Hi

All so true!

Here, in the UK, on 7 7 the mobile network was useless as it went into the
most basic of emergency modes.

Where I live, on the south coast near to the channel tunnel to France, we
had an earthquake a few years ago which did the same.  All the local TV and
radio shut down also.
I grabbed my mobile rig, put it into the car and liaised with fellow hams on
two metres.  A crowd of about fifty people gathered round the car within
about fifteen minutes as, in my locality, I was the only person with any
information about the amount of damage, its worst points, and what remedial
actions were being taken.

Surely the KISS principle should prevail!

73

David W Wood 

-----Original Message-----
From: For blind ham radio operators [mailto:[log in to unmask]]
On Behalf Of Eric Oyen
Sent: Tuesday, September 01, 2015 5:37 AM
To: [log in to unmask]
Subject: Re: FCC considering proposal to lock down computing devices
(routers, PCs, phones, SDRs) to prevent modification | Southgate Amateur
Radio News

it may smell like it, but the fact is, that it is likely true. I have =
already checked with a retired engineer type (a good friend of mine in =
fact) and what he tells me is even more frightening. The way these =
changes might be instituted in 47 USC, its likely to cause a great many =
problems not having anything to do with security.

He also told me (and he should know) that there are several very good =
implementations that would offer the same level of security without =
having to completely redesign these products. One such is a simple =
hardware jumper that would allow the end users to install or update the =
firmware on various devices and the only way the device would work =
normally is when its in "secured mode. That secured mode would basically =
not allow any modification. THis would allow the end user to =
upgrade/update without causing undue security headaches.

There are some other implementation schemes that are a bit more detailed =
than I am willing to write about here. All of them have their good =
points as well and would offer a good alternative to the "one size fits =
all" scheme that the Fcc wants to have. Also, the Fcc lumped in the =
amateur radio service with commercial stuff and their idea on this would =
severely cripple our ability to innovate the hobby and offer help in =
emergency relief situations.

SO far, the Fcc (and the general public) are under the impression that =
the cell phone network can handle an emergency situation. If history is =
any teacher here, it won't. Case in point: Katrina. Nearly all of the =
cell sites were knocked offline in the affected areas for as much as 3 =
weeks and none of the back haul systems were operational for much of =
that time. You either had sat phones (and not many of them) or ham =
radio. Now imagine the next emergency of such a large scale (say the =
cascade earthquake zone lets go). You are talking an area affecting =
everything west of I-5 from the northern border of california to the =
canadian border. WIth this regulation in force, there would be no ad-hoc =
mesh nets carrying emergency traffic to an available working internet =
point. There would also be severely impaired amateur radio operations =
because SDR radios wouldn't be able to do some of the modes that their =
unlocked cosignss could do (high speed broadband HF traffic for =
instance). And this is only a small (and directly related to ham radio) =
example.

There are a lot of other effects this proposed rule change would have. =
Increased cost to the end user, limited innovation, limited capability =
and no user choice.

Believe me, this is not another "the sky is falling" announcement. THis =
has been coming for a while and the recent data breaches have forced =
this into the Fcc's mind. The problem here is that the Fcc will use a =
sledge hammer approach that should actually have the use of a velvet =
glove. History is replete with similar situations that caused extremely =
negative consequences. SOme of these include: Prohibition, gun control, =
controlled substances act and others. A small amount of properly applied =
regulation works far more effectively than a mass strike of all or =
nothing regulation. I can see a situation where a lot of electronics =
manufacturers are simply going to sell the good stuff overseas and send =
us the costlier and more limited products. Some won't even bother to =
sell here and this will create an impetus for a black market in better =
electronics. The same things have already happened with the Hollstead =
Act, the machine-gun act, the controlled substances act and the clean =
water act (take a look at the latest fiasco with the EPA and tell me I =
am wrong).

IMHO, there is a better way than this. The Fcc needs to be told this.

73's DE n7zzt Eric

On Aug 31, 2015, at 8:12 PM, Martin McCormick wrote:

> 	First, thank you for posting this. I am not criticizing
> anyone on this list but this article has a certain familiar smell
> to it.
>=20
> 	I call stories like this and others Chicken Little
> stories. Remember Chicken Little who got bonked on the noggin with
> a falling nut or acorn and ran through the streets screaming that
> the sky is falling.
>=20
> 	Remember the modem tax scare of years ago and other
> similar conspiracy stories that basically said that the party is
> over and now terrible things are about to happen.
>=20
> 	This story sounds like a Chicken Little event for a
> couple of reasons. Firstly, the article only says that the FCC is
> considering a proposal to lock down all the stuff we use to
> communicate with. Probably some yo-yo in an expensive suit
> working for a large business interest had a team of lawyers write
> up a proposal and submit it to the FCC. When this happens and the
> submission passes the physical rules such as number of copies and
> the physical format of the document, it has to be heard/read even
> if it is a stupid idea. That's how America works.
>=20
> 	If you run a huge company or work for 1 and have deep
> pockets, they listen to you longer than they might listen to the
> average Joe or Jane but eventually, the FCC must put the proposal
> out for public comment.
>=20
> 	They are looking for thoughtful discussion so emails in
> all caps with half the words misspelled and maybe a period at the
> end of the last sentence are not given much weight.
>=20
> 	So what is a SDR? It's a computer program that runs on a
> DSP or Digital Signal Processor. A digital signal processor is
> similar to the CPU's in your computer except it is usually built
> for speed so that it can process video, audio and images as fast
> as possible.
>=20
> 	The CPU in your computer could be a SDR if you fed it the
> right program. It might not run as fast as a dedicated DSP chip
> set, but it could do all the math and spit out numbers just like
> the dedicated DSP's do, just not as efficiently.
>=20
> 	What will probably happen is that after a lot of discussion,
> the FCC may decide to do nothing because there is no way to
> enforce any kind of lock-down without interfering with
> legitimate design interests.
>=20
> 	I doubt that GNU Linux or any other operating system will
> be crippled simply because the howl and cries of "foul!" would
> be ever present.
>=20
> 	There have been previous odious proposals before the FCC
> or other agencies that were backed by business interests with
> lots of dough and still fell flat.
>=20
> 	Several years ago, the recording industry spent lots of
> money trying to foist some technology on to us that would thwart
> copying of audio. It was sophisticated for it's day and placed
> notches in the audio spectrum at around 4 KHZ. A
> copyright-compliant audio recorder would have detected these
> notches and refused to record or maybe would have produced a
> mangled recording that was unusable.
>=20
> 	There were double-blind scientific tests in which
> subjects listened to music that sometimes had been doctored with
> the copy-prevention technology and other times was okay and had
> not been de-horned, so to speak.
>=20
> 	The whole plan was scrapped when the test subjects could
> hear an audible reduction in sound quality on the doctored
> recordings.
>=20
> 	I doubt that much bad is going to happen here but you
> never know.
>=20
> Again, thanks for posting the article and links. Just remember to
> make your comments intelligent and not a rant. They really can't
> do much with a rant unless you have a good idea, anyway. Nobody
> here is ranting except possibly me, but if you do want to
> perticipate, be nice and logical.
>=20
> Martin WB5AGZ
>=20
> Ron Canazzi <[log in to unmask]> writes:
>> Hi Group,
>>=20
>> Here is the link so it works without the equal signs prevalent on =
this=20
>> list.
>> =
http://www.southgatearc.org/news/2015/august/fcc_proposes_ban_on_sdr_radio=
s_and_more.htm#.VeN4mJcnqzL
>>=20
>> Here is the text of the full article on it's originating website.
>> https://libreplanet.org/