N2EY wrote:
In article ,
(Steve
Robeson K4YZ) writes:

Subject: Problem for boaters and APRS?
From: "K=D8HB"
Date: 12/15/2004 10:23 PM Central Standard Time
Message-id: t

A friend sent me the link below. At first I thought it had to be
an April
Fool
joke, but apparently The Shrub really IS that stupid!



http://www.nytimes.com/aponline/nati...ellites.html?e
x=3D1104168601&ei=3D1&en=3D4e6b58c489759881

I'd ask you where you've been, Hans, but I know the question's
rhetorical.

Slick Willy specifically stated that he was authorizing the
deactivation
of accuracy inhibitors for non-military users based upon the pemise
that
American military commanders could re-activate it, or the President
could
order
it's complete isolation from non-authorized users. That was in 1993
or 1994,
I
believe.

IIRC, the accuracy inhibition was turned off just before Gulf War 1
(1991) and
President Clinton simply decided not to turn it back on.

Also IIRC, the effect of accuracy inhibition was to degrade the
accuracy of
"civilian" users to about plus-minus 30 feet.

WHY, Hans, would the United States NOT act to either "desensitize"
the
GPS
net, or completely remove it from use for the criteria set forth in
the
article...?!?!

The article talks about shutting it off. Or parts of it. Seems to me
that
capability should have been a part of it from day one.

I think Hans' point may be that we have become so dependent on GPS
that turning
it off would hurt us more than it would stop the terrorists. The 9/11
attacks
didn't depend on GPS in any way.

There's a reality out there which has been completely missed in this
thread. GPS is not the only game in the sat-nav biz. The Russians have
a similar system up and running and I understand that it's very good.
The EU just announced that they are tossing a massive pile of funds at
the development and deployment of their new system. The Japanese are
mulling the same possibility. Sat-nav systems are not about this
"national security" crappola, it's about a global free-market
competition for YOUR MONEY.

The messages I'm getting are (a) If the androids in DC shut down or
disable precision GPS "in the name of national security" all we'll have
to do eventually is switch to one of it's competitors who could care
less about what the androids do to GPS. (b) GPS will be, or maybe
already is, a lump of artifact technology vs. these newer systems and
could quite conceivably wind up withering to nothingness on this basis.



Or it may be that openly talking about what you're going to do
removes a level
of protection. Terrorists with any sense (yes, an oxymoron) know now
that they
shouldn't depend on GPS.

Is it your contention that, given a set of "extreme criteria"
(attack on
the United States, overt acts of war, etc), that we should leave the
net
"open" regardless...???

What was stated in the article is NOTHING NEW!
=20
Sure it is.=20
=20
73 de Jim, N2EY

w3rv