Well, I really do appreciate that we keep folks who can't articulate themselves without resorting to swear words out of the ham community, and that they have to take a test as well. The people we talk with on ham radio meet a higher standard than you'd meet in the local bar, or come to think of it, on Slashdot. And I'm not the slightest bit interested in lowering that standard.

Sorry, but gas mileage has not sored due to well written, but complex code. It has gotten of the ground [sored my ass] due to forced regulations. The Department of Energy asked every major auto manufacture in 1990 to be part of a DoE Engine efficiency project where everyone must submit a 90mpg automobile. They all did it. Not a single one exists on the market to this day. How come? They weren't forced to release them. They didn't reach improved Carnot engine cycles because of some embedded system: they used different composite materials in the engine block allowing doubling and more heat to burn the fuel more efficiently. End of story.

Have you considered that people who already regularly get pussy don't need to take charity from corporations in order to have a nice pair of tits in their face?

Yes, that's exactly right.

I appreciate a pretty woman (and, fortunately, am married to one), but I'd rather not have that appreciation manipulated for someone else's commercial gain.

I resent that some business is attempting to grab me by the balls rather than by my rational self.

Wouldn't this make the medium a much more relevant and useful tool in the modern age

No, it really would not.

What it would make it is duplicative of functionality of internet, the cellular network, WiFi and WiMAX, and point-to-point links on Part 15 bands. You can already use all of those to do whatever you want, including commercial and obscene material.

One of the most important means of preserving it as a sandbox for experimenters is that the whole commercial world is excluded. So, there's room for us.

There was a science fiction story about what happened when it became possible to screen for the "gay" gene, and that screening was expected to lead to the extinction of homosexuality.

We'd better think about this stuff before it becomes possible.

Martin,

I think you missed the point that we are talkinig about radio.

When people fill a page with noise on Slashdot, they aren't really using up a scarce resource. Slashdot would just get more servers if they ran out of bandwidth to present blather to readers. So, the only thing that's really being wasted is the reader's time, and the reader has mechanisms to avoid that such as moderation, and I think "foe" lists (I haven't tried them).

On radio, in contrast, frequencies in which to operate are a scarce resource. So, that noise is getting in the way of a more useful communication. And while we can tune off the channel, we don't have an infinite supply of other channels to use.

The situation is made worse by radio propogation, which makes many of the frequencies we do have unusable for much of the time; by issues like the hidden-transmitter problem, which make frequencies that might appear usable by one station unusable by the one he's trying to talk with; and by various incompatible sharing partners, the worst being PAVE PAWS out here in California. So, frequencies in which you can do something useful become scarce.

So, we have valid reasons to keep as much noise as possible off of the Amateur bands.

You're the guy who quoted from a far-right nutcase site and named them "a reliable source". It just doesn't work to blather anyhing you want using garbage for substantion and expect anyone with sense to buy your arguments.

Hopefully they'll teach you better by the time you're out of middle school.

I think you should pull off a successful non-profit project like Codec2 for the good of all Amateur Radio (and lots of the world outside of Amateur Radio) before you question my motives. That one really isn't called for.

The motive is to keep it open. That's really simple.

I continue to reject the premise that since there could be possible abuses that might not be handled by the rule or might not be caught, that we must allow all possible abuses. I don't leave my doors unlocked because a burglar might break the window.

It's from news media quoiting peopple who have no substantiation. In other words, it's B.S.

The QRZ survey numbers can be compared to the IARU survey of 2000.

But that's a bizarre argument. Many uses other than encryption might also do this (lets say, hypothetically, that it was indeed a Public Radio Entropy Source)

So, we're going to take an empty channel, filled with random noise, and replace it with a transmission filled with random noise! Which will be less random than what we started with.

I'm not impressed yet :-)

Go on believing that steganography can't be detected. I'd rather be able to watch you, if necessary, than not.

To say that you're not using real sources would be an understatement. The middle one is someone's entertaining list of things that they think will go extinct, offered more as comedy than anything else. The first is a 7-year-old interview with someone in Quatar, which just got Ham Radio around then, who offers no sources to substantiate his statement. And you seem to be assuming that the retirees cited by ARRL will all die and not be replaced, and the emergency groups will find something else to do, which makes no sense. But you are also relying on ARRL which has not presented any substantive survey on this issue.

QRZ, unlike ARRL, operates an online callbook, and thus can actually count the number of hams in many nations. Their survey is here. You need something with at least that much data to be taken seriously.

So, you're proposing that since we might not be able to detect steganography, that we allow all possible use of encryption. However, the first example would have to be well enough hidden that it would not make significant use of a scarce resource, and thus that resource would not be denied to others. The second example would potentially lock lots of people out of many frequencies that would be in exclusive use for private communications.

Also, don't assume that we can not detect steganography and intruders in general. There is a very active community that does just that.

Right and within 1 year the number of GPGPUs sold via their custom APUs inside Consoles with be 6:1 to 10:1 of your sales. They are in the new Wii, PS4 and XBox. They're expanding their small-to-mid-tier server footprint [beginning to own that space] and with more and more laptops using AMD APUs will begin to own that space. Their partnership with ARM will make them an attractive provider for future Smart TVs, and other embedded products not even yet projected out. AMD is going to be in the black very shortly.

http://www.istockanalyst.com/finance/story/6474155/3-v-checking-fbr-capital-markets-5-50-advanced-micro-devices-inc-amd-price-target ``Later in the report, Rolland added, `Whereas four months ago many investors were questioning AMD as an ongoing entity, today, we believe financial stability has been secured by next-gen gaming APU wins, with potential upside driven by new initiatives like SeaMicro. While AMD's recent woes remain fresh in mind, the business looks as though it has stabilized for now, and cash levels should remain sufficient for the near future.'

Obviously, investors are attracted by the possibility of a 35.8% return within a 12 month timeframe. If Rolland is correct, that's sort of like having your own ATM. Let's examine Advanced Micro Devices' five-year history for price-to-book (P/B), price-to-sales (P/S), and trailing price-to-earnings (P/E) to see if the analyst's price-tag is realistic.

While we have this AMD conversation, the street values the company at 6.98 times its book value; whereas, competitor Intel Corporation (INTC) trades with a P/B value of 2.34. To get to $5.50 based on the current book value of $0.58 per share, AMD would trade at 9.48 times book, well above the five year average of 4.78, but below the max of 17.06.

Since Wall Street expects AMD to lose $0.25 per share in 2013, we'll have to work with 2014's consensus profit estimate of $0.04 for our P/E analysis. A price-target of $5.50 requires a P/E of 137.5; whew, feeling a little light headed from the high altitude. How about you? It is dizzying as AMD's highest P/E in the last five-years has been 22.07. Five-fifty seems to be a little out-of-reach based on P/E. "

he petitioner is not asking for encryption to be allowed for all traffic on all ham bands, as you have suggested at your site

With good governance, it would go that way. With bad governance, any abuser will be able to claim that they were performing a test or drill of emergency communications, and we will have no way to prove otherwise.

Since the petitioner was completely unaware of HSMM-MESH until yesterday, he didn't consider all of the possible abuses, and did not propose any governance means to deal with them.