[HN Gopher] Back to the future: Are hackers the future of amateu...
       ___________________________________________________________________
        
       Back to the future: Are hackers the future of amateur radio?
        
       Author : austinallegro
       Score  : 80 points
       Date   : 2024-07-18 16:05 UTC (7 hours ago)
        
 (HTM) web link (www.kb6nu.com)
 (TXT) w3m dump (www.kb6nu.com)
        
       | gunalx wrote:
       | I do agree. amateur radio, can be so useful for hacking on custom
       | protocols, and transferring data. It does not all have to be
       | talking on the radio if that doe snot interest you. I also feel
       | like a new generation is blooming.
        
       | jcalvinowens wrote:
       | Playing with radios teaches you so much: no hobby has been more
       | helpful for my career than ham radio.
       | 
       | And it's such a broad hobby: you can make contacts just like your
       | granddad on MF/HF CW today, and then on monster microwave arrays
       | doing Earth-Moon-Earth with modern digital encodings tomorrow.
       | You only need the one license.
        
         | wepple wrote:
         | > Playing with radios teaches you so much: no hobby has been
         | more helpful for my career than ham radio.
         | 
         | Can you share some of the broad categories of things you've
         | learnt?
        
       | Animats wrote:
       | Of course hackers need to know how radio works. They need to know
       | how to break into WiFi, Bluetooth, and cellular comms, take over
       | drones, break into RF-controlled industrial networks, spoof GPS,
       | read RFID devices from a distance...
       | 
       | None of that is in the ham bands. Few hams have enough RF
       | knowledge to do any of that. Hams are mostly still at CQ DX, CQ
       | DX...
        
       | mikewarot wrote:
       | I'm glad to see that he mentions GNU Radio in his slides. It's
       | amazing what you can do with it. I built a VOR receiver a few
       | years ago.
       | 
       | I'll migrate it to the new QT based display sometime this fall.
        
         | lormayna wrote:
         | How hard was to create a VOR receiver with GNUradio? I really
         | like the idea, but I found GNUradio very difficult to learn
         | (and I have a master degree in Telecommunication Engineering).
         | The basic things are easy, but when things becoming complex I
         | am getting lost immediately. My side project, still unfinished
         | since years, is to create a WSPR decoder in GNUradio
        
           | mikewarot wrote:
           | It took me a day of futzing around, and then a drive out to
           | Chicago Heights and around the block where the VOR
           | transmitter is. I manually tweaked the timing to adjust for
           | the different delays in the detector chains.
        
       | polalavik wrote:
       | Im a signal processing engineer by day focusing in comms. That is
       | to say, I think radio is really exciting. I recently got my ham
       | license for fun and boy is it fucking boring. It's just a bunch
       | of old dudes talking about where they are driving to and gate
       | keeping the spectrum through repeater systems that you need to
       | pay to be a member of or else you might get a stern finger
       | wagging.
       | 
       | From my understanding, ham radio back in the day was about
       | tinkering. With the advent of Amazon and cheap electronics
       | anybody can now get into it without tinkering at all. Would be
       | nice to see people start tinkering again - really go crazy on
       | protocols, experimental PHYs, etc. that's the only way it's ever
       | going to be exciting again.
        
         | nullc wrote:
         | Your mistake may be doing things you find uninteresting with
         | it.
         | 
         | There are experimental protocols and PHYs... you just don't
         | (generally) find them on the VHF repeaters, which, I agree are
         | super boring.
        
           | jvanderbot wrote:
           | I'd love to do more local / device networking, but I feel
           | that's basically a solved problem. I can plug zigbee modules
           | in all day and make serial packets bounce anywhere.
           | 
           | Hackers are _sparse_ geographically. It 's not like my friend
           | down the street would plug in his radio and we'd share
           | packets. And if we did, why not use the internet?
           | 
           | HAM has been a bit of a letdown to me, too. I had higher /
           | hackier hopes for it.
        
             | falcolas wrote:
             | > that's basically a solved problem. ... why not use the
             | internet?
             | 
             | Pretty close to everything you can do with radio signals is
             | "solved", just like almost everything you can do with
             | computers is solved.
             | 
             | But these problems have been solved by _other_ people. Not
             | you. What are your motivations for hacking at all? It 's
             | probably not because you're in entirely novel territory.
        
         | red-iron-pine wrote:
         | > I recently got my ham license for fun and boy is it fucking
         | boring. It's just a bunch of old dudes talking about where they
         | are driving to and gate keeping the spectrum through repeater
         | systems that you need to pay to be a member of or else you
         | might get a stern finger wagging.
         | 
         | my experience, too. I did EW in the military and it was
         | interesting-ish. decided to, a couple years back, get the
         | license and play around, see if I could connect with some of
         | the local Elmers -- and it was laaaaaaame.
         | 
         | by comparison, other meetup groups like for drones, linux, or
         | other nerdy-as-hell topics was still pretty lively. I went to
         | some LUGs in Australia that were a straight-up blast, Linux
         | trivia night in bars, etc.
         | 
         | but ham was a snoozefest, and outside of doing some illegal-ass
         | shit that the FCC would absolutely hammer me for, I can't think
         | of anything cool to do with the license.
        
           | cloudripper wrote:
           | In California, you can get a license plate with your call
           | sign. That's kind of cool, right? Maybe moreso if you have a
           | punny vanity call sign.
        
             | dave78 wrote:
             | I think this is true for many states, however I personally
             | am not interested since callsigns are easily looked up
             | online. I don't really want to be driving around with a
             | giant sign on my car telling every random passer-by who I
             | am.
             | 
             | I do sometimes wonder if the privacy of amateur radio
             | operator info should be reconsidered - having my name and
             | home address plastered all over the internet just because I
             | have an amateur radio license is rather annoying.
        
         | unethical_ban wrote:
         | I agree it is largely boring, particularly on the local bands
         | where it's basically a local discord of people talking about
         | traffic.
         | 
         | But if you get your General license you can play with HF and
         | get geeky with antennas, try to make contact with people on low
         | power (qrp) on protocols like JS8.
         | 
         | I was able to make contacts from Texas to South America and
         | Canada, and even Europe I think, on 10w with a crummy EFHW
         | antenna, a wire slung over a tree at 45 degrees.
         | 
         | As far as more geeky protocol hacking, I haven't gotten into
         | it.
        
           | wdfx wrote:
           | I've played with a cheap Chinese clone sdr receiver and LNA
           | and filter and have received FT8 calls from Indonesia and
           | Australia on a length of scrap wire I hung up in my loft here
           | in London UK. Calls from all over Europe and from USA are
           | pretty trivial to pick up.
           | 
           | I would be interested in getting licensed to TX, but then to
           | apply that practically I'd need to invest also in 100s -
           | 1000s of PSPSPS of gear rather than a mere 10s. And then once
           | I've done that ... I think the novelty would be mostly gone
           | if I'm honest. I don't think the practical expense seems
           | worth it.
        
         | schmidtleonard wrote:
         | The value prop used to be "talk to other nerds around the
         | world" but the internet does it better and easier now. There
         | are other things ham radio _could_ grow into, but the community
         | does not seem to be interested in the radical change needed for
         | them yet.
        
           | Borg3 wrote:
           | Exacly. I've myself been looking around HAMs from networking
           | point of view. I am networker and I would love to get hands
           | on some digital radio.. at least 128Kbps, ideally 1024Kbps
           | stuff where I can slap all the protocol to build network on
           | top of it and then IP. But nope, cannot find anything
           | interesting with decent ranges and cheap enough to buy for
           | tinkering. It seems to be a nische that noone cares to claim.
           | 
           | I know about HSMM, but they are using normal WiFi AP and just
           | slap custom software on top of it and use HAM frequencies.
           | Not bad idea...
           | 
           | They communities are also awfully closed. I tried to find
           | some IRC servers for HAM/network related stuff and no luck
           | really. Found one channel, but they are mostly US people out
           | there (TZ issue for me).
        
           | falcolas wrote:
           | It's a good thing that you don't need the community to do
           | interesting things with radio signals, just an interest in
           | doing so. Chatting with other people is just a nice side
           | effect of working with signals sent over RF.
           | 
           | And when it comes to doing interesting things with
           | technology, there are many other communities to collaborate
           | with; someone might even build their own community of people
           | who also want to chat over RF.
        
           | cqqxo4zV46cp wrote:
           | Yeah, and it turns out that talking to other nerds around the
           | world kind of sucks a lot of the time.
        
         | etimberg wrote:
         | Similar problem for me. It seems like most folks near me do a
         | lot of contesting which I have neither the time nor the
         | interest to do.
        
         | clbrmbr wrote:
         | Indeed the typical VHF repeater conversation is quite dull.
         | It's a combination of the demographic and the statistical fact
         | that (as a broad generalization) the people who spend much of
         | their day chatting on the repeater don't have all that much
         | interesting going on in their lives.
         | 
         | That said, there are absolutely some fascinating people in
         | amateur radio, and on the air. I'd recommend:
         | 
         | 2M FM simplex (146.520 MHz) VHF SSB (6 meters or 2 meters) HF
         | SSB, specifically 30 meters or 17 meters
         | 
         | That's about trying to randomly find interesting technical
         | people to talk to on the air.
         | 
         | Even more interesting is the specialized communities around
         | microwave (10GHz point-to-point) and satellite (skip the old
         | VHF/UHF FM satellites and check out the 5/10 GHz geostationary
         | and other recent projects).
        
           | adrianpike wrote:
           | Those geostationary sats sound really interesting, but I've
           | struggled to find any remotely modern tools or DB's to find
           | visible sats - is there a current best of breed I can look
           | at?
        
         | kwesthaus wrote:
         | > Would be nice to see people start tinkering again - really go
         | crazy on protocols, experimental PHYs, etc.
         | 
         | https://m17project.org/ https://openrtx.org/#/
         | https://freedv.org/
         | 
         | These are a few projects that I personally think embody this
         | well.
        
         | nvy wrote:
         | >It's just a bunch of old dudes talking about where they are
         | driving to and gate keeping the spectrum
         | 
         | Yup and the grouchy boomers who LARP as emergency preparedness
         | personnel.
         | 
         | My experiences with amateur radio people have been universally
         | negative, and in my opinion the death of ham radio is squarely
         | the fault of its participants.
        
         | rcurry wrote:
         | For me, ham was about off grid communications. Back in the day
         | I used to do a lot of backpacking and this was before cell
         | phones. New Mexico had this incredible repeater network that
         | was linked into Kirkland AFB, so you could be just about
         | anywhere in the wilderness out there and use the auto patch to
         | make a phone call. It was incredible.
         | 
         | Now days we have satcoms for cheap and soon we will have
         | Starlink even on mobile phones so ham has lost a bit of its
         | value proposition in terms of backcountry safety.
         | 
         | It's still nice to have when there are big power outages or
         | emergencies, but you are right that the social side of it has
         | died down quite a bit.
         | 
         | Edit: it's also good to have a ham license if you're into
         | flying RC airplanes - you can use much more powerful radios and
         | have a lot more range.
        
           | nightbrawler wrote:
           | Yep! The New Mexico Mega-Link repeater network is still up
           | and running.
           | 
           | http://nm5ml.com/nm5ml_map.jpg
           | 
           | There's also a great APRS repeater network:
           | 
           | http://www.urfmsi.org/repeaters/aprs
           | 
           | With APRS you can send/recv text messages from pretty much
           | anywhere in NM
        
         | ozim wrote:
         | Uhm yeah talking with people is optional and only required to
         | check how well they receive you when you set antenna up.
         | 
         | Buying off the shelf everything is not fun. Buy radio and try
         | to build an antenna from metal wire or whatever else. Then try
         | to see if old farts can hear your calls.
         | 
         | It is much more like fishing it is supposed to be boring unless
         | you are really interested in the topic.
         | 
         | Yes there is Chinese vendor that you can buy antennas that will
         | work much better than whatever you cobble up by hand but yeah
         | YOU are the one to make it fun for yourself not old farts in
         | your propagation range.
        
         | jcalvinowens wrote:
         | You're barking up the wrong tree! Get into HF digital modes:
         | the lowest hanging fruit is WSJTX, but there's so much beyond
         | that if you want to tinker.
         | 
         | I can honestly say I've never plugged a mic into my
         | transceiver, and I probably never will. And I have 500+
         | confirmed contacts across 40+ countries. Phone is boring :)
        
       | th0ma5 wrote:
       | I've barely done any contesting or public safety or really any
       | rag chewing, but I got my Extra for digital RF synthesis
       | experiments and digital modes just in case I want to do something
       | in those extra bits of the bands.
       | 
       | Lowfer people don't need licensed under a certain power and QRSS
       | grabbers are an astoundingly neat thing for everyone licensed or
       | not.
        
       | RobotToaster wrote:
       | Meanwhile the RSGB won't even let you take the foundation license
       | test on linux, because they want to spy on potential members.
        
         | jimhefferon wrote:
         | What does that mean? They want to use a cheat-discouraging
         | browser?
        
         | abstractbeliefs wrote:
         | You can do it in a virtual machine, and people frequently do.
         | The software can't detect nor escape it.
         | 
         | Unrelated (seriously), there's also OARC, the online amateur
         | radio club. It's on discord (boo, proprietary), but it's got
         | some of the most exciting projects and a really young crowd.
         | I'd highly recommend it.
         | 
         | https://www.oarc.uk/
        
       | lormayna wrote:
       | What always surprises me on the ham world is the huge number of
       | possibilities. Beside having voice QSO in HF or VHF, there are
       | many other options: QRP and SOTA/POTA, digital modes, DYI
       | antennas and radios, SDR, EME, identifying unknown and misterious
       | signal, etc.
       | 
       | What I don't like about the communities is that is mostly
       | composed by grey hairs guy that are not really opened to change.
        
       | nanomonkey wrote:
       | I haven't seen much innovation in the HAM spectrum, but I do some
       | fun stuff done with Lora, and mesh networks by flashing routers
       | with custom version of OpenWRT.
       | 
       | Honestly I think the problem with the HAM spectrum is that it
       | doesn't allow for (much) encryption and so much digital
       | transmissions are hampered.
        
       | riffic wrote:
       | I actually have a little ambition but maybe one day if I have
       | energy I'll pursue an amateur radio art installation of sorts.
       | The space seems ripe for this sort of energy.
        
         | howard941 wrote:
         | Tell me more
        
       ___________________________________________________________________
       (page generated 2024-07-18 23:07 UTC)