On Jul 28, 2:35�am, John Smith wrote:

However, there are those who are like me, basically, we envision
communication for what it is--freqs, protocols, purposes, reasons,
traditional-justifications/historical-justifications, equipment,
firmware, software, etc. be damned ...

There's a fundamental problem with that viewpoint - see below.

we/I see amateur
radio simply
interfacing to the net as seamlessly as the other forms of
communications are/have done ...
I frequently use magicjack/voip--I am
certain this worries AT&T ... the possibilities with amateur
radio are
mind boggling -- and YET to be developed.

There's a difference between what can be done and what should be done.

This means, your amateur broadcast may begin on your xmitter,
transverse
a cell tower, a hard phone-line, a trans-atlantic cable, satellite, etc.
before it arrives at the fellow amateurs' shack--in Australia!--and
the packets decoded to voice/video/data.

The problem is that such a mindset as you describe misses a
fundamental point about what amateur radio is all about. Indeed, it
misses a fundamental point about what *life* is all about.

What you describe is what could be described as "the mindset of the
destination" or "the mindset of the message". Meaning all that matters
is getting there, not the method or the journey. And for a lot of
things, that's perfectly OK; I don't really care what exact path or
technology routes my phone call or my email as long as it gets there
reliably and at low cost. Most people don't care if the TV show they
watch is delivered by magnetic tape, optical disc, RF in the air, RF
in a cable, or light in a fiber, it's the program content that matters
to them.

But there's another mindset to consider as well, which can be
described as "the mindset of the method" or "the mindset of the
journey". It's the mindset where the route, the technology, the
experience, etc., *do* make a difference to the person. In many cases
the journey is more important than the destination. And it's a big
part of what Amateur Radio is all about.

Because one of the main reason for Amateur Radio to exist is that it
is "radio for its own sake". A thing done for its own intrinsic value
to the doer, not just for the final result.

It's like asking why anyone goes fishing non-professionally when they
can buy fish cheaper at the market. Or why anyone rides a bike, walks
or runs when they have a perfectly good car, or cooks when they can go
to a restaurant. Why anyone would paint or draw when there are
perfectly good cameras of many types.

The answer is that they are doing those things for the doing, not just
for the end result. A QSO from my radio to another ham's, direct by
ionosphere, troposphere, aurora, etc., is not the same journey as a
net-simulation, just as my homemade bread is not the same as a loaf
bought in a store.

More than ten years ago, I saw discussions about how practically all
that we radio amateurs do on HF from fixed points could be done on the
net using various forms of simulation/emulation. And I'm sure it could
be done.

The folks who proposed this simply didn't understand the difference
between the journey and the destination.

That difference is very important.

---

There's another factor: Having an alternate system. Too much
dependence on a single system is not always a good thing, because when
(not if) that system fails there's no alternative - no backup. Too
much dependence on a single system also stifles creativity because all
thought tends to be conditioned to that system.

--

None of this means Amateur Radio must never ever connect to the 'net
or to other communications systems. What it does mean is that such
connections are an enhancement and/or interface, not a replacement for
"A Boy And His Radio" (to use K0HB's phrase).

73 de Jim, N2EY