Yes, ham radio is still very much a "thing". But to me, the one "thing" it never has been is the purchasing of closed, proprietary software that can be turned off at whim by the developer.
To me, ham radio has always been a unique hands-on opportunity to learn what's "behind the knobs" of a piece of communications hardware (or now, software). Even if you don't build (or write) your own stuff, even if you're primarily interested in using it to talk to others, it still gives you (or should give you) the oppo
I second this so strongly that most probably won't understand how visceral this is.
Phil wrote some software used to enable UUCP over packet, way way back when. My roommate and I cobbled together a UUCP feed for a couple of BBSes in rural Idaho. While we were still figuring out the mysteries of Minix and this newfangled Linux thing, we had email before it was cool. It was made possible by software with that callsign in his email address emblazoned on the banners and docs.
Yep, some "talking on the radio." Lots of examples of that:
- Maximum average number of contacts per minute for an hour (this is a "contesting" rate) - Number of countries you can reach with a given setup (this is usually referred to as a DXCC) - I'm working on a variant of this where I intend to continue confirming contacts with 100 unique countries or territories every year. (3 years, so far) - Distance per Watt (SSB to Hawaii on 10mW in my case) - How many contacts you can make with a s
That's like saying you're "pushing the boundaries" by seeing how many q-tips you can fit in your ear. Sure, it's probably technically accurate. But you have to admit that it's "pushing the boundaries" of being bullshit.
Just like nearly all other forms of "pushing boundaries", for instance the leaderboard on that game you like. Or high karma score on Slashdot, or bringing you car to the car wash twice a week. Or getting laid every weekend, etc. etc.
Yes, I agree. All examples of setting the bar incredibly low. Thought that was made pretty clear by a couple other people above, but apparently not. Just let me know if it needs to be spelled out a little clearer. Not sure it can be done, but we'll give it the old college try.
Well, not to toot my own horn too loudly, but in the mid 1980s I wrote a TCP/IP implementation. I intended it for ham radio use on low end PCs, as the only existing general purpose implementations were on commercial minicomputers far beyond a ham budget. (I actually began it on a dare by Terry Fox, WB4JFI, who insisted it was too complex to implement on anything a ham could afford.)
Before I knew it, my software was being widely used outside ham radio for dialup access to the Internet. Universities and compa
Only through hard work and perseverance can one truly suffer.
Ham Radio? (Score:0, Funny)
That's still a thing?
Re: (Score:5, Informative)
Re: (Score:5, Insightful)
I second this so strongly that most probably won't understand how visceral this is.
Phil wrote some software used to enable UUCP over packet, way way back when. My roommate and I cobbled together a UUCP feed for a couple of BBSes in rural Idaho. While we were still figuring out the mysteries of Minix and this newfangled Linux thing, we had email before it was cool. It was made possible by software with that callsign in his email address emblazoned on the banners and docs.
I didn't understand what amateur r
Re: (Score:2)
So much interesting stuff to explore and try and so many people who want to push the boundaries.
With all due respect, boundaries of what? Talking on the radio?
Re: (Score:4, Informative)
Yep, some "talking on the radio." Lots of examples of that:
- Maximum average number of contacts per minute for an hour (this is a "contesting" rate)
- Number of countries you can reach with a given setup (this is usually referred to as a DXCC)
- I'm working on a variant of this where I intend to continue confirming contacts with 100 unique countries or territories every year. (3 years, so far)
- Distance per Watt (SSB to Hawaii on 10mW in my case)
- How many contacts you can make with a s
Re: (Score:0, Insightful)
That's like saying you're "pushing the boundaries" by seeing how many q-tips you can fit in your ear. Sure, it's probably technically accurate. But you have to admit that it's "pushing the boundaries" of being bullshit.
Re: Ham Radio? (Score:0)
Just like nearly all other forms of "pushing boundaries", for instance the leaderboard on that game you like. Or high karma score on Slashdot, or bringing you car to the car wash twice a week. Or getting laid every weekend, etc. etc.
Re: (Score:0)
Yes, I agree. All examples of setting the bar incredibly low. Thought that was made pretty clear by a couple other people above, but apparently not. Just let me know if it needs to be spelled out a little clearer. Not sure it can be done, but we'll give it the old college try.
Re: Ham Radio? (Score:2)
I was referring to the boundaries of the hobby, not the boundaries of human existence. But I appreciate the big thinking.
Re: (Score:2)
Well, not to toot my own horn too loudly, but in the mid 1980s I wrote a TCP/IP implementation. I intended it for ham radio use on low end PCs, as the only existing general purpose implementations were on commercial minicomputers far beyond a ham budget. (I actually began it on a dare by Terry Fox, WB4JFI, who insisted it was too complex to implement on anything a ham could afford.)
Before I knew it, my software was being widely used outside ham radio for dialup access to the Internet. Universities and compa