301
you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
view the rest of the comments
this post was submitted on 14 Oct 2024
301 points (98.1% liked)
Technology
58685 readers
5067 users here now
This is a most excellent place for technology news and articles.
Our Rules
- Follow the lemmy.world rules.
- Only tech related content.
- Be excellent to each another!
- Mod approved content bots can post up to 10 articles per day.
- Threads asking for personal tech support may be deleted.
- Politics threads may be removed.
- No memes allowed as posts, OK to post as comments.
- Only approved bots from the list below, to ask if your bot can be added please contact us.
- Check for duplicates before posting, duplicates may be removed
Approved Bots
founded 1 year ago
MODERATORS
I don't think smart phones are conventional communications. The are smart. They are still the "tech of tomorrow".
Smart phones use conventional communications to do very clever things. But those clever things are range limited and require specialised equipment. They also have absolutely no "hackability" without specialised equipment (easy to get, sure... But still pretty much single purpose)
AM is literally a couple caps, inductors, resistors (edit: and diode) then an amplifier (a couple transistors and resistors). And the range of lower frequency radio waves is (or can be) phenomenal.
It's just that it takes some experience to operate on these frequencies, and their bandwidth is limited.
Smart phones do away with the experience requirements, and trade higher frequencies & higher data rates for range (and I guess trade digital encoding for simplicity)
I see parallels to software.
People are nervous to "side loading apps" on their phone, but have no issues downloading and installing an exe on windows.
Smart phones give you the "this is how" kind of experience, and abstract away the sheer amount of technology they leverage. Which is amazing, and is what makes them smart!
But the underlying technology is phenomenal. And I feel it's a shame that the majority of people don't have any understanding of "installing an app" or similar (like calling internet access "WiFi".... 2 distinct things!)
Ham does require that one studies electric engineering (to a some level) and passes a test to acquire a license. Some of the equipment can either kill you or cause way too much interference potentially killing others indirectly
Not for nothing but I got my novice and tech license in grade school.
I didn't know what the hell I was doing. Looking back it was basically brain dumping (and learning code well enough to pass the 5WPM test).
Ended up getting 13WPM and general and advanced in 7th grade.
I still have my license, just renewed it a couple months ago. But haven't keyed up in maybe 15 years. Ain't nobody got time for that. I just got a little handheld transceiver on temu and haven't used it at all.
My local 2m is just old guys talking about Trump/conservative politics and their health conditions sadly.
You don't need to know Morse code any longer for the exam, btw.
No, not really. You just need to memorize a few symbols, remember like two equations, and know metric prefixes. You could learn it in a week or so just doing practice tests.
Huh. I wonder how you do that. If the wind knocked down a tree and the tree killed someone, would the wind indirectly have killed someone? That’s kind of like the old adage “speed doesn’t kill, it’s the sudden stop”
If you're fucking around with your radio equipment doing something you shouldn't and end up causing interference on, for example, aircraft frequencies or emergency service radio systems, you could be a contributing factor to an airliner crashing or an ambulance not being dispatched in a timely manner and a patient dying because they didn't get to the hospital in time.
You didn't directly kill anyone, but you set up the circumstances that resulted in someone dying.
Uhhh, no. I can't speak to the ambulance comms, but a plane isn't going to fall out of the sky because they can't hear the radio. Even if they have to fly VFR and make an emergency landing (which would be the worst case). Waaay too many safeguards in place (including the pilot themselves being trained for loss of comms).
The radio in the plane could melt and you'd still be able to communicate with ATC via light guns.
Radios are used for more than just comms like hearing other people talking on the radio. Gps, transponders, radar, and other systems rely on radio waves to operate, and so are potentially (however unlikely) susceptible to interference from other radio equipment.
There's a reason we have so many safeguards built in, sometimes those systems fail, sometimes multiple systems fail at once, and you don't want whatever you have left to go down too.
And yes, it can certainly interfere with ambulance comms, I work in 911 dispatch, we have some redundancy with the MDTs in their vehicles and smartphone apps and such, but those systems have been known to fail on us, leaving us with just radios to communicate with our field units. My agency's systems are a bit more advanced, but I've been to some rural areas where they're using pretty basic VHF/UHF radios that I could listen in and even key up and transmit on with a $30 baofeng (the frequencies they were using were a bit outside of what's legally permitted for ham radio use, but still within the capabilities of my radio)
So when I said "VFR" and "light guns", and you totally ignored it, it proved to me that you're spouting some armchair opinions, and have never flown a plane. Nor did any of the people who downvoted me. Looks like the reddit crowd is in full swing in this thread.
Also, I said I couldn't speak to the ambulance radios. I have no experience with those systems, and said as much. Everything you said about them is beside the point I was making.
You don't need radio comms to fly or land a plane. Could a shitty ham screw up the instruments? Yes. Is that a headache for ATC and pilots? Yes. Will they crash a plane? No.
No, it's not besides the point because you can have issues with poor visibility and those light guns are not immune from breaking down, and then you'd really want your other communication and instruments to be functioning as they should.
Look, I know we're talking one in a million, worst case scenarios here, not situations that are at all likely to happen, just ones that theoretically could if Murphy's law goes into full effect, multiple people at every level drop the ball, and the planets and stars are all aligned just so, etc.
Pilots are also trained for flight with poor visibility (for example, flying above clouds and looking for holes of clear sky to descend through, then looking for safe landing sites), and also landing with poor visibility, for exactly the reasons we've both brought up. I agree that it's more hazardous, but like I said, it's not falling out of the sky because someone pushed the wrong button on their equipment.
And not for nothin'; if someone keeps screwing up with short disruptions, or (even worse) leaves something on that causes consistent communication interference, the hams will find them, and the feds will start knocking on the door pretty quick.
It's not that hard to use ham radio equipment to screw with things like aviation com/nav radios and the like.
Same reason why power-line can do that; interference with emergency services radio.
"Fragility" is the typical descriptor for this sort of thing. Advanced technology is very powerful, and that is obvious to see, but it also tends to fail readily without long-term planning, in disaster and war, of course, but also in more benign ways, like when a consumer becomes reliant on the technology for a way of life, and a corporation abused their unique ability to maintain the technology, and the consumer has no recourse.
Weren't there some hobbyists that communicate via bed springs and a few Watt from Australia to USA?
On the other hand. Actual ham radio needs exotic and antiquated equipment, and for all of that you will get a clunky walkie-talkie that can't do the walkie part and has extremely limited bandwidth, that would collapse if even 0.1% of the population tried using it.
If you do have all the gear and license and just tried to find how to send even 2400 bits per second to another ham radio operator, it would take weeks just to find one another and setup this feat of engineering.
Modulations are obsolete, not even QAM64. There has been no attempt beam forming on HF so there is only very few channels that can be used concurently.
All in all it's like CB but with extra steps.
A hobby, not a reliable, practical method of mass communication and very stuck in its ways where preserving the spectrum is more valued than communication.
You kinda made my point with the whole "try and find another operator to send 2400bps to" part. The digital communication is not conventional, it's revolutionary.
Analog communication is conventional. And radios and their components aren't exotic.
Yes, modern communication is fantastic. But analog will still be more reliable