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

Mon Nov 4 14:01:08 PST 2013

Anthony - I almost labelled the idea an LPFM mesh but then I thought it
wouldn't have to mesh, ie the nodes would not need to talk to each other
(provided each host had an internet uplink) so maybe its a somewhat
different topology

Hol - In principle I totally agree with you about such a distribution of
radios simply blocking spectrum from being used for other purposen -- but
along the same sort of moral-political lines that justify pirate radio in
the first place, the spectrum of sidebands in question here (FM/LPFM) is,
from what I infer, already not technically-legally available to the
public..? So I don't see how in this particular case, how engaging in an
experiment like this cannabalizing a frequency etc would be that
deprivational for the public at large.. again, just as with 'normal'
pirate/community radio

Also - this is a really dumb question but in terms of interference, I
actually have no idea what sort of interference results when two
coverage-adjacent radios are broadcasting the exact same signal? Does it
make any difference if they'd both be broadcasting the same signal? I
should remember this, since I actually took one of those AARL tests wayyy
back when (and I think I am technically FCC licensed, at least for certain
spectrums like SSB? Can't exactly remember..i should have a certificate
somewhere) but:

Seems like one should be able to rewire existing off-the-shelf audio-in FM
transmitters for whatever frequency we want, and somehow make the signal a
bit stronger to cover a block or whatever, instead of only one's house..

Prolly a dumb idea, just a lark - I know nothing of 'cognitive radio' but
I'd love to talk to you more about it, anthony!

David

On Mon, Nov 4, 2013 at 1:32 PM, Anthony Di Franco <di.franco at gmail.com>wrote:

> 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
>>>
>>
>>
>
> _______________________________________________
> sudo-discuss mailing list
> sudo-discuss at lists.sudoroom.org
> http://lists.sudoroom.org/listinfo/sudo-discuss
>
>
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://sudoroom.org/pipermail/sudo-discuss/attachments/20131104/d382dc72/attachment.html>