Re: [44net] DN42 for 44net?

Speaking for myself, Encoding cannot be seen as encryption in any way. There are many ways of encoding a messsage. And there is many type of message that can only be sent by encoding. You cannot send an image without first encoding it in tone. You cannot send a numerical value without sending it as a tone scheme that can be decoded by a circuit. You cannot send a text without encoding either by voice (transforming letters/words/numbers to sounds) or by a digital mode ( morse being a digital mode) You cannot send digitaly compressed voice without encoding it in a way to send digital information. All of those action are accepted by the FCC. Encryption is making sure no one but the intended receipient of a message that have a method of removing the encryption of the message can receive it properly. If everyone can remove the encryption, it is in fact non encrypted. Microsoft use that as their explanation of encryption. What exactly are encryption? Encryption is the process of translating plain text data (plaintext) into something that appears to be random and meaningless (ciphertext). ... A symmetric key is used during both the encryption and decryption processes. To decrypt a particular piece of ciphertext, the key that was used to encrypt the data must be used. Morse is a way to send plain text data into something meaninless for anyone that does not know the code ( the key) . Using a language that no one know is a form of encryption. But from what I do know of the FCC law, someone only need to ID in english to be ok while talking in any other language. And at last, there is no provision in the FCC law for ham radio that deal with something that is Over The Air. (OTA) Also, If we follow all the rules for the ISM band for transmitting our data, being ham radio stuff or anything else, the FCC cannot do much stuff. Yeah some will say, but it that case it is not ham radio. Simply put, You are right. But we use the airwaves that are both assigned to the ISM and Ham band. So we use our bands. Pierre VE2PF ________________________________________ De : 44Net <44net-bounces+petem001=hotmail.com(a)mailman.ampr.org> de la part de Cliff Sojourner via 44Net <44net(a)mailman.ampr.org> Envoyé : 3 décembre 2021 14:44 À : 44Net general discussion Cc : Cliff Sojourner Objet : Re: [44net] DN42 for 44net? DStar is not a good example for your point. AMBE codec was patent encumbered for many years, not completely documented, so technically unable to be easily decoded. I'm aware of one open source implementation of it, don't know if it is used at all, or how well it works. Remember, PSK31 was not allowed by the FCC, until an open source implementation became commonly available. They key was documenting Vari-code. It's not difficult, or tricky, it is just a Huffman encoding such as used by Morse Code! So the PSK31 experience is the model for getting acceptance of a not-human-readable mode on amateur frequencies. Pactor 4 is in that situation now. Proprietary codec, patent encumbered, not publicly documented... So should not be allowed on amateur frequencies; Commercial frequencies, ok. I'm not sure about VARA, anyone know? On December 3, 2021 9:58:23 AM PST, KUN LIN via 44Net <44net(a)mailman.ampr.org> wrote: _________________________________________ 44Net mailing list 44Net(a)mailman.ampr.org https://mailman.ampr.org/mailman/listinfo/44net