ARRL's "private game preserve"

[Dave Farber <dave () farber net>]

Delivered-To: dfarber+ () ux13 sp cs cmu edu
Date: Wed, 29 Oct 2003 15:45:44 -0800
From: Dewayne Hendricks <dewayne () warpspeed com>

[Note:  This comment comes from reader Steve Schear.  DLH]

At 15:09 -0800 10/29/03, Steve Schear wrote:
> Date: Wed, 29 Oct 2003 15:09:56 -0800
> To: "David P. Reed" <dpreed () reed com>
> From: Steve Schear <s.schear () comcast net>
> Subject: Re: [Dewayne-Net] ARRL's "private game preserve"
> Cc: dewayne () warpspeed com
>
>
> > At 15:26 -0500 10/29/03, David P. Reed wrote:
> > > Date: Wed, 29 Oct 2003 15:26:33 -0500
> > > To: dewayne () warpspeed com,
> > >         "Dewayne-Net Technology List" <dewayne-net () warpspeed com>
> > > From: "David P. Reed" <dpreed () reed com>
> > > Subject: ARRL's "private game preserve"
> > >
> > > It's becoming increasingly clear to me that the ARRL (which does NOT 
> > > represent all hams) has begun to think of itself as a "spectrum owner" - 
> > > which it is NOT.   Hams who are not ARRL members might want to file 
> > > amicus briefs making this clear to the courts - that the ARRL does not 
> > > necessarily represent their interests in the spectrum they hold licenses to.
> > >
> > > As an R&D investment, the amateur bands appear to me to have had a piss 
> > > poor return in recent years - they have played very little role in 
> > > advancing the radio arts for a decade or more - instead they are 
> > > becoming a Luddite force that views anything new as bad.
> > >
> > > A true spirit of amateur radio would not be working at protecting their 
> > > ancient radio systems from "harmful interference" - instead they would 
> > > be working on ways to share bands with new and more effective 
> > > technologies and high density deployments.   They would not be working 
> > > to preserve "scarcity" but being constructive about solutions that 
> > > accomodate unbounded scaling of the number of users in a band - in other 
> > > words to create abundance.
> > >
> > > If they can't be constructive, perhaps we should replace the amateur 
> > > bands with amateur radio NETWORKING bands, where unlicensed radio 
> > > networks that can scale are mandated.
> > >
> > > Free the Ham Bands!
>
> Here, here.  A long ago let my ARRL membership lapse.  I lost interest in 
> dealing with the on-line prima donnas that frequent their ranks.  All the 
> fun radio stuff (e.g., truly random FFH in HF for anti-fade) is prohibited 
> in the ham bands. Any radio enthusiast who wants to advance the radio arts 
> will likely be playing in the unlicensed bands or operating outside the 
> regulations in the amateur bands.
>
> steve

Archives at: <http://Wireless.Com/Dewayne-Net>
Weblog at: <http://weblog.warpspeed.com>


-------------------------------------
You are subscribed as interesting-people () lists elistx com
To manage your subscription, go to
 http://v2.listbox.com/member/?listname=ip

Archives at: http://www.interesting-people.org/archives/interesting-people/