Its always Cruz.
post
Yes, Rafael suffered a 99-1 loss. Guessing he's the 1, so a total loss.
I mean, does anyone actually communicate on the ham bands? HF is for contesting and contesting only, 2 meters is for "checking in and out" on ragchew nets, 70cm is 2m again except half the range, 220 is hipster 2 meter, and I've never been given a reason to even think about 33cm and above. You're more likely to find discussion about Icom vs Yaesu's incompatible 2 meter digital things than high UHF.
Most actual communication is illegal on the ham bands one way or another so...I haven't renewed my license.
I lost power and water for several days following a hurricane. No internet and no cell signal.
A dual band HT was our only way to learn what was happening across the city and in our neighborhood. It was a lifeline. I’ve got a bigger mobile unit set up now with a better antenna. Easy thing to keep on hand for the next zombie attack.
This guy's full of shit. You can talk all you want on the HF bands, they're certainly not exclusively for contesting. You can do Morse code or digital modes too. The "most actual communication is illegal on ham bands" thing is wrong too, you can talk about pretty much anything you want as long as it's not "obscene or profane," according to the FCC.
It's illegal to transmit music, it's illegal to transmit anything encrypted unless you're controlling a satellite, it's illegal to transmit anything for commercial purposes, and it's actually illegal to transmit anything on a regular basis that could reasonably be communicated some other way.
It's illegal to transmit music
True, for obvious reasons
it's illegal to transmit anything encrypted unless you're controlling a satellite
True, it helps to ensure nothing illegal is going on and enforce keeping commercial interests out. It's a self regulating space, one of the only cases I know of that tends to work due to there being no monetary interests allowed. The point is to communicate information, not hide it.
it's illegal to transmit anything for commercial purposes.
True, the whole point is to keep commercial interests out. That's what "amateur" means.
illegal to transmit anything on a regular basis that could reasonably be communicated some other way.
False. This is for something like a non-profit wanting to use radios for their operations, they should be steered toward another service like gmrs, FRS, murs, etc. instead of amateur radio.
I call bs on the encryption part too. You just need to publicly post the key for your encryption and say you're not trying to hide what you're saying.
I haven't seen any regulations saying where you need to publicly post the key.
I say license up now and learn it how the shit works. Never know when some "pirate" stations may be needed.
Over here in Germany encryption is most definitely illegal. This includes encoded messages only the intended recipient could decode.
There's a difference between encryption and encoding, and that difference is intent.
Encoding is the process of imparting a digital message onto the radio carrier. A simple example is Morse code; transmitted by keying a continuous wave on and off in pre-determined patterns of long and short pulses with long and short gaps between. Frequency shift keying and bodot code are the encoding scheme behind RTTY, etc. Hams are permitted to experiment with novel encoding schemes, and have invented a few, PSK31 comes to mind, a phase shift keying standard designed to use commonly available PC sound cards as a modem.
Encryption is the process of obscuring the message for all but the intended recipient. There is one specific case the law calls out when this is permissible in Amateur radio service, and that's control signals of Amateur radio satellites. A novel encoding scheme, like making up your own alphabet instead of the standard Morse one, or ciphers of any kind that are intended to make the message secret, is illegal.
It's not uncommon to hear encrypted communiques on the ham bands; I've picked them up myself. You want a fun rabbit hole to fall down, look up numbers stations. Some serious cold war james bond bullshit.
I don't believe it is legal to send a PGP encrypted message over the air (on ham radio, go ahead and send it over Wi-Fi, you can encrypt the shit out of that) even if you've posted your private key on your website. What would even be the point of that? tilts head It might be legal to send a PGP signed message over ham radio; if I understand correctly that's basically a checksum that can guarantee the sender's possession of a private key.
Oh the legal system is pretty good at deciding intent, I mean what's the difference between manslaughter and murder?
Thing is, it's not like there's radio police that are going to pull you over for encrypting. Other hams might turn you in if you're being annoying. If you send an encrypted email over Hamlink once, or say something like "Beefy Burrito this is Enchilada, the tamales are in the basket" on 33cm once, probably nobody's gonna notice.
There's only ~3.7MHz worth of bandwith on the HF bands, another 4MHz on 6m. There's a lot of attention on the bands that propagate. If you want to secretly communicate with people, use Reddit, or the Fediverse.
You know r/kitty? One of a trillion cat subreddits that had a gimmick that the only written word allowed was "kitty." All post titles and comments had to consist only of "Kitty." Arrange with the leaders of the other terrorist cells you're working for that if u/chudmuffin posts a picture of an orange cat, we attack at dawn, and if he posts a picture of a grey cat, lay low they're onto us.
Encryption is legal and standard on the internet, where there's many orders of magnitude more traffic than on the ham bands. I can't send an encrypted email over Hamlink with a license, but I can host a Tor site without one.
Well on some popular image board like one of the hundreds of cat subs on Reddit, how do you identify a "listener" who is looking for a particular user to upload a picture of an orange cat? Thousands of people will view that post perfectly innocently.
So...let's actually set up a pretend scenario here. Pretend. We are pretend red teaming here; any resemblance to actual terrorist plots living or dead is purely coincidental.
Let's pretend our terrorist cell is going to spit up, travel to 10 places around the United States, and we're going to do a coordinated strike on 10 government buildings. Probably the smartest thing to do is just...do it at a planned time and not communicate after we split up. But for some convoluted Ocean's Umpteen reason we need to communicate and coordinate. I see 3 possible scenarios here:
- Leader just needs to say GO to the rest of the team, expecting no reply. So one, very brief, one-way communique.
- Leader needs to send several detailed instructions over a long period of time, expecting no reply. Repeated, large, one-way communiques.
- The team is going to gather some intelligence and report back, and based on all their observations the leader will say go. Full on two-way communication.
In all three cases, the internet is the better tool for this.
You are correct in that it is difficult or impossible to remotely detect radio receivers, no matter what the BBC tells you. There's no machinery making a log of who accesses what over analog radio. But the realities of radio equipment and propagation are going to eat into that advantage somewhat.
If we're talking truly coast-to-coast, you're going to need HF. MF/longwave won't reach far enough, you need skywave propagation, and you get that on HF...mostly at night mostly during favorable sunspot activity.
I bet you're imagining most of the team using one of those handheld commodity shortwave receivers that does AM/FM and shortwave, about the size of a pencil case with one of those telescoping whip antennas. That might do for 1 and 2, people hear hams on those sometimes.
The bosses transmitter would need to be a reasonably serious bit of kit. At the very least something like an Icom 706 mobile HF rig plus power supply and at least a two element yagi for 20 or 40m. This is an antenna that's 30 to 60 feet wide. Hams do routinely make do with less, but when you're talking to someone with those crappy little antennas, probably inside a building, I'd want to focus my beam at least a bit. A wire in a tree ain't gonna do.
Oh, and, let's say Boss is in Washington DC. It's possible he can make himself heard in Los Angeles but not Wichita, because the "optics" of the ionosphere doesn't bounce his signal down to the ground in the middle of the continent.
One communique of "Baker this is Oven: Preheat complete, insert the bread. Repeat: Insert the bread." might not be noticed. Or some ham somewhere will hear it and go "What the hell, who's horsing around?" If you don't transmit again, you're probably not going to be direction found. But that big radio tower you've got is a weird thing to have.
If you need to make routine transmissions, well now you're going to have to try some steganography crap. They did recently relax the baud restrictions on HF, but you're still talking about 2.8kHz of analog bandwidth that MIGHT get through. It's gonna look really weird if you're repeatedly sending digital pictures to...no one in particular on a regular basis. Now, to blend in, you'll need some genuine callsigns, because the FCC amateur radio license database is a matter of public record. You use a bogus callsign and you'll be found out. If you're transmitting a lot, people will find you, possibly out of curiosity.
Especially if you're talking about everyone in the terrorist cell communicating, well now EVERYONE has to have an amateur radio license from the government, and fairly large, fairly conspicuous radio hardware. There have been spies caught with shortwave radio equipment, and said equipment was used as evidence against them. Entering the US with a smart phone and laptop is utterly normal, entering the US with a shortwave radio is weird.
OR
Get accounts on Reddit, and post cat memes. Compared to sitting around listening to static on an HF set, that looks way more normal these days. Yes, there probably is a log of what IP addresses sent and received what, but it's really easy to make two-way secret communications look like perfectly legitimate traffic. The equipment required doesn't draw as much attention. Keep the steganography subtle or a matter of "which picture I post" and not doctor them at all, well now it's 100% indistinguishable from people having casual fun. Some guy posts a picture of an orange cat, it gets 30,000 views 975 likes and 75 comments, and ten IRS buildings explode. Do you think the authorities make the connection to the cat meme in the first place?
A HAM license realistically is for two things:
1 the test teaches you major items you should know about how radio works 2 how to not fuck shit up for everyone else
For the bands allocated to HAM radio in the US, as long as you're not fucking shit up for everyone else the FCC doesn't really care. A good example of that and my personal favorite rule is the power transmission rule of "only enough power to complete the transmission". Functionally it's so vague that I doubt anyone would ever actually get their license suspended over it.
The group AFRL ARRL has a pretty restrictive "band plan" that I think is where the above comment's salt is coming from. A perception I have and have heard others talk about is the HAM community has a tendency to be borderline hostile to newcomers and are very gate-keepy, which ARRL in my experience embodies.
I have a license purely to play by the rules from a legal standpoint when I'm out in the rocky mountains hiking and camping with friends, makes communicating with different groups way easier
Edit: formatting, typoing ARRL
It's illegal to push that button until you're licensed.
(No one will search you out if you're not being annoying)
Nothing legally stops you from listening. To transmit, you are legally required to have a callsign (which you must broadcast during transmit) and your callsign must be licensed for that frequency.
If you break the law, it's highly unlikely that the FCC themselves will hunt you down and fine you. If you're using it to talk to others on the HAM bands, they'll likely get pissed at you for not being licensed but actually tracking you down is difficult. Using it for your own personal projects, friend groups, etc, it's unlikely anyone would notice you at all.
A license is like $15 for life (just need to occasionally tell the FCC you're still alive), the test will teach you some stuff, I don't see it as that onerous to play by the rules so I'd recommend following them.
Do you mean ARRL?
I agree their bandplan is pretty restricty, but it's also not law. It's more for playing nice with each other. Keep high power up here so it doesn't wipe out the people playing with low power, digital here so they don't get overrun by voice, etc. You wouldn't have any idea you're stepping on someone sending Morse if you're on FM. So there's reason for it.
And yeah, with line of sight radios, nobody gives two shits 20 miles from civilization in the woods.
Lol whoops yeah, ARRL. I work in aerospace where we love our alphabet soup and I brainfarted AFRL.
I wasn't trying to say that the band plan doesn't exist for a reason, it absolutely does, some reasons which you pointed out exactly. I've definitely been around guys who treat the band plan like it is the law, and I imagine the original commenter had the misfortune of running into one of those guys and believed him at face value. Imho it's one of the reasons ham radio has been dying as a hobby.
The FCC hasn’t really punished anyone for not having a license other than those that are really bothersome/disruptive or are doing jamming. But like, if there’s civil unrest, the laws probably don’t matter anymore so you can just ignore the law.
Thanks for reminding me of this movie. :D https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Pump_Up_the_Volume_(film)
Get into ham radio if you like radios, that's pretty much the only topic you'll find on the air.
I live in Appalachia and people here regularly use ham for weather reports but that's about it. If there was an actual emergency I assume that would be sent out as well.
Well whoever ends up buying that band is in for a load of shit because I and a lot of other people are NOT going to stop using 6GHz WiFi
Same thing with Meshtastic. Go ahead and see just how much you'll waste your money.
Yup, the band is already littered with 6g devices. It'd be a stupid purchase.
But also, 6GHz is somewhat of a useless band for carriers. It's high enough frequency that it'll get absorbed by most things yet low enough frequency that it'll struggle to really carry a whole lot of data.
What do you mean by same thing with Meshtastic, are they trying to sell spectrum around 900mHz too?
The cell carriers don't need more bandwith. 5G is already quite fast with the existing allocations. The only times I've used 5G and thought it's too slow has been in rural areas where the issue is a lack of nearby cell towers, not a lack of bandwidth. The cell carriers already have loads of millimeter wave bandwidth available for use in densely packed, urban areas where the lower frequency bands are insufficient.
It's WiFi that should be getting more bandwidth. Home internet connections keep getting faster. Multi gigabit speeds are now common in areas with fiber.
This exactly. Wifi is damn near unusable in dense residential settings. It'll cut it for streaming and web browsing, but much more than that and you'll feel the pain of interference from all the other wifi APs in the area.
Especially with most of them defaulting to 80MHz on 5GHz and many of those defaulting away from UNII-2. which leaves 4 non-overlapping channels (with one of them giving trouble with a lot of devices). We're right back to where we were in 2.4. Even worse, I think, since wifi is more ubiquitous.
and on top of that, 5G afaik is specifically made so that if you need more density, you can turn down the cell power and install more cell sites rather than take more spectrum
it was designed for venues like sports stadiums so you could keep installing more and more cell towers inside stadiums etc to accommodate huge crowds
It's a bad band for cellular. It's short-range and shit at penetration.
It's really not even that good for wifi unless you're close or have a mesh network with APs all over the building.
mesh network
Or traditional network with Ethernet backhaul and lots of access points. I really wish mesh networks would die off honestly.
Like anything else, they have their place. But they've been shoved into use cases they dont fit as well.
Sometimes re-wiring a house or building isn't as practical as setting up a mesh network that's good-enough.
Yep, just set your Wi-Fi routers to use 6GHD and trample all over the other people in the band until they figure out that they can't control it.
So if I'm reading this right... wired Internet providers are against this due to home Wi-Fi Internet speeds and phone providers are for this for mobile speeds/bandwidth?
I don't know how I feel about this as I currently have T-Mobile home Internet and it's not the best experience... but it mostly works and it's cheaper than my previous cable provider. However, home Wi-Fi really needs 6 GHz for future IoT devices.
But I am definitely against it because Ted Cruz is for it. He obviously is getting paid/bribed by the telecoms... and he sucks.
Eh, IoT devices typically use 2.4ghz, or even 933mhz...
Yeah IoT devices don't need bandwith, they need range (at low powers) and those lower frequencies get them that. 6ghz wifi has pretty small range and is awful for IoT stuff.
Right, I figured they meant in order to make room. There’s too much cluttering 2.4 — zigbee, zwave, bluetooth, IO peripherals, microwave ovens, cordless handsets, walkies, and more. WRT general WiFi traffic, in dense residential settings 2.4 is often only used for initial client device handshake.
I kinda meant for like future products when AR and VR combine with IoT products, but if those can work on lower ranges with those 6 Ghz devices, then great... but VR and AR will definitely need 6 GHz to be more useful.
How would that work for the people already using 6 GHz routers?
Presumably given they’ve all been released in the past few years and are still getting updates the manufacturers would release an update disabling the functionality to comply with law. Same with end user devices removing the functionality via software update.
You’d have a small percentage of holdouts who have auto updates off and also refuse to apply it manually and who also have non-updated computers or smartphone. They’d leave it up to whoever buys the spectrum to locate illegal use like this based on detected interference in their usage, report it to the FCC and they send you a nasty letter followed by debilitating fines and a legal order to seize your equipment if that fails.
In practice people who go out of their way to avoid the updates that disable it will probably see no consequences but decreasing benefits as well and will eventually update or replace devices.
I thought wifi was on 2.4ghz, and the new ones were on 5ghz?
Current generation wifi 6E and 7 add 6Ghz which offers substantially more bandwidth / speed.
Wifi 7 also allows devices to use 2.4/5/6Ghz at the same time instead of just hard switching between them.
Would be a major setback since 6Ghz allows devices to easily hit Gigabit speeds wirelessly.
Yeah, I've got Wifi 7 set up and it's awesome. I've got a single access point, and I get full gigabit in my office with line of sight, and it auto switches to 5GHz or 2.4GHz when I move too far away. It's also great for apartments since it's more easily blocked by walls, there's way less interference from neighbors.
802.11a is over 20 years old, fortunately this law isn't talking about shutting down existing routers. the 6 GHZ is the next frontier to expand to, the military already owns the 7 GHZ spectrum... So the 6 GHZ is the one that can be expanded into. Of which origionally was planned to be made for the next generation of wifi... but now is going to be sold off to phone providers to use in the next generation of mobile networks.
So in short, our existing routers will continue to work as designed, but future routers will not be making any leaps forward.
Basically the choice between better faster wireless LANs, is getting killed in favor of better networks for cellphone services... of which the carriers will set the price on.
6GHz compatible devices are already being sold. If your phone is new-ish it likely supports it, and many routers already have it.
This isn’t a “next gen” problem, it’s a “current gen bleeding edge” problem.
802.11a was 5ghz, 802.11b was 2.4ghz. Both developed at the same time.
802.11g was 2.4ghz and extended b since 2.4 took off faster than 5ghz in the market.
Since g, n onwards has been used across both bands.
Since 802.11ax we now have 6ghz.
WiFi is on all three bands. It's not so much what's newer vs older. Newer devices tend to support 2.4, 5, and 6 and switch between them based on quality of signal and support by the WiFi network. Higher frequencies like 5 and 6GHz are generally better because there's less interference.
Cheaper devices tend to only support 2.4GHz
Nah wifi was actually originally on 5GHz spectrum, with 802.11a. It came out shortly before 802.11b, which used 2.4GHz, and was objectively better...but component shortages for 802.11a devices made the inferior 802.11b more successful on the market.
Then in 2009, after 802.11b and 802.11g came 802.11n, which used the 5GHz spectrum, and introduced dual-band routers to consumers.
Most recently, 6GHz got allocated with the advent of Wifi 6E and Wifi 7.
This would never work - there's already WiFi 6 (or newer) equipment deployed.
You somehow expect both Grandma and Samsung and Comcast to disable their 6Ghz wifi? AND you expect the military to give up their spectra and what... buy all new equipment that doesn't exist?
Ted Cruz is a fucking moron.

all 64 comments