There are too many broken email clients that send HTML documents without the correct headers saying it is HTML, so too many broken email clients automatically render messages that LOOK like HTML because that's probably what they ought to do.

And then you get idiots who think they need to send 50k of HTML for a one-sentence email, and get pissy when you tell them that you don't read HTML and to resend whatever the hell it was in text if they want you to get the message.

I'm pretty sure that none of the clients I use can be told to completely ignore HTML, not even a text-based client like pine. I used to have procmail strip every "Mime-Version" and "Content-Type" header in incoming email just to force the client to show it as text, but I got tired of dealing with the pissy folks from above.

Many mail clients have provisions for PGP signing of messages. It is one of the options I have set up on my tablet for K9 mail.

For it to work in a corporate environment, it must be mandated by the company so that everyone does it, everyone must have a client that supports it, keys must exist and be distributed, and only then can everyone rely on an unsigned message being invalid. If your boss forgets to sign a message telling you to do something and you ignore it, you better have a company policy backing you up.

That puts it in the realm of a social problem, not a technical one. And it does not solve the problem of external sources of email that don't sign anything being the alleged source of the email asking you to "click here" because your train reservation has changed and you need to pay a bit extra.

"Path to entry" is not the same as the lowest level license class.

You're talking about the original move to incentive licensing where higher class licenses had access to a bit more spectrum and earned that through both more advanced testing and faster code requirements. That was a VERY long time ago. That was the system in place when I was first licensed more than 40 years ago. You make it sound like the speeds were going up up up until you came along to lobby for them to go away by simply not using code.

And that "20 wpm test" you passed? You didn't need to pass that test to use, or not use, CW at 20wpm. You needed to pass that test to get a more advanced class of license which had access to more spectrum. Please tell me that you never used any of the additional privileges that came with that license as your way of "lobbying" against that class of license, because "20 wpm CW" is not a privilege that came with passing that test or the license.

Yes, as I said, the dependence on CW for maritime emergency traffic went away, and thus also the requirement in the international treaty that required it for HF frequency access.

Yes, and many of them are government or NGO employees who are getting licenses because they are being paid to do so. Congratulations on winning.

Now you're just showing your ignorance. Do you realize how much it costs to keep a satphone account active? Do you not realize how many ham radios you can buy for that money? And do you not realize the hassle and expense involved in coordinating and building out another land mobile frequency when the ones you already have are getting close to capacity? That's if you can get another frequency at all.

Perhaps you just aren't paying attention to the FCC enforcement bureau actions regarding intruding users, such as the Indianapolis city police. They aren't the only ones who were and are picking up cheap ham radios and using them without bothering with licenses.

And perhaps you just don't realize how much money governments and NGOs can save by underbuilding their communications systems and relying on amateur radio to save them when the ice storm hits the fan.

No, they SHOULD have no reason to use amateur radio, but that's not reality. "Save money" is. "Easy to access" is. "Use free existing infrastructure" is. "Lots of open spectrum" is. All are reasons for governments and NGO to use amateur radio, so your claim that they have no reason is patent nonsense.

Because that battle has been lost, and it was lost when our own ARRL got their employees a special exemption. 47CFR97.113(iv) is written to such an extent that nobody but ARRL/W1AW could meet the requirements. That section is there only so ARRL can have paid employees running the W1AW code practice transmissions.

Today any attempt to get the governmental/NGO exemption removed would be met with a hailstorm of opposing comments from all those governmental and NGO that you say have no need for amateur radio, but who were very effective in presenting the case that "amateur radio saves lives" and "when all else fails ...". In case you weren't aware, both of those slogans come from our dear ARRL who used them as spectrum defense bullet points, but they've now boomeranged into justification for GO/NGO access.

Yeah, go ahead and lobby against saving lives, sir, and see just how far you get. You'd run into ham radio's version of "think of the children" and get nowhere fast. I'll just ask you this: did YOU bother to file comments against either of the rule changes that opened the door to paid government employees using amateur radio? I did.

1. The novice class license had a Morse code requirement. That was the lowest grade of amateur radio license. Five WPM.

2. The Morse code requirement was mandated by the ITU treaty (International Telecommunications Union) that required anyone who had access to HF bands (that included Novice class amateur radio licensees) to know Morse code. That requirement was based on maritime safety, as an ability to read CW could help during emergencies. Satellite and other systems have replaced the old radio op sending the weak SOS signal from a sinking vessel, so that requirement went away.

As if the FCC cared that you passed the test and then never used code on the air. I dare say, there were many many people who lobbied the same way -- without any effect, and without even knowing it. Does it count that I passed the test and used CW exactly once, forty years ago?

There are a lot of people who lost, or at least have a good argument that they did. If nothing else, CW was a good way of holding back the push for government agencies and NGO to get access to amateur frequencies.

With the loss of CW and the changes to the rules, all it takes for a government agency to get essentially free access to the ham bands is having their employees pass a 34 question test. At that point, paid employees can use the ham bands for exercises and drills:

(i) A station licensee or station control operator may participate on behalf of an employer in an emergency preparedness or disaster readiness test or drill, limited to the duration and scope of such test or drill, and operational testing immediately prior to such test or drill. Tests or drills that are not government-sponsored are limited to a total time of one hour per week; except that no more than twice in any calendar year, they may be conducted for a period not to exceed 72 hours.

NGO are limited to one hour per week but for two weeks they can be 3 days long. There is no time limit on government-sponsored "drills".

I know that government agencies are doing exactly this, because I've VEd exam sessions where they had employees getting their licenses.

I think the point is not that you need to have v2v/autonomous stuff, but that the problem becomes much more serious when you do. When there's a driver behind the wheel you have some backup; when the passenger is asleep and/or the car has no controls you don't.

Why would they point it towards the ground? You want to point it towards the distance radio. In the hackaday picture, it was pointed slightly above the horizon, which will put a lot more the radiation towards the distant station than pointing it at the ground would.

The antenna was attached to something that would normally be mounted somewhere, but while it was sitting on the table it was pointed a few degrees up. The radiation pattern of a yagi isn't narrow enough that you'd need to worry about being off by a few degrees, either left/right or up/down. It's not a dish.

People sometimes say that debit and credit cards are protected the same way because the limits are the same, but that's not true.

If someone scams your debit card your money is gone until the bank decides you were scammed and puts it back, if they do. If someone scams your credit card your bank account still has money in it and the card issuer sends you a bill that you don't have to pay while the debt is being contested.

I.e., under one system the money you need to feed your family is gone gone gone; in the other you may eventually have to pay it off over time or not. Think of the children, man!

No, they can't. The government can't just say "Joe Smith's dollar bills aren't worth a dollar" as a way of taxing or confiscating his hard money, but they can have the bank hand over the electronic money it is holding on his behalf, or tax him on the balance.

The only thing that a "fiat" can do is devalue everyone's money, which isn't what the OP was talking about.

ProxyHam didn't have an encryption restriction, either, because it wasn't operating under amateur radio service rules. ISM 900MHz.

Is he going to refund the money of everyone who bought an 8-track tape of his stuff? Or is he claiming that 8-tracks aren't low quality so he can avoid having to do that?

If an artist had always allowed (and still allows) black and white versions of his full color works to be sold, I would question his motives if he then claimed that monochrome versions weren't good enough representations of the same works.

The same music that he happily allows to be sold on 8-track or cassette or cheap vinyl. Or on AM radio. You do realize, I hope, that when Neil Young was relevant to anything AM radio was monaural only. That means that the precious stereo sound of his recording was totally lost. And I hope you realize that even the precious stereo of FM radio goes through a horrific pre-emphasis/de-emphasis process to try to reduce noise (which modifies his careful equalization) but it is never completely eliminated. And that stereo is a poor representation of live ambiance.

Let's talk about media not being good enough to allow distribution of a precious "life's work", but let's talk about it before it has gone on for forty years, ok? Especially when some of those media have been the equivalent of tin cans and string compared to today's digital systems that are suddenly "not good enough".

That's right. But irrelevant. He's not saying he won't listen to streaming versions of his songs because they aren't good enough, he's saying NOBODY can listen to streaming versions. Even those people who couldn't tell a woofer from a tweeter or think MP3 means "Monty Python's Third album".

The same hippy era where every hippy car had an 8-track "hi fi", which was "hi fi" in name only. I remember listening to Edgar Winter on someone's 8-track and wondering "why the hell would anyone pay for such crappy reproduction of music?" I especially loved when the tape "ran out" and Frankenstein faded out in the middle of the good part, the tape machine went KLUNK to change tracks, and the music faded back in. Wow. Hi Fi you can hear with your ears and everything!

If there's a principle here, it's don't let your music be sold where you can't reap a good part of the profit. It's certainly not that a modern distribution medium is not good enough but 8-tracks and cassettes are.

Neil Young is available on 8-track and cassette tapes, if you recall what those are. A cassette of "Harvest" can be bought through Amazon for as little as $1.50, or if you are using a high fidelity system composed of oxygen free copper speaker cables, 00 gauge AC power cables (to allow the amps to reproduce the bass better), and typically use a green sharpie on the edges of your CDs, you can get a copy here for only $517.45, shipping included.

If he's willing to allow cassette tapes, he has no excuse for claiming that streaming is not good enough for his music.

No, from the pictures and text in the Hackaday article, it is using this product, which is an unlicensed bridge. (As is the one you link to.) Manufacturers of products that use licensed allocations do not obtain the licenses, it is the end user who does, or one party to the communications (as is done by cellphone providers to cover the licenses for Part 22 cellphone use.)

Manufacturers must have FCC certifications that authorize manufacture and sale of products that meet the technical standards for the intended frequency and regulatory use. If this device did not meet the FCC rules for the intended use, then the FCC could, and would, confiscate the offending products and levy a fine for violation of the rules. They do this on a semi-routine basis when they uncover a dealer who is selling illegal power amplifiers that can be used in the 11m (CB) band.

If "over 200 distributors", including NewEgg, are selling this device, then it is a good assumption that it is not illegal for manufacture or sale. Ubiquity states that this is for unlicensed wireless. Thus use of the device in a system where it is performing its intended function is not the issue.

From here, you will see that the 33cm amateur band runs from 902 to 928MHz, with all modes (except "pulse") authorized for all classes of amateur licensee except novice.

If you want to see what is allocated where, then this chart might be handy. Or this table may be more readable.

If the confusion is that you think a reference to "900 MHz" in marketing documents means 900.000 MHz only, then you should know that, in general, a reference like this means "an allocation somewhere around 900 MHz" and not the exact frequency. For example, when a ham says he's operating on "2 meters", he doesn't mean he's on 150.000 MHz (2 meter wavelength in free space), he's somewhere between 144 and 148 MHz. Likewise, when a public safety agency says they are operating on "700 MHz", they don't mean 700.000MHz, they mean in the allocation for public safety users up near 700 MHz (which actually extends into the 800's.)