Skip to content

Senate GOP budget bill has little-noticed provision that could hurt your Wi-Fi

Technology
68 42 2
  • 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 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.

  • 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.

  • Next they are gonna take away amateur radio frequencies so it would be illegal to communicate outside of the internet.

    Then its very easy to do censorship, just turn off power to ISPs and its information blackout.

  • 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.

    What do you mean by same thing with Meshtastic, are they trying to sell spectrum around 900mHz too?

  • What do you mean by same thing with Meshtastic, are they trying to sell spectrum around 900mHz too?

    IDK I heard something about it. I think it may have been the 866 MHz one?

  • This would need like a Canadian or Mexican to help provide the internet from across the border, because if they pull the Iran style blackout there will be zero internet for the entire country.

  • I thought about getting a ham license so are you telling me there is really no need?

    You don't need one if there's an emergency, civil unrest would probably qualify as an emergency so non-licensed people can legally transmit.

    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.

    But if you don't have a license, you don't have a callsign, and thus others will refuse to talk to you during non-emergency peacetime.

  • 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.

  • This would need like a Canadian or Mexican to help provide the internet from across the border, because if they pull the Iran style blackout there will be zero internet for the entire country.

    Meshenger app and mesh networks would still work, back to the BBS times we go

  • 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.

    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.

  • 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.

    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

  • Next they are gonna take away amateur radio frequencies so it would be illegal to communicate outside of the internet.

    Then its very easy to do censorship, just turn off power to ISPs and its information blackout.

    For what it's worth, I think Cruz's proposal (all of it) was defeated 99-1.

  • 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.

    Most actual communication is illegal on the ham bands one way or another

    Except in case of emergency, natural disaster, etc. Before we carried cell phones, I had ham handhelds that we would talk directly to each other on 70cm for the usual "Hi honey, I'm on my way home" or... in the days before cell phone lots existed at airports, I'd call her on the handheld to let her know I was approaching the passenger drop-off/pickup area at the airport after a flight so she could start going there from whatever makeshift staging area she was in.

    Anyway, when we would be out in the woods, we could reach each other roughly 1/2 mile like that from handheld to handheld, but if we ever had a serious problem we could switch to 2m and hit the local repeater which would get us more like 12 miles of range and coverage all the way into town where there was usually somebody who could make a 911 call if we needed it.

    So, yeah, we have cell phones today, and they work when they work, but I find that when the cell phones don't work (like during / after a hurricane) the ham bands generally are working - or at least are restored quicker, and nobody is going to press charges for emergency communications on the ham bands.

    If you want to use the ham band for instacart dispatch coordination, yeah, you're gonna get more than static about that.

  • I thought about getting a ham license so are you telling me there is really no need?

    If you intend to practice the hobby, get the license. I let mine lapse after 10 years because I don't practice anymore, but I generally still remember the basic rules and how to operate the gear, so if I ever had an emergency need I'd use what I had access to - but I haven't transmitted anything in years and years.

  • 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.

    difference is intent.

    And intent is functionally impossible to prove, but endlessly arguable and a judge can make a finding based on their judgement - something very different from proof.

    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.

    Correct.

  • difference is intent.

    And intent is functionally impossible to prove, but endlessly arguable and a judge can make a finding based on their judgement - something very different from proof.

    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.

    Correct.

    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.

  • Most actual communication is illegal on the ham bands one way or another

    Except in case of emergency, natural disaster, etc. Before we carried cell phones, I had ham handhelds that we would talk directly to each other on 70cm for the usual "Hi honey, I'm on my way home" or... in the days before cell phone lots existed at airports, I'd call her on the handheld to let her know I was approaching the passenger drop-off/pickup area at the airport after a flight so she could start going there from whatever makeshift staging area she was in.

    Anyway, when we would be out in the woods, we could reach each other roughly 1/2 mile like that from handheld to handheld, but if we ever had a serious problem we could switch to 2m and hit the local repeater which would get us more like 12 miles of range and coverage all the way into town where there was usually somebody who could make a 911 call if we needed it.

    So, yeah, we have cell phones today, and they work when they work, but I find that when the cell phones don't work (like during / after a hurricane) the ham bands generally are working - or at least are restored quicker, and nobody is going to press charges for emergency communications on the ham bands.

    If you want to use the ham band for instacart dispatch coordination, yeah, you're gonna get more than static about that.

    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.

  • 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.

    Oh the legal system is pretty good at deciding intent

    I wouldn't say it's good at determining actual intent, just good at deciding what intent is going to be assigned by the system.

    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.

    I've always wondered how much steganography is in practice - if it's being practiced well, nobody knows. Setup a HAM station that snaps a photo at sunset and a couple of other random times per day. Transmit the photo in a standard, open digital mode, but hide your message in the noisy lower bits of the 3 color channels 0-255 R G and B, you can easily modify 6 bits per pixel without visually distorting the image, drop that to 1 bit per pixel and nobody who doesn't know your scheme could ever find it. To the local hams, it's three chirps a day, with a reliable pretty picture of the sunset and a couple of more varied times. As a utility channel, that's three opportunities per day to secretly communicate something to a listener that nobody can identify. If the picture is just 2MP, that's 250kBytes of bandwidth per image.

    If you want to secretly communicate with people, use Reddit, or the Fediverse.

    Absolutely, though the "listeners" there are more readily identified, even via Tor.

  • This post did not contain any content.

    I’m just glad we live in a country where politicians can also be experts in RF design/engineering and make policies based on their expertise.

  • This post did not contain any content.

    How would that work for the people already using 6 GHz routers?

  • Blocking real-world ads: is the future here?

    Technology technology
    33
    1
    198 Stimmen
    33 Beiträge
    12 Aufrufe
    S
    Also a work of fiction
  • 518 Stimmen
    97 Beiträge
    19 Aufrufe
    I
    Fine, here is my pornhub account smh.
  • 120 Stimmen
    8 Beiträge
    13 Aufrufe
    anzo@programming.devA
    Interesting! Python and Bash do the same as British.
  • 1k Stimmen
    95 Beiträge
    15 Aufrufe
    G
    Obviously the law must be simple enough to follow so that for Jim’s furniture shop is not a problem nor a too high cost to respect it, but it must be clear that if you break it you can cease to exist as company. I think this may be the root of our disagreement, I do not believe that there is any law making body today that is capable of an elegantly simple law. I could be too naive, but I think it is possible. We also definitely have a difference on opinion when it comes to the severity of the infraction, in my mind, while privacy is important, it should not have the same level of punishments associated with it when compared to something on the level of poisoning water ways; I think that a privacy law should hurt but be able to be learned from while in the poison case it should result in the bankruptcy of a company. The severity is directly proportional to the number of people affected. If you violate the privacy of 200 million people is the same that you poison the water of 10 people. And while with the poisoning scenario it could be better to jail the responsible people (for a very, very long time) and let the company survive to clean the water, once your privacy is violated there is no way back, a company could not fix it. The issue we find ourselves with today is that the aggregate of all privacy breaches makes it harmful to the people, but with a sizeable enough fine, I find it hard to believe that there would be major or lasting damage. So how much money your privacy it's worth ? 6 For this reason I don’t think it is wise to write laws that will bankrupt a company off of one infraction which was not directly or indirectly harmful to the physical well being of the people: and I am using indirectly a little bit more strict than I would like to since as I said before, the aggregate of all the information is harmful. The point is that the goal is not to bankrupt companies but to have them behave right. The penalty associated to every law IS the tool that make you respect the law. And it must be so high that you don't want to break the law. I would have to look into the laws in question, but on a surface level I think that any company should be subjected to the same baseline privacy laws, so if there isn’t anything screwy within the law that apple, Google, and Facebook are ignoring, I think it should apply to them. Trust me on this one, direct experience payment processors have a lot more rules to follow to be able to work. I do not want jail time for the CEO by default but he need to know that he will pay personally if the company break the law, it is the only way to make him run the company being sure that it follow the laws. For some reason I don’t have my usual cynicism when it comes to this issue. I think that the magnitude of loses that vested interests have in these companies would make it so that companies would police themselves for fear of losing profits. That being said I wouldn’t be opposed to some form of personal accountability on corporate leadership, but I fear that they will just end up finding a way to create a scapegoat everytime. It is not cynicism. I simply think that a huge fine to a single person (the CEO for example) is useless since it too easy to avoid and if it really huge realistically it would be never paid anyway so nothing usefull since the net worth of this kind of people is only on the paper. So if you slap a 100 billion file to Musk he will never pay because he has not the money to pay even if technically he is worth way more than that. Jail time instead is something that even Musk can experience. In general I like laws that are as objective as possible, I think that a privacy law should be written so that it is very objectively overbearing, but that has a smaller fine associated with it. This way the law is very clear on right and wrong, while also giving the businesses time and incentive to change their practices without having to sink large amount of expenses into lawyers to review every minute detail, which is the logical conclusion of the one infraction bankrupt system that you seem to be supporting. Then you write a law that explicitally state what you can do and what is not allowed is forbidden by default.
  • Acute Leukemia Burden Trends and Future Predictions

    Technology technology
    5
    1
    5 Stimmen
    5 Beiträge
    16 Aufrufe
    G
    Looks like the delay in 2011 was so big the data became available after the 2017 one
  • 88 Stimmen
    21 Beiträge
    31 Aufrufe
    J
    The self hosted model has hard coded censored content.
  • 1 Stimmen
    14 Beiträge
    24 Aufrufe
    T
    ...is this some sort of joke my Nordic brain can't understand? I need to go hug a councilman.
  • WhatsApp provides no cryptographic management for group messages

    Technology technology
    3
    1
    17 Stimmen
    3 Beiträge
    13 Aufrufe
    S
    Just be sure to add only the people you want to be there. I've heard some people add others and it's a bit messy