Call Search
     

New to Ham Radio?
My Profile

Community
Articles
Forums
News
Reviews
Friends Remembered
Strays
Survey Question

Operating
Contesting
DX Cluster Spots
Propagation

Resources
Calendar
Classifieds
Ham Exams
Ham Links
List Archives
News Articles
Product Reviews
QSL Managers

Site Info
eHam Help (FAQ)
Support the site
The eHam Team
Advertising Info
Vision Statement
About eHam.net

donate to eham
   Home   Help Search  
Pages: Prev 1 2 3 4 [5] 6 7 8 9 Next   Go Down
  Print  
Author Topic: Politically Incorrect - Are These Hams ?  (Read 33061 times)
WS3N
Member

Posts: 1258




Ignore
« Reply #60 on: July 20, 2015, 04:48:48 AM »

Quote
My attitude has always been to try and make things better one person at a time.

This is the real reason eHam.com exists.  The only ones here getting flamed are those who ask the simplest of questions; questions that can be answered by simply reading the instruction manuals for their gear or some basic research.  Some here, including myself, gets annoyed with these who get into a technical hobby and just refuse or are too lazy to research basic information about their elected hobby.

LOL.



You guys can go ahead and laugh all you want.....BUT, if you ask anyone with half a brain what a "cycle" is, they can describe it to you.....rather it's an AC cycle or the number of times the water from their pool goes through the filter per hour or day.  Whatever.

When you mention hertz, the first thing that comes to mind is a rent-a-car!  If you mention 60Hz, you can see them vapor-lock!

Stuff like this and the present political bullshit sends me over the edge!

I suppose if you have half a brain then this, like most things, could be a problem. The idea that this unit was introduced simply as an excuse to honor Hertz is silly.

Why do we need an Ampere, when Coulombs per second is more descriptive of a flow of charge, or a Watt, when Joules per second is more descriptive of a rate of energy use? As a matter of fact, one can argue that these units (A and W) are purely a matter of convenience, while the Hz is that and more.

Frequency has dimensions of 1/time. The word "cycle" is insufficient, and "cycles per second" is cumbersome. Would it be preferable to express a power spectral density in Watt-seconds/cycle? Simply dropping the word "cycle" and letting "seconds" carry the dimensions is not a solution, for the concept of frequency will have been lost. A Watt-second, although dimensionally correct, looks like time-integrated power, whereas Watt/Hz is not only compact and dimensionally correct, but it also conveys the intended idea of a density in frequency, so that Hz and 1/s are not fully equivalent.

I'm sure you would be hard-pressed to find a practicing scientist or engineer - someone who actually works with measurements and equations on a daily basis - who would agree with you.


To be blunt I have no idea what you're talking about! 

I'm not sure what you mean by this. Are you disagreeing with my arguments or telling me that you don't understand the content?

I don't understand the content, and please don't try explaining it to me.  I supposed this is what is meant by "ignorance being bliss." 

I have been listening to politicians explain simple problems with "politico talk" for a very long time.  I usually classify such answers and BS because simple explanations for simple problems that simple people understand isn't that difficult. Unless the answer doesn't fit the agenda.

Whenever I read an "explanation" such as yours, I put it in the Bullshit and Bluster file. Sorry, it isn't worth getting all worked up about.

Don't worry, I wouldn't waste my time trying to explain it to you.

Ignorance is bliss, indeed. You not only admit to not understanding the content of my post (very simple dimensional arguments) but proudly proclaim that you're not interested in learning. Then, you go on to say that the thing you admittedly don't understand is BS.

Here's a quote that perfectly describes you.

"You can't fix stupid!"

Logged
KD8MJR
Member

Posts: 5053




Ignore
« Reply #61 on: July 20, 2015, 11:58:43 AM »

I have not waded through all of this thread but I have looked at several pages.

All I can say is that most kids I have encountered today are much better educated than kids of my generation but they typically lack drive or motivation to go in any one direction, they are either content to live with their parents till they are 50 or they are depressed that they cannot turn into millionaires overnight.  The overall problem that I see is a lack of patience and a need for instant gratification, we can thank bad parenting along with the PC, Internet and TV for that one.

For those kids who are motivated and focused, I would stack them up against any kid from the 1950's educational system.  We have come across some brilliant engineers, they may not be into RF stuff but they can work magic in the digital arena, coming up with really good circuit designs and they can lay down low level computer code at an unbelievable rate.   Some of these guys will stay up for 20 hours straight each day for a week to get a project done.

Whenever you feel your so brilliant and they are so dumb, I suggest you go out and buy an FPGA starter kit and try to learn how to make that work.  I guarantee you that it will be a humbling experience,

Ham Radio is just really old tech, I have tried discussing it with a few really good younger engineers and their minds cannot get past the point of "Why Bother".  To them it's like saying to a 1960's engineer lets send messages from Texas to California via Carrier Pigeon.

The point I am trying to make is that the best and brightest engineers that are produced today would not even think about Ham Radio as a hobby or even a method of communication.

« Last Edit: July 20, 2015, 12:06:26 PM by KD8MJR » Logged

“A lie can travel half way around the world while the truth is putting on its shoes.”  (Mark Twain)
G3RZP
Member

Posts: 8141




Ignore
« Reply #62 on: July 20, 2015, 02:10:18 PM »

Quote
The point I am trying to make is that the best and brightest engineers that are produced today would not even think about Ham Radio as a hobby or even a method of communication.

This leads me to wonder 'Do they know what radio is and what RF Engineering is?'  Being brilliant at digital stuff is fine, but there's still a requirement for RF expertise. After all, it was brilliant digital engineering that led to the great  cock up around the USAF radar stations using 432 MHz that required the amateur repeaters to close down. When the processing was analog, the radars weren't jammed by the repeaters....

I'm somewhat surprised that Congress hasn't got onto this massive DoD error.....
Logged
AF6LJ
Member

Posts: 372




Ignore
« Reply #63 on: July 20, 2015, 02:29:08 PM »



Quote
When it is all said and done we have nobody but ourselves to blame for the condition of the bands, the level of education of the newcomers, and the unwillingness of some to abide by the rules.

Perhaps you can explain that statement to me.  When the bands are controlled by the FCC and influenced by the ARRL, how does that come down to "nobody to blame but ourselves?"

As for the intelligence level of the newcomers, as a rule they are very well educated....not stupid people. 

As for those "unwilling to abide by the rules," I am truly baffled by these lids.  As a rule they are the older generation operators.  It's upsetting to see those that were once leaders or examples to the younger generation become what they are.



Yes the FCC is the overseeing regulatory agency, we as amateurs are relegated to self police, that doesn't mean we go out and take stations that belong to jammers and tar and feather them. What it means at leas to me; is we do some education of new hams regarding the rules and (some may disagree with this) discourage the kind lf behavior seen on other non amateur bands. In the example sited earlier on this thread someone should have let the techs know they were not supposed to be operating on twenty meters.

After all if rats get into your house you do something about it...
These bands are our home...

I hope that helps.

 
Logged

Take Care
Sue,
AF6LJ
K8AXW
Member

Posts: 6361




Ignore
« Reply #64 on: July 21, 2015, 10:47:34 AM »

I'm sorry Sue, but your "rats" analogy simply doesn't fly.  When rats get into your home you trap/kill them.  When you're dealing with obnoxious people he problem becomes more complicated and needs to be dealt with by one who has the biggest stick....the FCC. That's how you deal with human "rats."  Unfortunately, the ARRL (which I have been a member for almost 50 years and support them because they are the only thing between us and 'no ham radio') has been a contributor to the present day situation.  They are naturally governed by numbers, both membership and money. 

As an old man who has time on his hands, I've given this problem a lot of thought and have concluded that it is a sign of the times and there is NO answer.  This applies not only to ham radio but to our way of life in general.

I think if you stop for a few minutes and look at the problems we now face in the world, from nukes to our social lives, you will see that we are in a steady decline.

Call this a fatalistic outlook if you will, but only those who are blind, deaf or delusional will disagree. 

(Actually Sue, some who try to 'correct' these problems on the air only contribute to the chaos we now see on some frequencies)

Logged
AF6LJ
Member

Posts: 372




Ignore
« Reply #65 on: July 21, 2015, 10:57:37 AM »

I'm sorry Sue, but your "rats" analogy simply doesn't fly.  When rats get into your home you trap/kill them.  When you're dealing with obnoxious people he problem becomes more complicated and needs to be dealt with by one who has the biggest stick....the FCC. That's how you deal with human "rats."  Unfortunately, the ARRL (which I have been a member for almost 50 years and support them because they are the only thing between us and 'no ham radio') has been a contributor to the present day situation.  They are naturally governed by numbers, both membership and money. 

As an old man who has time on his hands, I've given this problem a lot of thought and have concluded that it is a sign of the times and there is NO answer.  This applies not only to ham radio but to our way of life in general.

I think if you stop for a few minutes and look at the problems we now face in the world, from nukes to our social lives, you will see that we are in a steady decline.

Call this a fatalistic outlook if you will, but only those who are blind, deaf or delusional will disagree. 

(Actually Sue, some who try to 'correct' these problems on the air only contribute to the chaos we now see on some frequencies)


We can slow the decline of society and amateur radio.
The best way to deal with the ham misfits is to shun them, don't talk to them, don't work them in contests, don't go to the RF ghettos they hang out in. If one calls you ignore them, you don't hear them. The less we interact with them the fewer chances they have to interact with hams in general.

Going into the reasons for this decline of civilization is beyond the scope of this thread, this has happened before and we could learn a great deal from history, at least what history has not been altered to reflect favorably on those who are to blame.
Logged

Take Care
Sue,
AF6LJ
N2EY
Member

Posts: 4455




Ignore
« Reply #66 on: July 21, 2015, 07:22:10 PM »

When rats get into your home you trap/kill them.  When you're dealing with obnoxious people he problem becomes more complicated and needs to be dealt with by one who has the biggest stick....the FCC. That's how you deal with human "rats."

Yes, but there's more to it.

Another thing you do with "rats" is to make it as difficult as possible for them to get into your home. If they are kept out, you don't need to rid your house of them.

Unfortunately, the ARRL (which I have been a member for almost 50 years and support them because they are the only thing between us and 'no ham radio') has been a contributor to the present day situation.  They are naturally governed by numbers, both membership and money.

How has the ARRL contributed to the current situation?

I've been an active radio amateur since 1967, an ARRL member since 1968, and have studied the history extensively. From what I have seen, ARRL has consistently tried to keep the quality high.  

As an old man who has time on his hands, I've given this problem a lot of thought and have concluded that it is a sign of the times and there is NO answer.  This applies not only to ham radio but to our way of life in general.

I think if you stop for a few minutes and look at the problems we now face in the world, from nukes to our social lives, you will see that we are in a steady decline.

I disagree strongly. What we're seeing overall is CHANGE, not decline.

Call this a fatalistic outlook if you will, but only those who are blind, deaf or delusional will disagree.

Not true. Also beside the point.

What I've seen happening in Amateur Radio is the combination of several factors:

It used to be that FCC ACTIVELY enforced the regulations. They monitored the amateur bands and sent out LOTS of warnings and notices of violation to licensees. Repeat offenders were fined, lost licenses, had equipment seized, etc. And all this happened quickly - in weeks and months, not years.

If you don't believe me, there were a couple of articles in QST in 1965 or 1965 about FCC monitoring and
enforcement practices back then. Look them up and see just how actively FCC enforced the rules.

Now, in those days, most of the violations were "technical" rather than "operational" - things like straying out of band, overmodulation splatter, harmonics, etc., rather than intentional jamming, foul language, failure to ID, etc. Which was to be expected, given the technology in use by most hams of the day. Regardless, the FCC's ACTIVE enforcement sent a clear message that FCC was listening and would take action.

Nowadays, FCC does much less enforcement that a half-century ago, and what is done takes much longer. The reason for this is simple: back in the late 1970s and early 1980s, the "small government" mantra took over, and FCC cut WAY bacl on active enforcement. For years there was practically nothing, until constant entreaties by ARRL and others got us Riley Hollingsworth and now Laura Smith. But their resources are limited.

FCC became hands-off in other ways, too. The VE system, while it helped increase access to exams, took away the direct interaction with FCC that most of us went through to get our licenses "back when". FCC forced the VE system on us due to budget constraints.

Another factor is....economic. Decades ago, even a modest amateur station required a considerable investment of time/money/effort to set up - much more so than today. Just look at what a middle-of-the-pack station cost 40/50 years ago, adjusted for inflation.

Then there was the whole licensing process. For most newcomers, getting started meant a considerable amount of time and effort learning code and theory to pass the tests. Not that the tests were "hard" - they weren't - but they DID require some serious learning effort on the part of most newcomers. Today we have "Technician in a day" classes, but in the past, there was no such thing as a "Novice in a day" class, because what needed to be learned for the Novice license could not be learned in a day or a week, except perhaps by less than 1% of the population.

We can talk endlessly about "self-policing" and "shunning" and such, and we should do those things. But we also need the Big Stick of the FCC; amateurs can't do it by themselves. Nor should they; vigilantism is not how a civilized society operates.

There is no easy solution, but there ARE solutions.

One of the most important is to set a good example - to do Amateur Radio to the best of our ability. That doesn't mean big fancy stations; it means good operating practice and good engineering practice, whatever we do. It means following ALL the rules ALL the time. It means constantly seeking to know more and do things better. Etc.

Another is to keep after our elected representatives, and FCC, to enforce the regulations. If that means more money for FCC, so be it.

Most of all, we need to focus on the good. From what I see and hear, 99% of US hams follow the rules, because it's the right thing to do. The "bad apples" are a tiny, tiny minority - they stick out BECAUSE they are a tiny minority!

73 de Jim, N2EY



Logged
K8AXW
Member

Posts: 6361




Ignore
« Reply #67 on: July 21, 2015, 09:25:40 PM »

Quote
I disagree strongly. What we're seeing overall is CHANGE, not decline.

Jim, You make my point precisely! We are seeing change and the change is declining.  (Like "hope and change")  How are you liking THAT one?   Roll Eyes

The ARRL has NOT tried to keep the "quality high."  The last time the ARRL tried to keep the quality high was when they introduced "Incentive Licensing."  Since then they've encouraged the dismantling of the licensing structure with No Code, Question Pools shorter and easier testing and VAs.

You mentioned "keeping the rats out."  What the ARRL has done is let the rats in!  BUT, please, let's not use the word rats.  This is totally wrong.  The new hams are definitely NOT rats!  It was an analogy that's been carried over...so let's just simply say they have made it very easy to get a ham ticket.  Consequently, we now see more and more emulation of the the CB band operation. 

And, once again, it was because the number of new hams was getting lower and lower.  It became necessary to lower standards to get the numbers up.  This went hand in hand with the new advertisers for ham gear which was necessary to keep the ARRL afloat.

I agree with you 100% Sue....the lids that have been causing such an uproar should be shunned.  Problem is that won't work either.  It seems than one attracts the second like minded and then the third and it keeps growing.  Then you have those who simply can't keep their mouths shut and feel they must take these lids to task over their poor operating habits......which is what the lids want.

Bottom line, decline.....no answer(s).....signs of the times.

Logged
N2EY
Member

Posts: 4455




Ignore
« Reply #68 on: July 21, 2015, 10:27:05 PM »

Quote
I disagree strongly. What we're seeing overall is CHANGE, not decline.

Jim, You make my point precisely! We are seeing change and the change is declining.  (Like "hope and change")  How are you liking THAT one?   Roll Eyes

I think we've made great progress in many areas since 2009. But that's a different subject...\

The ARRL has NOT tried to keep the "quality high."  The last time the ARRL tried to keep the quality high was when they introduced "Incentive Licensing."  Since then they've encouraged the dismantling of the licensing structure with No Code, Question Pools shorter and easier testing and VAs.

No, they haven't. You're blaming the wrong people.

It was FCC, not ARRL, that pushed for reduction and elimination of code testing.

It was FCC, not ARRL, that pushed the question pools and VE system on us,

It was FCC, not ARRL, that reduced the number of license classes and the overall testing requirements.

The plain and simple fact is that FCC made all these changes to save themselves money and resources.

Consider the question pools and VE system. It used to be that FCC made up the tests and administered most of them. FCC had offices in many cities, plus traveling examiners. All of them were paid Federal employees, with benefits and expenses paid. And remember, except for a few years in the late 1960s and early 1970s, it was all FREE for hams!

Then they created the VE system and the question pools - and, POOF, the work that used to be done by paid Federal employees was taken over by unpaid volunteers. (Yes, they charge a fee, but all it covers is postage, duplicating cost, facility rental, etc.)

ARRL was AGAINST the VE/QPC system - but it was a done deal from the beginning. Same for the code-test reductions and elimination - FCC wanted it to go away as early as 1975.

You mentioned "keeping the rats out."  What the ARRL has done is let the rats in!

HOW?

ARRL doesn't make the rules. FCC does. All ARRL, or anybody else, can do is propose, comment, and protest.

And remember, it wasn't just amateur licenses. There used to be multiple classes of Commercial operator license too - Radiotelephone and Radiotelegraph. The various Radiotelephone licenses were replaced by the GROL. The Radiotelegraph licenses still exist, in theory anyway - a few Second Class are issued per year. (The First Class still exists in theory, but there one of the requirements for First is a year's experience at a station, and no stations exist to get such experience!)

All Commercial license exams have been done by contractors for 30+ years. Typical fee is $100.

  BUT, please, let's not use the word rats.  This is totally wrong.  The new hams are definitely NOT rats! 

Nobody says they are. "Rats" means those few - old as well as new - who are troublemakers. Who don;t follow the rules, etc.

It was an analogy that's been carried over...so let's just simply say they have made it very easy to get a ham ticket.  Consequently, we now see more and more emulation of the the CB band operation. 

That trend started all the way back in the 1970s. FCC lost control of cb.

And, once again, it was because the number of new hams was getting lower and lower.  It became necessary to lower standards to get the numbers up.  This went hand in hand with the new advertisers for ham gear which was necessary to keep the ARRL afloat.

Except that the numbers don't bear that out. Once again, it was FCC, not ARRL, that pushed the changes on us.

the lids that have been causing such an uproar should be shunned.  Problem is that won't work either.  It seems than one attracts the second like minded and then the third and it keeps growing.  Then you have those who simply can't keep their mouths shut and feel they must take these lids to task over their poor operating habits......which is what the lids want.

There were bad apples back in the past, too. The difference was that FCC would jump on them and shut them down - fast.

73 de Jim, N2EY
Logged
WI8P
Member

Posts: 604




Ignore
« Reply #69 on: July 22, 2015, 05:22:06 AM »

Perhaps if the FCC were allowed to keep the fines instead of having to turn them into the government, we would see stricter policing of the offenders. I don't know, just throwing it out there.  Huh
Logged
N2EY
Member

Posts: 4455




Ignore
« Reply #70 on: July 22, 2015, 05:47:16 AM »

Perhaps if the FCC were allowed to keep the fines instead of having to turn them into the government, we would see stricter policing of the offenders. I don't know, just throwing it out there.  Huh

Maybe - or maybe not. It probably costs far more to levy and collect "fines" (IIRC they call them something else, but the meaning is the same) than the "fines" themselves would yield.

AFAIK, no Federal agency gets to keep the "fines" they collect. I think the idea is to avoid corruption.

All IMHO.

73 de Jim, N2EY
Logged
AF6LJ
Member

Posts: 372




Ignore
« Reply #71 on: July 22, 2015, 05:58:16 AM »

Perhaps if the FCC were allowed to keep the fines instead of having to turn them into the government, we would see stricter policing of the offenders. I don't know, just throwing it out there.  Huh
That wouldn't change things in a positive way as a matter of fact it might make for an oppressive regulatory agency.
Logged

Take Care
Sue,
AF6LJ
K1ZJH
Member

Posts: 3327




Ignore
« Reply #72 on: July 22, 2015, 08:43:10 AM »

Perhaps if the FCC were allowed to keep the fines instead of having to turn them into the government, we would see stricter policing of the offenders. I don't know, just throwing it out there.  Huh

Maybe - or maybe not. It probably costs far more to levy and collect "fines" (IIRC they call them something else, but the meaning is the same) than the "fines" themselves would yield.

AFAIK, no Federal agency gets to keep the "fines" they collect. I think the idea is to avoid corruption.

All IMHO.

73 de Jim, N2EY

Regardless, the courts are making it extremely difficult to collect the fines... "free speech" and other issues enter the fray and the miscreants get a free ride.

Pete
Logged
N2EY
Member

Posts: 4455




Ignore
« Reply #73 on: July 22, 2015, 10:20:45 AM »

Regardless, the courts are making it extremely difficult to collect the fines... "free speech" and other issues enter the fray and the miscreants get a free ride.

The First Amendment does come into play.....

I mean, in order to go after someone for the content of their transmissions, there has to be a clear definition of what is and isn't acceptable - right? Otherwise all sorts of things could get someone in trouble. Look at all the battles FCC has with broadcasters.

The thing is, in the bad old days, FCC would ACTIVELY listen to the amateur bands for violations, and go after them FAST. And they'd get them,
too, because of the fast action.

Maybe they can't go after someone for saying certain words or going off on certain subjects. But they can - and do - go after folks for things
like not IDing properly, not having a control operator, etc. - but only after many many complaints from other amateurs.

73 de Jim, N2EY
Logged
PITSWL
Member

Posts: 176




Ignore
« Reply #74 on: July 22, 2015, 11:32:27 AM »

The best way to deal with the ham misfits is to shun them, don't talk to them, don't work them in contests, don't go to the RF ghettos they hang out in. If one calls you ignore them, you don't hear them. The less we interact with them the fewer chances they have to interact with hams in general.

This.
Logged

"Section 97.101(d) prohibits ALL amateur licensees from causing harmful interference, and does not provide ANY exception for interference caused to other amateurs whom the interferer believes have violated a Commission rule." - DA 16-877 at 17
Pages: Prev 1 2 3 4 [5] 6 7 8 9 Next   Go Up
  Print  
 
Jump to:  

Powered by MySQL Powered by PHP Powered by SMF 1.1.11 | SMF © 2006-2009, Simple Machines LLC Valid XHTML 1.0! Valid CSS!