![]() |
From: K0HB on Jul 4, 3:58 pm
wrote The "reply" that is a classic reduction-to-the-absurd of Brakob is just one style .... In your case, Anderson, "reduction" isn't required. Ah, but that is EXACTLY what you did with those "billions and billions" "statements!" YOU thought they were "required!" :-) bit bit |
From: Dee Flint on Jul 4, 3:13 pm
"John Smith" wrote in message Len: I finally figured out why they truly hate you here! No one hates him but everyone gets tired of his derogatory remarks and antiquated stories. Antiquated Stories and Deragatory Remarks: 1. Hiram goes to Washington in 1918 to save ham radio's future! 2. Hams "pioneer SW [HF] bands" after 1923. 3. Saipan is "saved" by hams loading up a fence! 4. AM broadcasting is begun in 1906 (by a carbon mike in the antenna lead to "modulate" it...the technique for all subsequent AM broadcasters!). 5. "CW gets through when nothing else will!" (from 1930s) 6. "Putz! "Technician!" etc. (from loose-cannon Robeson) You have made a statement that cw is ridiculous and protested by never getting an amateur license--now there are tens of thousands or even hundreds of thousands who have joined you--I see them everyday--they refuse to get a license because of the code... I cannot believe that you have polled tens of thousands or hundreds of thousands about getting a license. Most of those people don't even know amateur radio exists let alone its requiements. YOU have "polled all those people" to PROVE they "don't even know amateur radio exists?" We didn't know that! :-) Most of us think it is silly to cut off your nose to spite your face. And most of us know it is far more effective to attempt changes from the inside rather than remaining on the outside and looking in. Tsk, tsk. Amateur radio is only ONE "window" to the EM spectrum. A rather small one at that. I've been looking through "windows" (plural), lots of them, bigger ones, for the last half century. From the "inside." :-) Might I suggest you WASH your little "window?" It would make it far easier for others to see into that small room called ham radio. Then again, you might NOT want "outsiders" to look in. :-) ... that is why they hate you, you were a man before your time my friend! And, your protest is being voiced by a strong majority today. Again no one hates him but simply will not tolerate his derogatory comments. The moment that someone disagrees with him, he starts in on that approach and continues in that vein despite the fact that some of us have persisted in remaining polite and not calling him names. All that "politeness" and "non" name-calling by all of you "us" is archived in Google. :-) "Horrid!" isn't it? :-) [your word, not mine...] Some of us finally have refused to feed the troll and do not respond to his posts. Ah! "Politeness!" Those you do not like are called "trolls!" :-) Hypocrisy is your handmaiden... Tsk, for someone who "does not respond," there seems a rather strong, lengthy, and "antiquated" RESPONSE! :-) bit bit |
From: Dee Flint on Jul 4, 3:40 pm
"John Smith" wrote in message Dee: Frankly I am surprised you are so offended over his "derogatory remarks", you all seem so asleep to the real world that short of striking you over the head with a two-by-four you will remain in this dream-like state. Positive is not always good, except to "new agers" studying mysticism and crystals, and I have no time for silliness... If offended by reality one can always change reality or change themselves--I have always found the latter more productive. He (Len) battles a whole klick of you which are functioning like a damn support group--and you don't let little things like reality, "real world", sanity and facts get in your way. You all begin your chants of known mantras and chase the light-weights away! You all exist in an echo chamber using the echo of your own words as "valid arguments", or to site "majority agreements." To be effective in the real world, one does not insult people with derogatory remarks. ...except in computer-modem communications! :-) In my profession, I frequently have to convince people that the new is better than the old. Hello? What "profession" is that? :-) I've only been in the electronics profession for...um...53 years now. Life Member in the IEEE, an international professional association. Guess that doesn't count, does it? :-) Is this newsgroup participation a "profession?" Insults and put downs would get me thrown out the door and cost me a job. It doesn't get a whole lot more real than that. Oh, I think that 53 years of actual professional participation might agree with you...and also disagree with you. Have you ever been on both sides of a Design Review meeting? :-) It takes tact along with accurate and verifiable data to implement new proposals. ...which doesn't apply to REMOVING an ancient test element for a radio hobby license. :-) Where is the "tact" and "accurate and verifiable data" to support the subjective claims, necessities, nobilities, expertise of morsemanship for a radio hobby? Ain't there, is it? :-) The cutting edge people in the real world know this although it may come as a shock to those in academia. ...which means what? Morsemanship is "cutting edge" comms? :-) [put the cover back on your jar of academia nuts] Len does not use tact and does not present accurate and verifiable data. Tsk. I've used hundreds of tacts to nail your morsemanship to the carpet and you still think that carpet will fly! :-) I'd best re-do my PowerPoint files, then? I'd use Vu-Graphs but your projector's bulb is burned out... bit bit |
Dee Flint wrote: "John Smith" wrote in message ... KXHB: Go ask the college and high school students in the EE fields why they do not obtain amateur licenses. I have asked, it is the code which they cite at least 90% of the time. However, you guys don't care, and will go on speaking like that is not true. Put your butt in a car, drive over to your local college and have a chat with an electronics engineer professor there and the students--then perhaps you will realize we who know are looking at you like some crazed manic reciting a ridiculous mantra about code not being a hindrance and the real reason amateur radio is dying... John Since all the "new action" is VHF and higher and that doesn't require a code license, code should be no detriment. Or is some one fibbing to them either directly or by omission so that they do not know about the codeless Technician license. One the NoCode status of the tech license is not that well known. Indeed until 26 day before I had my license I did not know of the no Code license, this aas after year of the no code licesne Two lots of folks (lets leave it vauage) go on and and on about how you can't do anything with the tech licesne Three VHF is hardly where the New action is Microwves Dee D. Flint, N8UZE |
KØHB wrote:
"John Smith" wrote However, you guys don't care, and will go on speaking like that is not true. Put your butt in a car, drive over to your local college and have a chat with an electronics engineer professor there and the students--then perhaps you will realize we who know are looking at you like some crazed manic reciting a ridiculous mantra about code not being a hindrance and the real reason amateur radio is dying... John, You're new around here, so I'll bring you up to date. I am a long time member of NCI, and I do not support continuation of the Morse test, so spare your jeremiads about "you guys don't care" for someone else. Since we're all having a heart to hear here.... I guess I should note that I do not use Morse code (even though I support the testing) at all. So much for typecasting at least you and me, eh? I guess I might also note that I make my coin in digital imagery. We would love it if a person came up with a method of transferring decent size, decent fidelity pictures in reasonable amount of time using a small bandwidth. At HF frequencies..... Having said that, your characterization of Len as a "man before his time" is the most laughable miscasting since someone suggested John Wayne play the part of a queer hairdessser in a movie about the old west. But it makes for interesting reading 8^) - Mike KB3EIA - |
|
Mike:
Oh no. Now someone is going to have to explain ccd cams and pixels to you, huh? Take a course! The short course goes, "a pixel either relates to a byte, a word (16 bits) or a double-word (32-bits, or larger)--you grab the pixels from the cam (bytes, words, etc)--you compress them, you send them, the guy at the other end uncompress them, sends them to his video card and views them... Geesh, are you guys all setting around the same computer in some old age home? If you even mention old analog cams from some Smithsonian the guys in the white coats will be here! John "Mike Coslo" wrote in message ... wrote: Mike Coslo wrote: Dave Heil wrote: wrote: How we be gonna scale those pictures and live video to fit into 2.5 KHz? Two steps: 1) Convert the pictures and video into highly-compressed digital formats for transmission. Oooh, there could be a problem there! There are limits to the compression, and we have exceeded them in some forms already. Check to see how many vertical pans there are on video signals lately. The compression on the digital signals (note that even if you are getting your feed via analog cable, you are still almost certainly looking at a digital signal) already calls for some major aliasing. There are limits, and there are limits. How much more are we going to throw away? 2) Use different modes/modulations/protocols Shannon's Theorem tells us that we can get very high data rates through very narrow bandwidths *if* we have adequate signal-to-noise ratio. Note that "noise" takes many forms, not just the thermal noise we're used to. What're we going to do when the data rate that we need is darn near(or above) frequency in use? For example, PSK has an advantage over OOK when dealing with thermal noise. But when dealing with other types of noise, OOK can have an advantage. It all depends on the transmission medium. What works on a telephone line may not work on an HF path of the same apparent bandwidth. I thought that we were going to be able to send live video and digital images on HF? You can do that now - just need enough S/N. Always? Simply by hooking our computers to our rigs via the proper interfaces. And software. I really didn't think it was all that simple. Why don't we get together and pop off a live video system for say the 160 meter band. The video would be real time, 30 fps, and otherwise like broadcast video. Better yet, Why don't we do it at computer resolution? Now it seems that the *idea* is that we are going to use DRM, and we're going to need to get more spectrum in which to use. There are all sorts of solutions. But there's a world of difference between people talking theory and actual application. I did hear that DRM was capable of doing imagery. I couldn't find any examples tho'. And they were very vague about it. Most of all, some folks confuse the journey and the destination. The journey beats all..... Does complex and newer equal better? Sometimes. Not always. Is analog simpler than digital? Sometimes! Does having a computer that attaches to the Internet make a person a digital expert? Some folks think so! I don't. And besides - "digital expert" doesn't mean someone knows much about radio. Ain't that the truff? I ask for enlightenment, I get invective. Are you surprised? Nope. It doesn't make for a very good discussion tho'. Appears to be what there is to offer. Now consider how effective such a person would be trying to sell amateur radio - with or without a code test. They might attract others of their ilk. I'll bet they like some of the "wonder antennas" that keep cropping up... - Mike KB3EIA - |
From: John Smith on Jul 4, 4:26 pm
Len: Lighten up, I think he has real potential as a comedian and/or movie director! And, I am only half joking! I'd pay to watch the movie he suggested, good belly laughs are hard to come by these days! John Wayne in that role would be perfect to evoke such! Okay...such as Erich von Stroheim doing light comedy? :-) He might even direct Owen Wilson as a heroic action hero! Maybe a Hardy Boys series? "Hardy Boys go to Newington!" [starring Jim Nabors and Richard Chamberlain] It would be more entertaining to watch that true-life documentary "Independence Day." ["morse code saves Terra!"] Excuse me, I've got to polish up my PowerPoint presentation files to meet the requirements of Our Girl Flint. buy, buy, bit bit |
Len:
Keep a stiff upper lip man, only poor breeding reduces one to name calling and personal attacks--they seek to include you among their ill-bred lot. A little "blood letting" is good for the spirit, just don't take 'em seriously. It is a gorilla war here, I will grant you that, some just wear gorilla suits, others really are. John wrote in message oups.com... From: John Smith on Jul 4, 4:26 pm Len: Lighten up, I think he has real potential as a comedian and/or movie director! And, I am only half joking! I'd pay to watch the movie he suggested, good belly laughs are hard to come by these days! John Wayne in that role would be perfect to evoke such! Okay...such as Erich von Stroheim doing light comedy? :-) He might even direct Owen Wilson as a heroic action hero! Maybe a Hardy Boys series? "Hardy Boys go to Newington!" [starring Jim Nabors and Richard Chamberlain] It would be more entertaining to watch that true-life documentary "Independence Day." ["morse code saves Terra!"] Excuse me, I've got to polish up my PowerPoint presentation files to meet the requirements of Our Girl Flint. buy, buy, bit bit |
| All times are GMT +1. The time now is 11:42 PM. |
Powered by vBulletin® Copyright ©2000 - 2025, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.
RadioBanter.com