• circuitfarmer@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    4
    ·
    1 day ago

    But it just isn’t. Why not put those resources towards ham, where there are considerably more handsets already there?

    This seems like a solution in search of a problem thay was already solved, hidden by people who don’t want a $10 license.

    • ysjet@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      5
      ·
      19 hours ago

      Have you thought about not trying to drag meshtastic down to try and prop ham up?

      I get it, you spent a bunch of time studying for your ham and you don’t want it to feel like a waste, but lets be perfectly frank here- most people aren’t going to get a HAM license. It IS, however, VERY accessible for someone to buy a cheap gadget on sale to try out.

      I never understand why ham radio people always try to sabotage every other communication method, but you guys do it every time.

      Let other people communicate how they want.

      • circuitfarmer@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        1
        ·
        19 hours ago

        I’m not trying to drag anything down. But I think it is important for many people to realize that the meshtastic is ultimately a ham device. It is using specific parts of the spectrum and reduced power to avoid needing the license. There’s nothing wrong with that, but by definition, it isn’t really adding anything that can’t also be done on ham. In a similar vein, the only direction to go in terms of enhancing its capabilities is further into ham.

        And no, I didn’t spend a bunch of time doing anything. People vastly overestimate the complexity of the ham radio exams.

        But by all means, use what you want to communicate. I’m not trying to dissuade anyone from it – I just think it’s important that they know the limitations of the device compared to the greater whole in which it exists.

        • 0x0@lemmy.zip
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          3
          ·
          18 hours ago

          it isn’t really adding anything that can’t also be done on ham.

          Encryption, affordability, ease of access.

          • circuitfarmer@lemmy.world
            link
            fedilink
            English
            arrow-up
            1
            ·
            15 hours ago

            It is a misconception that you cannot do encryption with ham radio.

            Affordability – looks like a wash to me.

            Ease of access – maybe. But it generally does less, so it’s a tradeoff.

    • Random_Character_A@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      5
      ·
      22 hours ago

      You get shitloads more people to buy a cheap gadget that’s easy carry with you.

      If you start talking about ham radios and licences, most people loose interest before you finish the sentence.

        • lepinkainen@lemmy.world
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          2
          ·
          19 hours ago

          Finland. The questions for the basic test require you to actually know your shit, they’re specifically worded so that you can’t wing it

          I failed it, that’s how I know. By a few points but still 😀