• circuitfarmer@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    1
    arrow-down
    3
    ·
    1 天前

    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
      5
      arrow-down
      1
      ·
      1 天前

      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
        arrow-down
        1
        ·
        1 天前

        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.

        • 0x0@lemmy.zip
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          2
          ·
          6 小时前

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

          Encryption: read the comments - in some jurisdictions you can’t (legally).
          Affordability: in some parts of the work it’s expensive to get a ham license (required by law).
          Ease of access: that one’s subjective, fine.