Email Detail
Show an email
GET /hyperkitty/api/list/[email protected]/email/ILAIQNJ4577PNROI3DDJGX2ZY4KDPTXR/
{ "url": "https://mailman.amsat.org/hyperkitty/api/list/[email protected]/email/ILAIQNJ4577PNROI3DDJGX2ZY4KDPTXR/", "mailinglist": "https://mailman.amsat.org/hyperkitty/api/list/[email protected]/", "message_id": "[email protected]", "message_id_hash": "ILAIQNJ4577PNROI3DDJGX2ZY4KDPTXR", "thread": "https://mailman.amsat.org/hyperkitty/api/list/[email protected]/thread/ILAIQNJ4577PNROI3DDJGX2ZY4KDPTXR/", "sender": { "address": "wy0x (a) mac.com", "mailman_id": null, "emails": null }, "sender_name": "Nate Duehr", "subject": "[amsat-bb] Fwd: Re: S band interference solution", "date": "2006-10-05T18:37:14Z", "parent": null, "children": [], "votes": { "likes": 0, "dislikes": 0, "status": "neutral" }, "content": "\n\nBegin forwarded message:\n\n> From: Nate Duehr <[email protected]>\n> Date: October 5, 2006 12:36:38 PM MDT\n> To: [email protected]\n> Subject: Re: [amsat-bb] Re: S band interference solution\n>\n> On Oct 5, 2006, at 11:40 AM, John Champa wrote:\n>> Nate,\n>>\n>> I am happy to report that I get along with my neighbors very well, \n>> thank you,\n>> so none of these TVI-type suggestions were any problem whatsoever \n>> at this QTH.\n>>\n>> Have you ever read any texts from the ARRL, etc. on how to manage \n>> a TVI problem?\n>> They are not as popular as they once were, but you can still find \n>> them around.\n>>\n>> They will help you in the social skills areas, another big weak \n>> point for most Hams.\n>>\n>> 73, John\n>\n> John,\n>\n> You completely misread my comments. I do just fine with social \n> skills and know the neighbors.\n>\n> What I *don't* want is to become the neighbor's \"tech support\" guy \n> by having a conversation with them about 2.4 interference or \n> \"helping\" them with their router. They don't know I can fix their \n> routers, computers, whatever... and I'd pretty much like to keep it \n> that way.\n>\n> I didn't make any TVI suggestions at all. Not sure where you got \n> that from.\n>\n> I was just (humorously) pointing out that:\n>\n> Being forced to deal with interference that's built-into the band- \n> plan given us by the FCC if 2.4 is flown brings added complexity \n> and time necessary that many hams will simply avoid. Not because \n> the technical details of hunting down low-power interference \n> sources is difficult, but because you have to go pester the \n> neighbors, ultimately leading to a number of other complex problems \n> completely unrelated to ham radio.\n>\n> For someone who just wants to get on and operate, finding out they \n> have to first hunt down local interference in the neighborhood will \n> simply mean they don't operate at all.\n>\n> I'm not the \"just want to operate\" type, but I certainly don't want \n> to involve myself in the nightmare that is known as my neighbor's \n> home computers. I do computers and networking and \n> telecommunications for a living -- fixing someone's (permanently) \n> broken Windows box, isn't my idea of fun, interesting, or even \n> slightly amusing anymore. Unless someone wants to pay me my usual \n> overtime rate for it.\n>\n> Walking next door to futz with the neighbor's 802.11 devices opens \n> me up to that.\n>\n> Currently I can \"hear\" six 802.11 devices from my back porch in a \n> suburban area without a gain antenna, using the built-in antenna on \n> my laptop. And those are the ones that are broadcasting an SSID, \n> and of course this doesn't include cordless phones. 900 MHz ham \n> is similarly trashed by various unlicensed \"household electronic \n> stuff\" I'm not going to bother hunting down.\n>\n> It's not getting any better where I live, and I'm in Denver. And \n> in places where housing is more compact... it must be far worse by \n> now.\n>\n> Nate WY0X\n>\n> --\n> Nate Duehr\n> [email protected]\n>\n>\n>\n\n--\nNate Duehr\[email protected]\n\n\n\n", "attachments": [] }