![]() |
"Chesty Puller" wrote in message ... "Kim" wrote in message m... "Dan/W4NTI" wrote in message ink.net... Yes she did....then proceeded to show us how ignorant she was/is. Proof positive of the dumbing down of Amateur Radio....IMHO. Dan/W4NTI And, you're proof positive of what alcohol can do to a 1/2 way decent mind. Kim W5TIT I think you ****ed her off Dan. I hope so. Dan/W4NTI |
|
|
|
My neighbor just got a 7500 NAL to pay. He lives in a falling down trailor
and his wife works to support him. Oh...he is a Freebander, or should I say...he was a Freebander. And you call hams stupid? Dan/W4NTI "Freebander" wrote in message news:iog26rbfbpcu5du.010720051029@kirk... is it possible for a bunch of ancient/decrepit old men to get more anemic, senile, ridiculous, loathsome or "dumbed down?" amateurs take all the prizes when it come to stupidity "Kim" wrote in message m... "Dan/W4NTI" wrote in message ink.net... Yes she did....then proceeded to show us how ignorant she was/is. Proof positive of the dumbing down of Amateur Radio....IMHO. Dan/W4NTI And, you're proof positive of what alcohol can do to a 1/2 way decent mind. Kim W5TIT |
Dee:
I don't know about how the laws cover physics in your neck of the woods, but here it goes like this: The "bandwidth" of my phoneline just happens to be about 300 hz to 5000 hz (this can vary widely with equip--but the phone company pretty well guarantees this minimum) and, my computer modem uses this "audio bandwidth" to send/recv data at speeds up to 5.7K bytes per second. Now, I just happen to know a guy with a transceiver which he put mic level jacks on to interface with a transceiver and a USRobotics external 57K modem and set to software flow control and ignore the fact there is NO DC carrier voltage on the line. Since the transceiver he hooked the modem to has a modified audio recv/xmit bandwidth of approx ~100 Hz to ~8K he has PLENTY OF BANDWIDTH. .... now really, a high school student should be able to manage this--indeed, the one I seen did... the USR modem takes care of data compaction and error control--pretty straight forward really... I expect the other hams will "discover" and present this "revolutionary" idea within the next decade. grin .... from there it was a simple matter to take/input the audio from/to the transceiver from the computer sound card and do enhanced encryption/compaction by means of software on the digital signals--basically you find very similar in cutting edge technologies--and while I am not 100% certain--I would almost bet it is done nearly 100% in a similar fashion... being a software engineer, I can almost guarantee that part--I am a little less sure about how they implement the hardware and I rather doubt it is an ancient 56K phone modem ROFLOL!!! Works equally well for data/voice/video. That is all taken care of in software, you simply need to know what type of data you are getting, if you try to interpret voice as text or the opposite--I am sure you can see there would be a problem... I might add, the first time I seen this done was over five years ago... so really, the hams may have it as quickly as another five years! innocent look John "Dee Flint" wrote in message ... "John Smith" wrote in message ... Dee: The only person talking 300 baud is you, I told you to throw away that 300 baud modem and get a decent one (or revamp an old phone modem to your needs.) Since you didn't even understand that, you certainly won't grasp the rest... John Well it just happens to be against the rules to use higher than 300 baud on HF so that is the limit that the data/video/audio signal must fit within. There is a very good reason for that limit. The higher the baud rate, the greater the bandwidth required, and the fewer users can fit on the band. And eventually you hit a baud rate where the required bandwidth is such that one signal won't stay within the upper and lower band edges. Now if you're talking VHF, it's already been done and your "bright, new minds" are a day late and a dollar short. Since you don't understand that, you certainly won't grasp the rest.... Dee D. Flint, N8UZE |
"Kim" wrote in message ... "Dan/W4NTI" wrote in message nk.net... "Michael Coslo" wrote in message ... Kim wrote: "Michael Coslo" wrote in message ... What is more important: 1. Having a license that allows HF access. 2. Not having to learn Morse code. IOW, is standing on principle, and refusing to learn Morse code a better thing than learning it to get the priveliges? - Mike KB3EIA - Hi Mike: I think you know I don't "hate" Morse Code. I, personally, never really wished to try it out; just like I have never really tried SCTV, anything digital (except for APRS--if that can be considered digital), ATV, etc. I think you get my point. Since I have ever first perused this newsgroup, except for a few real jerks, I'd believe that most of "us" who just don't wander into other means of communication--including Morse Code--are pretty much the same as I am. I absolutely support those who use the mode (as I do anyone who uses and/or invents any other modes), am willing to honor the tradition of Morse Code (as I honor the tradition of other steadfast things in amateur radio), and hold no animosity for anyone--OTHER than the "idiots" on both sides of the floor (as it would be stated in political terms :o). For me, it was never a matter of wanting HF privileges that much, and I learned the 5wpm needed to get the privileges I was happy with. So, could you do me a favor? Please rethink your phrase "Morse Code Haters." I don't think most of us feel that strongly about it. Yeah, "haters" was the wrong choice of word in retrospect. - Mike KB3EIA - No it's not Mike. There are Morse Code haters out there. Lennie the loser is one of the main ones. Dan/W4NTI You're just this side of the CB mentality. Pppfffffftttttttt Kim W5TIT I wouldn't know Twit. But I guarantee you do. Dan/W4NTI |
"Chesty Puller" wrote in message ... "Kim" wrote in message ... "Dan/W4NTI" wrote in message nk.net... "Michael Coslo" wrote in message ... Kim wrote: "Michael Coslo" wrote in message ... What is more important: 1. Having a license that allows HF access. 2. Not having to learn Morse code. IOW, is standing on principle, and refusing to learn Morse code a better thing than learning it to get the priveliges? - Mike KB3EIA - Hi Mike: I think you know I don't "hate" Morse Code. I, personally, never really wished to try it out; just like I have never really tried SCTV, anything digital (except for APRS--if that can be considered digital), ATV, etc. I think you get my point. Since I have ever first perused this newsgroup, except for a few real jerks, I'd believe that most of "us" who just don't wander into other means of communication--including Morse Code--are pretty much the same as I am. I absolutely support those who use the mode (as I do anyone who uses and/or invents any other modes), am willing to honor the tradition of Morse Code (as I honor the tradition of other steadfast things in amateur radio), and hold no animosity for anyone--OTHER than the "idiots" on both sides of the floor (as it would be stated in political terms :o). For me, it was never a matter of wanting HF privileges that much, and I learned the 5wpm needed to get the privileges I was happy with. So, could you do me a favor? Please rethink your phrase "Morse Code Haters." I don't think most of us feel that strongly about it. Yeah, "haters" was the wrong choice of word in retrospect. - Mike KB3EIA - No it's not Mike. There are Morse Code haters out there. Lennie the loser is one of the main ones. Dan/W4NTI You're just this side of the CB mentality. Pppfffffftttttttt Kim W5TIT Hey Dan, when did you start operating CB? LOL I used to fix them. Charged a few bux, met some good people, and some pure idiots. Talked a bunch of em into getting a ham ticket. Now I talk to the ex CBers on 2m and HF. Does that count? Dan/W4NTI |
|
All times are GMT +1. The time now is 11:00 PM. |
Powered by vBulletin® Copyright ©2000 - 2025, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.
RadioBanter.com