn't end in .JPG
    35. Re:Ham radio users by Jay+Maynard · · Score: 1

      However, cell phones magically don't work when there is no network.

      Not only that, they are fairly easily overloaded. I was in Manhattan on 9/11, and my cellphone was completely useless.

      Hams have a long, distinguished record of providing communications when nothing else can get through. Ham radio is a national resource, and BPL will, if that video is representative of its effects, utterly destroy it. ...de K5ZC

      --
      Disinfect the GNU General Public Virus!
    36. Re:Ham radio users by EtherealSys · · Score: 1

      Sure BPL might disrupt HAM signals, but wouldn't the disruption stop when the earthquake or what not wipes out the power, thus disabling BPL?

      --

    37. Re:Ham radio users by Gonarat · · Score: 4, Insightful

      Wait until there is a natural (or man made) disaster in your area and comunications are knocked out. No phone, internet, or power. Ham radio can be the only way to communicate out of an area. Modern communications are great, but there are times when good old ham radio is needed, and is the only way to communicate. So, yes, it is just a hobby -- at least until that tornado, earthquake, hurricane, etc. comes...


      DE WB3IZT

      --
      Beware of Sleestak
    38. Re:Ham radio users by /dev/trash · · Score: 1

      I'm looking to get into HAM radios. What would you recommend for a radio?

    39. Re:Ham radio users by 40ohms · · Score: 1
      As a licensed operator for over 25 years, I can tell you are not aware of some of the things hams do. Yes, TCP/IP has been and is still used over amateur radio. Much of the technology you now have (cell phones are a good example) had a good part of the development done by hams. In the 1970s I had the forerunner to a cell phone. One difference, I was able to make calls 100 miles from a repeator site. This helped immensely when I had to ask TVA to shut down some power lines due to them being collapsed from a tornado. Phones were out for 90 miles in both directions that night. If the Internet was available then, it would have been down in that area too. We had 13 dead in the county I was in (over 90 state wide) and it would have been many times that number dead if it was not for the quick response and ability to communicate in a hurry with the proper authorities.

      Does this have anything to do with current events? Yes! Two months ago a tornado struck 12 miles from my house. We were not only tracking the storm, as soon as the funnel left we had people on the scene. We had to immediately call to have power lines and gas lines shut down. With over 60 houses heavily damaged, and a few totally blown away, the damage was extensive. Cell sites were overloaded, phones were down, Internet connections in the area were not possible. Maybe you should look around to find what some hams are doing. A few sites
      mtsh.org arrl.org qrz.com eham.net findu.com
      tapr.org w4rpt.com. maybe in that list you can find something to enlighten you.

    40. Re:Ham radio users by ForestGrump · · Score: 1

      sure! when the power goes out, BPL should also go out. After all, doesn't BPL rely on the power line?

      But the main problem that Hams are griping over is that BPL creates alot of interference, thus making it very difficult for them to get HF contacts.

      I'm confident that these HAM ops will fight BPL to the end. After all, I am one, I know a few, and unlike me, some take this hobby very seriously.
      (log every contact they make; and when they make a contact, they send a card to eachother in recognition of the contact happening, Some are involved in emergency response service, where BPL causing interference would be unacceptable to them, and the reasons can go on.)

      Ok i gotta put a new air filter in the car.

      73s.
      KG6...
      -Grump

      --
      Is it true that more people vote for the winner of American Idol, than vote for the president? -Ali G.
    41. Re:Ham radio users by ForestGrump · · Score: 1

      oh sorry, I totally missed the point you were trying to make.

      The main problem is that BPL causes constant interference. That is the problem they have.

      Grump

      --
      Is it true that more people vote for the winner of American Idol, than vote for the president? -Ali G.
    42. Re:Ham radio users by shaitand · · Score: 0, Flamebait

      yes but broadband is obviously more important than emergency services for gods sakes. Jesus man, get your head out of your ass and THINK before you speak, sheesh.

    43. Re:Ham radio users by Fred+Ferrigno · · Score: 1

      Battery, antenna, and radio and you're "online".

      The only noticeable difference is the absence of a pre-existing network. How does this contradict the parent post?

    44. Re:Ham radio users by shaitand · · Score: 0, Flamebait

      christ, get over it. Yes radio is a fallback when absolutely every modern technology fails, just one step before carrier pigeon or worse, snail mail.

      But there are ham blackout areas already and lots and lots of things that interfere with radio on various frequencies. The answer is to discover which frequencies this interferes with and move the hams off of those frequencies. Hams get free air space, they actually literally get trillions of dollars worth of free airspace to play on. And HF isn't used for emergency services, most of the hams on HF are the old timers and are still using morse code for god sake.

    45. Re:Ham radio users by akintayo · · Score: 0

      While HAM radio operators are sometimes used in emergency, they are for most part hobbyists. This is a case of the wants of many (BPL) outweighing the wants of a few(HAM).

      I don't think HAM radio is that closely tied to emergency communications, and if it was a non HAM alternative could be deduced.

      The way I see this is just a case of boys playing with their toys ... not that there is anything wrong with that

      --
      Woe be on to them, all who rise against poor people, shall perish in a the end. Buju Banton
    46. Re:Ham radio users by eap · · Score: 1, Interesting
      I'm a ham operator, and I have held off joining the ARRL because of their lobbying against power line broadband. For me, the ability to have high speed internet access is more important than static free HF communications. I don't think local VHF/UHF will be affected anyway.

      I think the amateur radio community is overreacting to a perceived threat. Anyone can claim something causes RF interference -- look at what Clear Channel did when there was talk of allowing non-commercial radio stations. Power line broadband will not mean the end of ham radio. The two can coexist.

      I will not support the ARRL as long as they take a reactionary stance against this technology.

    47. Re:Ham radio users by shaitand · · Score: 0, Redundant

      ummm yes but we have satillite based communications for this... why exactly do we need the radios again?

      Yes I realize there are time when this wouldn't work... but do they happen often enough to outweigh the powerful communication and information transmission medium ever devised from making it the last mile?

      One is a technology that is obsolete in all but the rarest circumstances. And HF isn't needed for emergency services, your not likely to be operating on hf from your campsite in the moutains, and most hams aren't licensed for hf anyway, it's also most likely not all of hf that this interferes with.

      The internet has and will continue to be the most powerful resource for communication, learning, and otherwise aiding all mankind and uniting people of many nations in cries of outrage or sighs of joy. It will continue to be the factor in the advancement of the human race for the forseeable future. HAM once serviced this role, and as such we should leave it in place as much we can. But it's time for the old to give way to new. Just as one day it will be time for the internet to give way to a still greater technology (multicast teleportation?)

    48. Re:Ham radio users by timeOday · · Score: 1

      I'm surprised search and rescue teams can't use the same frequencies as other emergency services (e.g the police).

    49. Re:Ham radio users by shaitand · · Score: 1

      "most of those neighborhoods don't have running water, let alone cable for boradband)"

      Then these neighborhoods probably wouldn't have broadband running over the power lines either and therefore no interference.

    50. Re:Ham radio users by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      It depends largely on what is popular in your area, but a 2meter/70cm dual handheld is usually a great first radio. Handhelds (HTs) have gotten extremely capable in the last few years.

    51. Re:Ham radio users by treat · · Score: 0
      Ham Radio does not get spammed, does not receive DDOS attacks, was instrumental in coordinating rescue volunteers at the World Trade Center after 9/11,

      I'll bite. No it wasn't. In fact, there were so many bystanders wanting to help that they had to be turned away. Furthermore, there were about an order of magnitude fewer injured than dead, as opposed to most disasters where there are an order of magnitude more injured than dead.

      Everyone had access to communications of some sort by 5pm, and how much earlier just depended on how determined you were.

      I'm sure ham radio is great and all and will probably save all our asses in some other disaster. But you made this one up.

    52. Re:Ham radio users by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      And just because someone is an ass doesn't mean that all ham operators are. You said yourself, his tower was illegal, and he got shut down. Did you see other hams protesting when the FCC took him off the air? I seriously doubt it. Hell, it was probably a ham that turned him in.

      But OK, let's see how your analogy holds up. I've met some pretty nasty people on the Internet. Does that mean all Internet users are assholes? By your reasoning, it must.

      One more thing. Did it not occur to you that pointing out that BPL can cause interference is a good thing? Gee, I don't know, perhaps if it interferes with ham operators, it might interfere with other radio communications. And did it also not occur to you that the problem might be fixable? DSL and voice phone service can interfere with each other, as anyone who forgets to install line filters will find out, but those filters take care of that problem.

      Before you make generalizations and jump to conclusions, stop and think for a little while.

    53. Re:Ham radio users by tomstdenis · · Score: 0

      You obviously haven't listened to the calibre of people on say 10 meters lately have you?

      That's a big 10-4, and how's that new 10-20 coming along "LazyRock"?

      Some emergency service.

      Plus I doubt the rigs are intering with all amateur bands. If 10/11 meters disappeared I would be super happy. Keep 70cm and 2m for the rest of civilized society.

      Tom

      --
      Someday, I'll have a real sig.
    54. Re:Ham radio users by ilctoh · · Score: 1

      How many people use Linux? Why havent they moved over to something a little more popular, like Windows? Ham radio and linux have a lot in common. Both take some tinkering to get productive. Both have a relatively steep learning curve. Both have a sizable group of dedicated, sometimes almost fanatical users. Both are viewed as a hobby by many people, including myself. Ham radio is used during emergencies, when standard forms of communication are unavailanle. The FCC relies on hams during these times. How is radio not modern? Some of the most amazing radio breakthroughs were caused by hams. A high-end HF tranceiver is an incredibly "modern" device. Ham radio has several advantages. You can pick up a microphone and talk to almost any country in the world, without paying for your call. You can learn a lot just by "reading the mail". There are "nets" for just about every interest possible. In short, it may be easier to pick up a cell phone to call your mom, but you have no idea how much fun ham radio can be until you actually get to try it. 73 KC9DDI

      --
      How many slashes would a slashdot dot, if a slashdot could dot slashes?
    55. Re:Ham radio users by Alien+Being · · Score: 1

      Maybe I heard more than he actually said. It seemed that he was saying that the difference wasn't important. Sorry if I misunderstood.

      As long as I'm posting again, I'll add that ham also has the advantage of being a broadcast medium, even if regs don't always allow it.

    56. Re:Ham radio users by Eosha · · Score: 2, Insightful

      we can use the same frequencies (we often work in the 155-mHz band,like the police). Problem is, when you're in a deep valley, those frequencies don't work worth squat. The only thing you can do is hope to hit a mountaintop repeater, and those are ham only.

      --
      I have a girlfriend whose name doesn't end in .JPG
    57. Re:Ham radio users by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0, Interesting

      Yes, because so many remote areas have power lines acting as LANs (no, not just any powerlines are suspect, only residential ones - problem goes away at the transformer).

      Kid gets lost in downtown suburbia? Use a damn cellphone you ham radio hobbiest...

    58. Re:Ham radio users by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      The importance of ham radio becomes apparent during wartime and other emergency situations. Battery, antenna, and radio and you're "online". There are too many things (and people) that can happen to the average person's IP connectivity.

      Yes, but at that point the power lines are no longer much of a problem, are they?

    59. Re:Ham radio users by OwlofCreamCheese · · Score: 1

      if the power is up... worry of the power lines ruining ham radio sorta goes away... skipper...

      --
      -You're wasting your time. Alfador only likes me.
    60. Re:Ham radio users by NoCoward · · Score: 1

      Thats what sat phones are for. Ham is just a hobby for elitists.

    61. Re:Ham radio users by Alien+Being · · Score: 4, Insightful

      "The answer is to discover which frequencies this interferes with and move the hams off of those frequencies. "

      In other words, take some more ground from the commons and give it to big business. No thanks.

      And even if I did agree with you on that point, this case would still be different. It's a wired service. The RF bandwidth is being wasted because it's just a lousy way to send data. If they set their minds to it, they could probably come up with an economical way to string some fiber over the towers they already own. Power lines have some serious but unavoidable drawbacks as it is. Why add more problems?

    62. Re:Ham radio users by ChuckleBug · · Score: 2, Insightful

      Yeesh - Have you looked at the evidence they compiled? It's not just a little static. It's S9 and greater noise. It makes HF communications nearly impossible.

      I'd probably agree with you if they were just screaming about it. But they have *proof*.

    63. Re:Ham radio users by LinuxGeek · · Score: 2, Insightful

      Keep in mind that radio requires two things to be useful: a transmitter and a receiver. If power is out and phone lines are useless, then you are correct that hams could send distress messages out. But HF transmissions can be quite tricky to transmit with pinpoint precision and atmospheric conditions can leave you with only a few possible transmission destinations under even ideal conditions.

      In emergency conditions, directing your transmissions with makeshift antennas can leave you with only one or two possible destinations ( like the mentioned Mexico to New Zealand hop). If all of the possible receiving locations have a high level of inteference from local powerline broadband, then your plea for help "ain't gonna get heard". Hams are required to make sure that their radio emmissions do not cause inteference with nearby radio and TV receivers. They can also ask for FCC action to put a stop to intrusion into the ham bands.

      --

      Kindness is the language which the deaf can hear and the blind can see. - Mark Twain
    64. Re:Ham radio users by Fred+Ferrigno · · Score: 1

      That's really naive. Why do we still rely on cars? They're over 100 years old; haven't we moved to something more modern?

      I completely agree. Doesn't it bother anyone else that our world is built around a single mode of transportation?

    65. Re:Ham radio users by no_such_user · · Score: 1
      And besides, what good will a cell phone do if your towers go down like they did when the WTC fell? Ham radio had comms flowing in and out of ground zero in under 3 hours then.


      I'm a ham, although not a particularly active one, who was in NYC (just above Union Sq.) when the towers fell. Sad to sad, it was actually AIM which provided me with the most reliable contact with my family and friends during and after the tragedy. Phone calls were next to impossible for most of the 11th, and cell phones weren't much better due to congestion. But through my cable modem, I was AIMing the entire time without interruption.

      Regardless, I feel that it'd be irresponsible to allow BPL to come online until some way to resolve this issue of interference is resolved. After all, if you're just going to allow this technology to come along and render a large swath of spectrum unusable, why not just re-allocate the band for long-range wireless data and not bother with wires at all?

    66. Re:Ham radio users by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Hmmm I dont remember him ever having a ham license!?! Oh well... I guess it is legal to transmit when a persons life or property is in danger.

    67. Re:Ham radio users by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      "How many people use Linux? Why havent they moved over to something a little more popular, like Windows? Ham radio and linux have a lot in common."

      Not to mention that Linux itself has native support for Amateur Radio.

      73, AB2MH.

    68. Re:Ham radio users by CXI · · Score: 1

      Claiming "BPL will stop when a disaster happens since the power will go out" is similar to claiming "My flashlight is only useful when the power goes out, so I'll only test the batteries then." It's even worse than that actually. In our hypothetical situation, you'd also be assuming that the flashlight had batteries in it when in fact it does not. How does that equate to the BPL discussion? Who the heck are you going to contact? The people in the rest of the world who can't hear you because of BPL or other "interference in the name of progress" in their area? Brilliant.

      And I thought people here were supposed to be nerds (ie, smart)...

    69. Re:Ham radio users by Anonvmous+Coward · · Score: 1

      "Hmmm I dont remember him ever having a ham license!?!"

      He fell off the FCC's most wanted list when Skynet did a much more thorough job of interferring with radio devices.

    70. Re:Ham radio users by the_argent · · Score: 1

      I'm glad that broadband got you the connection that you needed to communicate. And in this case, it provided the exact medium you needed to communicate with someone, I.E. an IM client. In an emergency situation, whatever works, works.

      And I'm glad to to see that we both agree with the BPL issue. As it stands right now, it's badly designed and isn't that well implimented. Although, if they were to shield the power lines better, and subsequently had to replace between 90% and 100% of them, BPL wouldn't seem such a great "value" for the companies implementing it.

    71. Re:Ham radio users by shaitand · · Score: 0, Flamebait

      "take some more ground from the commons"

      As I've heard so many hams tonight proclaim, ham radio is licensed, it's NOT the common grounds.

      That's one thing that truely sucks, the hams have stolen what should be public property. They've got everyone thinking that the bands in their turf constitutes the spectrum being given to the people... that's not true, ham is an elitist club who has hoarded frequencies that SHOULD be unlicensed. Oh I'm not saying that there shouldn't be personal licensing for amatuers to play with and have some chance of keepin it to themselves (although really, I doubt many who would take advantage of these frequencies aren't already hams), but it should be the hams who are tied to a tiny cb style range and the rest should be public grounds instead of the other way around.

    72. Re:Ham radio users by demonbug · · Score: 4, Informative
      HAM radio is not only a hobby, but in my line of work it's a critical life-support resource, more so than any other technology we use (except maybe a flashlight). Tell the thousands of people whose lives have been saved through S&R or any of the other emergency situations that depend on HAM capabilities that it's not really a necessity.


      I have to second this. On a class camping trip a few years back we were at a hike-in campground along the coast in a remote part of California (yes, there are still some remote parts of California). One morning while boiling water for some coffee one of the guys on the trip accidentally overturned the pot, drenching himself with boiling water. Needles to say, he received some extremely bad burns from this. We were out of cell range, no phones within 15-20 miles, and no vehicles with us. The scope of the burns was way beyond anything we could treat with the first aid equipment we had on hand. Fortunately, one of the people on the trip was an amateur HAM radio operator and had brought his portable equipment along. Unable to contact anyone nearby, he was able to contact an operator in Hawaii, who then called the police and rescue people in our vicinity, who were then able to send a truck to pick him up in just over an hour. The HAM radio probably saved this guy's life - though yes, if we had had a satellite phone along it might have done the trick (but then it might not have - after using GPS, which tends to be extremely fickle in wooded areas, I'm not at all certain that it would have worked anyway). HAM provides a long-range method of communications that we really don't have a higher-tech replacement for at this point.

    73. Re:Ham radio users by LinuxGeek · · Score: 2, Insightful

      Different frequency ranges have greatly different propagation characteristics. Many of the bands used for local fire, rescue and police were picked specifically because they don't carry too far to keep them from overlapping too much.

      You may want to educate yourself before calling bullsh*t on someone elses post. He said nothing about a ham license requirement for every member of a S&R team. Only that some of what they have to do would be almost impossible without ham assistance.

      Also, if you are equating CB ( citizens band ) users with licensed amateur radio operators, you are completely wrong. CB is named for a section of radio spectrum that was taken from exclusive amateur radio use to create a spectrum for unlicensed use in low power (5 watt), short range communication. The motorola radios that you linked to as a great alternative have a great range, "- 2 mile range in ideal conditions but 1/4- 1/2 mile on average." Just what those rescue teams need in rough terrain, radios that won't communicate.

      Fire and Rescue, Police and other public safety groups have authority to stop a ham for use in emergency situations too. I'm not a ham, but know a couple that have been identified by either license plate or antenna and stopped for communication use. One was at a wreck scene that was in a valley that the HP radio couldn't get out of (cell phone either) and another was during a large wildfire.

      Now that I think about what you said, you are right. Even though hams help during emergencies, route messages around the world between military and families ( more in the past), provide a fun hobby and encourage learning about electronics, they really are useless. Just because you can't see a need or use for them, they will probably disband after seeing the compelling logic of your arguments.

      --

      Kindness is the language which the deaf can hear and the blind can see. - Mark Twain
    74. Re:Ham radio users by Alien+Being · · Score: 1

      You make a good point about how much spectrum hams have. I don't claim to know exactly where to draw the lines.

      But the licensing for hams is entirely different than the licensing for commercial spectrum usage. You used to need a license for CB too, but anyone could get one if they chose to and usage of the airwaves is first-come first-serve. Licensed or not, it's earmarked for public use. Allowing broadband over powerline at the expense of hams doesn't put that spectrum in the hands of most people. It puts it in the assets column of the line operators even though all they're really doing is polluting it.

      Allocating chunks of ham spectrum for low-power public uses doesn't bother me as long as there are still frequencies available for worldwide amateur transmissions. I just think it's that important.

    75. Re:Ham radio users by n9hmg · · Score: 1

      You insensitive clod! You should have been carrying (and paying for) a satellite phone.

    76. Re:Ham radio users by n9hmg · · Score: 1

      An $80 qrp rig that can work the world is a hobby for elitists, and sat phones are for the masses? Really?

    77. Re:Ham radio users by shaitand · · Score: 0, Flamebait

      Alas your right, they are just polluting the airwaves and not really transmitting or using the band for wireless transmission... But I think we are talking about a small price to pay for the technology. When the technology to fix this problem is inexpensive enough, or there is another already developed and working technology to reach the last mile with as much speed and as cheaply as this, I think we should fix it.

      Until then, the lesser gives way to the greater, we are talking about a small piece of radio spectrum here that would be useless for transmissions to accomplish one of the greatest technical challenges that faces mankind.

      To bring p0rn to every man, woman, and child on earth! Err, to transmit libraries of knowledge, allow perfect voip communications globally without per connection fees, to transmit information and allow collaboration globally etc.

    78. Re:Ham radio users by n9hmg · · Score: 1

      That's "Spiced ham", commonly rendered as "SPAM".

    79. Re:Ham radio users by tftp · · Score: 1
      But HF transmissions can be quite tricky to transmit

      They are tricky if you are sitting in your car and trying to contact someone 5000 miles away with your 10W rig. However if you bother to throw a LW into a tree, and if you only want to reach across a few hundred of miles then it is not tricky at all.

    80. Re:Ham radio users by n9hmg · · Score: 1

      Am I wrong?
      No. You meant that as a pro-ham comment, right? Or do you prefer to force everyone to communicate over media owned by large corporations?

    81. Re:Ham radio users by n9hmg · · Score: 1

      A: I'm guessing it wasn't illegal, just unpopular among the mindless lemmings like you.
      B: That's just the kind of language I'd expect from an AC. Look at my uid, look it up at the FCC, and you can drive right up to my house... In fact, please do, and try to break in, while you're at it.

    82. Re:Ham radio users by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      HAM Radio, the last spam free frontier. When was the last time you had your callsign harvested or received a broadcast offing to increase you penis size by 3 inches ?

    83. Re:Ham radio users by n9hmg · · Score: 1

      Umm... Ok, if only appliance operators count, then you're right. On the other hand, you can build and operate station for less than USD20 (I am counting the crystal). I admit, I use mostly my FT-817, as I like to have all frequencies and modes at my fingertips, but I love the challenge of working minimalist.

    84. Re:Ham radio users by Alien+Being · · Score: 1

      "But I think we are talking about a small price to pay for the technology."

      We'll just have to disagree about that one.

      "When the technology to fix this problem is inexpensive enough"
      Well, how about letting them take over some of the low vhf tv channels? Access to the broadband is going to be controlled by a commercial enterprise so let them compete on merit for commercial spectrum. In other words, they should pick on someone their own size.

    85. Re:Ham radio users by shaitand · · Score: 1

      "Access to the broadband is going to be controlled by a commercial enterprise"

      typically power companie are regulated by the government at some level.

      "We'll just have to disagree about that one."

      Agreed.

      "In other words, they should pick on someone their own size."

      I'm afraid I can't believe in supporting the little guy simply because he's the little guy.

      If it was possible to make it work at low vhf tv channel level I might be with you, but considering everything that plugs into a wall outlet is designed around the fixed rate of power distribution, somehow I think this would be a bigger challenge than the last mile. And it would certainly disrupt the little guy more interfering with some ham spectrum will. The ham won't be able to operate his radio at all anymore then, you won't be able to use your computer, microwave, etc, not the fix I would pick.

    86. Re:Ham radio users by Brad+the+Informer · · Score: 1

      Screw 'em.

      I don't say this as one who passed the written but missed the Morse code speed portion of the license test by a few lousy words (I'm not bitter.).

      Ham radio is no longer vital. One day, I saw a mention of little IR tanks, got the review from a site in Australia, then ordered the tanks from some cat in Japan. That's TWO DX's from the other side of the world in a few minutes!

    87. Re:Ham radio users by n9hmg · · Score: 1

      What do you want to do with it? If you want local conversations - maybe 70 mile radius range, a 2 meter rig using a good local repeater will put you in touch with the locals, maybe let you use IRLP for worldwide communications (not full coverage, but spots all over the world). Add 70cm (dual-banders are commonly insignificantly more than a single-bander) and you can operate remote bases, if anyone is offering one locally. If you want to be able to dabble in everything the service can do, go for one of the "do-all" rigs. I personally use a Yaesu FT-817, which gives me all bands up to 70cm except for 1-1/4 meters, all modes, but with a maximum output power of 5W. It lets me go battery power, and it was cheap for the coverage - USD650, and I heard they were selling them for USD500 at the Dayton HamVention this year. If you don't want to operate portable, you might prefer an FT-100, or the ICOM equivalent, the IC-706mkIIg, both 100W rigs with the capability of the FT-817.
      That said, you don't really know whether you will actually enjoy it (don't discount the possibility, the world is riddled with never-active hams). Most of us would like for everybody to be in the hobby. <DIGRESSION> That was actually a theme of my senior comprehensive exams (required to graduate from Wabash). I was asked what I would do if I could do one thing for the world. My answer was to get as many people as possible active as hams in all countries, on the grounds that it is hard to go to war against someone you know personally. The internet actually realizes a small part of that vision, but it affords few opportunities for meeting someone you wouldn't have already sought out on your own. Hell, mostly now it's people emailing other people they already now... that, and looking at pr0n.</DIGRESSION> Seek out your local club. You need to find out when/where the exams are anyway. Let it be known that you're wanting to check it out, but are leery of committing large cash against an unknown. Chances are that if you do in fact follow up, learn, and get the license, someone will be able to loan you an HT to get on the repeater, maybe even an HF rig. Sometimes you'll get used to, and fall in love with, the rig, and want to buy it off the guy who lent it to you, and sometimes, that's part of what he's hoping for. Regardless, the big hope is to create another ham. Everyone wants you to succeed. Even if nobody has something to lend, the local club probably has a station. Dues are usually in the USD20/y range, and include access to whatever the club has - a station, autopatch on the repeater (it's cool to call somebody on the phone when nobody else can get a signal on their cell phones), remote base access... I don't know what's offered in your area.
      Once you find your niche (and if you don't decide it's all bogus), you can start looking for the sort of equipment you want to own (or build), AND you'll know what you're looking for.
      If you can't connect with a local community, just get a do-all rig and start fucking around.

    88. Re:Ham radio users by Inspector+Lopez · · Score: 1

      There are other things that Hams can do; back in the 1970s and 1980s there were a couple of spectacular sources of interference on HF: "SSBers" (out of band, over power, illegal CB) and "The Woodpecker" (a Soviet Over-The-Horizon radar).

      Hams would routinely police the bottom of the 10 m band to sweep the SSBer's out; and those with automatic morse code keys could very effectively
      jam the Woodpecker, pushing it out of the 20 and 15 meter bands. I remember the slow-scan TV signals (sort of an early MPEG) as being particularly effective jammers.

      Not that I ever engaged in any of that, of course, although I may have been a bit leisurely in tuning up my transmitter from time to time.

    89. Re:Ham radio users by n9hmg · · Score: 1

      Recheck post parentage

    90. Re:Ham radio users by n9hmg · · Score: 1

      Dude (and all others using amateur radio for backcountry emergency contingency)... two words - "wilderness protocol". 146.520Mhz, FM, simplex, from the top of the hour to 5 after, 7AM to 10PM localtime. That's when to listen for distress calls (of course, any time is ok), and that's the time to call when you're most likely to be heard. Out here in the Rockies, hams try to listen at the right times when they're hiking, so they can relay or directly help. Some with homes in wilderness areas are set up for LitZ (long tone zero) detection, so you can call off-time (some need it all time), so if you don't get an answer, try holding down the "0" key (if you have DTMF) for a few seconds, then repeating your call. In the unlikely event that you're a ham without 2M fm capability, try 446 simplex or 52.525 simplex, same way.

    91. Re:Ham radio users by Kymermosst · · Score: 1

      How many people still rely on ham radio? Why havent they moved over to something a little more modern? Does ham radio have any advantages over current technology?

      I'm not sure you understand exactly what ham radio is. It isn't like FRS or CB, just a means for a few people to talk to each other. It is also a means for innovation, a tool for emergency services, and (as someone pointed out) is also a hobby to many people.

      For one, quite often the "bleeding edge" of radio technology is in ham radio. There are expirimentors working on new modulation techniques, low-power signalling, and new wireless data transmission protocols. There are little bits of hobbyist research going on every day.

      People who use ham radio routinely communicate with satellites, do Earth-Moon-Earth signalling, and work on wireless networks that reach distances that people using 802.11a/b could only dream of.

      Hams were some of the first people transmitting on those now-coveted 2.4 & 5.8 GHz bands that consumer electronics now use routinely.

      Secondly, hams offer an emergency means of communication. When there are no phones, how do you get realtime communications? As an example, central Oregon used to have only one long-distance fiber connection. It was cut by a backhoe a couple years ago, destroying communications. It was hams that offered vital communications services for hospitals in the area. Nobody else stepped in. When a huge ice storm hit upstate New York, destroying much of the communications infrastructure, it was hams who provided communications, before FEMA was even on its way.

      You might want to check out the ARRL web site, or Google for ARES, the Amateur Radio Emergency Service. You may find a chapter in your area... ask them what they will do for your community in the event of an emergency.

      Finally, there is the hobby aspect. Hams are typically electronics and/or computer geeks who love the power of wireless communications. What other medium lets a person living out in the middle of nowhere with no phone/internet talk to other people around the globe? You won't find anything else.

      When was the last time you heard of an individual in the middle of nowhere in Africa building their own Internet and phone network so they could talk with someone in Russia? Not likely. I guarantee you'll find a few hams that have built their own tranceivers, though.

      KD7ILU

      --
      "Alcohol, Tobacco, Firearms, and Explosives" should be a convenience store, not a government agency.
    92. Re:Ham radio users by n9hmg · · Score: 1

      Please note the difference between "recruiting" and "coordinating", then rethink your statement.

    93. Re:Ham radio users by n9hmg · · Score: 1

      "Being an Extra, I can actually use all of those frequencies"? If you mean receiving, I agree. If you mean transmitting, then you're either using frequencies illegally, or using amateur allocations above 50Mhz. Either way, it's no different from what any licensed ham in the USA can do. The entry-level license gives all privileges above 50MHz, and no amateur license level adds privileges beyond that.

    94. Re:Ham radio users by Kymermosst · · Score: 1

      I was not devaluing ham radio usage. I think ham radios are fascinating, but the only thing it can do that the internet cannot is provide long distance communication without the need of a network. Am I wrong?

      Yes, you are wrong.

      You can't do satellite relays with the internet. You can't do Earth-Moon-Earth bounces with the internet.

      You can't get an internet connection if you're a poor farmer in the middle of Africa. But you can build an AM tranciever from spare parts.

      Why is 802.11a/b/g such a craze now if wires are so good? GHz-band transmissions were pioneered by hams. The things people are starting to take for granted today. The first wireless networks were made by hams. The first pictures were transmitted over radio by hams. The first video-like signals (using a spiraling optical scanner) were sent by hams before television was even invented.

      You lose ham radio, you lose innovation, emergency services, and radio spectrum that belongs to the public. Anyone can get a ham license with a simple multiple-choice test. It's not like you even have to *work* to get one anymore.

      KD7ILU

      --
      "Alcohol, Tobacco, Firearms, and Explosives" should be a convenience store, not a government agency.
    95. Re:Ham radio users by Skuld-Chan · · Score: 1

      One nice thing about being a ham is your always connected. I can drive across america and with my mobile hf transciever talk around the country and world (one of my first contacts on 10 meters mobile was an operator in Japan for instance). I can talk on satellites to other operators around the country for free.

      When its your radio, antenna and the world there are no corperations to shut off your access or to rely on for that matter. Its all you.

      Which is what gets me about BPL - there's a profit to be made so they are willing to throw all that way.

    96. Re:Ham radio users by Fomhoire · · Score: 1

      It's more of a hobby than a necessity For most people, owning a computer and having internet access is more of a hobby than a necessity. It will be interesting to see people's broadband connections come to a grinding halt when the neighbourhood ham gets on 40 meters with 1kW. I can see it now. Every time the net slows down the closest ham will be blamed.

    97. Re:Ham radio users by Alien+Being · · Score: 1

      As kids during the CB boom of the mid-70s, I'd stay up til the wee hours chatting with local friends. It was great, especially in the summer.

      Towards the end of the craze I picked up a sidebander on the cheap and a beam antenna and did some dx'ing. I did cheat a bit on the upper end of the band, but I never had the balls to fire up the 250w amp I acquired.

      A few years ago a friend of mine asked me to install some VOIP software so he could do some testing. The only mic I had on hand was my old D104. Talking into that thing after 20+ years brought back some great memories, and it was pretty cool to think about the contrasts between a HyGain radio and a networked computer.

    98. Re:Ham radio users by Ancil · · Score: 1

      Fair enough, but I doubt you'll pick up much power line interference in the middle of nowhere.

    99. Re:Ham radio users by hazem · · Score: 1

      They might not have gotten any in the woods, but the guy who received and relayed their signal in Hawaii might.

      There's not much point in being a HAM if you can't send and receive signals from home. That would cut, by a large amount, the number of HAMs that can operate in the country.

      I'm all for more methods for broadband, as it increases competition and lowers prices. But they need to find a way to do it that doesn't wipe out other methods of communication.

    100. Re:Ham radio users by emtboy9 · · Score: 1

      I get on HF all the time and there is too much RF pollution there already (consumer electronics e.g. TVs, DSL modems, hubs,

      Hrmmm... I dont have that kind of problem... oddly enough, every time I key my HF rig, all my computers shut down. ;)

      --
      "Our funds have never taken part in toxic or death spiral convertible financings of any sort" -BayStar's managing partne
    101. Re:Ham radio users by Ancil · · Score: 2, Insightful
      I'm all for more methods for broadband... But they need to find a way to do it that doesn't wipe out other methods of communication.
      I disagree. If broadband can be extended to an extra 100 million people, and 100 thousand people can't use HAM radios anymore, that seems like a worthy tradeoff. Not that I have anything against HAMs, but an internet connection is rapidly becoming a necessity, and there are plenty of rural areas with power lines and little else.
    102. Re:Ham radio users by emtboy9 · · Score: 3, Informative

      give ya a real good example of this... this past winter most of North Carolina was covered in snow or several inches of hard packed ice. Millions of people were without power and heat for as much as 3 weeks or so (we had no power at my house for 17 days).

      In fact, the problems with the ice were so bad that none of the localities around had comms either. All their fancy trunked systems failed because of towers coming down, repeaters losing power and running their backups down, etc etc.

      The local ARES groups activated and provided what ended up being the ONLY form of communication for at least a few days until power was slowly restored. At one point in Chapel Hill, NC, ARES members were riding around in fire trucks and police vehicles because the Cops, firefighters and Paramedics couldnt use their own radios due to outages).

      I realize that a lot of what is said here is due to trolling, but some of the comments I have read are of just plain ignorance. And to answer something else, BPL does not just affect Ham frequencies... it will basically overload any reciever tuning in a freq in the HF spectrum, from 1.5MHz allthe way to 30MHz and maybe beyond. and a LOT more people than just Hams use those frequencies.

      --
      "Our funds have never taken part in toxic or death spiral convertible financings of any sort" -BayStar's managing partne
    103. Re:Ham radio users by Beliskner · · Score: 2, Funny
      Ham radio may just be a hobby, but it is an important one. We provide emergency communications when celular, telco, and power are dead. It promotes international goodwill. It allows many people to learn RF engineering and become great engineers. For the nerds, you can play with high power RF, pass data, send video, bounce signals off the moon, use sattelites, and much more....
      You are a voice from the past. For the US Government to increase the effectiveness of the DMCA, they must have full control over communications. If the Government doesn't like how many people are using Kazaa in a suburb, all they have to do is cut the power and switch off a couple of fibers to drop your net connection and phone lines over SONET. Your ham radio is an impediment to them, and so they are removing you.

      RF engineers are a bunch of people that can mod Xboxes and mock the DMCA by circumventing access restrictions. The RIAA doesn't want you, and they control the US Government.

      --
      A caveman dreams of being us, the incalculable power and riches. We dream of being Q, then what?
    104. Re:Ham radio users by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 2, Interesting

      on September 12th, 2001, several local hams flew out to NYC to help with emergency communications

      Um, no, they didn't. Air flights were grounded on September 12th, 2001.

    105. Re:Ham radio users by Tsu+Dho+Nimh · · Score: 1

      You've never seen a power line running through a poor neighborhood, on its way to a rich neighborhood?

    106. Re:Ham radio users by Tsu+Dho+Nimh · · Score: 1
      "If broadband can be extended to an extra 100 million people, and 100 thousand people can't use HAM radios anymore, that seems like a worthy tradeoff."

      That's also the frequency range used by a lot of fire and police departments. And when LA has its next big quake, wiping out power, cell phone towers, and snapping fiberoptic cables ... who you gonna call? How you gonna call? Smoke signals?

    107. Re:Ham radio users by jafiwam · · Score: 1

      It seems to me that in areas where S&R Ham is critical there are unlikely to be broadband carrying powerlines causing problems.

      You guys don't help Mommy find Jr. who wandered from JC Penny into the mall itself do you?

      Sure HAM has uses, but I bet the uses have a much smaller economic impact than broadband over power lines would.

      In addition, there ARE alternatives to the uses you describe, satilite phones for example could fit that bill too. You said yourself coverage is spotty and you have to hope for a mountain top repeater, using a Sat phone would be no different.

      In real emergency situations, power to run those broadband devices is gone, along with the lines and everything else. So your radio spectrum would be clear enough to be useful.

      HAM users are going to end up fucked in one way or another like many other hobbies in the last few years; model rocketry, gun collecting, etc.

    108. Re:Ham radio users by wendigo2002 · · Score: 1

      When I was in the Army we were running a Joint Task Force with the DEA on the US/Mexico border, and we had an emergency and had no way of contacting our base. So we found some HAM operators in California and used them to contact our UNIT and send help.

    109. Re:Ham radio users by op00to · · Score: 1

      Yes, but what good is not having interference in the bush if people in civilization have large amounts of interference?

      The radio frequencies that HAMS are upset about are the HF frequencies, from about 1.5mhz up through 20something mhz. 99% of the conversations on these frequencies are not run through a repeater -- they don't need to. Get a decent (not huge) antenna, and a decent radio, and you can easily talk the world from a fully mobile, even humanly portable station. This isn't with a repeater -- this is direct radio contact.

      It's irresponsible to take the spectrum away from the same guys who save our ass during severe thunderstorms. Many, if not most, HAMS are NOAA trained storm spotters. When thunderstorm warnings are issued for an area, there's a very good chance a HAM sitting in his car or looking out his window has participated in this process.

      How about during any large community event, like a bike race or marathon? Ham radio operators handle communcations for these types of situations regularly. They provide a public service and should be respected as much as possible.

      Another thing to bring up is Shortwave Listening (SWL). SWL is a very popular hobby, and the only way some people can get reliable news that isn't from a corporate radio station. Like to hear BBC radio, radio free cuba, or the countless other stations on the shortwave dial? Forget about it, if broadband over powerlines becomes commonplace, you won't be able to hear a thing.

      One would think in this age of media consolidation and government lies/censorship, most /.'ers would be smart enough to realize that having more communication options is a good idea.

    110. Re:Ham radio users by op00to · · Score: 1

      That is an outright lie. Ham radio is actually very cheap to get equipment for, and a 12 year old kid should have no problem passing the licensing exam. Most hams will give new hams their old equipment that they don't need very much anymore.

      Totally elitist!

      You hit the nail on the head.

    111. Re:Ham radio users by treat · · Score: 1
      Please note the difference between "recruiting" and "coordinating", then rethink your statement.

      Do people really need to use Ham radios to communicate over a distance of two blocks?

    112. Re:Ham radio users by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      OK, lets make this meaningful to the /. crowd. That way cool Atomic Clock Watch on your wrist won't work because it uses shortwave frequencies.

    113. Re:Ham radio users by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      "Why havent they moved over to something a little more modern? Does ham radio have any advantages over current technology?"

      Yeah, stick with AOL, it's more modern.

    114. Re:Ham radio users by madshot · · Score: 1
      I am a ham radio operator. I use my radio in the car all the time. When I travel I get to talk to all kinds of people.

      I drove across the USA last year, and when I did I was able to ask people where the best places to eat where and where local points of interest are.

      I also use my radio to talk to other hams to find out where the bad traffic is from someone thats really sitting in it.

      The problem with Boradband over Power Lines is that it damages the HF frequency spectrim. Normally you use this spectrim to talk to NASA space shuttles or talk around the world to other people. It is a lot of fun to do, sure some of this stuff you could use computers but it's just not the same.

      --
      Obama = Socialism.
    115. Re:Ham radio users by madshot · · Score: 2, Informative
      Police radios often require repeters (devices that pick up the signal and rebroadcast it) in order to function. And if you had to use your rigs HF radio to talk to someone far away to call in a chopper for rescue, and their were power lines there, you might to be able to or the other end might not be able to hear you.

      Police hand held radios have a short range, 2 - 5 miles in most cases (Line of site can increase range to 20 miles but you can't have buildings or mountains in the way). The police cars have a 3 - 7 mile range (again further with true line of site.).

      --
      Obama = Socialism.
    116. Re:Ham radio users by madshot · · Score: 1
      but if I can't talk on those frequencies because power over broadband is always on (except when power is out), chances are I'm not going to spend the $1,000 for the ham radio that works on those frequencies because I know I can't use them. If I don't buy the radio then I'll never beable to help during an emergency.

      catch 22

      Look, you have cable, dsl, even some wifi providers, and satilite. we don't need another way to connect to the net..

      --
      Obama = Socialism.
    117. Re:Ham radio users by madshot · · Score: 1

      that is very true. They get the time from a radio station in Colorado and another station (can't remember where). Thats not the only device that depends on atomic time recieved over the airwaves.

      --
      Obama = Socialism.
    118. Re:Ham radio users by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Yes, hams are required to prevent harmful interference to other stations. However, in times of emergency (immediate threat to human life or property), one is allowed to gain attention on ANY frequency with ANY mode at ANY power level. For US amateurs, the rules are spelled out in FCC Part 97.401-97.407 and various other places in Part 97.

      Steve, N7VQM

    119. Re:Ham radio users by shaitand · · Score: 1

      Nope, not neighborhoods without running water, you see, I've yet to see city that has BOTH rich neighborhoods and neighborhoods without running water. Rich neighborhoods = city water = running water even if it's a spiket down the alley.

    120. Re:Ham radio users by TrickyRick · · Score: 1

      >Then these neighborhoods probably wouldn't have >broadband running over the power lines either >and therefore no interference.

      There would be interference on this end. When they are needing to communicate from a disaster area to the rest of the world and the USA is a big part of the rest of the world. Therefore if broadband over power lines causes severe interfence to HF, it would make it difficult to impossible to communicate.

      AD5DU

    121. Re:Ham radio users by john82 · · Score: 1

      The answer is to discover which frequencies this interferes with and move the hams off of those frequencies.

      1) Ham has been around a hell of a lot longer than the internet
      2) HF isn't used for emrgency services? Since when?
      3) Ham is an international, low cost, grass roots communications system. But you think we should junk it because utilities companies in the US want to make money as ISPs?
      4) Even if many hams are old timers (as you put it) does that make it okay to take away their hobby? That's a piss poor justification for giving you what you want. "Screw them. They're old and can't do anything about it anyway." Instead, I suggest we remove your access to the internet since you seem to be just another script-kiddie haxor dood (getting trillions of dollars worth of p0rn).

    122. Re:Ham radio users by /dev/trash · · Score: 1

      Thanks. I was trying to look around for a radio to get, just some prelim research but google wasn't helping much.

      I do have a local club, nearby, with a test in Septemeber.

      Thanks for the reply.

    123. Re:Ham radio users by Wolfrider · · Score: 1

      --You are free to think that, until a disaster strikes and the Hams help save everybody's ass yet again.

      --
      .
      == WolfriderV6 == I'm willing to admit that *I just might* be wrong... Are you??
    124. Re:Ham radio users by dargaud · · Score: 1
      > As a strike team leader for a mountain search and rescue team, I'll tell you that without HAM radio, our job would be just plain impossible in many situations

      I'd like to believe that, unfortunately my wife's climbing party was once swept in a rockfall. She called for hours with her radio, could reach several HAM operators, but nobody believed her or would call a rescue. Finally 2 hours later one did. It would have been faster if she walked back to Chamonix. One of the guys still can't walk properly 10 years later.

      For all I care those frequencies should be put to much better use.

      And I don't take useless radios when I go climbing

      --
      Non-Linux Penguins ?
    125. Re:Ham radio users by TaxSlave · · Score: 1

      There's a big difference between relying on ham radio and using ham radio. I use my radios regularly, but I do not rely on them for my communications.

      Of course, should the phones and Internet go down in the area, I can power up my 10 meter rig, which runs on a deep-cycle battery

      The real reason why BPL is a problem is much deeper than just ham radio. The HF spectrum comprises a lot of space. Ham radio only occupies a portion of this space. BPL causes interference all across the HF spectrum. The result is that ham radio, and other services, will see problems. Some of those other services DO rely on radio communication.

      BPL is already in existence. It's already causing problems. The power companies want to be able to do more BPL work.

      As I understand the case, BPL requires DSL-style local access to the system. In other words, you must be within a certain distance of a base node in order to get access to the net. These base nodes will start in the high-population areas, due to the need for revenue to pay for startup. The outlying areas will probably not be among the first to get access. In fact, if DSL is any guide to how fast access goes to the rural areas, then we can expect NO BPL access for years in those areas.

      BPL sounds like a good idea, but has problems. It seems to have benefits, but upon examination, the benefits seem to already be provided by other sources.

      Respectfully, from reading this thread, most non-hams discussing the issue are pretty ignorant of what's going on. Many of you have benefitted from ham radio for years, and have never had any clue. From weather tracking to emergency services to high-tech experimentation, there are many reasons to keep ham radio accessible and our spectrum usable.

      How much space does ham radio use? Hmmm.

      1800-2000 kHz
      3500-7300
      10100-10150
      14000-14350
      18068-18 168
      21000-21450
      24890-24990
      28000-29700
      US HF allocations only

      So, if the tiny spectrum allocated to ham radio is majorly harmed by BPL, how much spectrum allocated to other services is gonna get the hatchet as well?

    126. Re:Ham radio users by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      If the power goes out, you'd only be able to talk to other people who also have the power out... the interference is on the receiving end skippy.

    127. Re:Ham radio users by slasher999 · · Score: 1

      As others have pointed out, radio is there when other forms of communications fail. 9/11 was proof that still is still true. The Internet and cell phones were useless due to volume, television stations were off the air due to the loss of their repeaters and/or antenna systems, but one could still turn on a radio and get news. Hams helped deliver messages (we call it "traffic") to families and friends of those effected and helped disseminate news via our own repeater systems.

      Recently us hams practiced our "emergency readiness" in our annual field day exercise where hams across the country operate from remote locations using "emergency power" and antenna systems that can be quickly errected and torn down.

      Techies and Hams are cut from a similar cloth. It's all about maximizing performance whether we're talking about eeking out performance in hardware or software, or getting our signal through to make a rare contact when there are 30 or 40 other stations trying for that same contact!

      I invite everyone here to check out their local ham radio club or clubs and see what it's all about. Check out a hamfest and see some of the cool gear we play with, and make sure you get to field day next year!

      --kc2kth

    128. Re:Ham radio users by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Did everyone miss the fact that BPL is within current FCC regulations? The Hamtones are notched in Homeplug devices, but of course if you tune right up to the edge, it's going to cause some noise. Should have been more involved when the regulations were created, instead of whining about someone who is following them.

    129. Re:Ham radio users by Supercilious · · Score: 1

      Talk about somebody without a clue!!! I gather since you are not interested, everyone must be not interested. If you enjoy the internet, you need to back up through history and see where this whole packet thing begins. If you enjoy your cell phone you need to back up through history and trace small transceivers. Ham radio is a lot like the cockroach - totally disrespected and constantly under a death threat - but the cockroach - and ham radio will be around after the Internet has crashed.

    130. Re:Ham radio users by Directrix1 · · Score: 1

      Ham = good. Free = good. Ham = open global network.

      --
      Occam's razor is the blind faith in the natural selection of least resistance and in universal oversimplification. -- EF
    131. Re:Ham radio users by Directrix1 · · Score: 1

      You can't do satellite relays with the internet. You can't do Earth-Moon-Earth bounces with the internet.
      Both of these are specific instances of the network which I just mentioned as being the only difference.

      You can't get an internet connection if you're a poor farmer in the middle of Africa. But you can build an AM tranciever from spare parts.
      If you are a really poor farmer you probably can't even do that. OK, so potential TCO is higher in some areas. Thats just nitpicking, and is not a universal "feature".

      Why is 802.11a/b/g such a craze now if wires are so good? GHz-band transmissions were pioneered by hams. The things people are starting to take for granted today. The first wireless networks were made by hams. The first pictures were transmitted over radio by hams. The first video-like signals (using a spiraling optical scanner) were sent by hams before television was even invented.
      "Firsts" have nothing to do with features. I suppose that is a big difference, their history. But suffice it to say you can pipe any signal you want over the internet as long as its digital.

      You lose ham radio, you lose innovation, emergency services, and radio spectrum that belongs to the public. Anyone can get a ham license with a simple multiple-choice test. It's not like you even have to *work* to get one anymore.
      I think you misunderstood my original comment as being a bash on hams. Hams have their place. Hams are cool. But the only difference between hams and the internet is the underlying connective medium itself. Nothing else. Thank you, have a nice day.

      --
      Occam's razor is the blind faith in the natural selection of least resistance and in universal oversimplification. -- EF
    132. Re:Ham radio users by kc2cjw · · Score: 1

      I'll address why the hams have concerns over BPL first, then answer your questions.

      BPL is a 'dirty' technology, which would run over a pretty old & dirty infrastructure. Other countries, such as Japan, have already rejected BPL due to the problems it creates. BPL literally wipes out large portions of the radio spectrum between 2 MHz and 80 MHz. (This segment includes Shortwave, "CB," the Public Safety VHF Low Band (it's still heavily used...), the lower VHF TV channels, Radio Remote Control, and Paging ("Beeper") frequencies. Hams are worried about the effects BPL will have on ALL users of the HF radio Spectrum, which includes broadcasters, Government (both admin and Military), the airlines, Public Safety, etc., and of course the ham bands.

      Now, about the hams:

      Numbers: Approx. 600,000 people in the US are licensed to use ham radio; Globally, it's in the millions, and new hams enter the hobby daily.

      As for who "relies" on ham radio, you can count the Office of Homeland Security, FEMA, Emergency Management offices in every state, the American Red Cross and other disaster relief agencies among the agencies which literally do rely on ham radio in times of crisis. "When all else fails..." has become something of a slogan for Ham Radio, simply because when something does go horribly wrong, ham radio is the one technology that does work. In the aftermath of major storms, there is typically no power, no phone service, and no functioning ISP connections for days, weeks, and sometimes longer. Hams, with portable gear, often fill the communications voids. (Personal Experience: the WTC attack Sept. 11th, 2001- NO wired telephone service south of Canal Street, Manhattan; No Cell service in a 30 mile radius of the WTC due to equipment destruction at Telco facilities in the WTC neighborhood, and general system overload. Officials had closed all bridges and tunnels due to further possible threats. Hams working with Emergency Management officials relayed information from NJ Transit/Rail and Port Authority TransHudson into NYC as precious few other links were available for many hours. Using ham radio, I was able to gather information about which Hudson River crossing was open, and was able to lead a couple of hundred fellow New Jersians out of Manhattan that afternoon. Hams were also provided communications directly to - and "interoperations" communications between - relief agencies, e.g. the Red Cross, Salvation Army, and National Guard staging and logistics areas, for several MONTHS after the actual attack.)

      As for "moving to something a little more modern," hams have been doing digital communications for decades & image communications (FAX, pictures, whatever) for almost as long. By tying a GPS to a microcomputer and a radio, hams developed something called APRS - Auto Position Reporting System - long before the commercial interests released AVL - Automatic Vehicle Location. Hams fly their own earth-orbiting satellites, and have voice and data equipment aboard the International Space Station. Hams have been experimenting with digital broadband on 2.4 GHz (and higher) for years. (Would you care to guess who thought of the "Pringles Can Antenna" or the use of 'surplus' 18-in. TVRO dishes to extend the range of WAP's and Wireless BroadBand routers?)

      Once "Ham Radio" is understood, it's difficult to split "current technology" from the techniques used by hams. Sure, sometimes basic old Morse Code is used, but don't forget we hams have many, many 'modes,' including digital data and voice, in our bag of tricks... and one advantage is how some hams have made this technology quite portable and independent.

  5. sounds like a fair trade to me! by larry+bagina · · Score: 3, Funny

    I'm sure the hams wouldn't mind so much if they realized how much free porn they could get with powerline broadband.

    --
    Do you even lift?

    These aren't the 'roids you're looking for.

    1. Re:sounds like a fair trade to me! by blibbleblobble · · Score: 1

      "I'm sure the hams wouldn't mind so much if they realized how much free porn they could get with powerline broadband."

      Yeah, great idea, given how much this country has just spent on anti-terrorism and "security" that there are now people lobbying for permission to completely disrupt the country's emergency communications systems. Who would have thought they'd be so bold as to risk the health of those caught in future attacks by blocking their calls for aid?

      Somebody really needs to point out (if the telecoms regulator hasn't already snorted their tea at the idea of such a prepostorous suggestion) that jamming emergency communications really isn't in anybody's best interests.

    2. Re:sounds like a fair trade to me! by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0
      umm... how about just using a cable modem, dsl, direttv internet, fractional t-1, ISDN, or a local ISP that uses microwave internet (usually about $80 a month).

      download your porn some other way. Ham radio is for the family, too bad the internet is so full of porn and other unfamily activities.

  6. good riddens by JVert · · Score: 0, Troll

    ever since this "internet" thing came along I havn't found a use for using my license. Lets make an agreement that the powerline internet gets shut down on field day, cause thats kinda fun.

    *eyes widen*...But there hasn't been any link beetween powerline internet and 802.11 performance has there?

    1. Re:good riddens by Anonvmous+Coward · · Score: 1

      "ever since this "internet" thing came along I havn't found a use for using my license. Lets make an agreement that the powerline internet gets shut down on field day, cause thats kinda fun.

      *eyes widen*...But there hasn't been any link beetween powerline internet and 802.11 performance has there?"


      Any Ham Radio Operator knows this isn't off-topic.

      The internet is directly responsible for my letting my license expire. Lots of people have a similar story. (For the record, there are more chicks on the net than on Ham Radio.)

    2. Re:good riddens by canuck_wingnut · · Score: 1

      You obviously weren't real interested in the first place.

      Canuck Wingnut

      --
      -: :- mv sco /dev/null because a computer is a terrible thing to waste. -:
    3. Re:good riddens by Anonvmous+Coward · · Score: 1

      "You obviously weren't real interested in the first place."

      Logic doesn't actually dictate that. Now, if you'd like to phrase that in the form of a question, I'd be happy to provide you with the truth.

    4. Re:good riddens by Aussie · · Score: 1
      The internet is directly responsible for my letting my license expire.

      Ditto.

      You would think slashdotters would understand things like the need/want to communicate over 1000km using 1 millwatt of power, compete in radio direction finding ( very useful skill in an emergency). Ham radio allows anyone to experiment with digital radio, long distance, microwaves etc. And don't forget the cool geeks you can meet in your local radio club :)


      Not to mention that in an emergency, radio operators that can maintain their own equipment are more than useful.



  7. who cares? by Stanley+Feinbaum · · Score: 0

    With the internet giving worldwide communication and stable voice transmission at your fingertips, why would anyone use ham radio? I think sacrificing the use of an old and tired medium is worth it to bring broadband to more people.

    And don't say ham radio would be useful in some sort of natural disaster, seeing as the internet WAS designed to withstand a nuclear attack!

    --

    Stanley Feinbaum, professional journalist and master debater! God bless the USA!

    1. Re:who cares? by Nathan+Ramella · · Score: 0, Troll
      Well, case in point.. The HAMs usually present themselves as being the last line of defense or communication, or something, I forget -- after a catastrophic event.

      Hey, that's fine. If something catastrophic occures and the phone lines (and power!) go out, you're back at the right hand of community service. All the girls who ran away to sidle up on the Broadband through Power hunks will realize the error in their ways and come slinking back in shame.

      Will this be like the movie where the stubborn general doesn't listen to the sensitive and intelligent scientist and tries to use force to solve the problem rather than playing a game of tic-tac-toe or having a skiing competition?

      Will the HAMs somehow arrange for the FCC or the PUC to end up with a custard pie in the collective faces to underscore how wrong they are, after they win the day?

      Just remember. Morse-Code over HAM radio won us the Independence Day Alien showdown. Without HAM we never could have coordinated! And Morse code! Don't forget Morse code!

      --
      http://www.remix.net/
    2. Re:who cares? by evilpenguin · · Score: 3, Insightful
      ...seeing as the internet WAS designed to withstand a nuclear attack!


      I don't recall seeing this in any DARPA specifications. It was designed to provide network communications over unreliable links. And before people go off bashing ham radio, consider that Karn's Algorithm, a critical component of TCP/IP without which the Internet would have died long before the present number of hosts, was developed by Phil Karn, KA9Q (a ham radio operator) to solve problems with TCP over AX.25, the ham packet radio protocol.

      "The Internet" would not survive a nuclear strike. Hell, as we have seen great swaths of it can be taken out by a clumsy backhoe operator. Ham radio definitely has uses. In fact, ham radio could quickly be brought to bear to provide TCP/IP links to replace damaged infrastructure.

      Ham radio is often used to provide communications following disasters like hurricanes.

      No doubt the Internet is more important, and more capable than ham radio in general, but with my ham gear and a 12v battery I can provide significant communications for a lot of people. How much of the internet functions when a whole city's power grid is out?
    3. Re:who cares? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Well, let's see how the Internet does after a hurricane knocks out the phone network, downs power lines, and puts the local cable system out of commission. There goes your dial-up, DSL, cable, and powerline broadband. What about wireless? Hurricanes take down towers quite nicely, so there goes any kind of wireless access. But you already lost that when the wireless provider's link to its backbone was cut when the phone lines went down.

      Oh, you don't live in an area prone to hurricanes? Well, how about a war zone? The Internet won't function so well when an army decides to cut an area's telecommunications links. And those snazzy video phones CNN used in Iraq ain't cheap, so unless you want all the news from that area coming from official sources or media outlets endorsed by at least one of the military forces, then you'd better be glad ham operators exist.

    4. Re:who cares? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      The internet network layer was designed to survive heavy damage, but not the copper wires and fiberoptic cables connecting it together.

    5. Re:who cares? by AKnightCowboy · · Score: 1
      With the internet giving worldwide communication and stable voice transmission at your fingertips, why would anyone use ham radio? I think sacrificing the use of an old and tired medium is worth it to bring broadband to more people.

      Your corporate masters would be very very proud of you Stanley. I recommend for additional ass-kissing effort to lobby that the FCC take away the amateur radio space and gives it to a private wireless communications provider who could in turn then sell back monthly access to people with ham equipment for a generous markup of course. And don't say ham radio would be useful in some sort of natural disaster, seeing as the internet WAS designed to withstand a nuclear attack!

      Have you ever seen an actual natural disaster? Generally utilities are the first things to go. I can guarentee you that in a hurricane or tornado Ma Bell's guys aren't going to be up on the pole trying to get your ADSL restablished so you can contact your parents and tell them you're OK. Cell phones are also out.. case in point: New York City, 9-11-2001. It's completely unreliable in a disaster. That was just a couple of buildings. Imagine if the whole city was a smoldering hole in the ground? Do you think your Lawn Guyland ADSL connection would still work?

    6. Re:who cares? by Tsu+Dho+Nimh · · Score: 1
      " With the internet giving worldwide communication and stable voice transmission at your fingertips, why would anyone use ham radio? ... And don't say ham radio would be useful in some sort of natural disaster, seeing as the internet WAS designed to withstand a nuclear attack!"

      OK ... you get lost in the desert or the Colorado mountains and we'll use the internet to coordinate the rescue effort on the ground. With everyone driving 50 miles to the nearest payphone to check what's happening in the search, you should be well skeletonized before you are found.

      Although the internet was designed to be robust and "withstand a nuclear attack", it's only because they can route traffic around areas where the network has been destroyed. For the people in that destroyed area, there may be no internet, or phones. When the cell phone towers lose power or fall down, so does the ability to communicate. When the routers lose power or the cables snap ... there goes the internet.

      Who you gonna call?

    7. Re:who cares? by DreadSpoon · · Score: 2

      If all the technology used to drive the internet is down, so would be I imagine the powerlines; so in these destroyed or desolate areas with no cell towers or working cabling, the ham radios would work well enough, no?

    8. Re:who cares? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0
      "Who you gonna call?"

      Ghost Busters?

    9. Re:who cares? by suwain_2 · · Score: 1

      And don't say ham radio would be useful in some sort of natural disaster, seeing as the internet WAS designed to withstand a nuclear attack!

      The Internet as a whole will never go down. But when was the last time your Internet connection went down? Earlier today, for me, lasting an hour or two. When your town is hit by a tornado, do you really think you'll still have an Internet connection? Sure, much of the world does. But not your town, where you need the help.

      Besides the emergency communication aspect, ham radio's just fun. Sure, I can e-mail someone overseas. But to talk without wires? Can you do that? I can. Sure, more people may take interest in the Internet than ham radio, but that's like saying "This Linux thing... Who needs it? Not many people use it; Windows is SOOOO much easier to add new hardware with. Surely we can just do away with Linux and let the Windows people be?" It's absurd to propose doing away with ham radio entirely.

      --
      ________________________________________________
      suwain_2 :: quality slashdot p
    10. Re:who cares? by stangbat · · Score: 1

      I won't say ham radio would be useful in some sort of natural disaster. I'll say it IS useful in natural disasters.

      Let's see...who is out monitoring storms and reporting severe weather to SKYWARN and NOAA?

      Who prepares and runs drills to be prepared when a tornado hits your town? (RACES, ARES)

      And how much do they get paid for this? Oh yeah, nothing. Okay, lets piss these guys off, belittle them, and make them feel less appreciated than the already are.

      Hams are kind of like lawyers in the sense that they aren't worth anything until you really need one.

      73,

      Stangbat

    11. Re:who cares? by geekoid · · Score: 1

      the internet was NEVER designed to withstand a nuclear attack. It was designed in a manner where information is routed to available routers. there is a BIG difference.

      During natural disasters, cell towers go down, rendering cell phone useless.

      What are you going to use to power all the routers from your house to the first router outside the disaster area?

      The internet is CAN NOT help you if you are in the disaster. A ham radio and a car on the other hand, can. Hell a hand held radio will be able to talk to someone else.

      In the case of a huge diaster, you can bet your ass while you are whing because you can't play your damn MMORPG, there will be Ham operators setting up stations so they can get help to the people in need.

      Now the military does have a hardened phone system, but good luck getting to it.

      --
      The Kruger Dunning explains most post on /. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Dunning%E2%80%93Kruger_effect
    12. Re:who cares? by Goody · · Score: 1

      And don't say ham radio would be useful in some sort of natural disaster, seeing as the internet WAS designed to withstand a nuclear attack!

      Saddam Hussein had a TCP/IP network in place during the first Gulf War. It was taken down by the US military by sending a new innocent-looking unlabeled printer with modified firware to a remote Iraqi military office. The personnel connected it to the network and it reeked havoc with the routing tables and dropped the network.... no nuclear devices deployed...

      --
      Tired of being "punished" by the Slashdot $rtbl since 2002. I'm now over at http://soylentnews.org/ .
    13. Re:who cares? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Sure, but who's going to receive the transmissions from these areas? If those who might be in a position to pick up the signal and offer assistance aren't able to hear it because of interference, it's all a moot point.

    14. Re:who cares? by HolyCoitus · · Score: 1

      That's the issue... No outside communication from the destroyed areas to the outside areas. It doesn't do enough good to be able to communicate in that area, transmissions being relayed out is the key.

      --
      That's scary.
    15. Re:who cares? by Tsu+Dho+Nimh · · Score: 1
      Yes, most of them would. They are low power, and most ham setups have batteries. Within a few hours of the collapse of the World Trade Center buildings (which had most of the cell phone relays for that area), they had communication via ham radio in and out. Most of the delay was in moving more equipment in.

      After the big Mexico City earthquake in the 1980s, some ham operators stayed on the air by using batteries from their neighbor's cars, but they stayed on the air.

  8. Article by Silvertre · · Score: 3, Informative

    ...Something tells me this site is gunna go down, so here's the text of the article:

    NEWINGTON, CT, Aug 6, 2003--ARRL President Jim Haynie, W5JBP, says Broadband over Power Line (BPL)--if widely deployed--would represent "spectrum pollution" on a level that is "difficult to imagine." Haynie reacted after seeing videotape and early data from recent ARRL field studies in four states where BPL is undergoing testing.

    "BPL is the most crucial issue facing Amateur Radio and the one that has the most devastating potential," Haynie said. In terms of interference potential on HF and low-VHF frequencies, "nothing is on the same scale as BPL."

    A form of power line carrier (PLC) technology, BPL would use existing low and medium-voltage power lines to deliver broadband services to homes and businesses. Because it uses frequencies between 2 and 80 MHz, BPL could affect HF and low-VHF amateur allocations wherever it's deployed. BPL proponents--primarily electric power utilities--already are testing BPL systems in several markets, and one reportedly is already offering the service. FCC rules already allow BPL, although industry proponents want the FCC to relax radiation limits. It's feared such a change could exacerbate BPL's interference potential.

    At the West Gulf Division Convention (Austin Summerfest 2003) August 1-2 in Austin, Texas, Haynie previewed a short video (see below) that covers highlights of a recent field tour by ARRL Lab Manager Ed Hare, W1RFI. The video, which will complement technical data ARRL is gathering and compiling, turned out to be a real eye-opener for many in the audience.

    Walt Dubose, K5YFW--assistant chairman of the ARRL High Speed Multimedia (HSMM) Working Group--said it was about what he'd expected. "But for most attending--maybe 60 percent--it was much worse than they had imagined, and for some it was a real shocker," he reported. Dubose said a few of those viewing the video simply couldn't believe that BPL actually was causing the high noise level.

    In late July, Hare traveled some 1350 miles to visit BPL trial communities in Maryland, Virginia, Pennsylvania and New York to take measurements over significant parts of the HF spectrum. He also took initial readings at low-VHF frequencies. Driving a specially equipped vehicle loaded with radio gear and measurement devices, Hare said he didn't need to look long or track down "a few hot spots" to find BPL interference. "The signals were all over," he said.

    "The interference found ranged from moderate to extremely strong," Hare said. The video shows the S meter of an HF transceiver holding steady in excess of S9 as the speaker emits a crackling din, which one observer described as sounding like a Geiger counter. Only the very strongest amateur signals broke through on 20 and 15 meters. Hare noted that the field strengths of the various systems all were within FCC Part 15 limits for power line carrier (PLC) devices.

    At a couple of points, the video shows noise continuing nearly unabated on 15 and 20 meters as the car moves down long streets lined with overhead wiring. Hare said the signal propagated for at least a couple of miles down one road.

    "Signals would have been much stronger using a gain antenna," he observed. Hare's vehicle carried a roof-mounted, horizontally polarized Buddi-Pole antenna--a loaded dipole.

    Each BPL system exhibited a unique sound depending upon the modulation scheme it used, and Hare said he was able to distinguish three types during his recent tour. While in most cases, the signal sounded like static or pulse noise, in one city, it resembled sort of interference a computer monitor or similar device might generate, with warbling "birdies" blanketing the bands at closely spaced intervals. "Naturally, overhead wiring was the worst," Hare said. BPL signals continued to be audible in neighborhoods with underground electrical utility wiring, although it was somewhat attenuated.

    The ARRL already has filed a 120-page package of text and technical exhibits

    1. Re:Article by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Thank you for posting the article text so everyone can view it incase the site goes down, however you should consider posting anonymously, or be cast into the fiery pits of hell, you karma whore...erm I mean, because its not fair to get abuse the system to get mod points. :) Thank you!

  9. First Real Post by terrymr · · Score: 0, Redundant

    Did nobody tell the power companies that power lines are like a really big antenna (not well tuned mind) and that sending data at radio frequencies was going to cause interference with radio. Can't figure out why nobody saw that coming.

  10. Onward /. ! by bersl2 · · Score: 1

    The fatal mistake of linking to a video has been made.

    BTW, that's some serious interference in the video!

    1. Re:Onward /. ! by bersl2 · · Score: 0, Offtopic

      Nah, I actually kind of laughed at the goatse guy. I mean, it's disgusting, and I don't like it, but it sure beats some of the other disgusting stuff out there, like in this troll's post. It's the one below the goatse.cx link.

      So, in conclusion:

  11. Mirror of video by caluml · · Score: 3, Informative

    I can see that video getting hammered.
    I'm grabbing a copy here

    1. Re:Mirror of video by killthiskid · · Score: 1

      Ok, having watched the video and listen to the audio, the interference sounds like a bunch of clicks... does this corresponde to the data transfer occuring over the powerlines being a type of packet-burst communication?

    2. Re:Mirror of video by punkmac · · Score: 1

      since that host seems slow as well..

      here as well

      enjoy

    3. Re:Mirror of video by caluml · · Score: 1

      Ahem. And here's the bandwidth graph ;o)

    4. Re:Mirror of video by fatboy · · Score: 3, Informative

      Ok, having watched the video and listen to the audio, the interference sounds like a bunch of clicks... does this corresponde to the data transfer occuring over the powerlines being a type of packet-burst communication?

      The noise is a broadband hash of signals that cover tens of Mhz.

      Here is a thread on qrz what has some answers by the guy that made the video, W1RFI.

      --
      --fatboy
  12. Seems Fair to me... by sogoodsofarsowhat · · Score: 1

    I have had problems with HAM radio operators coming in on my home speakers (when they are not even hooked up). So i guess this is fair. Some (not all) overpower thier rigs, so bleeding into their spectrum would seem fair. Turn around is fair play you know :)

    --
    . I love the sound of burning women and screaming rubber....
    1. Re:Seems Fair to me... by bandy · · Score: 2, Informative

      They're not "hooked up" [think terminated], so there's lots of spare wire serving as an antenna and corrosion serving as a discriminator -- no wonder you're getting "interference" -- you have a simple radio reciever. Put a small cap across the speaker terminals and your problem goes bye-bye.

      --
      "You might as well get your son a ticket to hell as give him a five string banjo." -unknown minister
    2. Re:Seems Fair to me... by Omkar · · Score: 1

      How about at least trying to stay out of each other's way?

    3. Re:Seems Fair to me... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Knock on the door of the local ham - you'll recognize his house by the antennas. FCC rules obligate him to help solve *your* problem, and he should be quite receptive once he gets over his embarassment.

      It'd be unlikely to find a ham 'overpowering' his equipment, in terms of running above the legal limit. (Our limit is rather high; we don't need to. ;)) Don't mistake some moron with a 500W CB station for a licensed ham, either.

    4. Re:Seems Fair to me... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      What you maybe getting is not HAMs but someone with a CB running to much power.

    5. Re:Seems Fair to me... by suwain_2 · · Score: 1

      As far as overpowering, we're allowed 1,500 Watts; I doubt more than a few exceed that.

      I certainly can't speak for everyone, but most of the hams I know are genuinely concerned about interference, many to the point of coming over and diagnosing problems if desired. (I should note that more often than not, the problem is shoddily-made electronics such as TVs or radios, as opposed to the radios themselves, although it's certainly not absolute.) Rather than trying to cause interference back, perhaps you could try to talk to neighborhood hams. I bet they'd be eager and willing to rectify the problem.

      --
      ________________________________________________
      suwain_2 :: quality slashdot p
    6. Re:Seems Fair to me... by sharkman67 · · Score: 1

      What does overpowering the rig mean? Please don't make up stuff and blame it on hams.

      There are FCC regulations regarding interference. If you are having a problem I'll bet $1000 that the problem is your equipment, not the ham's. Manufacturers (especially Sony) are notorious for not properly shielding their equipment.

      My favorite ham bashing story is about guy who put up a tower in his yard. A few days after it was up, the town building inspector comes by because of interference complaints (btw the town has zero juristiction over this matter). The building inspector has to laugh because the ham figured there would be fallout so he did not put any antennas on the tower. The inspector leaves and tells the ham not to worry about further complaints or problems.

    7. Re:Seems Fair to me... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      gee what a great story...

      ...Not
      Man, you are one pretentious bore.

    8. Re:Seems Fair to me... by sogoodsofarsowhat · · Score: 1

      Well when I say they are not hooked up thats what i mean. No wire from the terminals and no they are not shoddy speakers (Klipsch isnt known for shoddy speakers.) They are sitting next to my hooked up pair. I will investigate further if it is HAM or CB. You may well be right about it being an overdriven CB. As for it being a radio i do have a pretty good understanding of electronics and see no reason that a pair of speakers not hooked up should receive audio transmissions.

      --
      . I love the sound of burning women and screaming rubber....
  13. YOU FAILED IT!!! by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    We know what you're using that antenna for. You're a sick, sick man.

  14. *gasp* by hctimo787 · · Score: 0, Troll

    boofreakinghoo

    this is worse than coal train companies complaining about the DOT paving roads over railroad tracks.

  15. Harmful interference by frumin · · Score: 5, Insightful

    I'm a HAM radio oprator. It bothers me that some pople don't see anyting wrong with creating interference on already allocated radio waves. What if the same companies started to interfere with WiFi bands ? How would you react ?

    --
    I punched a baby once.
    1. Re:Harmful interference by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      There is a simple solution to that problem. De-allocate any ham bands where there is a problem.

    2. Re:Harmful interference by mhesseltine · · Score: 1

      I'm not a radio geek, or lawyer, but, doesn't every device that has an FCC label on it basically say that you have to accept any interference that occurs? Therefore, if it bothered the 802.11 spectrum, we'd be irritated about it, and probably contact someone to get it changed. But, until things changed, we'd have to deal with it, either by filtering the noise, changing frequencies, etc.

      This is the same thing that the HAM operators need to do. Eventually, they'll move things to the point that someone doesn't complain, or realize that they aren't bothering enough users to justify changing things. Either way, the ball is in the court of the HAM operators. Get together and start writing letters, making phone calls, etc.

      --
      Overrated / Underrated : Moderation :: Anonymous Coward : Posting
    3. Re:Harmful interference by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Ham radio is different though. It's like a commercial radio station, you don't have to accept interference. It's illegal to interfere with Ham radio transmissions.

    4. Re:Harmful interference by akb · · Score: 1

      I would react in proportion to the number of users effected and the nature of the uses that are effected. Hams would lose big on both counts.

    5. Re:Harmful interference by frumin · · Score: 1

      Well, if the company gets the FCC part 15 label thing (I don't think stuff like that does but...) they also can't create any harmful interference. What if they started to bleed the RF signal into a cordless phone (the old ones) or your iTrip spectrum ? Would want to live with that ?

      --
      I punched a baby once.
    6. Re:Harmful interference by DAldredge · · Score: 1

      I would react in proportion to the number of users effected and the nature of the uses that are effected. DeCSS users would lose big on both counts.

      Doesn't sound so good when it hurts something you support, now does it?

    7. Re:Harmful interference by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      I would venture to say there are more people interested in watching DVDs on linux then Ham operators.

    8. Re:Harmful interference by CharlieG · · Score: 5, Informative

      Actually, Ham radio operators, being licensed do NOT have to accept interference! That is the diference between a "Part 15" device and a Part 97 device.

      Your 802.11 device has to accept interference, part 97 (Ham radio) or any other licensed service does not

      --
      -- 73 de KG2V For the Children - RKBA! "You are what you do when it counts" - the Masso
    9. Re:Harmful interference by fatboy · · Score: 1

      I'm not a radio geek, or lawyer, but, doesn't every device that has an FCC label on it basically say that you have to accept any interference that occurs?

      Only if it is some kind of Part 15 device. The other requirement of unlicensed Part 15 devices is that they NOT cause harmful interference. The FCC wants to change that rule. Just wait until the military finds out they have no HF comms because the base in located in a town with BPL. Yep, S9 noise over the WHOLE HF spectrum. It will destroy a natural resource, the ionoshere.

      --
      --fatboy
    10. Re:Harmful interference by ChuckleBug · · Score: 5, Informative

      I'm not a radio geek, or lawyer, but, doesn't every device that has an FCC label on it basically say that you have to accept any interference that occurs? Therefore, if it bothered the 802.11 spectrum, we'd be irritated about it, and probably contact someone to get it changed. But, until things changed, we'd have to deal with it, either by filtering the noise, changing frequencies, etc.

      You can't filter this stuff. It's absolutely rock-crushing interference. The problem is that the overhead electrical wiring is a really efficient antenna.

      The other thing is, that Amateur Radio is a licensed service, which give it certain privileges, one of those being that you aren't allowed to interfere with it. You're thinking of unlicensed devices, like wireless phones, that aren't protected this way.

      Yet another thing: BPL radiates over a HUGE bandwidth. The BPL companies want to use 2 to 80 MHz. That would wipe out the entire HF band, which hams and others use to communicate long distance. It also includes 6 meter VHF (50-54 MHz). In contrast the entire HF allocation to hams is 3.36 Mhz total. Include 6m, and it's 7.36. BPL is an enormous bandwidth hog.

      This implementation of BPL would be disastrous for ham radio and anyone else using HF frequencies, like shortwave broadcasters, coast guard, government, marine, and so on.

      The idea that they could obliterate 78 MHz of spectrum should be of concern to everyone, not just hams.

      Either way, the ball is in the court of the HAM operators. Get together and start writing letters, making phone calls, etc.

      We are. BTW, ham is not an acronym.

    11. Re:Harmful interference by TRACK-YOUR-POSITION · · Score: 1

      No, you have to consider both sides of the equation sure there aren't yet many DeCSS users, but on the other side there are even fewer gigantic media corporations benefiting from CSS. Regardless, utilitarianism is less appropriate for in the first amendment DeCSS issue than it would be for spectrum allocation issues, which are supposed to be based on utilitarianism anyway.

    12. Re:Harmful interference by TRACK-YOUR-POSITION · · Score: 1

      I thought it would be perfectly legal to inferfere with WiFi bands, given their in the 2.4 ghz range for microwaves and such.

    13. Re:Harmful interference by Cerlyn · · Score: 3, Insightful

      Actually, the ball is in the opposite court. The FCC already has said that the Amateurs have the right to use their frequencies. The broadband powerline companies have to prove that they can safely do the same without disturbing other occupants.

      What is going on IIRC is that Amateur Radio operators presently have licensed permission to operate using certain modes on certain frequencies. The power companies could do power over broadband without getting licensed, but they would have to do so at lower power (less distance) and as a unlicensed operation (i.e. if any licensed operator complained, they would have to fix their problem or cease operations).

      What the power companies are trying to do is also get licensed permission, possibly on a higher basis of license than the Amateur Radio operators do. If they get a higher priority of license than the Amateur Radio operators, the Amateur Radio operators have to eat whatever the power lines put out.

      The problem is that the power distribution system presently uses unshielded cables which radiate noise everywhere. Drive around town listening to the AM band if you don't believe me. In extreme cases and with certain devices (like transformers), the power company has to be called out to fix their interfering noise. This could be seen as an excuse to avoid doing so.

      (I also seem to recall that DOCSIS cable modems skipped the ham bands to avoid interference going either way, but I do not recall which IEEE magazine and issue I have that states this; sorry.)

    14. Re:Harmful interference by DerekLyons · · Score: 4, Insightful
      I'm a HAM radio oprator. It bothers me that some pople don't see anyting wrong with creating interference on already allocated radio waves. What if the same companies started to interfere with WiFi bands ? How would you react ?
      Many folks on /. cheerfully support music & video piracy, copyright infringement, and outright theft of other peoples IP.

      Why should they feel different about the window of the electromagnetic spectrum you are legally entitled to use?
    15. Re:Harmful interference by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Agreed, I can't think of anything more boring than watching a Ham operator.

    16. Re:Harmful interference by mpoulton · · Score: 1

      Only FCC Part 15 devices are subject the the "accept harmful interference, and cause no harmful interference" requirement. Amateur radio is a licensed service with dedicated spectrum. Transmitting/interfering on ham bands is illegal. Moreover, ham radio activities are allowed to cause harmful interference to Part 15 and other unlicensed devices operating in the amateur spectrum.

      --
      I am a geek attorney, but not your geek attorney unless you've already retained me. This is not legal advice.
    17. Re:Harmful interference by chipperdog · · Score: 1

      The thing to remember is radio amateurs (I don't know we became associated with pigs) are LICENSED to use the bands they use (in fact we have primary allocations in many bands)which does give amateur radio operators protection from unlicensed or secondary licensed interference...
      WiFi, Powerline Broadband, etc. are all unlicensed servicre and thus are not protected
      We had a (inter)national packet network (also had a node aboard MIR), complete with email long before most /.ers had even heard of the internet

    18. Re:Harmful interference by akb · · Score: 1

      Spectrum is a commons, it should be managed for the benefit of society as a whole. It should not be managed for the trivial use of a very small number of people.

      There is a legitimate case to be made for DRM backed by law. The DeCSS example is more complex than that, I think it would be an error to assert it is analgous to the spectrum example.

    19. Re:Harmful interference by peeping_Thomist · · Score: 4, Insightful
      and outright theft of other peoples IP.

      There's no such thing as intellectual property. There's copyright law, trademark law, and patent law, but "IP" is an empty concept.

      --
      Anything worth doing is worth doing badly -- G.K. Chesterton
    20. Re:Harmful interference by Vrallis · · Score: 0, Flamebait

      Please tell that to the multitudes of HAM operators in my area that refuse to abide by the rules and cause MASSIVE TV reception interference. We've already HAD the FCC patrol vans checking them out before, and it did no good.

      What goes around, comes around...

    21. Re:Harmful interference by stephanruby · · Score: 1, Troll

      The radio spectrum is an infinite spectrum and it really does bother me that some people don't understand that. Personally, I think the spectrum should be reallocated and the regulations should be rewritten from scratch every ten years.

    22. Re:Harmful interference by Valar · · Score: 1

      Harmful interference? Or maybe...

      Hamful interference!
      Ba dum ching.

    23. Re:Harmful interference by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      That is because the Stations were operating with in the legal and correct operating procedures.

      What you may have is TV makers have removed the filters to reduce cost. and as a result your TV picks up the radio waves from the ham station. If this is the case just wait until the power lines emit many times the power of the HAM stations.

    24. Re:Harmful interference by canuck_wingnut · · Score: 1

      "BPL is an enormous bandwidth hog."

      This is axactly why spark gap transmitters were finally illegalised in the mid '20s
      Some spark gap transmitters could eat up as much as 26 mhz of spectrum, anything that uses up that much
      bandwidth over hf through vhf radio spectrum is horrendously innefficiant, and should basically
      be laughed off the table.

      Canuck Wingnut

      --
      -: :- mv sco /dev/null because a computer is a terrible thing to waste. -:
    25. Re:Harmful interference by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      The way PLC works doesn't add anything new per say to the power line, it just modulates some aspects of the power.. one could argue that this isn't anything new, and that power companies have the right under fair use / prior art to do what they want with it.. but you'd be lame Viva la Hams!

    26. Re:Harmful interference by Goody · · Score: 1

      I would react in proportion to the number of users effected and the nature of the uses that are effected. Hams would lose big on both counts

      Marine distress frequencies, shortwave broadcasts, military frequencies, various government services, and probably public safety and aviation frequencies will be affected as well. What's the score now ?

      --
      Tired of being "punished" by the Slashdot $rtbl since 2002. I'm now over at http://soylentnews.org/ .
    27. Re:Harmful interference by sharkman67 · · Score: 1

      Obviously, if the FCC came by and there was no resolution the ham was within his rights. Not only that but his equipment was within specifications. If the FCC found a problem they would issue an Notice of Liability to the ham. If they don't comply they can be on the hook for fines in excess of $10,000

      What it means is your shit equipment is not properly shielded. Ever hear of ferrite beads? Probably not. You probably pull all the shielding out of your computer cases as well. Don't complain when it accepts interference. If the interference is coming through cable (if you have it) then the cable company has a leak. Either way it is not the hams fault or problem. Check the FCC laws. Start with Part 97.

      Get a grip and a life.

    28. Re:Harmful interference by v1 · · Score: 1


      The spectrum actually has a limit, but it's only because it gets into light frequencies. (light is a frequency of wave, very high) The problem is that serious technical challenges appear as frequency goes up. Like it or not, hams are the ones storming the boundaries. We are allowed full coverage above certain limits, a limit that keeps getting pushed up as civilian technology requires it. That's why you can now have your gigahertz toys. Hams pioneer the technologies and frequency issues and then the general public is able to use the technology.

      Reallocating spectrum use every 10 years is a completely insane idea. That would mean throwing away perfectly good equipment every ten years because it can no longer be used on that band. Ham radios are some of the best lasting pieces of equipment around because their owners are usually capable of repairing and maintaining them. (it's quite common to see a ham using a radio that's 15 yrs old, and tube-type radios are still in use and bought and sold at swap meets) Electronics manufacturers also design RF parts around certain bands, and can't simply scrap and re-engineer 15 yrs worth of R&D just because it makes things convenient for band planning.

      The boys at the FCC (Federal Communications Commission) are in charge of planning ahead with the new high frequencies and determining where to best allocate bandwidth, knowing that their decisions have to be able to last a long time. Although lately there's been a lot of discussion about them "selling off" portions of ham bands to private ("business band") use. This would generate revenue for the somewhat economically-strapped FCC, but auctioning off a limited resource only fixes problems in the present, and leaves a lasting mark.

      - Nathan / N0ZYC

      --
      I work for the Department of Redundancy Department.
    29. Re:Harmful interference by fwc · · Score: 4, Informative
      If the Amateur radio operators are out of compliance, believe me, the FCC will notify them and shut them down if they don't fix the problem.

      That said, RFI problems like you described are usually NOT the fault of Amateur Radio operators. More specifically:

      1. Many times the source of interference is someone operating illegally. Illegal CB operation (I.E. big huge amplifiers - which are against FCC rules, etc. etc.) is probably the biggest cause. Believe me, most Ham radio operators would love to take these people out back and teach them about respect for the rules.

      2. Even if the source of the interference is an Amateur radio operator, many times the problem is tracked down to a low-quality piece of consumer equipment at the person being interfered with's end. As long as the Ham radio operator is operating within the rules, the owner of the equipment is responsible to fix the issue - as it is their equipment with the technical problem.

      3. If it is in fact the amateur radio operator's problem, it is their duty to fix it. The FCC can and does pull licenses for this type of stuff.

      If you are having problems along this line, contact your local Ham Radio Club a call. In most cases, they have a vested interest in finding the source of the problem and helping fix it. You can see clubs in your area by going to The club search page on the ARRL site.

      Remember that Ham radio operators provide a valuable service when the crap hits the fan. Most Amateur radio operators are actually skilled in what they do and take great pains to insure they don't cause unwanted interference, as interference only hurts the Ham radio community.

    30. Re:Harmful interference by Goody · · Score: 1

      The way PLC works doesn't add anything new per say to the power line, it just modulates some aspects of the power

      Ummmm, how do you modulate a 60 Hz sine wave to carry 30 megabits of data ? If you can do that and stay within the 60 Hz bandwidth, you've defied all laws of physics and have a product that will make you obscenely rich.

      --
      Tired of being "punished" by the Slashdot $rtbl since 2002. I'm now over at http://soylentnews.org/ .
    31. Re:Harmful interference by RocketScientist · · Score: 4, Informative

      Keep that in mind next time you're flying in from europe on approach to Kennedy airport.

      All the communications that planes use all the way across the ocean is shortwave. Aeronautical mobile service. But this is only a few thousand people a day, no big deal, let 'em miss the airport?

      Maybe next time your fishing boat is out in the atlantic and you need to call the coast guard. Maritime mobile service. Wow, this might only be a dozen people a year, let 'em drown.

      Your "proportion to number of users effected" argument doesn't look so good now does it?

      Every time there's an earthquake or a hurricane in the western hemisphere, I get a little email from the FCC via the ARRL telling me I can't use a specific set of frequencies because they're being used for emergency health and welfare traffic. Usually this is the non-urgent stuff, like "yeah, mom, me and the kids got through the earthquake OK". But that's only a few thousand folks a year. Let mom worry.

      These are things that happen. Real people who use those frequencies in ways that make their lives better. And you are advocating interfering with all of that so you can get Internet access into your house faster and cheaper. Your "nature of use" argument begins to wear here. Seriously, given the choice between more effective air-sea rescue and cheaper porn, you're choosing the porn. Unfortunately, I think the FCC's on your side. I don't think Congress is though, they've already overruled that dickmaster once.

      Admittedly, this is low power interference, but on those frequencies, it doesn't take much to send signals globally. Seriously, you can send signals with fractions of a watt in the right conditions and get good readable copy on the other side of the world. This interference level would pretty much devastate those frequencies worldwide.

    32. Re:Harmful interference by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      "IP" is an empty concept

      Then why isn't all property an empty concept?

      How can my landlord claim to "own" my apartment, when I'm the one living in it?

      The reality is: laws determine ownership.

    33. Re:Harmful interference by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      HAMS (in my limited bad experience) only seem to care about interference when it affects them. I used to live 2 houses down from a HAM. Funny that I couldn't record a TV show on my VCR because he caused so much interference and used so much power, that you could hear his conversation on my alarm clock radio--when it was off! The audio on a show taped on my VCR would be his side of the conversation, and good luck trying to make out the answering machine message when is was recorded while he was broadcasting. Complaints to the FCC fell on deaf ears because he was licensed, and they don't consider that interference, or something like that..... Whatever.

    34. Re:Harmful interference by Goody · · Score: 1

      Ask him to help you out. Chances are he'd be happy to work with you to minimize or eliminate the interference. The FCC probably wasn't interested because the ham was operating within regulations and consumer equipment often lacks the proper filtering on power, speaker, and video lines (which costs a few dollars to include, btw).

      I'm a ham and got severe interference on my phone line. I wrapped the phone cord going to the telephone through a Radio Shack ferrite core a couple times and the interence was gone.

      We like to help. Just ask....

      --
      Tired of being "punished" by the Slashdot $rtbl since 2002. I'm now over at http://soylentnews.org/ .
    35. Re:Harmful interference by geekoid · · Score: 1

      Because spectrum issues arn't complex at all...

      --
      The Kruger Dunning explains most post on /. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Dunning%E2%80%93Kruger_effect
    36. Re:Harmful interference by geekoid · · Score: 1

      You be sure to tell the judge that, dickwad.

      http://www.copyright.gov/docs/ipo.html

      How about you look at otherplaces on what is going on in regards to law,as opposed to what you here on /. on your 2600 meeting.

      Yeah, I could make it a link, but you don't deserve it.

      --
      The Kruger Dunning explains most post on /. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Dunning%E2%80%93Kruger_effect
    37. Re:Harmful interference by marauder404 · · Score: 1
      There's no such thing as intellectual property. There's copyright law, trademark law, and patent law, but "IP" is an empty concept.
      Intellectual property law is an accurate and accepted term to refer to the collection of copyright, trademark, and patent law, among others, that deal primarily with ideas and thoughts rather than people or physical things. To think otherwise is semantics.
    38. Re:Harmful interference by ChuckleBug · · Score: 1

      In addition to all the other comments about having RFI-susceptible equipment, the irony here is that BPL would also affect broadcast TV frequencies. What goes around comes around indeed.

    39. Re:Harmful interference by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      i would simply devise a noise generator, and attach it to the power line, even if i had to climb the pole and put it on. get a couple of friends to do it also! bam, make it harder for them to deply the service until they change.... but i agree, they should not be able to polute the waves like that.

    40. Re:Harmful interference by Phanatic1a · · Score: 1

      How can my landlord claim to "own" my apartment, when I'm the one living in it?


      Because you have a contract.

      Show me where the contract between me and the RIAA exists, and you'd have the merest glimmering of a point.

    41. Re:Harmful interference by stephanruby · · Score: 1
      "The spectrum actually has a limit, but it's only because it gets into light frequencies. (light is a frequency of wave, very high)"

      By infinite spectrum, I meant the spectrum was infinitly divisible. Please read the article I was referencing, apparently few people read it. My post was modded from +5 insightful to -1 troll.

      "Ham radios are some of the best lasting pieces of equipment around because their owners are usually capable of repairing and maintaining them."

      By your logic, since my Apple 1200 baud modem is still working and since I really took good care of it, the government should have made a law preventing my ISP from requiring me to upgrade. I know the technology is different and I know the problem is different, but the results are the same -- I can't use my 1200 baud modem anymore and you might not be able to use your Ham Radio anymore. Big f- deal. This kind of sacrifice is made everyday. It's called Eminent Domain. If we can fit 100 times more people on the same chunk of bandwidth, we're going to do it. It would be insane not to.

    42. Re:Harmful interference by LostCluster · · Score: 1

      Which is to say the powerline broadband people are saying "Change the rules! We can't do what we want to do without breaking either the laws of physics or the laws of the land!"

    43. Re:Harmful interference by ImpTech · · Score: 1

      > This implementation of BPL would be disastrous for ham radio and anyone else using HF frequencies, like shortwave broadcasters, coast guard, government, marine, and so on.

      Minor point, but afaik marine and coast guard channels are all around 155-165MHz. Sure this implementation is eating a lot of bandwidth so to speak, but its not quite as disastrous as you say. More to the point, if it were eating Coast Guard channels, there's no way in hell Washington or the FCC or anybody would let it fly.

    44. Re:Harmful interference by shaitand · · Score: 0, Flamebait

      "Seriously, you can send signals with fractions of a watt in the right conditions and get good readable copy on the other side of the world"

      Exactly, and that is what those bands are used for... to chat globally. EMERGENCY services tend to be with the guy 2 mile away who is checking in to say he found the kid under the log or there is a fire. If you find a fire, you don't radio someone on the other side of the globe, the other side of the globe can wait to find out the news if that is what it takes to get the greatest communication medium that has ever existed the last mile.

      We aren't talking cheaper and faster here... we are talking about bridging the last mile, bringing internet not just cheaper for those who can already get it, but bringing to those who cannot.

      Ham radio has it's purposes, and hams should have their allocated bands (whether they need trillions of dollars worth of them is a debate for another day, I personally believe those bands have been robbed from your average unlicensed joe who they really belong to giving them to hams has been made to look like they were "given to the people"). But it's time for ham radio to give way to the technology which has already proven to be a medium for communication and information exchange that by far exceeds anything ever before known to man.

    45. Re:Harmful interference by shaitand · · Score: 1

      But that spectrum can be divided up into infinately smaller pieces.

    46. Re:Harmful interference by spikedvodka · · Score: 1

      hrmm... random thought here... The power lines are really big antennas (Dipoles pretty much, my dad was OE3JBU and a part of 4U1VIC) and if they are producing interfereance, doesn't that work both ways?

      here's my thought... in areas where BPL is being set up, get all the ham opperators together, and crank up your sets, and generate interferance for the power-line broadband... in theory that should work, making BPL less usable... any comments?

      --
      I will not give in to the terrorists. I will not become fearful.
    47. Re:Harmful interference by ChuckleBug · · Score: 1

      Here is a list of coast guard HF and MF frequencies. They use HF plenty.

      The affected government agencies have yet to weigh in with FCC. Traditionally, they wait until the last minute. Right now, there are BPL lobbyists claiming there is no interference. The FCC has an extreme bias towards these lobbyists, and the other government agencies are in a "wait and see" mode. The director of NTIA came out supportive of the inquiry into implementing BPL, but said it the FCC must see to it that no interference is caused to established services.

    48. Re:Harmful interference by ProtonMotiveForce · · Score: 1

      Yeah, sorry. 2 words.

      Nobody cares.

    49. Re:Harmful interference by ProtonMotiveForce · · Score: 1

      You're _so_ right. I'm sure boat users and plan flyers really need to worry about this. I mean, they're so close to power lines! And hey, nobody ever thinks about those poor people flying planes, they're practically defenseless! PEople will just let them die by the hundreds since aircraft are so unprotected!

      I'm sorry, did that whole ditraibe seem sarcastic?

    50. Re:Harmful interference by ProtonMotiveForce · · Score: 1

      Hey, rocket surgeon. Did someone teach you in high school that copyright, trademarks, or patents were _physical_ entities? They are all, as you like to pointlessly quote, "IP". Hence, there is most certainly a concept (a generality) of "IP".

      Monkey.

    51. Re:Harmful interference by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      I got a comment, the FCC prohibits ham's from transmitting a signal just to disrupt another communication.... Is one of the questions on the technician exam.

    52. Re:Harmful interference by RocketScientist · · Score: 1

      Few miles? Uh...no. Typical hurricane communications is over hundreds of miles, at HF frequencies. The short range stuff (around 3.75 Mhz, usually) is typically 60-100 miles. Hurricanes are BIG, dude.

      My point, and since you didn't read my entire previous comment, you probably won't read this so it doesn't really matter, is that there are no other bands. The only bands suitable for worldwide communications are the ones that BPL will make nearly unusable. So by taking away the amateur allocations, you're taking away the ones for radio astronomy, the ones that the coast guard and the airlines use, and the ones that missionaries in africa use to talk to home. All of that, gone so you can get cheaper, faster porn ^H^H^H^Hinternet access.

    53. Re:Harmful interference by RocketScientist · · Score: 1

      So, did you read the part in the comment you're allegedly replying to about the low power not mattering? Low power transmissions on the right frequencies are GLOBAL. Read the entire comment. I addressed this already, you moron. Signals less than 1 watt are readable worldwide. Even signals less than 1 watt raise the noise floor of the bands, making it harder or impossible to dig out weak signals. We're not talking about stupid-ass lame VHF signals that are line-of-sight only. These are GLOBAL signals that bounce off the ionosphere.

      Plus, it don't matter if the plane's out in the middle of the ocean when the receiver is generally going to be on land, and probably even hooked up to commercial power. Usually the way these things are done isn't ship-to-ship, it's ship-to-shore-to-ship, because it's easier to put a really big high-gain antenna on the shore, not on a boat. Bear in mind that the antennas are typically 30 to 50 feet across (30 feet for the 14 Mhz band, and they get much bigger from there). Plus if you want directional antennas with gain, you need to have one that's pretty wide and long. Try and fit that onto a small powerboat--not so good.

      But that's ok, anything you don't personally use is worthless, because you don't know anything about it.

      On a side note, how would one fly a plan anyway? Easiest way to tell a knee-jerk, poorly reasoned and uninformed response is the total lack of proofreading, you illiterate twerp.

    54. Re:Harmful interference by shaitand · · Score: 1

      It's not about faster and cheaper, although that is part of it. The world moves on computer and internet technology. We aren't talking a couple groups here, we are talking EVERY group, including airlines, the coast guard, radio astronomy and now days even hams are starting to catch up. Hams even do things know to use the internet to cheat a bit where radio can't do the trick, using things like echolink.

      Most of these groups again could use sat technology, they don't have to use radio. And lets be honest, we are talking about part of HF that will be rendered nearly unusable not all of it.

      This is where my knowledge goes grey... but obviously OUTSIDE the hurricane would be irrelevant, the rest of the world watching interesting news about what is going on inside the hurricane is hardly critical, knowing x building toppled in this city within your response time is what is important, and you can't really respond in time if your more than 100miles away, that's common sense. But using the right kind of transmission doesn't it bounce off the cloud cover and extend your range within it?

      What it comes down to is this, both technologies are crucial, so both need to made to perform thier functions as well as they can. The most important thing for internet over powerlines isn't fast access at all, it's simply access at reasonable speeds, at reasonable prices (9600 baud radio wouldn't qualify as reasonable so we can't go that route). If that means a combination of both moving people around and sacrifices in speed of the BPL access then so be it. As long as that mile gets served and we can keep the CRITICAL emergency communications. And of course we need to keep radio astronomy, although the large radio telescopes are generally raised up above power-line level anyway and away from civilization AFAIK. I suspect they wouldn't be too greatly affected.

    55. Re:Harmful interference by ProtonMotiveForce · · Score: 1

      Proofreading is for sucks, Paco.

    56. Re:Harmful interference by N0JCG · · Score: 1

      Prior to 1929 all radio communication was unlicensed and all was chaos. The problem back then was that only the strongest signal got through. Fast foward to 2003. The physics haven't changed. In a totally unlicensed world it would again be chaos and only the strongest signal would get through. Licensing brings order to the chaos just as it does to the highways. For some reason the FCC itself has forgotten this. As for the internet "far exceeds anything ever before known to man". I was at UCLA in 1969 when the internet was born. It is an infrastructure intensive animal, albiet decentralized. It depends totally on infrastructure. Even your cell phone that you can talk around the world on would barely reach the next block without $$billions in infrastructure. The tiny sliver of frequencies between 2 and 80 MHZ are the ONLY ones that allow world wide, low power, communication without any infrastructure whatsoever. To polute them would be analogous to using the geysers of Yellowstone to heat New York.

    57. Re:Harmful interference by IM6100 · · Score: 1

      Shit, that one is easy. I'll just show you a bunch of squatters who've moved into a vacant building and are shitting in the hallways. There's no contract, the owner of the building has property rights, the squatters get booted out so the owner can renovate and bring in renters.

      --
      A Good Intro to NetBS
    58. Re:Harmful interference by IM6100 · · Score: 1

      The problem with your arguement is that Powerline broadband doesn't make good use of the spectrum it shits on. It just fucks it up for any useful purposes.

      Let's be real here. Powerline broadband is a cheap hack, not technically sophisticated at all. It's a get-rich-quick kludge for a few interests who control the power lines. It's basically the equivalent of issuing bullhorns to teenagers in school so they can talk to each other in the hallway between classes. The proper thing to do is pull shielded cable or fibre.

      --
      A Good Intro to NetBS
    59. Re:Harmful interference by Ashtead · · Score: 1
      The chunks you end up with after performing this infinite division may be too small to be useable for anything. Various kinds of radio communication or broadcasts require a certain minimum bandwidth in order to be useable. Generally, the lower carrier frequency you have the narrower is the available bandwidth, and this places constraints on what kinds of modulation you may use.

      Another big constraining factor is the way the ionosphere interact with radio signals. No legal concept such as Eminent Domain is going to change this, or even be relevant. Signals at the various HF and VHF bands (0.3 MHz to 300 MHz) behave quite differently depending on thier frequency. Some (around 1 MHz) allow for long-distance communication during the night, others depend on the solar activity, and range of signals here varies with a period of 11 years; most of the higher frequencies work best with point-to-point communications. Arbitrarily shifting allocations of this around at the whim of legislators will make little sense.

      Your example with modems and ISPs describes a utility-customer relationship, in this case the utility may change its terms of service in order to give what they consider "better service", obsoleting equipment in the process. Ham radio by contrast is peer-to-peer, each individual operator may and does communicate with each other with no central office full of equipment between them. Thus, as long as my receiver can pick up your transmitter and vice versa, we can chat or whatever -- it doesn't matter if my radio was made in 1930 and yours made in 2003. Old radio equipment becomes obsolete much as old cars do; they may have difficulties with spare parts availability, but if they are in proper working order and your licence is valid, you're good to go.

      If I were to draw any further analogy, I'd say ham radio is like ships at sea, each ship has to be seaworthy (transmitters have to meet certain requirements), each captain has to have the proper certificates (each operator is required to be licensed, with some leeway in emergencies), and there are rules of behavior on the sea (power and frequency limits), which are determined in large part by international treaties (WARC, CEPT etc) and with national governments having organizations that enforce these (such as FCC). The medium (ocean or spectrum) upon which all operate is a natural resource which needs to be parcelled out to all, with nobody being allowed to hog it.

      --
      SIGBUS @ NO-07.308
    60. Re:Harmful interference by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Well, ya thought wrong, dingus. A 'microwave', as in oven, not the specific range of the electromagnetic spectrum, is, as you may have noticed, a device for the purpose of cooking. Not of communications.

    61. Re:Harmful interference by akb · · Score: 1

      No.

      I'm making the case that spectrum is a commons and should be managed for the benefit of society as a whole and that hams are a narrow interest and their use of the spectrum should not hold back the deployment of mass scale services.

      If you are trying to make a point go ahead and do so. So far you have none.

    62. Re:Harmful interference by rvega · · Score: 1

      Define "trivial".

      In my opinion, the amateur radio framework, which allows private individuals to communicate freely (relatively -- no profanity, encryption, etc. allowed) with eachother, across national / political borders without permission from or payment to any corporation is anything but trivial.

      Considering this, along with the benefits mentioned by others in terms of emergency services and the encouragement of learning, experimenting and the do-it-yourself tradition, I have to wonder what you would consider important about the alternative.

      I was recently traveling in Norway, and learned that in (at least) Norway and Sweden, the right of individuals to travel across and even camp on almost any piece of ground in the country is enshrined in law as a basic right. Can you imagine this in the US ("Get the hell off my property!") where in many places it is very nearly impossible to travel from one place to another by walking, cycling, etc., where law, "proerty rights" and poor planning have made people dependent on paid services that they might do just as well without?

      Anyone who advocates personal freedoms should look at amateur radio and decide if is not, in some ways, the last stand of non-mediated communications. Remember, *Congress* may not make any law abridging the freedom of speech. But your ISP can shut you off whenever they like.

    63. Re:Harmful interference by rvega · · Score: 1

      Someone claimed to have been done it. Wired magazine ran a story.

    64. Re:Harmful interference by madshot · · Score: 1
      Thats correct. If Ham Radio operators find out that they are causing interfearance Part 97 says they must stop causing that interfearance. That goes for TV sets too as well as anything else we cause interfearance too.

      Now for your WiFi card, Part 15 says that it won't cause interfearance, but if it does you must as a consumer stop operation of that.

      So, if BPL causes interfearance does that mean the end users must stop using it? Interesting question for a lawyer I guess..

      --
      Obama = Socialism.
    65. Re:Harmful interference by akb · · Score: 1

      I have no problem with the existence of Ham radio. I think it would be a loss if there were no place for it. But if thousands of people speaking will prevent millions of people from speaking, then I think the thousands of people should move to accomodate the millions.

    66. Re:Harmful interference by RocketScientist · · Score: 1

      You're still doing an excellent job of missing the entire point.

      This raises the "noise floor". These are not line of sight signals, they are global signals. Putting radio telescopes above the power lines would help absolutely not at all, because the signals are bouncing up, hitting the ionosphere, and coming back down. Unless we place radio telescopes above the ionosphere, they can't be placed high enough. There's no shielding this, and there's no filtering it out. It's like walking into a room full of very very loud, broadbanded static and trying to listen to the person next to you say something. Unless you can read lips, you're hosed.

      If it's only 9600 bps, then if they've got power they've got phones. You're not making any sense here. This doesn't solve the last-mile problem any better than residential phone service does in that case.

      Bouncing signals off of clouds, by the way, is not very likely. Typically, the signal will be absorbed by water vapor. Usually any kind of non-ionospheric long-range bounce you get is from tropospheric ducting, which requires hot, still air and cold, still air and a very quick transition between the two, usually caused by a regional tropospheric inversion, which happens occasionally in the summer, but I wouldn't ever bet a chance of rescue on it.

    67. Re:Harmful interference by akb · · Score: 1

      I'm not sure why you are replying to arguments I haven't made. I said hams would lose in a consideration of numbers of users and nature of the use. Obviously sea rescue is in a different category from hams.

      You also make an argument about the value of hams, I don't find the anecdotal evidence you and other commenters have given to be very convincing. Backup emergency communications is a good idea, I have no confidence in the ham community to provide it, I'd rather it be planned. I get the impression that the ham community is like any other spectrum incumbent with a narrow set of interests, its got spectrum and will latch onto the most politically expedient rational it can to keep it. The impression I have of hams is that they do it because its "cool" (see the comments elsewhere about the guy talking to Ecuador).

    68. Re:Harmful interference by AJ5TT · · Score: 1

      akb

      Current communications by local governments is not designed to handle much more that "normal" business traffic. Believe me when problems are insurmountable, local police, fire, ambulance are easily overwhelmed. I live near the Gulf Coast and have listened to the chaos. Small cities do not have the money to invest in multi-redundant systems.

      If you truly believe in your statement that your local city backup emergency communications is reliable then spend some time to research it. You state that "I'd rather it be planned". I think you would be surprised how many Emergency Operation Centers keep HAM Radio as an option (last resort backup) because they know how bad it truly can be when their systems fall apart.

      I am not advocating that HAM radio is to be used in every emergency event. Various forms of communication are efficient and are able to perform the task to which they were designed for during emergencies. Where HAM radio comes into play is when all else fails.

      The below are examples when existing systems did not meet the requirements.

      To add "anecdotal evidence", easily found with a little research. Below is just a fraction.

      Hams Aid Columbia Debris Search in Western States
      http://www.arrl.org/news/stories/2003/02/2 6/2/?nc= 1

      Hams help handle 911 outage:
      http://www.arrl.org/news/stories/2001/08/ 01/3/#Ham s

      Amateurs Respond to Southwestern Fires
      http://www.arrl.org/news/stories/2003/06/25 /2/?nc= 1

      Ham Radio Aids Rescue on the High Seas
      http://www.arrl.org/news/stories/2001/03/21/ 6/

      Hams Respond to El Salvador Earthquake
      http://www.arrl.org/news/stories/2001/ 01/15/1/

      Indian Hams Assist in Quake's Wake
      http://www.arrl.org/news/stories/2001/01/26/ 3/

      Appalachian hams assist in rescue effort:
      http://www.arrl.org/news/stories/2002/09/ 05/100/#a ppalachian

      Ricky to the Rescue! "ham recently used ham radio to help save the life of an injured "
      http://www.arrl.org/news/stories/1999/10/04/2/

      Some of the articles pertain to aiding existing authorities. The aid is generally welcome to supplement their shortfall.

      Finally, HAM radio is available to the general public. Yes you need a license but it is available. Unlicensed radio operations available to the public are FRS and CB. I think that many people really do not understand HAM radio and its significance.

      Sincerely,
      John - AJ5TT

    69. Re:Harmful interference by stephanruby · · Score: 1
      "The chunks you end up with after performing this infinite division may be too small to be useable for anything. Various kinds of radio communication or broadcasts require a certain minimum bandwidth in order to be useable."

      Yes, this is a determination that has to be made by the scientists and the regulators. And this shouldn't be set in stones yet because our technology hasn't reached the theoritical limits yet.

      "each captain has to have the proper certificates (each operator is required to be licensed, with some leeway in emergencies),"

      This depends on the type of boats you're talking about. Private sailboats, for example, don't need to have a licensed skipper on board. I am talking from personal experience here.

    70. Re:Harmful interference by stephanruby · · Score: 1
      Let's be real here. Powerline broadband is a cheap hack, not technically sophisticated at all. It's a get-rich-quick kludge for a few interests who control the power lines. It's basically the equivalent of issuing bullhorns to teenagers in school so they can talk to each other in the hallway between classes. The proper thing to do is pull shielded cable or fibre.

      I'll give you that one. You're probably right on that count.

    71. Re:Harmful interference by RocketScientist · · Score: 1

      OK, leave hams out of it for a second.

      How are you going to communicate to do air/sea rescue? Long range, say with a boat out in the middle of the ocean.

      With BPL, the noise floor is raised so high NOBODY can use ANY spectrum from 2 to 70 Mhz. That's all of the spectrum that propagates globally. It doesn't matter if the boat's next to the powerlines or not, because the potentially receiving station might be, and even if it's not, BPL is broad bandwidth raising of the noise floor that will propagate globally. Not just next to the powerlines, but everywhere the powerline-caused interference can propagate to.

      So, the hams can't use the spectrum, but then NEITHER CAN THE COAST GUARD. Or anybody else for that matter.

      Satellite won't work. Either you've got to have a really directional antenna (not very easy on a tossing ship, or with a lost airplane who can't get bearings, or a lost hiker) or a lot of power (not likely on a ship in distress running battery power).

      Land rescue's another biggie. It's a piece of cake to throw out a quick antenna for HF, just a couple pieces of long wire work.

      The hams are complaining, but I bet the shortwave broadcasters are too, along with the Coasties, the FAA, and everyone else.

    72. Re:Harmful interference by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      By your logic, since my Apple 1200 baud modem is still working and since I really took good care of it, the government should have made a law preventing my ISP from requiring me to upgrade.

      Your analogy is flawed.

      It's not like the other ham radios decided to change frequencies so I'm forced to also. It is more analagous to the government telling you and your isp to no longer use the 1200 baud modem even if you are both content with it.

  16. Movie Mirror by MrBiiggy · · Score: 2, Informative

    The movie site is pretty slow, so I mirrored it: BPL_Trial-small.mpg

    1. Re:Movie Mirror by MrBiiggy · · Score: 0

      As well, here's the larger movie: BPL_Trial-web.mpg

  17. The area of concern by Shaklee39 · · Score: 2, Interesting

    by the amateur radio community is that this internet signal is transmitted through the electrical lines at frequencies from 2Mhz to 80Mhz - 80 through 6 meters. Studies have shown that, at the power levels suggested by the power companies along with the transmission lines acting like very large antennas, the typical amateur operator with have an estimated 33.7db to 65.4db of additional ambient noise to contend with, and would obviously ruin ham radio.

    1. Re:The area of concern by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Well hams lets get even... how about 33.7db to 65.4db of degredation to the WiFi bands! The 2.4GHz and the 6.5GHz bands are Part15 and can legally be degraded by the true owners...Guess who...the Hams of the Amateur Radio Service. Some Hams in Texas shut down a WISP wireless ISP in Texas for Interfering with their Amateur Television Pr0n Broadcasts!

      --
      an anon amateur vhf radio enthusiast

  18. wait... by riotstarter · · Score: 0, Troll

    "Hams Complain about Powerline Broadband"
    All ten of them?

    1. Re:wait... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Actually 700,000 of them.

    2. Re:wait... by ArsonSmith · · Score: 1

      Dude!!! HAM sales, world wide, were well into the hundreds last year alone.

      --
      Paying taxes to buy civilization is like paying a hooker to buy love.
    3. Re:wait... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      of course, in order to get a ham radio license, you have to be smart enough to understand how radio works, which oviously most slashdotters don't... so that is certainly going to cut down on the number. most breakthroughs in modern radio technology start with ham radio operators playing around, or people who started out as ham operators and used the skills they learned to start a company.

      Ever wonder where 802.11b came from? Ham radio operators have been sending data from computer to computer over the waves for 20 years. You shut down Ham Radio, you're talking about puting a major block on advancements to modern tech.

    4. Re:wait... by fenix+down · · Score: 1

      Well, eight. Walt and Steve got girlfriends, so they don't care anymore.

  19. Slashdot sponsoring BitTorrent link? by nacturation · · Score: 2, Interesting

    Would it be a huge problem for Slashdot to download the video first and then put up a bittorrent link for the file? Really -- any video link posted in a story immediately goes down due to mega-traffic.

    Thoughts?

    --
    Want to improve your Karma? Instead of "Post Anonymously", try the "Post Humously" option.
    1. Re:Slashdot sponsoring BitTorrent link? by Xerithane · · Score: 1

      Would it be a huge problem for Slashdot to download the video first and then put up a bittorrent link for the file? Really -- any video link posted in a story immediately goes down due to mega-traffic.

      That would require the Slashdot editors to do more work, and that isn't going to happen. Beg the submittors, but most of them don't care unless it's their site anyway.

      --
      Dacels Jewelers can't be trusted.
    2. Re:Slashdot sponsoring BitTorrent link? by mhesseltine · · Score: 1

      Well, it would be possible. However, it would cost VA, Taco, and crew the bandwidth, which they already bitch about spending on people who don't subscribe. So, in conclusion, no Slashdot will not host a bittorrent tracker, or files to prevent slashdotting.

      --
      Overrated / Underrated : Moderation :: Anonymous Coward : Posting
  20. Well how about the people by MC68040 · · Score: 1

    That already got broadband over powerlines and the people living close to them?
    The technology is in use in Sweden and Germany plus other places, anyone from there that got it that can give us some feedback this?

    1. Re:Well how about the people by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Full details are here of how it polluted the shortwave in Europe;

      http://www.darc.de/referate/emv/plc/

    2. Re:Well how about the people by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      In the ARRL article they talk about the interference in Germany and Sweeden being a problem. Also part of what the power companies are asking for is a relazation of the part 15 rules to let them radiate more power than now so they want to make this even worse.

      Having operated in several emergencies where normal phone lines were down or simply overloaded I know ham radio is still very important.

      There arn't just hams to think about either - the HF spectrum is used by ships, aircraft, the military, and other users.

  21. Wrong icon... by tcc · · Score: 1

    But.. but... why HAM and antenna... shouldn't HAM go with the icon of the previous story?

    --
    --- Metamoderating abusive downgraders since my 300th post.
  22. Harmful interference? by ForestGrump · · Score: 2, Interesting

    Well yes. If this BPL stuff is causing harmful interference, I will not 100% be for the use of it - Partly because I am a ham op myself.

    That said, BPL does seem like a promising technology. This way, the electrical utlity can also sell internet, allowing the consumer to benefit from market competition.

    For me, I see HAM radio's biggest benefit to society being when disasters strike and nothing works (phone, cell phone, etc) HAM ops are able to get communication going and assist emergency response efforts.

    Now, if this BPL is causing HF interference, thats OK! after all, in the event of an emergency and the power is out, NO HF noise caused by BPL!

    -Grump.

    --
    Is it true that more people vote for the winner of American Idol, than vote for the president? -Ali G.
    1. Re:Harmful interference? by AntiOrganic · · Score: 1

      I've heard of this interference before, and some people have made claims that the radio interference from BPL can travel hundreds of miles.

      So yes, there's still a pretty good chance of interference if these claims are substantiated.

    2. Re:Harmful interference? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      I am also a ham operator... and seriously, how many people will own HF rigs if they can't use them except in emergencies? Sure, in an emergency, no HF noise would be caused, but you wouldn't own or know how to operate the equipment anyway, so it wouldn't matter.

    3. Re:Harmful interference? by ForestGrump · · Score: 1

      OK, I wrote the post with a bit of sarcasm. But you will be surprised how many people out there are licensed but don't use their equip.

      They get licensed for many reasons, may it be they work for emergency services and it helped them get the job if they were a licensed ham op, or they were once into ham radio, lost intrest but stil has his equip.

      Either way, these people can assist in an emergency.
      -Grump

      --
      Is it true that more people vote for the winner of American Idol, than vote for the president? -Ali G.
    4. Re:Harmful interference? by Goody · · Score: 1

      For me, I see HAM radio's biggest benefit to society being when disasters strike and nothing works (phone, cell phone, etc) HAM ops are able to get communication going and assist emergency response efforts

      Let's not forget about being able to legally handle 1.5 kilowatts of RF power. Nothing like having an 802.11 amplifier that can fry birds ;-) But seriously, ham radio allows people to learn and experiment. Some of the best and brightest engineers in various fields got started in amateur radio.

      --
      Tired of being "punished" by the Slashdot $rtbl since 2002. I'm now over at http://soylentnews.org/ .
    5. Re:Harmful interference? by Ramadog · · Score: 1
      The distance the radio signals travel are part of why the hf bands are used for comms.

      I live in the south east corner of Queensland Australia. Depending on the frequency and time of day a signal can easily travell around the world. By listening on the 7MHz and 14MHz bands it is generally easy to find someone in Europe, the US or other places around the world.

      From what I have read BPL has the potential to cause interence anywhere in the world by varying degrees because the frequencies travell so far.

  23. One can only dread by Yanna · · Score: 1

    The moment that a script kiddie releases an exploit that takes advantage of the combination (broadband over power line).

    I am sure it will bring a new meaning to the flying toasters...

    1. Re:One can only dread by nacturation · · Score: 1
      The moment that a script kiddie releases an exploit that takes advantage of the combination (broadband over power line).

      I am sure it will bring a new meaning to the flying toasters...


      You can tell when this happens when you pull your toast out of the toaster in the morning and you see:
      0wn3d
      burnt into the bread.
      --
      Want to improve your Karma? Instead of "Post Anonymously", try the "Post Humously" option.
    2. Re:One can only dread by canuck_wingnut · · Score: 1

      0wn3d

      burnt into the bread.


      Or the cans in the coke machine are always empty ;-D

      Canuck Wingnut

      --
      -: :- mv sco /dev/null because a computer is a terrible thing to waste. -:
  24. Nooooooo! by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Blast it! Power line broadband is my only hope of ever getting high speed internet.

  25. 4-80MHz by bandy · · Score: 2, Insightful

    Oh goodie, they're going to splatter all over the low TV channels and the first harmonics will trash the VHF band as well, not to mention low-band VHF used by many police/fire departments in rural/hilly areas.

    --
    "You might as well get your son a ticket to hell as give him a five string banjo." -unknown minister
  26. give the guy an insightful by siskbc · · Score: 0, Flamebait
    Obviously the HAM operators are burning their mod points, but the guy is right. Boradband communication for (m|b)illions of people is more important than a hobby for a few thousand. Not trying to be insensitive, but maybe get away from the power lines?

    Come to think of it, maybe that was the problem all along. ;)

    And don't say ham radio would be useful in some sort of natural disaster, seeing as the internet WAS designed to withstand a nuclear attack!

    Not only that, but where the hell am I going to find a HAM operator after an earthquake? That's probably the least of my worries.

    --

    -Looking for a job as a materials chemist or multivariat

    1. Re:give the guy an insightful by ouzel · · Score: 1

      It's not really about whether *you* can find a HAM operator. It's about what HAMs with their mobile, battery-powered rigs can do to aid city/county/state/federal emergency communications. They can provide a significant amount of aid, and that's why emergency personnel often include them in disaster preparedness drills.

    2. Re:give the guy an insightful by CharlieG · · Score: 4, Informative

      The same place they found them after 9/11 where ham radio was the only reliable mode of comms around ground zero for a couple of days. You know who told the disaster workers WHO to contact to start getting phones setup? The Hams on site, who had contacts with the right folks

      You live in, let's sa the LA area (you mention earthquakes). No a search on LA and CERT. The hams TRAIN to work with the police and fire departments in case of disaster

      Look up ARES - The Amateur Radio Emergency Service

      Look up the fact that ARES works closely with the Red Cross, the Dept of Homeland Security, FEMA, LOTS of fire departments, wilderness rescue teams and the like

      Look up RACES - Look up what happens if the Government declares a Radio Communications Emergency (and think about what happens to your 802.11 links - say "Bye-bye")

      --
      -- 73 de KG2V For the Children - RKBA! "You are what you do when it counts" - the Masso
    3. Re:give the guy an insightful by Gonarat · · Score: 1

      Not only that, but where the hell am I going to find a HAM operator after an earthquake? That's probably the least of my worries.


      Things Hams after a disaster :

      1. Help Coordinate emergency relief (police/fire communications may be out, espicially if they are trunked or depend on repeaters*)

      2. Coordinate supplies -- food, medicine, water, blankets, etc.

      3. Send messages out -- "Hey Mom, I'm alive and okay! Don't worry."

      Don't worry about finding one -- we pop out of the woodwork real quick when there is a disaster.


      * repeater : a radio that retransmits a signal received on an input frequency out over a second frequency for reception. This allows 2 units that could not communicate directly to be able to communicate. The repeater is at a location that allows a large area to be covered.



      --
      Beware of Sleestak
    4. Re:give the guy an insightful by madshot · · Score: 1
      That Ham operator will probably be the one that will find you and help you communicate with your family.

      San Fran big quake, guess who helped out the police? Ham Operators and members of the Civil Air Patrol and other orginizations. Guess how they got the big news out? HF radio!

      Hams need the frequency spectrim to communicate. Home users have lots of options for internet. Cable Modem, DSL, DirecTV Internet, ISDN, and even some ISPs offer microwave links for about $90 a month.

      --
      Obama = Socialism.
  27. HAM still has applications! by hellish+products · · Score: 1

    for one, there is no worldwide wireless ISP whereas with HAM one can communicate with pretty much anyone on the globe from pretty much any point so for unpopulated areas wanting a way of communicating long distances HAM is the only way to communicate with the outside world and ships only long range communication.

    --
    This sig blantantly stolen by a pack of robo-monkeys.
  28. Security risk? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Question I want to know the answer to: can the leaky signal be reconstructed into data?

    If so, this would be the world's easiest communications tap. Kind of like war driving, but with a sitting duck of a target that's several miles long.

    1. Re:Security risk? by RevSmiley · · Score: 1

      Hell yes they are going to be broadcasting it.
      This isn't very secure LOL

      King Henry, VI part II act IV
      "The first thing we do, lets kill all the lawyers."
      It's a joke about lawyers sure it is. There are to many lawyers. Do your part.

      --
      As you can see I don't care about my karma.
    2. Re:Security risk? by hiaips · · Score: 1

      Not many people have touched on this...but yes, it does seem frightfully insecure doesn't it? HF receivers are much more prominent (and you don't need a license to have one) than technology which would allow one to grab internet packets off a satellite link.

  29. Move to Shoutcast.. Less interference by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Those 10 HAM operators should migrate to shoutcast.

  30. Re:Ham radio users - ampr.org by Cerlyn · · Score: 3, Interesting
    That would be ampr.org, the 44.* subnet on the Internet.

    Of course, it is largely isolated from the main Internet, since there are a lot of restrictions as to what can be done with Amateur Radio (no commercial use, no swearing, etc.) as opposed to the Internet at large.

  31. Hams Complain? by FsG · · Score: 1

    Perhaps this topic image would have been appropriate?

    --
    I made a PHP/MySQL library that prevents SQL injection & makes coding easier!
  32. For years... by tarquin_fim_bim · · Score: 1

    ... hams with mobile tranceivers have parked up underneath power lines and have got poor reception, now they've got poor reception with added clicking noises. Probably more interesting than the stuff they usually listen to. I think someone should tell them that amateur radio was interesting in the first half of the 20th century, most of us have now moved on. BTW I still use Betamax.

    1. Re:For years... by canuck_wingnut · · Score: 1

      I think someone should tell them that amateur radio was interesting in the first half of the 20th century, most of us have now moved on.

      Wake up, some the communications techniques (spread spectrum, for example) were heavily experimented with by hams before most people had even heard
      of it. If it's new, radical and ever so much more interesting than other communications modes, hams
      probably used it first, or adopted it earlier than most.

      Canuck Wingnut

      --
      -: :- mv sco /dev/null because a computer is a terrible thing to waste. -:
  33. Re:Ham radio users - ampr.org by Directrix1 · · Score: 1

    What the hell? Why would you want tcp/ip over ham. Thats limiting yourself to having to use IP addresses. Packetized transmission I understand, but ham is not exactly routable so why is tcp/ip needed?

    --
    Occam's razor is the blind faith in the natural selection of least resistance and in universal oversimplification. -- EF
  34. Horse drawn buggies. by pete-classic · · Score: 1

    Cars interfere with horse drawn buggies on the road. Technology marches on.

    -Peter

    1. Re:Horse drawn buggies. by LostCluster · · Score: 1

      Other way around... ever been on a city street with a horse drawn buggy on the road?

      Cars have to put up with buggies, except on the specially marked car-only roads where other things like pedestrians are banned too. (Those would be called "highways".)

      Horses and cars cause problems for each other, but they're expected to co-exist without killing each other.

  35. BPL is a dead end by CausticWindow · · Score: 3, Insightful

    Yes, broadband over powerlines has proven to be a technological dead end. It's been tested over here for several years, and it's just not worth it compared to already installed adsl or cable.

    The power companies is doing one thing right though, with every new long span high voltage line they're laying, they're twirling fiber with the lines. That's the future. A fiber channel into each and every home.

    --
    How small a thought it takes to fill a whole life
    1. Re:BPL is a dead end by LostCluster · · Score: 1

      There are only a limited number of connections to a typical house. In order of popularity: Power, water, phone, cable TV, natural gas.

      Phone and cable TV wires nicely converted into data networks, and it has been done. Water and natural gas might have looked at the idea, but they've got physical things going through their pipes so they really didn't have much hope. Power owners at least have a few things that work in the lab, but they all seem to die in the real world. Afterall, a "powermodem" would likely have an unacceptable occasional failure rate where it fails to strip out the rest of the voltage and goes boom!

      I think ham radio is a much safer thing to keep around...

  36. Re: Finding Ham Operators by CycleMan · · Score: 1
    To find a HAM organization, try the following:
    ARRLWeb Affiliated Club Search
    There are only 17 clubs within 20 miles of my zipcode.

    To become one yourself, consider:
    Welcome to Amateur Radio!

    And if you're less insensitive, I might volunteer use of my generator to keep your PC running while I radio the county office of emergency services.

  37. My experience with a Ham Group by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1, Interesting

    About eight months ago I started experiencing MASSIVE interference on my 2.4ghz phone (it goes static every 3 seconds from some source of cyclic perpetual interference) and my wireless network suffered a noticable drop-off in range. I tried to isolate the source (turned off the router, talked to neighbors, etc.), but was totally unable to pin it down.

    A couple months after I had been forced to go with an old wired phone I read an article discussing how certain RF lights used for radio towers and other commercial level items can cause long range interference. So I think to myself, "I'm in VT, and VT has mountains with radio towers on them, so maybe its an RF light somewhere."

    Of course I don't have the resources to know what towers are around, etc., but maybe a local Ham operator group does? Figuring they would at least no more than I do about interference I searched for a local group and emailed the head of the VT Ham Radio organization located up near Burlington.

    I basically asked him if his group knew of any sources of interference in my area, if he knew how I might track it down, and what my recourse might be. I'm basically thinking hey, I'm just wondering what's up, and this guy is probably in a position to help. I've heard the stories of self-absorbed Hams fighting with neighbors, but I'm figuring its an overblown stereotype based on a noted minority of the group.

    The response I got was immediately hostile. First point was no answer in terms of known sources of interference... basically just ignored the question and said it could be anything. Then he goes on this diatribe telling me I have no rights, the 2.4ghz range is unregulated (yes, I already knew all this), he and other Hams have more rights since they are licensed, and how I generally have no expectation of a clear channel.

    I made the point that I don't think it's unreasonable to expect that I should be able to receive a signal for my phone inside my own house 20 feet from the base station. I also noted that 802.11b and similar technologies in the 2,4ghz frequency are one of the fastest growing areas of the technology industry, and that a rural area like VT might be well served socially and economically from the advent of such tech developments. He disagreed, stating that Hams had done more to maintain the spectrum than anyone else, and thus had a greater right to a greater share than anyone else.

    The emails went back and forth a bit, but it basically confirmed the general stereotype for Ham operators as a group relatively unconcerned with the happiness of their neighbors.

    So what's the summary? Hams are over-defensive, self-absorbed, and unrealstic. In the old days they had the run of the frequencies since most of the spectrum was totally unutilized. They got comfy living in a big house with few people to bother them. The explosion in communications and utilization of the various frequencies has thus begun to threaten their little fiefdom, and it now has them screaming bloody murder.

    My message to Hams: get over it, you are a TINY minority whose hobby does ABSOLUTELY NOTHING for anyone but yourself. I and many others don't have a problem with your hobby in general, but we have a right not to lose our use of radio frequencies ENTIRELY just so you can talk with a guy a hundred miles away. You don't generate jobs with your hobby, you don't venefit the community, and your licensing does not entitle you to run rampant over the rights of your neighbors. Despite what the FCC might contend, radio frequencies are the property of ALL citizens and not a select few.

    -rt

    1. Re:My experience with a Ham Group by canuck_wingnut · · Score: 1

      A few are idiots, but don't tar us all with the same brush,
      a LARGER number (like me) would be out doing
      everything we could to help. You probably wound
      up with one of the Pricks, they are in every
      field and interest. I have seen a few post to /.

      As for the hobby doing nothing for anyone but ourselves, you need to read a little more
      electronics and communications history.

      Canuck Wingnut (a longtime ham as well as an IT professional)

      --
      -: :- mv sco /dev/null because a computer is a terrible thing to waste. -:
    2. Re:My experience with a Ham Group by Dachannien · · Score: 3, Insightful

      Sample size: 1

    3. Re:My experience with a Ham Group by Goody · · Score: 1

      The response I got was immediately hostile. First point was no answer in terms of known sources of interference... basically just ignored the question and said it could be anything. Then he goes on this diatribe telling me I have no rights, the 2.4ghz range is unregulated (yes, I already knew all this), he and other Hams have more rights since they are licensed, and how I generally have no expectation of a clear channel.

      You hit a bad group. Just like there are hostile Linux folks, ham radio has them, too.

      Alot of WISPs using 802.11 spectrum which is shared with ham radio have learned that hams can be a big help, when asked. I'm sorry your experience wasn't so good.

      Realize that these frequencies are *yours* as well, and not a corporation's. You can get licensed quite easily if you want to. You say the frequencies are the citizens', but once they go to BPL, they will belong to the utilities.

      --
      Tired of being "punished" by the Slashdot $rtbl since 2002. I'm now over at http://soylentnews.org/ .
    4. Re:My experience with a Ham Group by finkployd · · Score: 1

      Wow, all that uninformed opinion with a sample size of one. I hope a minority never wrongs you, I can just imagine the racist opinions you will develop based off of that single experience.

      Finkployd

    5. Re:My experience with a Ham Group by hiaips · · Score: 1

      1. As others mentioned, your sample size is 1. So, based on your post, I now think that everyone in Vermont is judgemental.

      2. Ham radio is currently a major source of exploration, education, and fun for almost 700,000 people. As someone mentioned earlier, many engineers have begun in amateur radio and many people have learned about and experimented with electronics and technology -- all because of ham radio.

      3. Actually our hobby does generate jobs. There are engineers who design our equipment, manufacturers who make it, retailers who distribute it. That goes for antennas, software, computers, QSL card printers, transceivers, microphones, keyers, etc., etc. Hams spend a lot of money on their hobby, so what you say isn't exactly true.

      4. Our humanitarian efforts during times of emergency are well documented.

      5. Hams use 3 MHz of the bands from 2-30 MHz (and another 4 MHz from 30-80), and these bands are almost invariably busy, propagation permitting.

      Conclusion: Why don't YOU get over it and let 700,000 (in the US alone, almost 3 million worldwide) who are LICENSED radio operators have their 2.6 MHz???

      --Dave, W5HVV

    6. Re:My experience with a Ham Group by RevSmiley · · Score: 1

      Sorry you met up with an ass hole. But I can understand having been accused of causing inteference when I was not even in town how defensive someone might get.

      Some (a very few) of the very old hams are old farts and assholes, greedy assholes at that as well. Most Hams I know are great people that is the true of the majority. I would have been more than happy to try and help you find the problem.
      I am suprized you didn't do a web search. The FCC has lots of info on interference. At the frequency you are having problems at it has got to be very local. 2.5 ghz doesn't travel far it is attunated by trees,plants, walls, people and, things. The siganl your 2.5 ghz stuff puts out is weak as well. I would start looking very close to home. Start by unplugging stuff in the house and see if it goes away. Be sure to include your Monitor and Computer. Find out if your neighbors have got any new "toys" like 2.5 ghz networking gear or a phone. I just saw a wirless/wired networking box that uses the house wiring on sale. Don't know if that could cause trouble either. Look for stuff in that same frequency range. It's going to be close to you distance wise. Try finding a HAM your age and get some help from him. Good luck.

      King Henry, VI part II act IV
      "The first thing we do, lets kill all the lawyers."
      It's a joke about lawyers sure it is. There are to many lawyers. Do your part.

      --
      As you can see I don't care about my karma.
    7. Re:My experience with a Ham Group by ChuckleBug · · Score: 1

      My message to Hams: get over it, you are a TINY minority whose hobby does ABSOLUTELY NOTHING for anyone but yourself.

      Oh. Like these guys, or this here, or when my repeater group goes to Children's Hospital in December to let some terminally ill kids talk to "Santa Claus," or when we help coordinate the March of Dimes Walk-a-thon, or provide communications for parades...

      You have two problems with what you wrote: First is, you extrapolated from one experience to pass judgment on all hams. Second, you don't know what the hell you're talking about, yet that didn't stop you from posting a snotty, insulting rant.

    8. Re:My experience with a Ham Group by SpacePunk · · Score: 1

      "Conclusion: Why don't YOU get over it and let 700,000 (in the US alone, almost 3 million worldwide) who are LICENSED radio operators have their 2.6 MHz???"

      Nobody gives a shit about your LICENSE. Nobody cares. Grasp that concept.

      Does it make you special? No, it doesn't.
      Does it give you any special rights? No, it doesn't.

      Nobody else needs to get over anything, it's you who need to get over yourselves.

    9. Re:My experience with a Ham Group by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      So, 3 million in a word of what, 5 *billion*?

      Deal.

    10. Re:My experience with a Ham Group by Skuld-Chan · · Score: 1

      Thats rough...

      I can understand why hams get a little touchy about interference. Being one - its funny you can operate out of your apartment for years, and if you don't tell anyone what you are doing everything is cool.

      If you ever reveal what you are you are suddenly blamed for every glitch that happens in the neighborhood everything from snow on the TV Set to computers crashing. I've been blamed for interference even when I was on vacation and out of town.

    11. Re:My experience with a Ham Group by emtboy9 · · Score: 1

      Sorry you had such a bad experience... but as with anything, there are good and bad ops. Hell, how can you come to \. and complain about people giving you unfriendly replies??

      And by the way, all your wi-fi gear, and most likely all your computer gear, AND your 2.4GHz phone are Part 15 devices, and thus NOT licensed, and thus you really do have no legal recourse...

      --
      "Our funds have never taken part in toxic or death spiral convertible financings of any sort" -BayStar's managing partne
    12. Re:My experience with a Ham Group by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0
      do you realize how many computer jerks are out their. Network Admins that won't tell you the time of day?

      Do you know how many car dealers are jerks? Lots, but there are a few that are ok..

      my point is, everyplace in life you are going to find a few jerks. Some Ham operators are jerks too, but I would say the majority of us would help you out. I know I would if I was in your area.

    13. Re:My experience with a Ham Group by rvega · · Score: 1

      "You don't generate jobs with your hobby"

      Although several statements in your post illustrate your ignorance, this one is especially telling.

      Just for starters, numerous small electronics companies exist primarily to server the needs of the amateur radio community, as do divisions of larger ones, like Kenwood. Several monthly magazines are printed for and sold to hams. Have a look at CQ mazazine's list of advertisers.

      And, although their tie to amateur radio is no longer evident, Radio Shack started partly to supply ham radio operators. According to Standard & Poor's, Radio Shack currently employes over 41,400 people.

      Nope, no jobs created here!

    14. Re:My experience with a Ham Group by binarytoaster · · Score: 1

      Interestingly, it does in fact give them special rights.. namely, the rights to operate radio equipment on those frequencies... Just a thought :p

    15. Re:My experience with a Ham Group by SpacePunk · · Score: 1

      Sounds more like a priviledge than a right. Just as with a drivers license... having one doesn't mean a thing. It certainly doesn't guarantee that the roads will be clear for my use.

    16. Re:My experience with a Ham Group by kc2cjw · · Score: 1

      It's a shame your first (and I'll presume only) contact with a ham happened to be with someone who may well be a jerk. Many others would have been willing to help.

      Sadly, "Anonymous Coward" is the victim of some heavy interference which rendered about $200.00 of his equipment ineffective. These are devices which, by his own admission, he does not need, but desires. (Substitution of a wired phone works, although not really what is wanted... and a Cat 5 LAN COULD substitute for 802.11...) It sounds to me like "Anonymous Coward" has found the solution to his interference problem- get rid of wireless.

      Read a few of the other posts... the ham world isn't tiny, and has contributed more than you'd ever realize to the world economy and humanity in general.

  38. That's a shame by Knife_Edge · · Score: 1

    The major reason that broadband over powerlines is a good idea is because the power companies have comprehensive right-of-way for their cables, right to your door. They also do not have much incentive not to sell it to you, like the local phone and cable monopolies, the first of which does not really see how broadband relates to their business, and the second who thinks broadband is a good way to sell you more digital media content. If power companies could leverage their access, they could make some money that otherwise will just go somewhere else.

    I would almost be inclined to say to heck with the ham radio operators in this case. After all, what would hurt them would benefit lots of other people. But on the other hand, this is ridiculous! Is the only way to get broadband to more American homes over frickin' powerlines?! Too bad if this comes to pass, it will be the fault of the telcos and the cable companies if it does.

    1. Re:That's a shame by LostCluster · · Score: 1

      The thing is, powerline data would have to be converted back to more typical networks somewhere. Afterall, you've gotta limit the collision domain somehow. So, just because there's power there won't promise there's networking there... kinda like the limits that make DSL useless in rural areas. This isn't a be-all fix, even if they do get it to work outside a lab.

  39. You called? Advanced Class, Right here :-) by calebb · · Score: 3, Insightful

    I'm N7ZTT. I can never get my extra class license now that they lowered the morse code test to 5wpm - the advanced class (which no longer exists) is my only proof that I can transmit data by hand at ~10 baud (yes, faster than some early modems! 13wpm = ~10 baud)

    If you follow that link, you'll see I earned my advanced class in 1993; I received my first license in ~1991. But I'm not an old fark, I was homeschooled & did this for part of my curriculum. I'm only 23 :-)

    I'll make another post in a few minutes that won't be a brag thread. It's actually sorta sad to see Ham radio fading out. You can do everything and more on the internet than you can on amateur radio. Of course, if we had wide-scale power outages & the sun was spewing crud at our atmosphere, morse code could potentially be the only way to quickly send information to other countries. Due to the nature of morse code, it can be deciphered even with a very low S/N ratio.

    Anyway, I'll make a more intelligent post soon:

  40. Is that the sound of speed? by McNihil · · Score: 1

    I want it now.

  41. Actually... by calebb · · Score: 1

    I took a ham class in 1992 that had some nice equipment: We had a couple AT computers (286's I believe) that were capable of logging on to 'Ham BBS's' I had an account & we could send email around the world via FidoNet. I also downloaded this old game called "Welltris" via (Amtor I think) - it's like tetris, but in a well. It was definitely not open-source - so there you go, warez at 120 baud. *groan*

  42. radio guys... by apophenia · · Score: 0
    when they key up their mike's my TV reception goes to hell..

    they can give it, but not take it.

  43. Sound file of interference by nacturation · · Score: 1

    You can also listen to this sound file for a sample of the radio inteference.

    --
    Want to improve your Karma? Instead of "Post Anonymously", try the "Post Humously" option.
  44. International Treaties by Detritus · · Score: 3, Interesting

    Have the proponents of BPL considered that it may be a violation of international treaties governing the use and allocation of the RF spectrum? If I want to put an HF transmitter on the air, I must obtain a license from my country's radio administration, who in turn is required to follow international treaties that say what frequencies and emission types are available for specific classes of users. There are bands reserved for broadcasting, ships, aircraft, amateur radio, etc.

    --
    Mea navis aericumbens anguillis abundat
  45. Not impressed by BPL by thirty2bit · · Score: 1

    Personally I'd rather have fiber, cable or DSL than rely upon power lines. From my testing, AC in my area isn't stable in voltage or frequency. Power companies don't give a hang if trees wear insulation off wires. Pushing data across a decrepit infrastructure... not very reassuring. Let's not hear whining about dropped packets due to birds or squirrels. Ham radio is ancient, but at least it will operate regardless of the latest virus, DOS, or hack attacks. There is no DRM on the air, and best of all: Microsoft has no presence on ham bands. Old hams use morse code which is really binary (dot,dash = one, zero), and they hack hardware left & right. There is more in common with hams than most think. Ham::Linux as Cellphone::Windows. I am !ham

  46. We Need Ham Radio by Kyle+Hamilton · · Score: 1

    Ham Radio is still needed today! after 9/11 the cell phone system was in chaos with so many calls but hams were there to set up wireless communications and if there were ever a 9/11 style attack on america hams would need to be there to aid us. so why not give hams what they want it could save your life

    --
    Linux is like living in a teepee. No Windows, no Gates, Apache in house.
    1. Re:We Need Ham Radio by yaroze32 · · Score: 1

      AMEN..... 73 KD7VVH

  47. Gee, that's ironic by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Since many people DO experience interference on ALL Their devices from local Ham operators with overpowered rigs.

    Do you really expect sympathy from the public at large when most Hams treat their neigbors and others whose lives they trample with nothing but disdain?

    -rt

  48. Are you kidding? by NoDoZ · · Score: 1

    How many people still rely on ham radio? Why havent they moved over to something a little more modern? Does ham radio have any advantages over current technology?

    YOU rely on ham radio, you think that the technology behind 802.11 wireless networks isn't based on techmology that hams came up with? The mode used in the data over powerline stuff is almost certainly based on their experimentation. So, lots of people rely on ham radio, even you.

    1. Re:Are you kidding? by BrainInAJar · · Score: 1

      Yeah, it's evolved... and it's time for the weaker one to die.

    2. Re:Are you kidding? by NoDoZ · · Score: 1

      Have data over broadband users come up with any new modes of transmission, anything usefull in that area at all? HAM radio is still more productive in that area, and it benifits you.

    3. Re:Are you kidding? by canuck_wingnut · · Score: 1

      "Yeah, it's evolved... and it's time for the weaker one to die."

      Considering the evolution of ham radio, I guess wireless net is toast, see ya around. :-}

      Canuck Wingnut

      --
      -: :- mv sco /dev/null because a computer is a terrible thing to waste. -:
    4. Re:Are you kidding? by RevSmiley · · Score: 1

      I am a amateur radio operator. We have a big lobby with the FCC. Every place powerline broad band has been tried it's been a big problem. I don't think powerline brodaband is going to fly. Sorry you broad band can't interfere with the communications we provide during disaster free of charge to the goverment. FEMA loves us, most local emergency services love us. The only place this may not hold true is in a few east coast cities. Being a trained emergenct responder I have to let you know Powerline Broadband will be fought tooth and nail. We have the experience of HAMs in the U.K. as proof it's a issue. I also want to know how you will cope when I fire up my 1.5 KW RF amplifier and start talking with folks 500 or more miles away? It's going to swamp your puny little signal.

      King Henry, VI part II act IV
      "The first thing we do, lets kill all the lawyers."
      It's a joke about lawyers sure it is. We have to many lawyers. Do your part.

      --
      As you can see I don't care about my karma.
    5. Re:Are you kidding? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      I'll come to your house and shoot you in the face.

    6. Re:Are you kidding? by RevSmiley · · Score: 1

      Better bring a fucking army or swat team. You haven't see my marvelous Wall O' Guns or notices the close curcit tv camera on my front porch.
      Back to your cave troll.

      King Henry, VI part II act IV
      "The first thing we do, lets kill all the lawyers."
      It's a joke about lawyers sure it is. There are to many lawyers. Do your part.

      --
      As you can see I don't care about my karma.
    7. Re:Are you kidding? by geekoid · · Score: 1

      When the military starts getting interference because of BPL, you bet there ass they will show up, and please, draw a weapon.

      --
      The Kruger Dunning explains most post on /. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Dunning%E2%80%93Kruger_effect
  49. Stars Wars American Idol tryouts? by Willie_the_Wimp · · Score: 1

    That sound coming from the scanner isn't interefence from the power lines... The guy just picked up a couple of R2 units singing a duet.

  50. Re:Ham radio users - ampr.org by Cerlyn · · Score: 4, Informative

    Packet radio is extremely routable. TCP/IP is one way we do it, but actually is not the most common method.

    As another poster pointed out, amateur radio operators mainly use AX.25. Both TCP/IP and AX.25 are X.25 derivatines. AX.25 identifiers are Amateur Radio callsigns with numeric suffixes (such as "N0CALL-10"). AX.25 routing is done by broadcasting while gradually incrementing your TTL until someone hears them for you (if they aren't your immediate neighbor), or manually entered information (either as a route table or "Connect to SOME1 via SOME2, SOME3, SOME4").

    There are also a few other ways (such as NETROM and ROSE) amateur radio operators can route information digitally. While it would be a stretch, NETROM could be considered our equivalent of BGP router advertising and periodic route annoucements. ROSE is a polled system similar to Token Ring.

    We also have our share of propritary speedup techniques (such as KA-NODE from Kantronics) and experiemental protocols as well.

  51. little white dot? by MikeD227 · · Score: 1

    does anyone else see a little white dot near the top ... just under the ads?

    1. Re:little white dot? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Yep, I first noticed that a few weeks ago. A quick peek at the HTML reveals a 1 x 1 iframe embeded in the page immediately following the ad. (web bug?) I have no idea what the hell the extra 1 x 1 frame is all about... (too lazy to read the rest of the code...) Has ayone else looked into this?

  52. Re:Ham radio users - ampr.org by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1, Funny

    > no swearing

    So "ping -p 6675636b 44.255.255.255" will get people in trouble?

  53. HAM is an acronym... by calebb · · Score: 1

    Home Amateur Mechanic...

    N7ZTT

    1. Re:HAM is an acronym... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Hmm... we always say its for "Had Alot of Money"

  54. The myth of BPL and rural areas - bait and switch by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1, Interesting

    The claim that BPL is good for rural deployment is yet another myth propagated by the BPL lobbyists. In essence it is bait and switch. The BPL strategy is to get the FCC to allow the high levels of interference / pollution as the FCC is focused on getting broadband to communities that don't have it

    In reality, if the BPL lobbyists succeed, they will immediately focus on the wealthy suburban markets that are profitable (and already have cable and DSL) and ignore the rural areas.

    DSL can work out to about ~ 16,000 feet from the central office. BPL can only go 2,000 feet from the BPL equivalent of a DSLAM, then it needs an expensive repeater installed by an linesman trained to work with 11,000 volt cables. So for a 16,000 foot run 8 BPL repeaters are needed.
    At the customer's pole transformer a bridge needs to be installed to couple the signals from the 11,000 volt line to the 110 volt line (shudder to think what would happen if the bridge failed).

    However the math is worked, there is no way they can implement this vast array of expensive equipment in rural areas with any hope of meeting the projected pricing.

    The existing DSL broadband technology is proven and could be provided to almost everyone who has a phone, the barriers are political not technical. The solution to universal broadband lies in ensuring the phone companies serve all of their customers equally. BPL is a broken technology that is a pure distraction to the objective of universal broadband.

  55. Oh, Good... by qtp · · Score: 1

    Now we can blame the high cost of broadband on the HAM operators, instead of the exclusive provider deals the cable companies enjoy and the stupid way the phone companies were "required" to allow competition through thier lines. (Can a company really fairly act as a "Common Carrier" if they are competing in the service market that they are "carrying"?)

    Oooh, those HAMs burn me up! I feel better already.

    It's not a brilliant idea anyway, with power lines being incredible non tunable antaennas, irregular variations in power transmission frequency (which would be your carrier freq), and most power transformers filtering frequencies that are not close to 60Hz (that's the freq you feel when you stick your finger in the wall socket).

    There are better ways to expand the broadband market, such as wireless. I figure that if they can afford it in Bangladesh, there's no logical reason it can't be done in the States or other fully developed countries.

    --
    Read, L
  56. BPL is gross pollution by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    The radio spectrum is a limited, shared resource, which is why we have different services, licenses, etc. And of course there must be a balance between the needs of various services, such as broadcasting vs. hams vs. maritime users, etc.

    But BPL isn't a *user* of the radio spectrum, just a *polluter*. And a basic principle of regulation has been that polluters must not interfere with licensed users.

    Imagine a river that is used for many purposes - transportation, recreation, energy production, food production, etc. Different parts of the river are reserved for different purposes and all benefit from the river. The different users of the river all pay for licenses and support preservation and intelligent use of the river.

    Then along comes a company that wants to use the river as a dump for its industrial waste, without paying any fees and without regard for other users of the river, who are NOT allowed to dump anything into the river at all! The company says they should be allowed to dump their waste into the river wherever and whenever they want, and if the other river users don't like it, too bad.

    On top of all this, other companies in the same business do not dump waste into anybody's river. Instead, they invest heavily in new technology so that they don't generate much waste in the first place, and also invest in treatment, containment and disposal technology so that what little waste they do generate is handled safely. Those other companies are in direct competition with the new company, but they don't get the exception the new company is asking for.

  57. talk about shortsighted... by poptones · · Score: 1
    Let's see how well you communicate when an EMP takes out all the local computers.

    There's a very good reason the military uses so much RF gear, you know. You don't really think all hams do is chat on HF.. do you?

    1. Re:talk about shortsighted... by PurpleFloyd · · Score: 1

      Of course, an EMP is likely to take out your radio system as well. In fact, due to the antenna, your radio would probably end up a pile of molten slag. While amateur radio is good for communications in a large variety of emergencies, an EMP would probably take communications down to the level of semaphore and smoke signals.

      --

      That's it. I'm no longer part of Team Sanity.
    2. Re:talk about shortsighted... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1, Informative

      Vacuum tubes are immune to EMP and there are still a lot of HAMS out there with tube radios. The military radios for critical comms will be hardened against EMP. They've had folks working on survivable comms since the 50's.

  58. time they modernised by sentientbeing · · Score: 1

    im not trolling her but ive always thought CB radio is a shocking waste of spectrum anyway. its really more of a niche compared to the flexibility of the internet. no offence to any CBers here. if people can get more use out of broadband using the same spectrum space then so be it.

    Perhaps if citizens radio was modernised to more spectrally efficient and used compression methods and error correction like the myriad internet protocols and cellular phone protocols it wouldnt matter so much.

    --

    ------
    beware he who would deny you access to information, for in his mind he dreams himself your master
    1. Re:time they modernised by RevSmiley · · Score: 1

      CB does not equal "Ham Radio"

      CB= unlicensed 27 Mhz band 1,000 od mouth breathers can get radio in truck stop

      Amateur Radio = licensed Bands from 160 meters to above 5 ghz, mostly tech heads and geeks. Lots of trained emergencey service comunications provided for free provided to goverment with equipemtn provided by self. Radio's cost up 6 digits before decmials.

      King Henry, VI part II act IV
      "The first thing we do, lets kill all the lawyers."
      It's a joke about lawyers sure it is. There are to many lawyers. Do your part.

      --
      As you can see I don't care about my karma.
    2. Re:time they modernised by sharkman67 · · Score: 1

      Ham radio is not CB, FRS or any of the other non licensed radio services. Please get your facts straight.

      Oh and there are many modes of Ham Radio that are 'spectrally efficient'. Look up WJST

      BTW, if this goes through and your TV is not properly shielded, when they turn the service on you may loose channels 2-13 or so. Are you going to complain then?

    3. Re:time they modernised by sentientbeing · · Score: 1

      CB / HAM, the points moot. its inefficient spectrum use because the transmission power is so high you cant locally recycle frequencies as well as low power cellular phones do. you tie up the spectrum over a vast area.

      compared with modern multimedia communications Its a waste of bandwidth if all youre transmitting around the world is your own voice. (Consider the improvements made in video transmission and compression over 20Khz landlines. - its not HAM radio driving these technologies) much better to provide service to the general population.

      --

      ------
      beware he who would deny you access to information, for in his mind he dreams himself your master
    4. Re:time they modernised by NoCoward · · Score: 1

      What an elitist you are. No wonder hams get such a rep.

    5. Re:time they modernised by kirkjobsluder · · Score: 1

      compared with modern multimedia communications Its a waste of bandwidth if all youre transmitting around the world is your own voice.

      A problem with this is that computer users confuse bandwidth with throughput. In fact voice is a more conservative use of bandwidth than digital multimedia. This is the reason why telephone companies can offer universal voice access through the united states, but limited DSL access. (HAM digital modes such as CW, and PSK31 are even more conservative.)

    6. Re:time they modernised by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      You are a dishit. Elitist? Have you ever listened to 11 meters. It's whores,drug dealers and truck drivers. 11 meters is a wasteland. Sorry you can't read but this guy is right and you are a turd.

    7. Re:time they modernised by NoCoward · · Score: 1

      I'm glad you think that truck drivers are in the same class as whores and drug dealers. I am sure they would love to hear that from an elitist like you.

      Besides, posting as AC doesn't hide the fact that we all know who you are.

    8. Re:time they modernised by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Sure they do. Look at the antennas on the trucks they are not for TV. 11 meters is a unlicensed shit band the FCC doesn't even attempt to enforce the laws. Truckers who know what is up have already got Amateur Radio licenses or cell phones because of the problems with the CB band.

    9. Re:time they modernised by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      It's clear you don't understand radio wave propigation between 1 and 30 Mhz. Under most conditions you can't "reuse" a frequency without causing interference. The signal just doesn't stay local no mater how little power you run. Intercontinental communications using milliwatts of rf power are not uncommon. Even using the most efficent forms of transmission and modern digital filtering reuse is not generally viable at HF frequencies. CellPhones use UHF frequncies and above. Propigation at UHF frequencies over great distances is uncommon. Frequency reuse is possible with UHF and above.

  59. Tighter systems by canuck_wingnut · · Score: 1

    What they need to do is head "back to the drawing board" and come up with some tighter systems,
    what interferes with hf will eventually interefere with other frequencies, particularly if there
    is a majour system failure, filters go out of whack or whatever. Also, poorly designed and
    cheap (can you say Radio Shack?) electronics will also inevitably be susceptable.

    Coming to a cordless phone near you! Interference from Power Line Broadband! Get it while it's hot!

    Canuck Wingnut

    --
    -: :- mv sco /dev/null because a computer is a terrible thing to waste. -:
  60. Not just HAM!! by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    If this is correct, and the interfered range is 2Mhz to 80Mhz....that is a hell of a lot more than just hams!!
    That includes military HF, and the low band used for alot of dispatch radio.
    I dont see this happening ...if the article is true.

  61. I don't want to start a holy war here by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0


    I don't want to start a holy war here, but what is the deal with you Ham Radio fanatics? I've been sitting here at my freelance gig in front of a Ham Radio and TNC (Kantronics KPC-2 TNC Packet Communicator II hooked up to an ICOM 706 MK IIG) for about 20 minutes now while it attempts to copy a 17 Meg file from one folder on the hard drive to another folder on a harddrive 5 miles away. 20 minutes. At home, on my WiFi enabled laptop, which by all standards should be a lot slower than this Ham Radio/TNC combonation, the same operation would take about 2 minutes. If that.
    In addition, during this file transfer, simplex communication will not work. And everything else has ground to a halt. Even my morse code keyer is straining to keep up as I type this.

    I won't bore you with the laundry list of other problems that I've encountered while working on various Ham Radio machines, but suffice it to say there have been many, not the least of which is I've never seen a Ham Radio box that has run faster than its WiFi counterpart, despite the Ham Radio machines faster chip architecture. My ancient 1980's numeric pager with 8 megs of ram runs faster than this machine at times. From a productivity standpoint, I don't get how people can claim that Ham Radio is a "superior" machine.

    Ham Radio addicts, flame me if you'd like, but I'd rather hear some intelligent reasons why anyone would choose to use a Ham Radio over other faster, cheaper, more stable systems.

    1. Re:I don't want to start a holy war here by RevSmiley · · Score: 1

      Well who the fuck is stupid enough to send files over packet radio anymore? The facts are I can carry a floppy 5 miles faster than you can send it teh data on .1% of it over VFH or HF packet radio. I ran a packet radio BBS for years. Packet radio is dead
      If you go up to 2.5 or 5 ghz you can send that files at about 50 mbt LOL. It's not my fault you can't pick and use technology. Packet Radio is dead That TNC is usless. It's even to light for a bookend. Try FEC or one of the other modes digital modes that does error correction. I have a HAL card that does only does 45 baud that can do binary transfers faster than that TNC and it's obsolete too. Broadband over power line is dead as a door nail just like packet radio is dead .
      I know why you poster as an AC you are a bootlegger so what ever you say may be true but is of zero value anyway.

      King Henry, VI part II act IV
      "The first thing we do, lets kill all the lawyers."
      It's a joke about lawyers sure it is. There are to many lawyers. Do your part.

      --
      As you can see I don't care about my karma.
    2. Re:I don't want to start a holy war here by Kyle+Hamilton · · Score: 1

      as I recall hams pioneerd packet radio

      --
      Linux is like living in a teepee. No Windows, no Gates, Apache in house.
    3. Re:I don't want to start a holy war here by RevSmiley · · Score: 1

      Yea and most of them gave it up and went on to other interests the only use for TNC's these days is APRS
      I haven't got that kind of interest these days. There are better modes of digital communications.

      --
      As you can see I don't care about my karma.
  62. BPL is already obsolete! by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    BPL is already obsolete. The power companies can hang 5GHz Unlicensed National Information Infrastructure (U-NII) equipment on the poles and do it all at 5GHz. No interference to HF, and more bandwidth to boot.
    By the way, the U-NII was another pet project of the lawyers running the FCC. Looks like they inadvertently short circuited BPL.

    U-NII equipment is already available, see motorola.canopywireless.com/

    For more of the idea of hanging U-NII on the power poles see
    home.comcast.net/~gbox/

  63. Where's the problem?? by r00zky · · Score: 1, Troll

    From posted comments we can infer:

    a) Ham is only useful in:
    - disasters
    - unpopulated areas w/o internet connectivity or cellphone coverage or satellite communication coverage

    b) The rest of uses of ham radio falls under the description of hobby.

    - When a disaster happens the first to go out is power, so no problem with interferences here.
    - The unpopulated areas which comply requisites of such isolation are unlikely to have power coverage!

    So, no problem! Benefits of broadband over power lines overweight by some orders of magnitude the ham radio usefulness.

    --
    I'm a chainsmokin' alcoholic sociopath, so-ci-o-path
    1. Re:Where's the problem?? by canuck_wingnut · · Score: 1

      The problem is, that there are FAR more commercial interests in the HF spectrum than ham usage.
      This article focuses on the ham aspect of the interferance, when the hams can't hear each other,
      ships at sea, tugs, shortwave (and more users) can't be heard either.

      Canuck Wingnut

      --
      -: :- mv sco /dev/null because a computer is a terrible thing to waste. -:
    2. Re:Where's the problem?? by sharkman67 · · Score: 1

      OK, when you loose the lower channels (2-13) on your new Sony TV (Sony's always have poor shielding), your cordless phone no longer works (now you have to go buy a 2.4 GHz one that interferes with your WiFi) and all your baby monitor picks up is noise are you going to cry unfair?

      Lets not forget no more AM radio. And interference is claimed to end at 60MHz. If it goes any higher say good by to FM radio. But you have no problem going out and buying a XM radio for your car right?

    3. Re:Where's the problem?? by geekoid · · Score: 3, Insightful

      please think.

      Sure, the disaster area has no power, but what about the people you need to recieve you?

      What benefits? no AM? no emergency services?(other emergency services as well as ham), Noise on non properly shield equipment(like most home electronic equipment)?
      Now, what benefits of broadband are there? you can get email with dial-up, you can get IM with dial-up. clearly broadband is not a criticle need.

      Don't confuse numbers of users with usefullness. Perhaps we should get rid of the firestaions, since they only help a small handfull of people?

      --
      The Kruger Dunning explains most post on /. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Dunning%E2%80%93Kruger_effect
    4. Re:Where's the problem?? by NoCoward · · Score: 1

      This is baloney. I work at a company planning a rollout, and this is GARBAGE. There is no "loosing" of your TV channels.

      What a "looser". Must be a ham.

  64. Feed teh troll by RevSmiley · · Score: 1

    to clear up your confusion.

    Amateur Radio. Licensed people who go out in disasters and provide comunications and experiment with radio. Mostly geeks of one type or another.

    CBers and FRS unlicensed comunications by mouth breathers.

    Don't insult your fellow /.ers who are HAMS with your ignorance.

    King Henry, VI part II act IV
    "The first thing we do, lets kill all the lawyers."
    It's a joke about lawyers sure it is. We have to many lawyers. Do your part.

    --
    As you can see I don't care about my karma.
  65. File a comment with the FCC about Wi-Fi and BPL by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0
  66. 2,500 comments to the FCC; 99% against BPL by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1, Interesting

    Massive and diverse opposition to interference from BPL / PLC

    Overwhelming number of comments to the FCC strongly oppose interference from BPL.

    A very diverse range of corporations, organizations, associations, groups and citizens have filed comments that urge the FCC to ensure that BPL / PLC interference does not pollute our shortwave.

    Of the 2,500 comments that have been filed. Over 99% of the comments to the FCC have been against allowing BPL interference. The small number of comments supporting BPL have been from Power Companies looking for quick profits at the expense of turning our American shortwave into an electronic version of Prince William Sound after the Exxon Valdez oil spill.

    Below are links to some of the submissions.

    IEEE (Institute of Electrical and Electronic Engineers)
    gullfoss2.fcc.gov/prod/ecfs/retrieve.c ..

    National Academy of Sciences (BPL will severely disrupt Radio Astronomy)
    svartifoss2.fcc.gov/prod/ecfs/retrieve ..

    Wireless Communications Association (BPL could disrupt Wireless Internet access)
    svartifoss2.fcc.gov/prod/ecfs/retrieve..

    North American Shortwave Association
    gullfoss2.fcc.gov/prod/ecfs/retrieve. c..

    ARRL (Represents 700,000 American radio amateurs)
    svartifoss2.fcc.gov/prod/ecfs/retrieve. .

    National Association of Broadcasters (Folks that own the TV and Radio stations)
    svartifoss2.fcc.gov/prod/ecfs/retrieve. .

  67. I'm suprised at my reaction by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    I started reading the article thinking.. man HF is of the best spectrum for a ham, the only spectrum for the most part a DXer cares about.. but in thinking about BPL, and how it could change the so many things.. I almost think it's worth the loss (although I still favor the Hams at heart [first come first serve ;) ]) As compress abilities get better, and as transmision methods get more affective BPL could have the potiential to save countless dollars on the up keep on all of our telephone poll infrustructure. VoIP replacing our POTS lines, BPL bandwidth replacing our cable/dsl modems, perhaps a shift in the way cable television services our delivered. Opens the doors to some crazy stuff like interactive TV and other integrated services albiet seemingly far fetched at the present.

  68. Slashdot only has part of the story by KC7GR · · Score: 3, Informative

    The bottom line is that BPL's harmful effects ARE NOT limited to ham frequencies. There's a bunch of other services, both commercial and government, using HF from 2-30MHz.

    Just as a few examples: Aeronautical HF, NOAA RadioFAX over HF, NOAA storm warnings broadcast by SITOR over HF, Federal and Marine HF frequencies... The list goes on forever.

    So, it really isn't just hams that are going to be suffering. It's EVERYONE that uses the HF spectrum, including the U.S. Government!

    How long do you think said government is going to let BPL exist in its current form once critical military or Justice Department installations start noticing the very same interference that'll be driving us hams nuts?

    --

    Bruce Lane, KC7GR,

    Blue Feather Technologies

    1. Re:Slashdot only has part of the story by Tsu+Dho+Nimh · · Score: 1
      "NOAA storm warnings broadcast by SITOR over HF"

      Who needs those tornado alerts anyway, as long as they have broadband access to pr0n sites?

    2. Re:Slashdot only has part of the story by KC7GR · · Score: 1

      Hmm... Pr0n tornados?

      You are one sick puppy... ;-)

      --

      Bruce Lane, KC7GR,

      Blue Feather Technologies

  69. Re:Stupid beyond words... by Atilla · · Score: 1

    nice, except you forgot to mention that HAMs are involved with such things like storm chasing, and emergency comm services?

    HAMs were known to provide emergency communications in disaster areas and helping to provide such services as 911... which some of you take for granted.

    Don't mix up CB operators and HAMs.

    --
    --- sig moved for great justice.
  70. Re:Horse drawn buggies. [IANAHAM by pigscanfly.ca · · Score: 1

    really bad comparision . HAM technology is usefull ; sure it might be a bit slower but in the event of an emergancy or failure of other methods of communication it can ,literaly, be a life saver for many thousands. HAM radio is also a great educational resource , want to learn about radios? Unfortunitly the CRTC (or FCC in the US or whatever) wont let you just pick a random band and start transmitting on it (I know CB and 900mhz , 2.4ghz , 5ghz ; both are only good for very small regions , and are allready quite crowded and full of junk). (Note : HAM's (in canada not sure else where) have preference on the 2.4ghz band :-) . Anyways when all is said and done , if the power company is causing interference then they either have the choice of fixing it or being forceable shut down (not power but broadband).
    IANHAM But I am studying to become one (admitedly with slightly out of date material) .

  71. I'm suprised at my reaction [So blazed] by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    I started reading the article thinking.. man HF is some of the best spectrum for a ham; the only spectrum, for the most part, that a DXer cares about. In thinking about BPL though, and how it could change the way we do so many things.. I' almost convinced that it's worth the loss (although I still favor the Hams at heart [first come first serve ;) ]) As compression abilities get better, and transmision methods get more affective, BPL could have the potiential to save countless dollars on the up keep on all of our telephone-pole-based infrustructure. VoIP replacing our POTS lines, BPL bandwidth replacing our cable/dsl modems, perhaps a shift in the way cable television services our delivered. Opens the doors to some crazy stuff like interactive TV and other integrated services albiet seemingly far fetched at the present.

  72. When it hits the fan by The+Tyro · · Score: 0, Redundant

    You might find yourself thankful for HAMs.

    Disclaimer: I am a HAM operator myself, so I'm just stating my bias up front... mod as you wish.

    In disaster situations, HAM radio has really come through... I was in Florida when Andrew came rolling through Miami and Homestead; HAMs were a big help in getting comms reestablished. HAMs assisted with comms when the WTC's fell on 911. HAMs assist in tracking of dangerous storms via the SKYWARN system.

    During a bad blizzard in the midwest a few years back, myself and a bunch of other HAMs coordinated a service with our 4WD vehicles and mobile radios... we ferried healthcare workers to the hospital to help deal with the influx of patients.

    HAM radio is valuable... would be a shame to see it go, particularly if the interference problem can be fixed with a bit of re-engineering.

    --
    Even if a man chops off your hand with a sword, you still have two nice, sharp bones to stick in his eyes.
  73. BPL is a Technological Train Wreck by Goody · · Score: 4, Insightful

    Passing data over power lines is irresponsible from an engineering perspective. Power lines were designed to carry very very low frequencies, 60 hertz to be exact. BPL is wideband noise from 1 to 80 megahertz.

    Anyone with the slightest electical engineering knowledge knows that a signal of such high frequencies will be radiated and antenuated nearly immediately. The power lines are just awful transmission media for these frequencies. What is needed for the power cables is shielding -- that's what's known as coaxial cable. ( Why don't they pass data on cable ? :-)

    This is analogous to the water company trying to deliver water with perforated pipes. The water just spills out everywhere and every couple hundred feet they would have to pump in more water so that you had sufficient water pressure at your house.

    BPL was rejected in Japan and Europe, becuase it polluted the spectrum so bad it was pathetic.

    For those dumping on ham radio as being obsolete or feel broadband is more important, consider that this will interfere with many other services including international ship distress frequencies, government (including military) allocations, shortwave broadcasts, and most likely aviation and public safety frequencies. Is your ability to get high speed pr0n more important than all this ?

    Why is everyone else (like the FCC and utility companies) saying this is great ? The FCC is pro-big business and pro-utility. Equipment vendors are retreading the same technology that was rejected overseas and not informing their clients, the power companies, of the true interference potential. The power companies are dying to get into the broadband race as the telcos have their heads up their butts with DSL.

    We need broadband, but this is not the solution. We need to remove the barriers for DSL and cable. Power companies could leapfrog the telcos and cable companies with fiber into the home or unlicensed wireless from their poles.

    Quite simply, BPL is DOA.

    --
    Tired of being "punished" by the Slashdot $rtbl since 2002. I'm now over at http://soylentnews.org/ .
    1. Re:BPL is a Technological Train Wreck by jrivar59 · · Score: 3, Funny
      consider that this will interfere with many other services including international ship distress frequencies, government (including military) allocations, shortwave broadcasts, and most likely aviation and public safety frequencies. Is your ability to get high speed pr0n more important than all this ?

      yes.

    2. Re:BPL is a Technological Train Wreck by ImpTech · · Score: 0

      > For those dumping on ham radio as being obsolete or feel broadband is more important, consider that this will interfere with many other services including international ship distress frequencies, government (including military) allocations, shortwave broadcasts, and most likely aviation and public safety frequencies. Is your ability to get high speed pr0n more important than all this ?

      I pointed this out above somewhere too, but 80MHz is well below all the marine frequencies that I know of. Additionally there are few to no powerlines on the water, so I think ships in distress will likely be fine (or at least no more in trouble than they would be otherwise).

    3. Re:BPL is a Technological Train Wreck by shaitand · · Score: 1, Interesting

      Most of that was utter nonsense, it's a given that bridging the last mile of arguably the most significant technological advance in the history of mankind to date is more important than those services, which can move to other frequencies.

      Considering all electronic devices, including your radio need the power running at the frequency it's already at, Guess who will have to change first? Shielding the cables isn't an option either, that puts this right back in the same spot it is with dsl and cable internet (except perhaps a distance over the cable increase, and that really is just a way of making broadband cheaper and wider reaching, instead of the internet itself).

    4. Re:BPL is a Technological Train Wreck by Goody · · Score: 1

      You're thinking of VHF marine. There are several bands of frequencies scattered below 30 Mhz used by ships at sea. VHF only goes so far.

      Regarding no power lines at sea, yes, you're right, but you forget how far HF signals propagate. And ships need to talk to shore stations sometime.

      --
      Tired of being "punished" by the Slashdot $rtbl since 2002. I'm now over at http://soylentnews.org/ .
    5. Re:BPL is a Technological Train Wreck by Goody · · Score: 1

      Most of that was utter nonsense, it's a given that bridging the last mile of arguably the most significant technological advance in the history of mankind to date is more important than those services, which can move to other frequencies.


      Oh really ? Where in the spectrum do you intend on moving them ? Everyone's a frequency allocation expert until you get down to brass tacks and have to figure out where to rellocate everything and deal with millions of dollars of obsoleted equiment. The spectrum is so congested now it's not funny. Having a wired-based network making a chunk of valuable wireless spectrum is insane. Saying this can all be moved is utter nonsense.

      Shielding the cables isn't an option either, that puts this right back in the same spot it is with dsl and cable internet

      What ? Basic electronics theory tells you that unshielded cables will radiate. This was discovered in the early 1900s. BPL is a step backwards. To suggest that shielded cable isn't an option is again... utter nonsense. The barriers to cable and DSL deployment are political, while the barrier to BPL is technical.

      --
      Tired of being "punished" by the Slashdot $rtbl since 2002. I'm now over at http://soylentnews.org/ .
    6. Re:BPL is a Technological Train Wreck by shaitand · · Score: 1, Interesting

      The barriers to dsl and cable deployment are COST. The COST of running the cable and also the fact that neither can go very far from the office due to technical limitations.

      Since it's the COST of laying cable and range the technology can travel on the wire the prevent dsl or cable from reaching the last mile, it's reasonable to suspect it would turn out to be just as expensive to replace all the power lines in every location way the hell out in the middle of nowhere. BPL overcomes some of the distanced traveled on the wire limitations.

      I'm not saying shielding wouldn't stop or reduce the impact this has on radio, I'm saying reruning every power line in the world might be a tad more expensive than replacing the radios on boats with ones that use what are currently ham bands.

      After all, the hams have trillions worth of frequencies that have been dead pretty much anytime I've listened. A friend who is a ham laughed and admitted it, 90% of the time 90% of hf is silent, in fact, you have to know where to look to find transmissions, that doesn't sound like you have to hunt around to find an open frequency to me.. and it has to go aways beyond you have to search for 5mins to find an open frequency before they are "crowded". Allocated is not the same thing as crowded, it doesn't matter if it's Allocated, it can be reallocated, again, hams have trillions worth of spectrum that should rightly belong to the common man... not an elite group of licensed operators.

      Since I don't have the spectrum anyway, might as well contribute it to something which actually IS useful to the common man. Ships can use satillite technology, just as US Naval ships do. Emergency services don't need to inform the globe before the power is back on, communicating with rescue workers within a few miles until the crisis is resolved will do just fine. Hams can chat across the globe with these things called instant messengers and voip technologies that run through *gasp* the internet. And thanks to power cable provided bandwidth you won't even have lag in your always digitally PERFECT transmission.

    7. Re:BPL is a Technological Train Wreck by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Don't waste your time man, these guys don't know a dam thing about propigation. Knowing that VHF is mostly a line of sight should be pretty basic. The concept that a 200 mw signal at HF frequencys could travel from the US and wipe out a emergency marine radio telephone call on the other side of the earth is not something these guys would not understand. They mostly understand computers and stealing music but are ignorant of phyics. Their "high speed internet access choices are more importan than human life and limb. Powerline broad band is like DC current for mains power a really bad idea. Edison wanted a smoke belching DC generator every few blocks to provide power. They would be all for that I bet too.

    8. Re:BPL is a Technological Train Wreck by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Over and again, I've seen the pro-HAM group say something like "Is your ability to get high speed pr0n more important than all this ?"

      Hate to tell you, whenever I see that, you just irritate me as another bunch of elitist assholes ready to label everyone with broadband as pr0n-junkies. It certainly doesn't do your argument any good.

      Yes, I have broadband. No, I don't use it for pr0n. Yes, I think BPL is a Bad Thing[tm] if it does indeed spew crap out like this.

      But you guys seem to be doing your damnedest to make sure I don't care...

    9. Re:BPL is a Technological Train Wreck by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      First off, Hams don't have 'trillions worth of spectrum.'. You keep saying shit like that over and over in comment after comment.

      What's your problem?

    10. Re:BPL is a Technological Train Wreck by Goody · · Score: 1

      BPL overcomes some of the distanced traveled on the wire limitations

      But it doesn't overcome the distance limitations, have you been listening ? BPL has to be regenerated every couple hundred feet because it's radiated out of the line. This is jury-rigging at its finest. And how anyone can justify a wire-based network rendering an 80 MHz swath of wireless frequencies unusable is beyond me.

      After all, the hams have trillions worth of frequencies that have been dead pretty much anytime I've listened

      It depends on what bands you were listening to. Was it HF, VHF, or microwave ? If it was HF, what were the K and A indexes at that time and what was the propagation like ? You're not understanding the breadth of the hobby nor the dynamics of the frequencies involved. Also, again, hams hold something like only 10% of the frequencies in question here. Others have suggested to relocate the users in these bands, but this shows a clear lack of understanding of the enormity of that task or the properties of the frequencies which the services that are there now require. It would be cheaper for the government to subsidize DSL deployment than attempt to relocate everyone. I don't even know where to begin with how you would deal with the international treaty implications of all of this.

      Since I don't have the spectrum anyway, might as well contribute it to something which actually IS useful to the common man

      I think this statement sums it up for the majority of Slashdotters who are against ham radio and for BPL. Translate "the common man" to say "me" . I'm not able to use it because I'm not licensed nor am I interested in learning something that requires some time and thought, so screw the hams, government services, aviation, and ships. I don't care if this violates all common-sense engineering. I want my cheap broadband and I want it now !!! What ? I can get $5 off if I kill my grandmother ? Where's the aresenic ? Get out of my way !

      As I've said before, but nobody seems to understand, the frequencies do belong to you now, much like the way national parks below to you. Sure, you can't go in and cut down the trees for your personal use, but it's there for you to enjoy. They are internationally allocated for you to use. All you have to do is pass a test to use them. If a corporation owns them, they are not yours. Paying $40 a month for broadband doesn't make them yours.

      --
      Tired of being "punished" by the Slashdot $rtbl since 2002. I'm now over at http://soylentnews.org/ .
    11. Re:BPL is a Technological Train Wreck by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      please mod this up, very well stated if i may say so...

    12. Re:BPL is a Technological Train Wreck by Tsu+Dho+Nimh · · Score: 1
      We need broadband, but this is not the solution. We need to remove the barriers for DSL and cable. Power companies could leapfrog the telcos and cable companies with fiber into the home or unlicensed wireless from their poles.

      You mean the way the Arizona Public Service (electric company) leases their unused fiberoptic capacity ... they installed the cable for their own communications needs, but it apparently comes in only one size: big.

      See here: for further informaton on how the power companies are doing it without having to ruin radio.

  74. Not just ham bands by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    There is a lot more going on from 2mhz to 70mhz. If you live in CA, then I hope you don't ever want CHP to respond to an accident to save your life, because their radios operate on 39 and 42mhz. Fire protection districts nation wide have dispatches on 42 and 45mhz. The ARRL is the group that started yelling about BPL first, but much much more would be destroyed if it went live.

    1. Re:Not just ham bands by Gonarat · · Score: 1

      I'm suprised that no one has brought up that TV channels 2 thru 6 are just above the 6 Meter band (50 MHz to 54 MHz). So if this technology messes up frequencies from 2 MHz to 80 Mhz, Channels 2 to 5 will definitely get hammered, and channel 6 (which ends at the 88 MHz FM radio band) may be slightly affected.



      --
      Beware of Sleestak
  75. This shouldn't even be an issue by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Since it will soon cost $699 to have a kernel to compile HAM drivers in to.

  76. You would be pissed, too, if... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Whether the ham radios are home-built or paid for with hard-earned money, the issue is whether these radios would be rendered useless by this technology.

    To put this in terms that a typical Slashdot reader would understand, you would be just as pissed (and probably a lot less level-headed than the ham radio operators are being) if someone rendered permanently inoperable any computer you now have or ever bought in the future.

  77. Well, Duh. by macemoneta · · Score: 2, Insightful

    Broadband over power lines is running a high frequency signal over unshielded, untwisted wire, for miles. Hmm, who would have thought that could cause radio interference? Maybe the power companies (and the equipment manufacturers) should have thought about this for a bit longer.

    It's one thing to run fiber to the curb, and use a low-power signal to the home - that might be workable. It's basically what the hybrid fiber coax cable systems do, but their wire is shielded too.

    If the equipment is generating this much RF interference, I don't see how the equipment could be certified for deployment. If it is certified, I'd be interested to know what agency put their mark on it.

    --

    Can You Say Linux? I Knew That You Could.

    1. Re:Well, Duh. by outanowhere · · Score: 1

      But is it not obvious that the power lines would be a big, huge, enormous antenna array which would radiate the entire broadband spectrum applied to it, plus harmonics thanks to various defects and attached equipment, etc., adn.?

      I suppose no one wants to go there.

      Power lines already emit too much noise and interference. Why add more?

      Seems most people are totally ignorant of and oblivious to anything that is not AM, FM, TV, FRS, good-buddy CB or wireless phone.

      Wake up people! There's more to the world than you think.

  78. Beyond the ham part by SWTP_OS9 · · Score: 1

    Beyond the ham part and interference for other users of that chunk of sprectium is simple this:

    Everywhere they have run test and trial it does not live up to even 1% of the hype. Japan tried it and kill it. I think Scotland been redoing the test and failing. It does not work. Its one of those great idea but wont fly. Wont solve the last mile problem. Mosly would compete with already existing Broadband services. And takes a lot of rework to get signals past transformers and the rest of the power line equipment. You are trying to run data over lines never designed for this stuff. Look at your net cable. Its twisted to do some limited shielding. This has none. Is not self shielding and both act as a receive/tramission antenna. Also the harmonic { mutiple/division of primary freq } would hit into FM { 88~108 ), Air{ 108~12?} and possible the AM band etc. At the level they would need to drive this the interference beyond the 2 80 is almost certain.

    Just because you can do something doe mot mean you should do it.

    DSlReports had this a while back.

    1. Re:Beyond the ham part by Tsu+Dho+Nimh · · Score: 1
      "Is not self shielding and both act as a receive/tramission antenna. "

      So, could I tap into the signal and get free pr0n?

  79. Re:Stupid beyond words... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Get your facts correct. That is CBers. Not HAMs.

  80. TVI/RFI by Detritus · · Score: 1

    The vast majority of cases of TVI (television interference) and RFI (radio frequency interference) are caused by the poor design and engineering of consumer electronics equipment, not spurious or illegal emissions from amateur radio stations. Consumer electronics equipment is designed to be cheap, not to be well shielded and resistant to EMI (electro-magnetic interference). The manufacturers could substantially increase their product's resistance to EMI with a few dollars worth of components, but they wont do it. They would rather pocket the money and let the consumer suffer the consequences. To make things worse, the amateur radio operator, who probably spent thousands of dollars on high-quality, properly engineered, radio equipment, gets the blame for the deficiencies of someone's crap TV set, built in China for $50.

    --
    Mea navis aericumbens anguillis abundat
  81. Hams Complain about Powerline Broadband by MainframeKiller · · Score: 1

    Why do pigs care about powerline broadband?

    --
    http://www.club977.com/ - The 80's Channel!
    Your source for commercial free 80's music!
  82. Disappointed by NatZi · · Score: 5, Insightful

    I have been reading /. for years and this is the most disappointing reaction to a story posting that I have seen to date.

    First, BPL is proven to cause interference to more than just amateur radio. Amateur radio operators are one of the few groups that has the skills and capabilities to prove the problem exists before a major mistake is made in deploying BPL.

    Second, I have seen a number of anecdotes indicating that "ham" radio operators are jerks and, therefore, apparently should not have any rights. Obviously, in any group, a small minority of the members may be jerks. However, "hams" are by far one of the kindest, most intelligent, and thoughtful groups that I know. It is not fair for me to minimize the "jerk" problem, but I cannot see a link between being a jerk and having rights taken away. Get to know some real amateur radio operators and you will see a dedicated, service-oriented, and technologically cutting edge group.

    Third, amateur radio operators are licensed by the FCC. The licensing requires extensive testing and is conducted very professionally (locate a local VEC session and you will see what I mean about professionalism). The tests are rigorous, especially for the higher classes, and require the applicant to be seriously interested in radio and technical communications.
    Amateur radio operators are not a bunch of people with "CBs" sitting around making life difficult for others.

    Forth, amateur radio operators are largely responsible for many of the "Internet crowd" technologies. Wireless Internet (I was doing that in 1990), satellite tv, "cell" phones, etc. were all largely based on amateur radio technologies. Amateur radio is really a cutting edge scientific and technical discipline.

    Fifth, and probably most important, BPL may sound like an excellent idea; but the telecom industry promised broadband access via standard telephone and digital line technologies to most people in the US by 2006 as part of the mega merger process in the 1980s and 1990s. In exchange for creating mega-monopolies, the telcos promised to provide broadband services. The telcos, however, have heavily lobbied Congress and state governments to conveniently "forget" this little deal because it is now "too expensive." If the telcos would be held to their agreements, poor technologies like BPL would not be needed. Think about it: do you really want your Internet connections from a high voltage/amperage power line? Contact your Congressperson and state representatives and ask why the telcos have not lived up to the commitments.

    I guess I am just disappointed that a number of /.ers are attacking amateur radio rather than seeking more information about the service. "Hams" are not just ten old guys sitting around using "CBs" to talk in some antiquated manner or a bunch of old guys hunched over a telegraph key slowly tapping out morse code. Amateur radio is also not just an "emergency" service -- although some amateur radio operators do participate in emergency communications. You would be amazed at what amateur radio has to offer -- GPS location services, radio/Internet interconnects, satellite communications, digital communications, microwave projects, rural Internet, and other bleeding edge projects. Many of these projects will become standard /.er fair in five or ten years.

    Sorry to get on my soap box.

    1. Re:Disappointed by geekoid · · Score: 1

      but you forget, there are no jerks on the internet!

      oh wait....

      --
      The Kruger Dunning explains most post on /. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Dunning%E2%80%93Kruger_effect
    2. Re:Disappointed by IM6100 · · Score: 1

      However, "hams" are by far one of the kindest, most intelligent, and thoughtful groups that I know.

      I would just like to add the comment that I only recently got a Ham license, but have been going to Ham swapmeets (for my electronics hobby as well as computer stuff) for years and years. My impression of a swapmeet has always been that it's a place where every person present is that guy who who would stop to help you fix a flat tire. Really nice people, and smart, too.

      But as you said, this isn't about Ham radio. The Hams are the early warning system on this one. It will hose up so much, and for such a lame kludged purpose.

      --
      A Good Intro to NetBS
    3. Re:Disappointed by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      This is Slashdot. No one reads the articles and it's a race to post first and earn karma points. If it doesn't affect the Linux kernel, the GPL, file swapping, or Mozilla 1.0.0.0.1 release candidate 45, it's not important. A two-liner off-topic reply post on intellectual property got modded up to a '5 - Insightful' almost immediately. 'Nuff said...

  83. It's not just hams who'll suffer interference by KC7YRN · · Score: 1

    The proposed frequency range for broadband over power line runs up to 80 MHz. There's a radio astronomy allocation at 25.55 Mhz, a couple more around 38, and another at 73.

    Over-the-air TV channels 2-5 lie in the affected range.

    There's also a subtler problem. That transformer near your house blocks high frequencies. To get broadband in and out of your house, the power company will have to buy and install bypass circuits to divert high-frequency signals around the transformer. OK so far ...

    But what happens next? Right now that transformer is isolating you from your neighbors X-10 system, your neighbor's cheap switching power supplies, your neighbor's made-in-Sweatshopistan dimmers, and the home power line network on the next block.

    Bypass that transformer and every one of those sources might as well be plugged into your house.

  84. Re:Stupid beyond words... by Kyle+Hamilton · · Score: 1

    Yea thats it lets get rid of Public Safety so a few losers can have faster internet life or fast internet...choices

    --
    Linux is like living in a teepee. No Windows, no Gates, Apache in house.
  85. Not just hams would be effected by RocketScientist · · Score: 4, Informative

    Check this out..

    There's a link there for the PDF of the spectrum allocation. Pretty much "DC to Daylight". The piece that BPL is going to destroy covers a lot of Ham allocations. But it also covers things like:
    Maritime Mobile
    Aeronautical Mobile
    Space Research
    Standard Time Signals
    Shortwave Broadcast
    Radio Astronomy
    Land Mobile
    Fixed-station

    The amateur service is a very small part of the spectrum below 30 Mhz. A lot of it is used for things like trans-oceanic flights, military and civilian mobile services, and the like.

    I'm of two minds whether this will pass or not. Michael Powell, the FCC chair, hasn't made a good decision since he got into office, so I'm thinking this will go through because he's got the power companies all giving him blow jobs under the table. On the other hand, the FAA, NTIA, the military, and the shortwave broadcasters may get through to the FCC that they can't allow this, and maybe somebody will get that lamebrain Powell to do something right.

    1. Re:Not just hams would be effected by Goody · · Score: 1

      I'm of two minds whether this will pass or not. Michael Powell, the FCC chair, hasn't made a good decision since he got into office, so I'm thinking this will go through because he's got the power companies all giving him blow jobs under the table. On the other hand, the FAA, NTIA, the military, and the shortwave broadcasters may get through to the FCC that they can't allow this, and maybe somebody will get that lamebrain Powell to do something right.

      I thought only the Dems got the BJs :-)

      Powell also hammered through the media ownership rule changes without any public hearings or comment period, under the protest of Commisioners Copps and Adelstein. It looks like some legislators have come to their senses and media ownership rules changes will be derailed. But left to his own discretion, Powell would let any corporate interest run rampant over consumers and the spectrum. He didn't inherit alot of brains from the old man.

      --
      Tired of being "punished" by the Slashdot $rtbl since 2002. I'm now over at http://soylentnews.org/ .
    2. Re:Not just hams would be effected by akb · · Score: 1

      Powell also hammered through the media ownership rule changes without any public hearings or comment period

      There was most certainly both a comment period and public hearings. Thousands and thousands of comments were filed for the rule making you refer to, Powell made sarcastic remarks about them. All FCC meetings are public, there was a special meeting to pass these rules. If you mean a forum where members of the public get up and speak, that did occur in Richmond after Powell got cajoled into it. Copps and Adelstein held additional, nonofficial forums on their own. The FCC did also have a "roundtable discussion" where it invited experts on both sides of the debate to testify.

      He didn't inherit alot of brains from the old man.

      Powell is quite smart, I don't think you will find anyone who is intimate with the issues that will say otherwise.

      There are many reasons to excoriate Powell and the FCC but please be informed enough to do so accurately.

    3. Re:Not just hams would be effected by Goody · · Score: 1

      There was most certainly both a comment period and public hearings

      I'll eat crow on this one. Yes, there were publc forums before it became a public 6 o'clock news issue, courtesy of Copps and Adelstein. Powell still tried to fast-track it in the face of public outcry and congressional inquiries.

      Powell is quite smart

      Smart, perhaps; a friend of the little guy, ummm, no.

      --
      Tired of being "punished" by the Slashdot $rtbl since 2002. I'm now over at http://soylentnews.org/ .
  86. Re:Elitist Bastards! by Dun+Malg · · Score: 1

    who modded this "troll"? It's a standard pot/kettle joke!

    --
    If a job's not worth doing, it's not worth doing right.
  87. Harmful interference is only part of the problem by Sleeper · · Score: 2, Interesting

    I don't want to sound troll. But this thing (ethernet over power lines) has been freaking out ham radio operators all over the world for quite some time. Look for example here [eham.net]. And based on the law "if the shit can happen it certainly will" this will bring EMI problems to all equipment that is connected to or in the vicinty of the jack in the wall. Your TVs your stereos your computers etc.

    Besides have anybody of had to deal with power companies? Do you really want THEM to provide your internet connection? Or even being involved in providing one.

    Time and time again it returns (and will keep returning) to the simple truth. You need an adequate infrastructure to provide high speed Internet.

    In the beginning of DSL I kept hearing a lot of strange things going against physics. Such as UTP (unshielded twisted pair) is better than coaxial cable etc. Well guess what, being entirely untrue this is not the end of the story. The pair that runs the phone line in your home/appartment is not even twisted, its flat (and it's CAT 3 most of the time to the central office).

    It took huge amount of money to put power lines, phone lines and CATV into every home. And the companies that were doing that were cutting costs like crazy. Which means that nobody ever thought that someday it will be used for something else besides its initial purpose. And again based on the law I mentioned in the beginning it will be probably the worst case scenario for anytiing else. In case of DSLs that certainly is crosstalk and EMI and also distance. For example in my case no DSL provider does even want to install it for me citing that I am too far from central office.

    Personally I think the interrim winners of all this will be the cable companies. Just because the people who decided to get broadband internet access usually go all the way once they've set to have it. Most people I know who started with DSL eventually just switch to cable modems. But eventually every body will lose because again CATV was not intended for anything else. (Just an example untill recently CATV equipment manufacturers were refusing to use multilayered PCBs because it was "too expensive"). So this is it. People just keep their heads in the body cavities of their choice and keep selling each other a snake oil.

    On the other hand. It would be actually nice (especially with current situation in tech sector of economy) if we'd start laying fiber to the home and/or build sane infrastructure for wireless access.

    Just my $0.02

    --
    - Back off man. I am a scientist
  88. Emergency use by desenz · · Score: 1

    On the plus side, i think many emergencies that require HAM use will have also taken out power and phone lines, and so would free them from much interference

  89. Awful joke; don't read me!! by bersl2 · · Score: 1

    HAM is dying!
    [/me ducks!]

  90. Where is the skip? by TheSync · · Score: 1

    Personally (as an ex-Ham who can copy code), I don't think this BPL stuff is so bad. First of all, on a lot of the lower HF frequencies you are screwed if you are near a power line today as is. Even broadcast AM is unlistenable if you are driving on a road with a lot of power poles and overhead wiring.

    Second, if this stuff is really bad, where is the skip? All it takes is a few watts on 20m to do worldwide communication, so if the BPL is really an issue, it should show up globally there, yet I don't think it does.

    While HF communications are pretty much dead in the continental US (except for relious shortwave and CQ DX UR 599 QSL 73), it is important in developing areas such as Africa.

    The third issue is that if skywaves really become an issue, BPL could be filtered to 30-80 MHz, which really don't have much skip outside of solar max years.

    You'll notice that all of the times when it is "hams to the rescue" in recent years really center around 144 MHz and up...also note that after 911, there was a lot of use of unlicensed 900 MHz Ricochets around the former WTC site.

    1. Re:Where is the skip? by RevSmiley · · Score: 1

      I am on a HF traffic net on 3975 right now. With all the QRN and tuner upers we get it's hardly dead. 20 meters is packed. HF is the most active place on the bands. My UHF repeater is dead only one QSO in the last month.

      King Henry, VI part II act IV
      "The first thing we do, lets kill all the lawyers."
      It's a joke about lawyers sure it is. There are to many lawyers. Do your part.

      --
      As you can see I don't care about my karma.
    2. Re:Where is the skip? by TheSync · · Score: 1

      Yeah, that is my point, if BPL is really "polluting" HF, why is 20m still packed and not totally blown away?

      The BPL interference is probably mostly a problem for HF operations in the immediate vicinity of them.

    3. Re:Where is the skip? by Dun+Malg · · Score: 1
      Yeah, that is my point, if BPL is really "polluting" HF, why is 20m still packed and not totally blown away?

      Because BPL has not progressed beyond the limited, trial stages of deployment. It's currently operating in just a few areas. RTFA.

      The BPL interference is probably mostly a problem for HF operations in the immediate vicinity of them.

      And if BPL is deployed to the extent power companies want, "immediate vicinity" will be equivalent to "anywhere near a populated area".

      --
      If a job's not worth doing, it's not worth doing right.
  91. uhhhh you have to be kidding by Soothh · · Score: 0, Flamebait

    lets keep that old ass system alive for the old badgers and not proceed with new technology, RIGHT.
    tell the old turds to get a new hobby.

    --
    We have seen that living things are too improbable and too beautifully "designed" to have come into existence by chance.
  92. Hams not the only ones affected by Crusty+Oldman · · Score: 1

    .

    I don't understand why this article would be slanted to make it seem that only wrinkly old radio amateurs will be affected by the BPS broadband RF noise scheme. There are literally hundreds of thousands of users of this part of the spectrum that will be adversely impacted, from private and industrial communications to aircraft and maritime navigation and weather stations.

    And YOU TOO, if you have marginal radio or television reception. Look at the chart at http://www.geog.ucl.ac.uk/casa/martin/atlas/us_spe ctrum_map.pdf for an idea of the frequiencies and services that will be affected.

    Hams, my ass! You're being lied to, again.

    1. Re:Hams not the only ones affected by Epsillon · · Score: 1

      only wrinkly old radio amateurs

      OI! I resemble that remark! Why, I ought to take my Wouff-Hong to you for that!

      Seriously, where does everyone and his dog get the idea that all amateur radio ops and enthusiasts are wrinkly oldsters? Sure, many are, but there is life away from the RAOTA nets. Try looking up the spectrum a bit and see what's being done by amateurs in the microwave bands, with things like 802.11 kit with bi-directional amplifiers that we can legally use (802.11b and g just happens to be smack bang inside the 13cms amateur band), along with high gain antennas. Satellite, emergency and disater communications, DX, awards, you name it there will be a facet of amateur radio to cater for your whims. Oh, sorry, no pr0n, though.

      Old hat? See amateur radio in the 21st century before you cast your judgement, old son.

      --
      Resistance is futile. Reactance buggers it up.
    2. Re:Hams not the only ones affected by Crusty+Oldman · · Score: 1

      Well, I was going to say "old fart". Would you like that better? (BTW, I've had a bookmark on Cebik's page for the last several years.)

    3. Re:Hams not the only ones affected by IM6100 · · Score: 1

      At the last Ham social gathering I was at, I was scoffed a little bit because I'm still using PIC embedded controllers with EEPROM in them. Flash is the way forward. There was also an interesting old gent who was impressed that I know what a sharp cutoff pentode was for, of course.

      --
      A Good Intro to NetBS
    4. Re:Hams not the only ones affected by Epsillon · · Score: 1

      Well, I was going to say "old fart". Would you like that better?

      To be perfectly honest I couldn't care less what you call me, personally. However, many radio enthusiasts are young people, especially since the national radio societies rightly or wrongly seem to be targetting amateur radio at school/college age youngsters as a route into electronics.

      You still didn't answer the question, BTW. Why are we all instantly assumed to be crusty old farts with racks full of old ex-WW2 tube equipment so heavy that it needs a reinforced concrete floor? Times change, technology has mevoed on, and like it or not, so has amateur radio.

      Example of amateur radio embracing technology for your consideration: eQSO, Amateur radio over the Internet

      --
      Resistance is futile. Reactance buggers it up.
  93. hmmm by mlerner · · Score: 0

    This would explain why I suddenly get bad radio reception, our local power company has rolled out this technology a year ago to businesses.

  94. Defensive Hams by Detritus · · Score: 1

    Do you know why some hams have a defensive attitude? Because there are large numbers of ignorant people who will blame their local amateur radio operator for every glitch and defect in the performance of their hi-fi and TV. If you try to rationally explain that you were not on the air when they experienced the problem, or that there may be a problem with the design or installation of the electronics equipment, their brain shuts down, their face turns red, and they start shouting at you. They know they are right and they don't want to be distracted by the facts.

    --
    Mea navis aericumbens anguillis abundat
    1. Re:Defensive Hams by Ramadog · · Score: 2, Interesting
      I recently had a phone from one of my hieghbours because he was getting a lot of interference on his tv. Even though I said I had not been using the radios and they were not even connected he still thought I was the cause of the interence. He had heard I had transmitting equipment so immediately though it was me.

      After making wait him while I unpacked everything I needed to make my radios work we conducted some test and he was finally convinced I was not the cause of the interference. Even telling him that the radio gear was not even capable of being used at the time was not enough for him to think that someone/something else was to blame.

      People resent being blamed for something that was not their fault even when the blame continues after his has been shown there is no way it could have been them.

  95. I wonder by Dachannien · · Score: 1

    The question that comes to my mind after watching the video is, can data be recovered from the signals picked up as interference?

    1. Re:I wonder by Nonillion · · Score: 1

      I voiced this concern in another post. It would be possible to "sniff" the packets since the energy is radiated and easyly intercepted. Boy, talk about privacy and DMCA snafus there!

      (S)art (C)oding (O)penly

      --
      "I bow to no man" - Riddick
  96. Freecache it dude by halr9000 · · Score: 1
  97. How can it be harmful if it doesn't exist? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Gosh, I'm so confused... Didn't we already learn on Slashdot that radio interference is a myth?

  98. Holy run-on sentence, batman! (n/t) by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    (n/t)

  99. They should not get to wipe out a by PotatoHead · · Score: 0

    large portion of the spectrum unless there is a damn good tradeoff for the public at large.

    How about very low cost internet access funded by a small tax on your utility bill? You choose your ISP, they move the data.

    The problem I have with this is simple.

    Power companies want to make more money and they intend to keep it. This is theft from everyone else with established uses on the HF bands. --Yes this includes HAM radio.

    HAM radio is responsible for a lot of good in this country and worldwide. To just brush them off is an insult at best and outright theft at worst.

    We should support HAMs the same way we do others who are using technology in creative ways. What if a law were passed that prevented anyone from moving their own e-mail? Or that limited their ability to move large portions of data?

    Everyone here would be *pissed*. Raising the noise floor this high on the HF bands is the same sort of thing.

    I am in the process of (re) earning my license again after a 15 year lapse. HF is one of the reasons I want to start again. This is lame. I plan to write my reps and congress critters. You all should do the same if you value anything. Afterall your particular technology niche just might be next...

    One more thought:

    If this goes through without some serious compensation to both the general public and the HF community in general, it is nothing more than an outright money grab that we all should be ashamed of. --nothing more.

  100. Re:Horse drawn buggies. [IANAHAM by pete-classic · · Score: 1
    I don't think that you have illustrated any failures in the analogy.

    In fact I think you have shown just how apt it is. Try this:

    Buggies are usefull; sure they might be a bit slower but in the event of failure of other methods of transportation they can, literally, be a life saver for many thousands. Buggies are also a great educational resource , want to learn about horses?

    I don't have anything against radio or HAMs. My Dad and Great Uncle are HAMs. I was a commo guy in the Army. In Joint Endeavor ("Bosnia") our land based comms were less than ideal. Our shortwaves were, literally, lifesavers. I'm certainly not prejudiced against the technology.

    The fact is, however, that broadband Internet access in urban areas is more valuable than HAM radio by any rational criterion other than historical value.

    There are certainly arguments for HAM in rural areas, but thanks to the trusty inverse square law of electromagnetic radiation and the fact that rural areas, by definition, have a lot of open space they are not relevant to the discussion.


    they either have the choice of fixing it or being forceable shut down


    What does this mean? In the courts? By the CRTC? As I understand it Canadians are ill equipped to mount a revolution . . .

    -Peter
  101. Leakage by RevSmiley · · Score: 1

    Being a HAM and have been on the recieving end of unlicensed "transmitting" power lines abet not broadband I can tell you the last people you want delivering your access to broadband is the power company. You want PG&E to deliver your broadband?
    These folks will not even fix their rf leaking transformers unless you threaten to bring in the FCC. They take 10 years to get anything done. Man the technology is a gross poluter of the RF enviroment, it's insecure as hell and ain't gonna happen. Have you ever dealt with the uptight bitches thay have answering the Phone? Give me a break LOL.

    King Henry, VI part II act IV
    "The first thing we do, lets kill all the lawyers."
    It's a joke about lawyers sure it is. There are to many lawyers. Do your part.

    --
    As you can see I don't care about my karma.
  102. Japan did study and found Powerline distrupts many by fedrive · · Score: 1

    technologies and shot powerline down as bad.

    The powerline commission doing the study
    a few years back found it could do major damage
    to their economy.

  103. This just in! /.'ers ignotant Pretentious SOBs! by geekoid · · Score: 0

    I find it amusing that when people send an unsolicited Email advertisment, everybody gets up in arms over the usage, and how it intefers with there email service.

    But as soon as some yet to be proven technology hits a snag because someone else was using the frequency first, they all take the "its progress!" stand.

    Well, I got news for you, its different then the 'internet'. it usese different technolgy, for a different purpose.
    Ham radio operators have done more for progress then all the webmasters combined.

    --
    The Kruger Dunning explains most post on /. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Dunning%E2%80%93Kruger_effect
    1. Re:This just in! /.'ers ignotant Pretentious SOBs! by NoCoward · · Score: 0

      Talk about pretentious!!!

  104. Re:You called? Advanced Class, Right here :-) by ChuckleBug · · Score: 1

    Don't let that stop you from getting your extra! I got mine in the 80's when I had to pass 20 wpm, so I sort of got hosed in the sense you're talking about. But you can prove your code proficiency with an ARRL qualifying run. Then you'll get a nifty certificate of code proficiency.

    73,
    NX7E

  105. There is more in the affected bandwidth than hams by lophophore · · Score: 2, Interesting

    There is a lot more in the affected bandwidth than ham radio. The hams are just the most vocal group to oppose BPL.

    There is worldwide shortwave broadcast, citizen's band, government and land-mobile radio, too, including police and fire dispatch (although a lot of that has moved up to VHF higher, there is still a lot on "low band"), cordless telephones and baby monitors, television channels 2-6, etc.

    So it's not just hams that will lose out if this technology is deployed. Shortwave listeners, public safety communications, other land mobile (there are a lot of utilities using these frequencies) and pepole receiving television off antennas will all find their communcations disrupted.

    Not to mention the technical problems of distributing RF over a very-low-frequency network.

    This is a bad idea, poorly implemented. Like a nuclear powered airplane with an air-shielded reactor. An idea who's time will never come.

    --
    there are 3 kinds of people:
    * those who can count
    * those who can't
  106. So if there's no network by IshanCaspian · · Score: 1

    for the cell phones to work, then there's no interference. If there's interference, your cell phone works. Hmm.

    --

    But there is another kind of evil that we must fear most... and that is the indifference of good men.
    1. Re:So if there's no network by n9hmg · · Score: 1

      cell phones are unrelated to this discussion. The lowest frequency they use is around 800Mhz, and thi highest used by access BPL is around 100. The 2nd harmonic will be fairly low-level.

  107. Some BPL Thoughts by joseph.moore · · Score: 1

    During the last decade, there have been numerous promises of fast Internet for the rural community. These included ADSL, Cable Modems and Satellite Internet. So far, do to low user population, none of them have moved to the rural community. I ask you now; does anyone honestly believe that BPL will be provided to the rural user that is the only customer on a five-mile run? After all, it is the promise of cheap Internet that the BPL associations are using to press for FCC approval. With all of the damage to Amateur Radio, which provides vital emergency services, is it worth it? Many people question whether or not the Amateur Radio operators still have value to the community. If you have this question, I invite you to talk to the National Weather Service, the Red Cross, the Salvation Army or any of the national disaster relief organizations. Don't take my word on the subject, talk to the people who work with hams during the disasters. Would the communities not be better off encouraging the CATV providers to move out into the rural areas and service internet as well as television. I don't want to provide any family or business of fast Internet services, but as a ham radio operator active in emergency communications, I have great concern about my future ability to serve my community if BPL is allowed to continue.

    1. Re:Some BPL Thoughts by harmanjd · · Score: 1

      Not to mention the ham support for events like MS Bicycle rides, marathons and other large public events for non-profit organizations.

    2. Re:Some BPL Thoughts by joseph.moore · · Score: 1

      I don't want to provide any family or business of fast Internet services, I don't want to deprive any family or business of fast Internet services, Should read

  108. Re:Horse drawn buggies. [IANAHAM by geekoid · · Score: 1

    "Buggies are usefull; sure they might be a bit slower but in the event of failure of other methods of transportation they can, literally, be a life saver for many thousands. Buggies are also a great educational resource , want to learn about horses?"

    It is far more lickley that you will lose power, then all the vehicals will fail.

    Not compared to vehicals. I know its new, so you might never of heard of it, but there are vehicals that don't need roads. Now in the backward place you live, this might sound like mahic, but there are vehicles that FLY THROUGH THE AIR!

    Placing buggie for that example is just stupid. Buggies often require roads be in better repiar them many vehicals.

    "The fact is, however, that broadband Internet access in urban areas is more valuable than HAM radio by any rational criterion other than historical value."

    Uh-huh.
    So peple in urban areas don't deserve the emergency service of hams why, exatly?

    In the US, they would be shut down by the FCC. I'm sure Canada has a similiar situation.

    --
    The Kruger Dunning explains most post on /. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Dunning%E2%80%93Kruger_effect
  109. HAM? Broadband? Compromise damnit! by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    I'm sure one of you HAMs out there have done the math on the radio spectrum and so rather than re-figure i'll just ask - If i had the entire radio spectrum (as current technology and practical antenna sizes permit) at my disposal, how many terabits could I throw/catch and how would that compare to the amount of terabits that currently flow around the net during peak times?

    With software defined radio and multiband antennas i can't see why a network couldn't be set up entirely wireless. line of sight communications for local and cached data with HF for long hauls. Software defined radio to bridge the gaps. Sure, you'd want to leave bandwith for low tech audio tranceivers in case of emergencies, but other than that all equipment that currently uses analog mush should be scrapped. screw it all and i don't care about backwards compatibility other than the slice of bandwith left for low-tech. Phase it out. Promptly. Tough sh!t for big businesses and governments who want to squeeze the last few ounces out of their old tech equipment. Digital is efficent and analog isn't.

    1. Re:HAM? Broadband? Compromise damnit! by RevSmiley · · Score: 1

      Ok Will Robinson you get the FCC and WARCC to accept that all then come talk to us. I figure it will only take you about 20 years. Really you have no idea how long this crap takes if they agree with you.

      King Henry, VI part II act IV
      "The first thing we do, lets kill all the lawyers."
      It's a joke about lawyers sure it is. There are to many lawyers. Do your part.

      --
      As you can see I don't care about my karma.
  110. ampr.org - An entire 44/8 for disconnected nodes. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    From http://www.ampr.org/bother.html:

    "Why is this? The AMPRNet is mostly NOT connected to the Internet. Out of the multiple thousand computer systems ("hosts") registered in the AMPR.ORG domain, and the thousands of IP addresses on network 44, few are actually able to reach or be reached from the Internet."

    All because (http://www.ampr.org/amprnet.html):

    "An address allocation originally obtained in the 1970's by Hank Magnuski, [snip]"

    So they get to use perfectly valid IP addresses for nodes that are largely not plugged into the internet? Maybe offtopic here, but damn will this get posted in the next inevitable running out of IPs story.

  111. Ham, not HAM by suwain_2 · · Score: 1

    Appologies if I come off as a karma whore, or an off-topic ranter, but I wanted to make the note that "ham" is simply another term for "amateur" radio. There's much debate about where the "ham" name from.

    But it doesn't stand for anything, and thus HAM isn't really correct. It's rather like the people who, unfamiliar with the term, talk about LINUX, not Linux. To those familiar with the term, and who regard caps as SHOUTING, it's rather disconcerting to have people randomly shouting "HAM!" at you.

    So please, ham, not HAM. :)

    --
    ________________________________________________
    suwain_2 :: quality slashdot p
  112. Marine HF Freq's (was: Re:Harmful interference) by akamoe · · Score: 1

    Minor point, but afaik marine and coast guard channels are all around 155-165MHz.

    Sure, but they still use HF for long distance communications, which can be critical on the high seas... Satellite phones aren't everything.

    -- R

  113. Re:Ham radio is not just HF and is very modern! by cf91993 · · Score: 1

    I am shocked at the ignorance of so many slashdotters. Amateur radio is NOT just HF! Amateur radio has had an impressive presence in space since day one. The VERY FIRST communications satellite, which actively relayed signals between two points on Earth (as opposed to being a dumb reflector), was an amateur radio satellite, OSCAR 3 in 1965 ("OSCAR" stands for "Orbiting Satellite Carrying Amateur Radio"). Do you call this backwardness? Radio amateurs were able to enjoy "phone patches" in their VHF/UHF bands decades before the deployment of cellphones. For the latest in space activities of radio amateurs take a look at the official web site of AMSAT, www.amsat.org. Amateur satellites are not placed in geosynchronous orbits (those precious spots are reserved for commercial ones). That creates a host of problems unknown to operators/users of commercial satellites: Doppler shift, antenna aiming, and wildly varying polarization, just to name a few (the typical "satellite dish" user never experiences these problems because his antenna aims at a geosynchronous satellite, which stays at the same point in the sky with respect to his dish). Yet, radio amateurs successfully use these satellites every day. Do you call this backwardness (or not current technology)? I think you are very ignorant. Where do you think the numerically-controlled oscillator came from? (A radio amateur invented it). Or other exotic demodulation schemes, such as the Costas loop? Or many different kinds of antennas used today? (John D. Kraus, W8JK, is credited with the invention of the helical antenna and the so-called supergain array, just to name a couple of examples. He also built the first radiotelescope.) You may want to know that this path to innovation is still followed today. Today's amateurs are experimenting with new modulation schemes, are trying to push the envelope of usable frequencies well into the millimeter waves, and are also very active in free-space optical links. These are but a few examples. So, ham radio has been AHEAD of current technology! Exotic amateur communications techniques of yesterday are mainstream today after the commercial interests took a look at them in action and realized their potential. So, if you think that amateur radio is technology of the past, you are dead wrong! As an aside on the importance of the HF spectrum, what would provide long-range communication if today's satellites were destroyed, say in a case of war? Have you, pro-BPL slashdotters, ever thought of that?

  114. an emergency by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    it just occurred to me that, in case of an emergency, where BPL is operating ham radio won't be terribly missed. by the same token, if an emergency knocks out BPL service, then ham radio can pick up the slack without interference.

    but perhaps i'm just illustrating my own lack of understanding of the technologies involved?

    1. Re:an emergency by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Yes you are.

  115. As a ham myself by zarthrag · · Score: 2, Interesting

    I have a license, KC5LHH. And while hams aren't at the forefront, neither is the emergency broadcast service. Hams train themselves to provide a worldwide communications network under the *worst* possible conditions. And while BPL would do much to harm broadcasts, I do think that proper power supply filtering and construction can greatly reduce/eliminate the problem. Just don't count em out. In the event of a disaster as trivial as a hurricane/earthquake, they are quite useful. And one day when some conventional/nuclear war takes place or aliens invade, you might owe them your life.

    --
    Why can't all fpga/microcontroller manufacturers just release free optimizing compilers???
  116. Re:Horse drawn buggies. [IANAHAM by pigscanfly.ca · · Score: 1

    CRTC just so happens to be the canadian agency . What I am saying isd that if power line broadband were to be implemented in canada (or tested in canada) and it cuased interferance with amateur radio the CRTC would , in all likely hood , shut down the pilot project . In the US I think the orgnaization is the FCC .

    Now , buggies are slower , but the problem is they arent as usefull as cars . For instance , I cant drive a buggy from ottawa to vancouver in a timely fashon , yet the car will get me there in a timely fashon . The buggy is completely unusable for that application . However with HAM radio I can still talk from say northern ontario in the middle of nowhere to just about anywhere in the world (depending on my category of license and transmision equipment) . Where as with powerline broadband the same is true , except to a lesser extent .With power line broadband I can talk to most places in the world (that have internet access and HAM covers wider range than this) when everything is working . It is a bit faster than HAM radio , but if it is implemented then it blocks out the older slower (to to mention more open and relaible) method of communication . If they can implement power line broadband in a way witch does not interfer with HAM radio , then go ahead ; however the way they wish to implement it will effectively block out short wave bands (that are used for a hell of a lot more than HAM radio . BBC , voice of america , CBC international , countless others) .

    For instance on Ontario roads , in most cities some notable exceptions , I can drive a buggy if I please , but motorists can still drive there car.

    The reason why the hourse & buggy anology if flawed is because the car did not stop the buggy from being used; powerline broadband will prevent HAM radio equipment from being used.

  117. Why would they still be around? by AzrealAO · · Score: 2, Interesting

    That's great that if the power is out, the interference would be gone, but why would the HAM operators all over the country still be operating, if 99.999% of the time, they were drowned out by interference, they'd all be gone.

  118. Who the fuck do you think they're talking to? by AzrealAO · · Score: 1

    Magic elves?

    The people recieving their transmissions are goign to be right smack in the middle of BPL interference, and unable to hear a fucking thing.

    Use your head.

    1. Re:Who the fuck do you think they're talking to? by shaitand · · Score: 1

      unless of course they just use satallite technology instead.

    2. Re:Who the fuck do you think they're talking to? by maverickbna · · Score: 1

      Alright then, you can pay for one satellite for each potential person or airplane that is using it (remember, a satellite can only repeat one signal at a time).

      Lemme do the math. Now I might be wrong, but that sounds a lot like a couple hundred million dollars. Would you like to make monthly installments?

      Also, on another note, satellites are frequently affected by solar flares and geomagnetic storms, which means that satellites could be useless when we need them the most.

      Now see how much we depend on HF spectrum?

      --
      You are great player! Present you with points!
  119. there's a reason... by poptones · · Score: 1

    ...many folks still use tubes. Take one hell of an EMP even to pop a couple of 6LF6's.

  120. Re:You called? Advanced Class, Right here :-) by jnik · · Score: 3, Insightful

    I'll call you on that :) FCC abolished the sending test how long ago? Pre-1993, at any rate...as that's when my Advanced license dates from. You can still receive at 13WPM though (and the test was kinda weak in my opinion...the examiners were amazed at five minutes of solid copy. A one-minute requirement strikes me as barely workable). Get your extra. And hang onto your CSCE. I still have all of mine around here somewhere. As far as all these chumps complaining about hams and their "private playground"--yeesh. The REASON for the amateur service is that it's proven, in technological and social resources, to greatly enhance the commons. Same basic reason we have copyright protection--investing or limiting the public domain in the short term to enrich it in the long term. If you want to eliminate all ham bands, fine. Never use your cell phone again. Or TCP/IP (look up Phil Karn...some of us know him as KA9Q). Heck, wireless networking owes a lot to TAPR and other amateur experimenters. Avoid anything using the microwaves--hams developed the technology to make them accessible. Oh, you mean you want unlicensed usage? Fine. Plenty of bands for that. The ELF area, for example. Or 49MHz. You know why 49MHz, 900MHz, all those other unlicensed bands are shitholes? Because they're unlicensed. There's no responsibility for maintaining equipment or proper operating procedure. Nothing keeping the corporations off there. The airwaves are a public resource. Ham bands are a publicly-available way to use them. Just like accessing other public resources may require licensing (such as operating a motor vehicle on the public roads), ham bands require licenses. That doesn't make them some sort of "exclusive club."

  121. It's the economics, stupid... by ChaoticPup · · Score: 1

    Okay, so you don't care about ham radio, great.

    Put some thought into this: Just how many times are you willing to pay for broadband infrastructure? You think this stuff is going to be cheap? You think they just plug a router in at the 'ole power plant in New York and you plug a modem into the wall in California? Get informed.

    This would not be a trivial undertaking. They'll need to add equipment at the powerplants, add equipment in the neighborhoods, modify or replace existing equipment (like transformers) to make things compatible, etc, etc.

    Who's going to pay for all that? YOU, stupid. Even if you don't get their service -- because you DO pay a power bill, don't you?

    Do you also pay a cable bill or satellite TV bill? You're paying for broadband there, too.

    How 'bout a phone bill? Got one of those? Guess what? You're paying for broadband there, too.

    And if you *do* actually pay for broadband (to really get it, I mean) -- you're only going to pay one of these providers, right? So the other two or three will whine that they're not getting enough demand. This type of thing is already happening with the telcos and cable companies -- they're spending big bucks to build the infrastructure and not getting the ROI.

    So we're going to add yet another utility to the mix? How is that going to help? More competition, lower prices? Bah -- infrastructure ain't free. These companies are already bleeding all over the place with the current level of competition. *That's* why broadband isn't as readily available now as it should be.

    -- CP

  122. I'm both by n9hmg · · Score: 1
    1. Male, 39
    2. Live with my wife and two kids, who, despite resembling me strongly, are very good looking... The kids, not the wife. She's good looking too, but not on the order of our products.
    3. holistic slob.
  123. Uninformed, as usual by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    As currently implemented, the two cannot coexist. If you actually kept up with the ham community or even just read the story or watched the video, you would know this is much more than a "perceived threat" to HF communications.

    The ARRL is probably much better off not having you as a member, you don't think or research before you speak/write/post. You, sir, must be a tremendous asset to those around you.

  124. Coincadence... by dave1g · · Score: 1

    Most of the situations where HAM was considered critical involve disasters.

    If the disaster itself didn't already take out the power lines then the power company can surely be contacted to disable their BPL service for a while. And it would be included in a clause in the contract you sign up when you order the service...yada yada...

    But I have a quesitons, does all this interference happen at the small wodden poles, or the huge mainline supertall metal towers holding the power lines up?

    What about underground wires? do they generate the interference too?

    1. Re:Coincadence... by Ashtead · · Score: 3, Informative
      Even if the BPL goes out in an area during a disaster, it would still affect reception in other areas. And the way the signals at some of these frequencies propagate may result in BPL interference from far away.

      Then there is possible international issues as the ionosphere doesn't obey any kinds of national borders when propagating signals. What if a US BPL installation interferes with radio communication in an emergency in China?

      Now on to your question. All kinds of overhead transmission wires can and will act as long-wire antennas and will spread these signals around. Underground cables could be less radiating, depending on what configuration they are. Thus, I would expect a 3-core cable which is three conductors twisted like a rope to contain the signals better than three individual one-core cables laid side by side. However, once these cables emerge and connect to the wiring in your house, all bets are off. I would expect the house wiring to be the biggest radiator in suburban areas where the grid is underground.

      Note that "long" in this context means longer than the wavelength of the signals. For a wideband signal like BPL, the shortest wavelengths are on the order of 2 meters, (7 ft)so any piece of wire longer than about 1/4 of this can radiate some of this signal. The longer the wire, the better the radiator and the more signal is emitted and interferes. The low frequency end of the BPL spectrum has wavelengths on the order of 300 meters or 1000 feet, so even a little neighborhood-sized power spur line could radiate a lot.

      Considering that the power distribution network is designed for 50 Hz or 60 Hz and most components were either designed to block high frequencies or never had any specs for these high frequencies, there could be a lot of rework needed.

      Just look at a commonly seen energy meter for example; an electromechanical meter of the kind counting your consumed kilowatt-hours. This is basically a big series inductor, which does a good job of blocking these high frequency signals. So every house may need some kind of RF meter bypass or at least the old electromechanical meters may need to be replaced. Everywhere.

      Stringing fibers along the power-line rights of way would be a much better way of distributing these data signals. It might even be less expensive than trying to pass high frequency signals through devices handling high voltages. Some kind of bridge for the "last mile" appears to be necessary anyways.

      --
      SIGBUS @ NO-07.308
  125. Hrm.. by retro128 · · Score: 1

    Definitely a major problem. Not surprising though. Power lines are huge antennas. Whenever you put any kind of alternating current though a wire it will generate a propogating EM wave at the same frequency. Right now, all the power lines are "broadcasting" at 60Hz (50 for those of you who do not live in North America), but you start puting other frequencies in there, it will start broadcasting those too. I'm sure the FCC would have something to say about this.
    And no doubt they will since ham radio operators have documented interference problems.

    --
    -R
  126. Re:There is more in the affected bandwidth than ha by mightymik2 · · Score: 1

    Imagine out in the boonies, and some tornado comes along and wipes out an entire trailer park. Hams are usually the first ones in to establish communications and let the world know what's going on. (happens all the time) Now...imagine the guy trying to dig a signal out of THAT mess. I wouldn't want to do it, and it could, in some cases, result in lost lives. There are better ways to distribute bandwith, and this one isn't it. And yes, I am a Ham.

  127. BPL is obsolete by N0JCG · · Score: 2, Informative

    BPL should never be approved for three, sinple reasons; 1. Injecting high frequency RF onto the power lines at levels higher than the limits specified in 1989 WILL cause interference across the entire HF bands (actualy lower levels will do that). This is illegal according to FCC Part 15. Any device doing this can and will be shut down. 2. An entirely legal amateur transmitter, say a beacon transmitting 100 watts at 28.2MHz, in a common suburban backyard will render the local BPL system useless; and according to Part 15 the BPL system MUST accept this situation. 3. It is entirely unnecessary for the utilities to use the 2 to 80 MHz band for this purpose. The FCC has set aside 435MHz at 5GHZ for the Unlicensed National Information Infrastructure. This is more than 5 TIMES the bandwidth BPL could ever hope to use in HF. Systems using U-NII can be deployed TODAY (google Motorola Canopy); are already being used for broadband internet access in several communities and require no further action from the FCC. All the utilities have to do is hang U-NII nodes on the power poles at 2 to 10 mile intervals, depending on local geography. All that remains is to convince the powers that be of the obvious.

    1. Re:BPL is obsolete by ProfMoriarty · · Score: 1
      1. Injecting high frequency RF onto the power lines at levels higher than the limits specified in 1989 WILL cause interference across the entire HF bands (actualy lower levels will do that). This is illegal according to FCC Part 15. Any device doing this can and will be shut down.

      They (the FCC) will lobby congress to change the law. This is already assumed, otherwise you are correct and BPL won't make it to market.

      2. An entirely legal amateur transmitter, say a beacon transmitting 100 watts at 28.2MHz, in a common suburban backyard will render the local BPL system useless; and according to Part 15 the BPL system MUST accept this situation.

      You are correct, if the Part 15 rules hold. If not, no big deal to BPL ... it's a spread spectrum style of communication. Its self-reparing and self-healing if there is interference. And laws MAY be created that state if one intentionally interferes with BPL fines etc.

      3. It is entirely unnecessary for the utilities to use the 2 to 80 MHz band for this purpose.

      Here we both agree. One thing to think about, BPL WILL knock out amateur radio, shortwave radio, government radiolocation services, old cordless phones, lower TV channels (up to like 6 or 7).

      One more thing ... harmonics.

      --
      Karma? Karma? I don't need no stinkin' karma.
    2. Re:BPL is obsolete by N0JCG · · Score: 1

      Another note on immunity. The BPL receiver is a spread spectrum receiver, and thus a broadband one at that. A high level RF signal on the "antenna" will simply saturate the receiver front end. Nothing will get through and it won't be able to heal it unless it can attenuate the signal with a preselector of some kind.

    3. Re:BPL is obsolete by N0JCG · · Score: 1

      Placing restrictions on a licensed service (Amateur) to protect an unlicensed service (BPL) would be contrary to everything in Part 15 and may even be in violation of the FCC charter. Who is the congressional oversight for the FCC anyway?

  128. HDTV and Satellite Phones by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Muhaha, Ham radios always get the shaft. First the FCC cans the Land Mobile act, and now you get interference from new broadband. Oh well, I'll have my HDTV and high speed internet, I'll be set. And once Satellite phones become mainstream, all these pidly cell phones will become walky talkies. Godzilla could be stomping through the city and your satellite phone would still work.

    1. Re:HDTV and Satellite Phones by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Thats exactly what they said about cellphones. The god dammed thigs don't work in disaster because the frequencies are overloaded and cell sites are damged. Don't get rid of any of your old stuff it might still work.

  129. video by M0ker · · Score: 1

    that video doesn't "show" anything that the fcc could use. they'd need to get a specan and capture a screenshot for the fcc to be able to make any use of it. Isn't ham operated in the general use spectrum? it's gonna be mighty hard to get them to filter their signal

    --
    noU
  130. about the video... by mmu_man · · Score: 1

    good experimental music !

  131. That movie... by phrogeeb · · Score: 1

    Was the most boring 6 minutes and 34 seconds of footage that I have ever downloaded and then absent-mindedly left running in the background in my entire life. It was shaky bad-image video of static. And at the end some vaguely Star-wars like noise. Really, I believed them when they made the claims. I didn't need to sit through that. Even 10 seconds of that would have convinced me.

    Come to think of it, how do we know they're not just tuning to a random static-frequency and recording it?

    Send us more videotape! Better documentation, and longer!

    --

    ------

    "Will the highways on the Internet become more few?" --George W. Bush, in Jan. 2000

    1. Re:That movie... by M0ker · · Score: 1

      well, that video (at least what i watched, half of it) showed absolutley nothing. no "proof" it was from broadband, just some noises at their freq

      --
      noU
  132. IRLP!!! by cdf12345 · · Score: 1

    Hasn't anyone here heard of
    IRLP - Internet Radio Linking Project
    www.irlp.net

    This is one of the coolest things ham radio has done recently. Basically you attach a simple ham radio repeater to a broadband connection, run some software, then let it fly.

    Hams then connect to the repeater with their radios. Use the numeric keypad to send commands (DTMF tones) and the interface will connect to another repeater via the broadband connection.

    So a ham with a handheld can connect to a repeater in Chicago, enter the numeric code for California, and both repeaters will be connected. so anything said in chicago is broadcast in California and vice versa. This makes long range communication very easy with extremely low power radios. If anyone here runs a repeater or is part of a radio club I would highly recommend adding this ability to your repeater.

    KB9WNO

    --
    Chicago2600.net more than a lifestyle, its a survival trait.
    1. Re:IRLP!!! by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Yea just what about 98% of hams don't want to hear on their local repeater, 2 old fats taling about how they had a shit today via the internet. It's also wonderful when your local area ARES/RACES simplex freq has a "internet" connection and the owner goes off and leaves it up and the frequency is unuseable. It's a nice idea but not "radio."

  133. Kiss R/C goodbye by The+Asmodeus · · Score: 1

    Yep, every RC item you have or would like to have operates within the 2-80 mhz range. Toys around 23Mhz (I think), Airplanes at 72Mhz and cars/boats at 75mhz. 50Mhz is reserved for Ham licensed RC..

    Oh, and the Airplanes are secondary users. They also split a few of our frequencies to control large crans and construction equipment..

    I've sent this article on to Dave Brown, president of the AMA (Academy of Model Aeronautics) to try and get their lobbing clout in action also.

  134. Re:You called? Advanced Class, Right here :-) by Skuld-Chan · · Score: 1

    Personally I'd hope that your proof would be your operator skill. I'm about the same age actually - got my license around the same time - did it because I wanted to :).

    I'm an extra, and I took the exam when it was "lowered" to 5 (its actually 18 wpm character rate with 5 wpm spacing) but (and I don't mean to brag or anything) I can still operate code faster than 13 wpm because I practice - which anyone could do even if they lift the requirement.

  135. BPL by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    DUH, you could see this coming from a mile away. Remember the powerline trials in Europe? Of course not, in America everything is different :). Want to bet they will reach the same conclusion as with the trials in Europe only a couple years later?

    1. Re:BPL by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      What conclusion would that be? That it works???

      Several power companies have been offering broadband over power lines for a couple of years now, in Finland and Germany for example.

  136. what's with the video? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    The video quality is unbeliavably crappy, and you'd think they'd learn to bittorrent video-download links, especially if they end up on /. :-)

    I would be more convinced with a plots of the power spectrum or just sound samples of demodulated bands.

    Anyway, it was known from the very start that power line communications will generate insane amounts of interference. The lines have no shieldings whatsoever to prevent RF. It isn't a problem when transmitting power (well, you do transmit at 50Hz/60Hz and the harmonics, but that's really low frequency, and can be filtered out (or even equalized out, since it's trivially predictable)) but when you push a broadband signal down those plain copper wires it goes straight into RF too.

    HAM'ers are a bit late to complain now. FCC who makes the rules has already approved interference limits for BPL-systems and the ones that are in use comply with the rules. IMHO, FCC should take a hint and ban BPL, but who knows how much BPL-companies are paying FCC... :-)

  137. just listening to the radio by rzm · · Score: 1

    VoA is not the only station people can listen to on HF. There is A LOT of English language stations. And in may other languges too. Just now I listen to Radio Liberty in Russian, see www.svoboda.org. It is one of the best stations I can find anywhere. Polish Section of RFE would be quite good too but unfortunatley it was the only section of RFE/RL (www.rferl.org) which completely ceased operation in 1996. In Radio Liberty I have a lot of information about politics and culture in the world and in Russia. Not much about my country but I am interested anyway and Russia is a very important and interesting country for me. Svoboda gives unbiased news e.g. about Chechnia in a style far from black propaganda of Radio Moscow. On the UHF in Warsaw there are practically only music stations. Some stations have few hours of political news sometimes, usually still mixed with music. When I randomly switch Svoboda on I have much over 50% chance to find something interesting. It would a pity to have Liberty jammed again, today by some PLC. I tested one PLC solution recently. It would be difficult or impossible to listen do Radio Liberty in a building where somebody uses such connections. They use Internet for their broadcasts too but it is not practical for many listeners.

  138. Ham radio is alive and well by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    http://www.eham.net/articles/6138

  139. Aaargh - Data over Powerlines is a stupid idea by parabyte · · Score: 1
    In Germany it is quite dead, not only because of many RF Interference problems with TV, Wavelan, Radio, Air Traffic Control, Rescue Services and other, but also because the users had a lot of trouble really getting substantial bandwidth.

    And DSL or Cable is almost always a much better, cheaper and more realiable alternative.

    Power lines are a really bad environment for data transmission for many reasons:

    1. Many people not aware of it share the same physical medium, causing hard-to-track down interference problems and raising scalabilty issues
    2. There is a lot of noise from all kinds of devices connected to the powerline, eg. motors, phase-modulated light dimmers, old TV Sets, Microwave Ovens, Switching Power Supplies and many other things you might have never heard of, all inducing noise and possibly altering the characteristics of the medium
    3. The topology of the network is unpredictable, you never really now how many branches there are
    4. The cable types and their characteristics are in a wide range as well, cause a lot distortion, echoes and RF leakage

    To overcome a least some of these problems, the transmission power had to be raised to a level where they started to cause RF interference, also exceeding the allowed limits of RF Power emission.

    IMO Data over Powerlines will never be a commercial success and is a brainchild of the .com era where everbody and his sister wanted to be part of the internet craze. There were even plans for IP over gas and water tubes, but I think is was dropped because the new tubes are made of plastics.

    I can not see a niche between Phone, DSL, Cable and Wireless that might justify this abuse of powerline and pollution of the RF spectrum.

    p.

    --
    Without order, nothing can exist. Without chaos, nothing can be created.
    1. Re:Aaargh - Data over Powerlines is a stupid idea by weeboo0104 · · Score: 1

      I'm in agreement with you. If broadband is really going to take off, it's far more beneficial for the phone/cable companies to upgrade their lines and do everything right.

      Trying to transmit Broadband over a powerline may be kind of cool to try, but in the end it's a totally half-assed end solution.

      --
      It is easier to build strong children than to repair broken men. -Frederick Douglass
  140. I don't know much about the technology but. by FauxReal · · Score: 1

    If these are the results of small test areas at a lower power than they want for nationwide service. What kind of results are we going to get when the whole country is saturated with these signals? I've read that it also interferes with not only the hams for that matter as well. Have there been any environmental studies regarding human/small animal/insect constant exposure to these signals pouring out over unshielded powerlines?

  141. Absolutely Horrifying interference by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Oh My God. I just watched that ARRL video. I wouldn't have believed it if I hadn't seen it.

    For the uninitiated, a mid-scale meter reading on an HF receiver typically corresponds to about an S-9 level of received signal strength or higher. That is some incredibly powerful man-made interference; positively overwhelming.

    Most incredibly it was not just a single frequency here or there nor even confined to a single band; it was zapping and chirping all over the spectrum at once!

  142. Re: Clean water drinkers by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    By a similar argument, how many people still drink fresh water? Why haven't they moved over to something a little more modern, such as aspartame cola? Let's just go ahead and pollute all the lakes in your area, since nobody in their right mind would drink water today anyway with all the available alternatives.

    Don't like the smell of dead fish? Hey just plug your nose!

  143. If there is a natural disaster with no power... by voss · · Score: 1

    Then there will be no interference from powerline internet anyway. Because when the power is off...the Internet over powerlines wont work. DUH!

  144. BPL, HAMS, and First Amendment rights by LegioXX · · Score: 1

    Technology is obscuring the real issue in regard to polution of the Ham frequencies by anything. The FCC (aka Government) gives all of us free acces to a certain part of the radio spectrum. All other communication channels, other than smoke signals, are owned by vendors. If you talk on the power lines, the power companies own you. The FCC would love to sell off the Ham frequencies to private companies, or lock them up for goverment use. If these public resources become poluted by private vendors, we all suffer. Ham Radio was the original Open Source for communication. Wireless Geeks should learn from the masters and add their digital contributions to freedom of speach. Speach is not free if there's no way to communicate.

  145. Re:More modern by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    If bouncing signal off the Moon or meteor trails is not modern enough for you geeks then I don't know what is.

  146. Hey dumbass by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0
    That non-link of yours goes to a page descrbing a bill that was proposed in 1996 and never passed--Congress considered the idea of creating "intellectual property" as a legal concept and rejected it. (which is why there's no "united states intellectual property organization") You have successfully disproven your own point.

    Dumbass.

  147. Don't confuse the two different PLC technologies by VTdude · · Score: 2, Informative
    There are two different PowerLine Communications (PLC) technologies in the press right now and I would like to make sure we are not confusing them.

    Broadband PowerLine (BPL) is an access technology. It is somewhat experimental and is being used to connect a service provider, like a Telco CO that is several miles from your home or business, to your home to provide broadband access. This technology needs a good deal of power to send signals over the Medium Voltage (~16 kV - think "finger of God") lines over great distances. This is the technology that the HAMers are upset about. This is also the technology that the FCC is looking at.

    HomePlug Powerline technology is a home networking technology used to distribute the signal from your home gateway or music server to other devices or PC's in your home. HomePlug uses OFDM, a technology that puts a comb of carriers across the spectrum. With a comb we can then turn off and notch out the HAM frequencies. HomePlug goes from 4-21 MHz and has deep notches to prevent interference with the HAM bands in that space. A large number of FCC and CE approved HomePlug devices are available in the market (look for the NETGEAR Wall Bridges at Circuit City or the Devolo devices in Europe).

    Just wanted to speak up because there's been a lot of confusion here. Intellon or HomePlug can put a whitepaper on this on their to-do list.

    thanks,
    James Mentz
    Senior Applications Engineer, Intellon Corporation

  148. AM talk radio too? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0
    So much for the Hams - wouldn't this pretty much kill the AM broadcast band too? You mean no more Rush, Stern, etc.?


    Gee. Too bad.

  149. So farm animals complain about BPL by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    If it wasn't that bad, now we have farm animals complaining that powerline broadband is interfering with them.. What's next..

  150. Re:Ham radio is not just HF and is very modern! by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Jansky is credited with the first radiotelescope, although he didn't do much. Grober is the father of radio astronomy.

  151. Ham by H8X55 · · Score: 0

    maybe this would be their cue to abandon ham in favor of web broadcasts... hey, and they'll get broadband out of the deal. ever try to download porn on ham radio?

    1. Re:Ham by M0ker · · Score: 1

      i guess you didn't read any of the posts about how ham helps SAR, and police, FD, special service groups. when you have no power cuz of an earthquake/flood/whatever, and lines are down what then?? Ham radio is very beneficial to the community, and these coroporations should be made to filter

      --
      noU
    2. Re:Ham by H8X55 · · Score: 0

      Ham radios don't use electricity?

  152. HAM! by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    mmmm, sweet suculent ham...

  153. Re:Ham radio users - ampr.org by Valdrax · · Score: 1

    Woah, woah, woah. TCP/IP is NOT a derivative of X.25. They are almost completely different protocols that serve very different purposes. For one thing, in the classic OSI model, X.25 covers the physical, the datalink, and the network layers whereas TCP is the transport layer and IP is just the network layer. You run TCP/IP over X.25 or AX.25 much in the same way run it over Ethernet, ATM, FDDI, etc.

    I've read large parts of the CCITT X.25 standard. While it is packet-switched, it's VERY different from IP.

    --
    If it's for-profit but free, you're not the customer -- you're the product (e.g., the Slashdot Beta's "audience").
  154. BPL is dead :o) by DG3JKB · · Score: 1

    We had all this in Germany a few years ago! Noone speaks about BPL in Germany nowadays! It was too expensive and too unreliable when many BPL customers are connected to BPL. But now some small Boxes for "Inhouse BPL" are spreading on the Market, just like the Intercom that connects to your normal 110V Socket the new Version hast Ethernet Jacks on it! Although the Signal-Level is much lower than on commercial BPL you can imagine how id will add up if your whole neigborhood uses this crappy boxes! .......And whats about encryption? Every Wi-Fi user complains about encryption! Whats on BPL or these Home-BPL Boxes! NOTHING! Even 128-Bit WEP is more secure! IPsec Tunnels would be a solution vor BPL....but arent there millions of Wireless Accesspoints WITHOUT encryption?!?!? :-) BigBrother is watching you even more.... 73.... fm Germany DG 3 JKB

  155. well there you go by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    as a uk ham & working for an ISP i suggest all this energy is directed to the FCC (US) & you make some noise where it can be heard & not on a forum

  156. Who was there on 9/11? by Phreakiture · · Score: 1

    Who was there on 9/11/01 helping to provide communications where the telephone network had buckled under the load? Oh yeah! That was us, the ham radio operators in the U.S.

    And how about the time that the local telephone CO was flooded from a water main break, killing all local telephone service in the City of Schenectady, and most long-distance service for hundreds of miles around? Who was it that patrolled the city on crime and fire watch? Yep, that was us!

    And who provides a means during hurricanes and firestorms for people to reach their loved ones and let them know they're OK? yep, that's us!

    The internet is less important. I say that as a user of both, and as someone who has been an Internet user much longer than a ham.

    KC2IDF

    --
    www.wavefront-av.com
  157. Here's an idea by siskbc · · Score: 1
    The same place they found them after 9/11 where ham radio was the only reliable mode of comms around ground zero for a couple of days. You know who told the disaster workers WHO to contact to start getting phones setup? The Hams on site, who had contacts with the right folks

    Here's a compromise. Give us all our broadband over power lines. In a natural disaster that cuts communication, it'll also cut power, and with it any interference with HAM. Bingo - problem solved.

    But really, expecting millions to forego broadband access for the hobby of a few isn't realistic or fair.

    --

    -Looking for a job as a materials chemist or multivariat

    1. Re:Here's an idea by CharlieG · · Score: 1

      And we're going to buy our own gear, train with it, and the like, and not be able to use it....

      right

      --
      -- 73 de KG2V For the Children - RKBA! "You are what you do when it counts" - the Masso
    2. Re:Here's an idea by siskbc · · Score: 1
      And we're going to buy our own gear, train with it, and the like, and not be able to use it....

      I wa being facetious, but being serious about it, what's the range of disruption caused by lines carrying broadband vs. regular power lines now? I'd recommend not operating HAM from under a transformer, but otherwise, I want to see how this development would make HAM thoroughly impossible.

      Basically, how is it fair for a hobby shared by a few tens of thousands of people in this country (I'm guessing, don't flame) to take precedence of the needs of millions? Even if this were some sort of allocated resource, imminent domain would take precedence.

      I'm not saying it wouldn't suck for a hobby into which you've sunk serious cash to be affected like this, but you have to see the public benefit aspect of this.

      --

      -Looking for a job as a materials chemist or multivariat

    3. Re:Here's an idea by CharlieG · · Score: 1

      OK, I won't flame, and if sounds like I do, I appologize in advance. Heck, if I can educate, I help win the battle (maybe)

      Personally, I won't be affected that much, as my class of license does not allow me to run in the HF part of the band. Based upon the reports I've seen, it will basically wipe out all HF communications - not only near transformers, but everywhere!

      You raise a good point about 10s of Ks vs millions, but of course, there are other options for the millions - read as dsl/adsl.

      Currently, the range of disruption of powerlines is SUPPOSED to be nil. In fact, if you have any problems with powerline disruption, it's because there is a problem in the powerline, and you can report it to the power company, and they are obligated by law to fix it. Yep - right now, if a power line interferes with ham radio, the power company must fix it. It's called incidental radiation, and it can't interfere with a "licensed service"

      I don't know the real answer to this, but I think BPL as proposed will be killed - NOT by the hams, but by the broadcast and Public Safety industies, because it looks like it'll wipe out a lot of the AM broadcast band, plus much of the long range public safety stuff. VHF/UHF won't be affected as much, but all the lower frequency stuff used for "long haul" will be really wiped

      --
      -- 73 de KG2V For the Children - RKBA! "You are what you do when it counts" - the Masso
  158. test by n6kuy · · Score: 1

    test

    --
    If you disagree with me on social issues, then it's pretty clear that you are a narrow-minded bigot.
    1. Re:test by n6kuy · · Score: 1

      test again

      --
      If you disagree with me on social issues, then it's pretty clear that you are a narrow-minded bigot.
  159. Re:You called? Advanced Class, Right here :-) by maynard · · Score: 1

    can transmit data by hand at ~10 baud (yes, faster than some early modems! 13wpm = ~10 baud)

    As an aside, the very first teletype I used ran at 110 baud; the thing printed to old thermal paper and was connectecd to a PDP-11/34. Heh, those were the days. OK, so I'm poking through old threads and noticed this; thought it was cool and wanted to coment. Take care, Caleb. --M

  160. Re:You called? Advanced Class, Right here :-) by calebb · · Score: 1

    People forget that the first "facsimile's" were sent by HAM's... cool to hear you're a HAM - thanks for being a nice guy, too, btw. I guess I misjudged ya bigtime. I gotta work on that - please forgive me :-) Caleb

  161. Sat link? by Andy+Dodd · · Score: 1

    Do you realize how expensive that is?

    Do you realize how low-capacity it is?

    Face it - HF communications is the only option for people located in remote areas that are not filthy rich. (Example: I know some people in the Peace Corps. For many of them, there is only one way to communicate with friends and family back home - The local ham with an HF rig.)

    --
    retrorocket.o not found, launch anyway?