[sudo-discuss] there are no LPFM slots on the FM band in the bay area, period.

Mon Nov 4 13:32:38 PST 2013

Software-defined radio and the broader embracing paradigm of cognitive
radio are still topics of active research on fundamental issues and they
are both built out of the practice of negotiation among participants in a
communication about the means of communication (what part of spectrum to
use and what encoding mainly).
They were in part motivated by desire to work around existing fixed uses of
spectrum (like FM audio broadcasts) in a non-interfering way, but wouldn't
really be useful to transmit to existing receivers that can't participate
in the negotiations they involve.
Good stuff to build into a mesh architecture but heavy-duty to implement or
even play with without hardware and software tools that are currently
mostly ad-hoc and specialized and usually fairly obscure and expensive.
This may be changing a lot fairly soon because imminent generations of cell
phones are due to incorporate pretty good software-defined radio, I recall
hearing somewhere.
The only simple hack along the same lines I can think of is to choose a
frequency to transmit FM audio on, detect interference from other
transmitters on that frequency, and stop transmitting in that case. I don't
see the usefulness of doing that in this context though.

On Mon, Nov 4, 2013 at 1:17 PM, Eddan Katz <eddan at sudoroom.tv> wrote:

> I've read about software-defined radio making interference problems
> negligible (can't find anything in particular at the moment - but most
> coming from the IEEE publications).
>
> I'd be interested whether others (a) understood if this is true; (b) knew
> of affordable SDR equipment; and/or (c) thought this would solve the
> problem.
>
>
> Sidenote: While streaming-only radio stations do not have to deal with
> spectrum licensing issues, their Internet presence make broadcasting anyone
> else's copyrighted content a complicated and either expensive or risky
> endeavor.
>
>
> sent from eddan.com
>
>
>
> On 2013-11-04 12:52, Hol Gaskill wrote:
>
>> it does seem philosophically better to provide content on an opt-in
>> basis via existing RF links than to simply radiate it in every
>> direction and block that portion of the spectrum from other uses
>>
>> on Nov 04, 2013, ANTHONY DI FRANCO <di.franco at gmail.com> wrote:
>>
>>  This sounds a lot like the mesh networking projects, which move away
>>> from broadcasting as fundamental and rebase broadcasting in a
>>> peer-to-peer context, and are already oriented the right ways
>>> technically and with respect to regulations for those goals.
>>> On Nov 4, 2013 11:31 AM, "David Keenan" <dkeenan44 at gmail.com [23]>
>>> wrote:
>>>
>>>  I find myself most sympathetic to Naomi's position - although I do
>>>> still think FM as a medium has some romance and cool left in it, I
>>>> don't know that it's actually worth it, given the cost and effort.
>>>>
>>>>
>>>> Completely naiive riffing follows, but -- since decentralizing
>>>> information and the means of production are (for me) integral to
>>>> freeing information / culture.. if one wanted to recolonize the
>>>> airwaves, I wonder if it might be possible to simply distribute
>>>> LPFM?
>>>>
>>>> Ie, give people a small appliance that transceives internet radio
>>>> into LPFM or way lower-power radio, ie just for their block /
>>>> neighborhood / whathaveyou.. A device that doesn't take a whole
>>>> lot of power, that is innately not geographically bounded, and can
>>>> become a diaspora of signal. And not necessarily legal but
>>>> decentralized and dispersed.. if enough folks did this in
>>>> aggregate in a given neighborhood or community, could that
>>>> collectively function coverage-wise as a single relatively strong
>>>> broadcast / antenna?
>>>>
>>>> Has anyone tried anything similar, or does this even make sense..?
>>>>
>>>>
>>>> dreamin'
>>>>
>>>> On Mon, Nov 4, 2013 at 10:08 AM, Hol Gaskill <hol at gaskill.com
>>>> [20]> wrote:
>>>>
>>>>  agree on not having transmitter co-located with hq. dropping
>>>>> repeaters nearby can also prevent pinpointing by birds overhead.
>>>>>
>>>>> on Nov 03, 2013, NAOMI MOST <pnaomi at gmail.com [17]> wrote:
>>>>>
>>>>>  Dudes I was THERE managing tech for Pirate Cat went that all
>>>>>> went
>>>>>> down. See also:
>>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>
>>>
>> http://nthmost.com/2011/04/radio-valencia-the-little-
>> radio-station-that-could/
>>
>>>  [1]
>>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>>> The major difference here to what was suggested above is that
>>>>>> Pirate
>>>>>> Cat hosted its antenna in many many different places over the
>>>>>> years.
>>>>>> We moved it every 3 months or so. And 95% of the membership
>>>>>> didn't
>>>>>> know where it was.
>>>>>>
>>>>>> My point was to ask the question WHY put up the antenna at
>>>>>> all.
>>>>>>
>>>>>> The return on investment for putting up an antenna --
>>>>>> particularly,
>>>>>> one physically located at the locus of control as opposed to
>>>>>> offsite
>>>>>> somewhere like in a van or something -- is pretty abysmal.
>>>>>> Listenership to the airwaves continues to drop.
>>>>>>
>>>>>> If you decided to jam some corporate radio station, you'd be
>>>>>> implicating Sudo Room and the feds would come down on it
>>>>>> sooner or
>>>>>> later.
>>>>>>
>>>>>> If you just wanted to squat some frequency in the lower band,
>>>>>> you'd
>>>>>> have an abysmal listenership at the cost of the power of
>>>>>> operating the
>>>>>> antenna.
>>>>>>
>>>>>> It's just not that compelling an exercise for the amount of
>>>>>> risk.
>>>>>> Not for me, anyway. I guess a lot of people still feel that
>>>>>> the
>>>>>> airwaves are somehow inherently exciting.
>>>>>>
>>>>>> --Naomi
>>>>>>
>>>>>> On Sun, Nov 3, 2013 at 5:54 PM, Gregg Horton
>>>>>> <greggahorton at gmail.com [2]> wrote:
>>>>>> > We agree on absolutely nothing so I abstain
>>>>>>
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> On Nov 3, 2013 5:17 PM, "GtwoG PublicOhOne"
>>>>>>>
>>>>>> <g2g-public01 at att.net [3]> wrote:
>>>>>>
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>  >>
>>>>>>
>>>>>>> If someone or a group wants to propose or operate a radio
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> station in an
>>>>>>
>>>>>>> act of peaceful civil disobedience, they should research
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> the regs, laws,
>>>>>>
>>>>>>> and potential penalties, and talk with an attorney who has
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> represented
>>>>>> >> clients who have engaged in similar acts in the past. That
>>>>>> would be a
>>>>>>
>>>>>>> project for a group that is not formally identical with SR.
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> The most successful peaceful civil disobedience actions in
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> the past
>>>>>> >> fifty years have been conducted by people who were not
>>>>>> only
>>>>>>
>>>>>>> well-grounded in principles, but also had trained
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> themselves in how to
>>>>>>
>>>>>>> interact in a peaceful and effective manner with all of the
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> people they
>>>>>> >> would come into contact with, including law enforcement
>>>>>> and government
>>>>>>
>>>>>>> officials. The civil rights movement and the Clamshell
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> Alliance
>>>>>>
>>>>>>> anti-nuclear group are excellent examples to study, and
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> much of their
>>>>>> >> material can be found online.
>>>>>>
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> All of that said, online/internet radio is still the
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> fastest way to
>>>>>>
>>>>>>> reach an audience with no geographic limits or regulatory
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> risks, and
>>>>>>
>>>>>>> spreading the word is easy. Linkage with other online
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> broadcasters can
>>>>>> >> build up a seamless network with 24/7/365 coverage.
>>>>>>
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> To challenge the existing AM/FM broadcast status-quo, will
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> inevitably
>>>>>>
>>>>>>> require challenging station licenses in order to re-capture
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> spectrum.
>>>>>> >> And the best place to start is by challenging the crowding
>>>>>> of spectrum
>>>>>>
>>>>>>> by multiple redundant right-wing religious broadcasters.
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> The case for
>>>>>>
>>>>>>> it is clear and obvious in any area with strong cultural
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> diversity, and
>>>>>> >> a win is a victory on multiple fronts.
>>>>>>
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> Under-thinking, rather than over-thinking, is the risk for
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> failure.
>>>>>>
>>>>>>> Reaction is not action.
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> -G
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>  >> =====
>>>>>>
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> On 13-11-03-Sun 4:39 PM, Jake wrote:
>>>>>>>> >>> Just put a big fucking antenna on the roof and start
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> broadcasting, if
>>>>>>
>>>>>>> >>> you don't, i will, god damnit.
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> >> >>>
>>>>>>
>>>>>>> >>> Stop overthinking things and do it.
>>>>>>>> >>
>>>>>>>> >> Why? So you can inflict a $20,000 fine on Sudo Room as
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> quickly as
>>>>>>
>>>>>>> >> humanly possible?
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> >> >
>>>>>>
>>>>>>> > it takes a long time and a lot of work and listeners
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> before you even
>>>>>>
>>>>>>> > get the ten-day warning, let alone an unenforcable fine.
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> Don't forget
>>>>>>
>>>>>>> > that Berkeley Liberation Radio has been broadcasting for
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> almost ten
>>>>>> >> > years now, interrupted more often by their own failures
>>>>>> than by two
>>>>>>
>>>>>>> > FCC raids where the FCC basically snatched their
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> equipment and fled
>>>>>>
>>>>>>> > like cowards.
>>>>>>>> >
>>>>>>>> > No one at BLR has ever been successfully "fined", and
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> even the NAL
>>>>>> >> > (Notice of Apparent Liability) filed against Stephen
>>>>>> Dunifer of FRB
>>>>>>
>>>>>>> > before them has just sat uncollected, like almost all
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> NALs against
>>>>>>
>>>>>>> > pirates, for twenty years now. Stephen's very public
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> response to the
>>>>>> >> > Notice of Apparent Liability was "Apparently not."
>>>>>>
>>>>>>> >
>>>>>>>> > The FCC's fine enforcement mechanism is to threaten to
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> revoke your
>>>>>>
>>>>>>> > stations lisence. This works when they fine lisenced
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> broadcasters for
>>>>>> >> > the seven deadly words or whatever, but filed against an
>>>>>> unlisenced
>>>>>>
>>>>>>> > person it's a joke. Witness the fine against Daniel
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> Robert of Pirate
>>>>>>
>>>>>>> > Cat Radio, which is an example of a person who put his
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> full name all
>>>>>> >> > over everything and even corresponded with the FCC in
>>>>>> the mail, making
>>>>>>
>>>>>>> > it personal. They haven't even collected anything from
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> him.
>>>>>>
>>>>>>> >
>>>>>>>> > here's the story of pirate cat's fine:
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> >> >
>>>>>>
>>>>>>> >
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>
>>>
>> http://arstechnica.com/tech-policy/2011/10/fcc-fines-
>> monkey-man-radio-pirate-10k-war-continues/
>>
>>>  [4]
>>>>>>
>>>>>> >> >
>>>>>>
>>>>>>> >
>>>>>>>> > The point is, if sudoroom decides as a group to broadcast
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> a signal
>>>>>>
>>>>>>> > from the roof or wherever (we can stream over the
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> internet you know)
>>>>>>
>>>>>>> > then sudoroom can decide for itself whether it wants to
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> keep going
>>>>>> >> > after getting a "ten day notice to cease broadcasting"
>>>>>> If that EVER
>>>>>>
>>>>>>> > happens.
>>>>>>>> >
>>>>>>>> >
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>  http://transition.fcc.gov/eb/FieldNotices/2003/DOC-264276A1.html
>>>>>
>>>>>> [5]
>>>>>>
>>>>>> >> >
>>>>>>
>>>>>>> > and if a broadcast is not coming from the building where
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> sudoroom is,
>>>>>>
>>>>>>> > then it is not even a matter for sudoroom to have to
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> decide on.
>>>>>>
>>>>>>> > Sudoroom can continue to have an internet streaming radio
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> station and
>>>>>> >> > leave it at that.
>>>>>>
>>>>>>> >
>>>>>>>> > _______________________________________________
>>>>>>>> > sudo-discuss mailing list
>>>>>>>> > sudo-discuss at lists.sudoroom.org [6]
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> >> > http://lists.sudoroom.org/listinfo/sudo-discuss [7]
>>>>>>
>>>>>>> >
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> _______________________________________________
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> >> sudo-discuss mailing list
>>>>>>
>>>>>>> sudo-discuss at lists.sudoroom.org [8]
>>>>>>>> http://lists.sudoroom.org/listinfo/sudo-discuss [9]
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> >
>>>>>>
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> _______________________________________________
>>>>>>> sudo-discuss mailing list
>>>>>>> sudo-discuss at lists.sudoroom.org [10]
>>>>>>> http://lists.sudoroom.org/listinfo/sudo-discuss [11]
>>>>>>>
>>>>>> >
>>>>>>
>>>>>> --
>>>>>> Naomi Theora Most
>>>>>> naomi at nthmost.com [12]
>>>>>> +1-415-728-7490 [13]
>>>>>>
>>>>>> skype: nthmost
>>>>>>
>>>>>> http://twitter.com/nthmost [14]
>>>>>> _______________________________________________
>>>>>> sudo-discuss mailing list
>>>>>> sudo-discuss at lists.sudoroom.org [15]
>>>>>> http://lists.sudoroom.org/listinfo/sudo-discuss [16]
>>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>> _______________________________________________
>>>>> sudo-discuss mailing list
>>>>> sudo-discuss at lists.sudoroom.org [18]
>>>>> http://lists.sudoroom.org/listinfo/sudo-discuss [19]
>>>>>
>>>>
>>>> _______________________________________________
>>>> sudo-discuss mailing list
>>>> sudo-discuss at lists.sudoroom.org [21]
>>>> http://lists.sudoroom.org/listinfo/sudo-discuss [22]
>>>>
>>>
>>> -------------------------
>>>
>>> _______________________________________________
>>> sudo-discuss mailing list
>>> sudo-discuss at lists.sudoroom.org [24]
>>> http://lists.sudoroom.org/listinfo/sudo-discuss [25]
>>>
>>
>>
>>
>> Links:
>> ------
>> [1]
>>
>> http://nthmost.com/2011/04/radio-valencia-the-little-
>> radio-station-that-could/
>> [2] mailto:greggahorton at gmail.com
>> [3] mailto:g2g-public01 at att.net
>> [4]
>>
>> http://arstechnica.com/tech-policy/2011/10/fcc-fines-
>> monkey-man-radio-pirate-10k-war-continues/
>> [5] http://transition.fcc.gov/eb/FieldNotices/2003/DOC-264276A1.html
>> [6] mailto:sudo-discuss at lists.sudoroom.org
>> [7] http://lists.sudoroom.org/listinfo/sudo-discuss
>> [8] mailto:sudo-discuss at lists.sudoroom.org
>> [9] http://lists.sudoroom.org/listinfo/sudo-discuss
>> [10] mailto:sudo-discuss at lists.sudoroom.org
>> [11] http://lists.sudoroom.org/listinfo/sudo-discuss
>> [12] mailto:naomi at nthmost.com
>> [13] http://tel%2B1-415-728-7490
>> [14] http://twitter.com/nthmost
>> [15] mailto:sudo-discuss at lists.sudoroom.org
>> [16] http://lists.sudoroom.org/listinfo/sudo-discuss
>> [17] mailto:pnaomi at gmail.com
>> [18] mailto:sudo-discuss at lists.sudoroom.org
>> [19] http://lists.sudoroom.org/listinfo/sudo-discuss
>> [20] mailto:hol at gaskill.com
>> [21] mailto:sudo-discuss at lists.sudoroom.org
>> [22] http://lists.sudoroom.org/listinfo/sudo-discuss
>> [23] mailto:dkeenan44 at gmail.com
>> [24] mailto:sudo-discuss at lists.sudoroom.org
>> [25] http://lists.sudoroom.org/listinfo/sudo-discuss
>>
>
>
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://sudoroom.org/pipermail/sudo-discuss/attachments/20131104/8097f388/attachment.html>