🚀 go-pugleaf

On Thursday, February 8, 2018 at 4:45:43 PM UTC-8, han...@bbs.cpcn.com wrote:
> In 1963, Western Union, under contract with the US Air Force, installed 
> a nationwide nuclear weapon detonation detection system.  If there
> was an attack, the airforce would be immediately notified.
> [...]
It would now be possible to install AI sentinels that 
monitor the entire world and nearby parsecs of space 
for any desired phenomena, such as earthquakes; asteroids; 
airplane crashes; military conflicts; floods, etc. 

http://wiki.opencog.org/w/Ghost -- ghost.pl AI in Perl -- 

is the free-of-charge, open-source AI Mind suitable for 
installation anywhere as an AI sentinel watching for events. 

http://dl.acm.org/citation.cfm?doid=307824.307853 -- MindForth -- 

is the same AI program in Forth for autonomous humanoid robots. 

http://ai.neocities.org/MsIeAi.html -- is the same AI Mind -- 

in tutorial JavaScript so that Netizens may interact with the 
concept-based artificial intelligence and decide whether they 
would like to work with robot MindForth or webserver ghost.pl AI. 

https://github.com/BuildingXwithJS/proposals/issues/22 -- is the 

Next Big Thing in JavaScript artificial intelligence as a topic 
for a video or livestream on Building Things With JavaScript. 

On Thu, 8 Feb 2018 16:45:42 -0800 (PST), hanc...@bbs.cpcn.com wrote:

>In 1963, Western Union, under contract with the US Air Force, installed 
>a nationwide nuclear weapon detonation detection system.  If there
>was an attack, the airforce would be immediately notified.
>
>The system worked by having special sensors that would only be
>triggered by the intense light of a nuclear weapon.  Other light
>(sunlight, lightning, etc) would not affect it.  Upon receipt of
>the blast light, the sensor would send a off signal before the blast
>shock wave (travels slower) and destroyed the sensor and wires.
>Areas would have multiple sensors in case one was destroyed.
>
>The sensors and warning system is described in the WUTR:
>http://massis.lcs.mit.edu/telecom-archives/archives/technical/western-union-tech-review/17-1/p032.htm
>
>

A satellite designed to do that some decades ago... found x-ray
burster stars. It almost caused a big panic and a war.

On 2018-02-09, JimP <solo...@gmail.com> wrote:
> On Thu, 8 Feb 2018 16:45:42 -0800 (PST), hanc...@bbs.cpcn.com wrote:
>
>>In 1963, Western Union, under contract with the US Air Force, installed 
>>a nationwide nuclear weapon detonation detection system.  If there
>>was an attack, the airforce would be immediately notified.
>>
>>The system worked by having special sensors that would only be
>>triggered by the intense light of a nuclear weapon.  Other light
>>(sunlight, lightning, etc) would not affect it.  Upon receipt of
>>the blast light, the sensor would send a off signal before the blast
>>shock wave (travels slower) and destroyed the sensor and wires.
>>Areas would have multiple sensors in case one was destroyed.
>>
>>The sensors and warning system is described in the WUTR:
>>http://massis.lcs.mit.edu/telecom-archives/archives/technical/western-union-tech-review/17-1/p032.htm
>>
>>
>
> A satellite designed to do that some decades ago... found x-ray
> burster stars. It almost caused a big panic and a war.

There was a panic as well with the radar once,   when the moon rose,
was that right.?


-- 
greymaus.ireland.ie
Just_Another_Grumpy_Old_Man

On 9 Feb 2018 09:03:10 GMT, ma...@mail.com wrote:

>On 2018-02-09, JimP <solo...@gmail.com> wrote:
>> On Thu, 8 Feb 2018 16:45:42 -0800 (PST), hanc...@bbs.cpcn.com wrote:
>>
>>>In 1963, Western Union, under contract with the US Air Force, installed 
>>>a nationwide nuclear weapon detonation detection system.  If there
>>>was an attack, the airforce would be immediately notified.
>>>
>>>The system worked by having special sensors that would only be
>>>triggered by the intense light of a nuclear weapon.  Other light
>>>(sunlight, lightning, etc) would not affect it.  Upon receipt of
>>>the blast light, the sensor would send a off signal before the blast
>>>shock wave (travels slower) and destroyed the sensor and wires.
>>>Areas would have multiple sensors in case one was destroyed.
>>>
>>>The sensors and warning system is described in the WUTR:
>>>http://massis.lcs.mit.edu/telecom-archives/archives/technical/western-union-tech-review/17-1/p032.htm
>>>
>>>
>>
>> A satellite designed to do that some decades ago... found x-ray
>> burster stars. It almost caused a big panic and a war.
>
>There was a panic as well with the radar once,   when the moon rose,
>was that right.?

Yeah, they weren't expecting it to get return from the Moon.

On Friday, 9 February 2018 10:01:21 UTC, J. Clarke  wrote:
> On 9 Feb 2018 09:03:10 GMT, mau...@mail.com wrote:
> 
> >On 2018-02-09, JimP <sol...@gmail.com> wrote:
> >There was a panic as well with the radar once,   when the moon rose,
> >was that right.?
> 
> Yeah, they weren't expecting it to get return from the Moon.

I thought when I heard about it that the problem had been with 
wraparound.  The echo time modulo its supposed maximum possible 
value put the echoing object somewhere above Siberia.
-- 

On 9 Feb 2018 09:03:10 GMT, ma...@mail.com wrote:

>On 2018-02-09, JimP <solo...@gmail.com> wrote:
>> On Thu, 8 Feb 2018 16:45:42 -0800 (PST), hanc...@bbs.cpcn.com wrote:
>>
>>>In 1963, Western Union, under contract with the US Air Force, installed 
>>>a nationwide nuclear weapon detonation detection system.  If there
>>>was an attack, the airforce would be immediately notified.
>>>
>>>The system worked by having special sensors that would only be
>>>triggered by the intense light of a nuclear weapon.  Other light
>>>(sunlight, lightning, etc) would not affect it.  Upon receipt of
>>>the blast light, the sensor would send a off signal before the blast
>>>shock wave (travels slower) and destroyed the sensor and wires.
>>>Areas would have multiple sensors in case one was destroyed.
>>>
>>>The sensors and warning system is described in the WUTR:
>>>http://massis.lcs.mit.edu/telecom-archives/archives/technical/western-union-tech-review/17-1/p032.htm
>>>
>>>
>>
>> A satellite designed to do that some decades ago... found x-ray
>> burster stars. It almost caused a big panic and a war.
>
>There was a panic as well with the radar once,   when the moon rose,
>was that right.?

Yes the DEW line was supposed to detect Soviet missles coming over the
North pole area... instead it spotted the moon rising over the
horizon.

<hanc...@bbs.cpcn.com> wrote:
> In 1963, Western Union, under contract with the US Air Force, installed 
> a nationwide nuclear weapon detonation detection system.  If there
> was an attack, the airforce would be immediately notified.
> 
> The system worked by having special sensors that would only be
> triggered by the intense light of a nuclear weapon.  Other light
> (sunlight, lightning, etc) would not affect it.  Upon receipt of
> the blast light, the sensor would send a off signal before the blast
> shock wave (travels slower) and destroyed the sensor and wires.
> Areas would have multiple sensors in case one was destroyed.
> 
> The sensors and warning system is described in the WUTR:
> http://massis.lcs.mit.edu/telecom-archives/archives/technical/western-union-tech-review/17-1/p032.htm
> 

There is a story that there is one radio station in Russia (Moscow)  that
broadcasts nothing but a continuous tone. Supposedly, if it ever stops
broadcasting it will trigger a fail-safe launch on nukes. I read a story
about this, but later it turned up in several factual contexts.

-- 
Pete

On 2018-02-09, Peter Flass <peter...@yahoo.com> wrote:
><hanc...@bbs.cpcn.com> wrote:
>> In 1963, Western Union, under contract with the US Air Force, installed 
>> a nationwide nuclear weapon detonation detection system.  If there
>> was an attack, the airforce would be immediately notified.
>> 
>> The system worked by having special sensors that would only be
>> triggered by the intense light of a nuclear weapon.  Other light
>> (sunlight, lightning, etc) would not affect it.  Upon receipt of
>> the blast light, the sensor would send a off signal before the blast
>> shock wave (travels slower) and destroyed the sensor and wires.
>> Areas would have multiple sensors in case one was destroyed.
>> 
>> The sensors and warning system is described in the WUTR:
>> http://massis.lcs.mit.edu/telecom-archives/archives/technical/western-union-tech-review/17-1/p032.htm
>> 
>
> There is a story that there is one radio station in Russia (Moscow)  that
> broadcasts nothing but a continuous tone. Supposedly, if it ever stops
> broadcasting it will trigger a fail-safe launch on nukes. I read a story
> about this, but later it turned up in several factual contexts.
>

Variation on Dr, Strangelove?.

I lost my SW radio, but there used to be many, many very peculiar
broadcasts

The was a story of a Catholic couple in Ireland that had trouble
conceiving children, so the local parish priest was going to Rome,
and promised that he would light a candle in a certain church there,
and that wwould do the trick. 

The priest was sent on to the Missions and got home to his Irish
prish years after, so went to see the couple, the back door was
hanging off the hinges, children everywhere, but no sign of the
husband, Where was he?

"He is gone to Rome to make sure that bloody candle has gone out."


-- 
greymaus.ireland.ie
Just_Another_Grumpy_Old_Man

On 10 Feb 2018 08:49:33 GMT, ma...@mail.com wrote:

>On 2018-02-09, Peter Flass <peter...@yahoo.com> wrote:
>><hanc...@bbs.cpcn.com> wrote:
>>> In 1963, Western Union, under contract with the US Air Force, installed 
>>> a nationwide nuclear weapon detonation detection system.  If there
>>> was an attack, the airforce would be immediately notified.
>>> 
>>> The system worked by having special sensors that would only be
>>> triggered by the intense light of a nuclear weapon.  Other light
>>> (sunlight, lightning, etc) would not affect it.  Upon receipt of
>>> the blast light, the sensor would send a off signal before the blast
>>> shock wave (travels slower) and destroyed the sensor and wires.
>>> Areas would have multiple sensors in case one was destroyed.
>>> 
>>> The sensors and warning system is described in the WUTR:
>>> http://massis.lcs.mit.edu/telecom-archives/archives/technical/western-union-tech-review/17-1/p032.htm
>>> 
>>
>> There is a story that there is one radio station in Russia (Moscow)  that
>> broadcasts nothing but a continuous tone. Supposedly, if it ever stops
>> broadcasting it will trigger a fail-safe launch on nukes. I read a story
>> about this, but later it turned up in several factual contexts.
>>
>
>Variation on Dr, Strangelove?.
>
>I lost my SW radio, but there used to be many, many very peculiar
>broadcasts

Numbers stations still broadcast.

>The was a story of a Catholic couple in Ireland that had trouble
>conceiving children, so the local parish priest was going to Rome,
>and promised that he would light a candle in a certain church there,
>and that wwould do the trick. 
>
>The priest was sent on to the Missions and got home to his Irish
>prish years after, so went to see the couple, the back door was
>hanging off the hinges, children everywhere, but no sign of the
>husband, Where was he?
>
>"He is gone to Rome to make sure that bloody candle has gone out."

Most likely they figured out to do it.

On Fri, 9 Feb 2018 16:43:52 -0700, Peter Flass wrote:
>
> <hanc...@bbs.cpcn.com> wrote:
>> In 1963, Western Union, under contract with the US Air Force, installed 
>> a nationwide nuclear weapon detonation detection system.  If there
>> was an attack, the airforce would be immediately notified.
>> 
>> The system worked by having special sensors that would only be
>> triggered by the intense light of a nuclear weapon.  Other light
>> (sunlight, lightning, etc) would not affect it.  Upon receipt of
>> the blast light, the sensor would send a off signal before the blast
>> shock wave (travels slower) and destroyed the sensor and wires.
>> Areas would have multiple sensors in case one was destroyed.
>> 
>> The sensors and warning system is described in the WUTR:
>> http://massis.lcs.mit.edu/telecom-archives/archives/technical/western-union-tech-review/17-1/p032.htm
>> 
>
> There is a story that there is one radio station in Russia (Moscow)  that
> broadcasts nothing but a continuous tone. Supposedly, if it ever stops
> broadcasting it will trigger a fail-safe launch on nukes. I read a story
> about this, but later it turned up in several factual contexts.

I love Number Stations. No idea what their purpose is today, just loving
them. :-)

Could put up my own station, announcing random numbers. Having some three
letter agencies wasting their time investigating. *g*
-- 
Andreas
You know you are a redneck if
you refer to the time you won a free case of oil as the
"day my ship came in."

On 2018-02-10, Andreas Kohlbach <a...@spamfence.net> wrote:
> On Fri, 9 Feb 2018 16:43:52 -0700, Peter Flass wrote:
>>
>> <hanc...@bbs.cpcn.com> wrote:
>>> In 1963, Western Union, under contract with the US Air Force, installed 
>>> a nationwide nuclear weapon detonation detection system.  If there
>>> was an attack, the airforce would be immediately notified.
>>> 
>>> The system worked by having special sensors that would only be
>>> triggered by the intense light of a nuclear weapon.  Other light
>>> (sunlight, lightning, etc) would not affect it.  Upon receipt of
>>> the blast light, the sensor would send a off signal before the blast
>>> shock wave (travels slower) and destroyed the sensor and wires.
>>> Areas would have multiple sensors in case one was destroyed.
>>> 
>>> The sensors and warning system is described in the WUTR:
>>> http://massis.lcs.mit.edu/telecom-archives/archives/technical/western-union-tech-review/17-1/p032.htm
>>> 
>>
>> There is a story that there is one radio station in Russia (Moscow)  that
>> broadcasts nothing but a continuous tone. Supposedly, if it ever stops
>> broadcasting it will trigger a fail-safe launch on nukes. I read a story
>> about this, but later it turned up in several factual contexts.
>
> I love Number Stations. No idea what their purpose is today, just loving
> them. :-)
>
> Could put up my own station, announcing random numbers. Having some three
> letter agencies wasting their time investigating. *g*

They say Guantanamo is nice this time of year

-- 
greymaus.ireland.ie
Just_Another_Grumpy_Old_Man

On 10 Feb 2018 21:37:38 GMT, ma...@mail.com wrote:

>On 2018-02-10, Andreas Kohlbach <a...@spamfence.net> wrote:
>> On Fri, 9 Feb 2018 16:43:52 -0700, Peter Flass wrote:
>>>
>>> <hanc...@bbs.cpcn.com> wrote:
>>>> In 1963, Western Union, under contract with the US Air Force, installed 
>>>> a nationwide nuclear weapon detonation detection system.  If there
>>>> was an attack, the airforce would be immediately notified.
>>>> 
>>>> The system worked by having special sensors that would only be
>>>> triggered by the intense light of a nuclear weapon.  Other light
>>>> (sunlight, lightning, etc) would not affect it.  Upon receipt of
>>>> the blast light, the sensor would send a off signal before the blast
>>>> shock wave (travels slower) and destroyed the sensor and wires.
>>>> Areas would have multiple sensors in case one was destroyed.
>>>> 
>>>> The sensors and warning system is described in the WUTR:
>>>> http://massis.lcs.mit.edu/telecom-archives/archives/technical/western-union-tech-review/17-1/p032.htm
>>>> 
>>>
>>> There is a story that there is one radio station in Russia (Moscow)  that
>>> broadcasts nothing but a continuous tone. Supposedly, if it ever stops
>>> broadcasting it will trigger a fail-safe launch on nukes. I read a story
>>> about this, but later it turned up in several factual contexts.
>>
>> I love Number Stations. No idea what their purpose is today, just loving
>> them. :-)
>>
>> Could put up my own station, announcing random numbers. Having some three
>> letter agencies wasting their time investigating. *g*
>
>They say Guantanamo is nice this time of year

Actually it's nice most of the year (I've been there).  Probably not a
good place to be a prisoner . . .

However it's unlikely that that would happen to a US citizen in the
US.  More likely you'd have your station confiscated for broadcasting
without a license.

Andreas Kohlbach <a...@spamfence.net> wrote:
> On Fri, 9 Feb 2018 16:43:52 -0700, Peter Flass wrote:
>> 
>> <hanc...@bbs.cpcn.com> wrote:
>>> In 1963, Western Union, under contract with the US Air Force, installed 
>>> a nationwide nuclear weapon detonation detection system.  If there
>>> was an attack, the airforce would be immediately notified.
>>> 
>>> The system worked by having special sensors that would only be
>>> triggered by the intense light of a nuclear weapon.  Other light
>>> (sunlight, lightning, etc) would not affect it.  Upon receipt of
>>> the blast light, the sensor would send a off signal before the blast
>>> shock wave (travels slower) and destroyed the sensor and wires.
>>> Areas would have multiple sensors in case one was destroyed.
>>> 
>>> The sensors and warning system is described in the WUTR:
>>> http://massis.lcs.mit.edu/telecom-archives/archives/technical/western-union-tech-review/17-1/p032.htm
>>> 
>> 
>> There is a story that there is one radio station in Russia (Moscow)  that
>> broadcasts nothing but a continuous tone. Supposedly, if it ever stops
>> broadcasting it will trigger a fail-safe launch on nukes. I read a story
>> about this, but later it turned up in several factual contexts.
> 
> I love Number Stations. No idea what their purpose is today, just loving
> them. :-)
> 
> Could put up my own station, announcing random numbers. Having some three
> letter agencies wasting their time investigating. *g*

A web site would be funny - just a blank screen with a constantly changing
sequence of  numbers.

-- 
Pete

On 2018-02-10, Peter Flass <peter...@yahoo.com> wrote:
> Andreas Kohlbach <a...@spamfence.net> wrote:
>> On Fri, 9 Feb 2018 16:43:52 -0700, Peter Flass wrote:
>>> 
>>> <hanc...@bbs.cpcn.com> wrote:
>>>> In 1963, Western Union, under contract with the US Air Force, installed 
>>>> a nationwide nuclear weapon detonation detection system.  If there
>>>> was an attack, the airforce would be immediately notified.
>>>> 
>>>> The system worked by having special sensors that would only be
>>>> triggered by the intense light of a nuclear weapon.  Other light
>>>> (sunlight, lightning, etc) would not affect it.  Upon receipt of
>>>> the blast light, the sensor would send a off signal before the blast
>>>> shock wave (travels slower) and destroyed the sensor and wires.
>>>> Areas would have multiple sensors in case one was destroyed.
>>>> 
>>>> The sensors and warning system is described in the WUTR:
>>>> http://massis.lcs.mit.edu/telecom-archives/archives/technical/western-union-tech-review/17-1/p032.htm
>>>> 
>>> 
>>> There is a story that there is one radio station in Russia (Moscow)  that
>>> broadcasts nothing but a continuous tone. Supposedly, if it ever stops
>>> broadcasting it will trigger a fail-safe launch on nukes. I read a story
>>> about this, but later it turned up in several factual contexts.
>> 
>> I love Number Stations. No idea what their purpose is today, just loving
>> them. :-)
>> 
>> Could put up my own station, announcing random numbers. Having some three
>> letter agencies wasting their time investigating. *g*
>
> A web site would be funny - just a blank screen with a constantly changing
> sequence of  numbers.
>

Radio better, even one using Morse, you need good power to get
internet
 


-- 
greymaus.ireland.ie
Just_Another_Grumpy_Old_Man

On 11 Feb 2018 10:49:36 GMT
Huge <Huge@nowhere.much.invalid> wrote:

> Talking of which, when number stations started, how was the voice
> generated? Surely they didn't have someone sit there and read them out?

	Perhaps a mechanism similar to the "speaking clock" phone service.

-- 
Steve O'Hara-Smith                          |   Directable Mirror Arrays
C:\>WIN                                     | A better way to focus the sun
The computer obeys and wins.                |    licences available see
You lose and Bill collects.                 |    http://www.sohara.org/

On 11 Feb 2018 10:49:36 GMT, Huge <Huge@nowhere.much.invalid> wrote:

>On 2018-02-10, Andreas Kohlbach <a...@spamfence.net> wrote:
>
>[22 lines snipped]
>
>> I love Number Stations. No idea what their purpose is today, just loving
>> them. :-)
>>
>> Could put up my own station, announcing random numbers. Having some three
>> letter agencies wasting their time investigating. *g*
>
>*laugh8 What a marvellous idea!!!
>
>I've a radio amatuer licence - I wonder what the authorities would think
>of a synthesised voice announcing random 5 letter groups?

In the U.S., which I know you aren't here, its illegal for cryptic
coded messages to be sent by ham radio operators.

Saw an argument about this on a ham radio forum. Was digital 'plain
speech' ? What about CW ? etc. I just ignored it except for randomly
reading one or two posts.

>Talking of which, when number stations started, how was the voice generated?
>Surely they didn't have someone sit there and read them out? Although
>given the kinds of country that did it, it would surprise me.

My little understanding of it is that now its a computer voice, but
people did it years ago.

<ma...@mail.com> wrote:
> On 2018-02-10, Peter Flass <peter...@yahoo.com> wrote:
>> Andreas Kohlbach <a...@spamfence.net> wrote:
>>> On Fri, 9 Feb 2018 16:43:52 -0700, Peter Flass wrote:
>>>> 
>>>> <hanc...@bbs.cpcn.com> wrote:
>>>>> In 1963, Western Union, under contract with the US Air Force, installed 
>>>>> a nationwide nuclear weapon detonation detection system.  If there
>>>>> was an attack, the airforce would be immediately notified.
>>>>> 
>>>>> The system worked by having special sensors that would only be
>>>>> triggered by the intense light of a nuclear weapon.  Other light
>>>>> (sunlight, lightning, etc) would not affect it.  Upon receipt of
>>>>> the blast light, the sensor would send a off signal before the blast
>>>>> shock wave (travels slower) and destroyed the sensor and wires.
>>>>> Areas would have multiple sensors in case one was destroyed.
>>>>> 
>>>>> The sensors and warning system is described in the WUTR:
>>>>> http://massis.lcs.mit.edu/telecom-archives/archives/technical/western-union-tech-review/17-1/p032.htm
>>>>> 
>>>> 
>>>> There is a story that there is one radio station in Russia (Moscow)  that
>>>> broadcasts nothing but a continuous tone. Supposedly, if it ever stops
>>>> broadcasting it will trigger a fail-safe launch on nukes. I read a story
>>>> about this, but later it turned up in several factual contexts.
>>> 
>>> I love Number Stations. No idea what their purpose is today, just loving
>>> them. :-)
>>> 
>>> Could put up my own station, announcing random numbers. Having some three
>>> letter agencies wasting their time investigating. *g*
>> 
>> A web site would be funny - just a blank screen with a constantly changing
>> sequence of  numbers.
>> 
> 
> Radio better, even one using Morse, you need good power to get
> internet
>  

Yes, but to yank the chains of the gov't and conspiracy theorists a web
site is handier, since you don't need a license.

-- 
Pete

JimP <solo...@gmail.com> wrote:
> On 11 Feb 2018 10:49:36 GMT, Huge <Huge@nowhere.much.invalid> wrote:
> 
>> On 2018-02-10, Andreas Kohlbach <a...@spamfence.net> wrote:
>> 
>> [22 lines snipped]
>> 
>>> I love Number Stations. No idea what their purpose is today, just loving
>>> them. :-)
>>> 
>>> Could put up my own station, announcing random numbers. Having some three
>>> letter agencies wasting their time investigating. *g*
>> 
>> *laugh8 What a marvellous idea!!!
>> 
>> I've a radio amatuer licence - I wonder what the authorities would think
>> of a synthesised voice announcing random 5 letter groups?
> 
> In the U.S., which I know you aren't here, its illegal for cryptic
> coded messages to be sent by ham radio operators.
> 
> Saw an argument about this on a ham radio forum. Was digital 'plain
> speech' ? What about CW ? etc. I just ignored it except for randomly
> reading one or two posts.

Surprised they're still arguing this. Digital packet radio has been around
"forever", based on the AlohaNet. The KA9Q tcp/ip package was developed, as
the name suggests for ham radio.

> 
>> Talking of which, when number stations started, how was the voice generated?
>> Surely they didn't have someone sit there and read them out? Although
>> given the kinds of country that did it, it would surprise me.
> 
> My little understanding of it is that now its a computer voice, but
> people did it years ago.
> 
> 



-- 
Pete

On Sun, 11 Feb 2018 07:30:27 -0600, JimP wrote:

> On 11 Feb 2018 10:49:36 GMT, Huge <Huge@nowhere.much.invalid> wrote:

>>I've a radio amatuer licence - I wonder what the authorities would think
>>of a synthesised voice announcing random 5 letter groups?
> 
> In the U.S., which I know you aren't here, its illegal for cryptic coded
> messages to be sent by ham radio operators.

Clause 2.87 of the UK licence forbids use of encryption except under 
certain exceptional circumstances. I guess you'd have to prove the groups 
were random.

And you still have to broadcast the callsign regularly.

-- 
Using UNIX since v6 (1975)...

Use the BIG mirror service in the UK:
 http://www.mirrorservice.org

On 2018-02-11, Peter Flass <peter...@yahoo.com> wrote:
><ma...@mail.com> wrote:
>> On 2018-02-10, Peter Flass <peter...@yahoo.com> wrote:
>>> Andreas Kohlbach <a...@spamfence.net> wrote:
>>> sequence of  numbers.
>>> 
>> 
>> Radio better, even one using Morse, you need good power to get
>> internet
>>  
>
> Yes, but to yank the chains of the gov't and conspiracy theorists a web
> site is handier, since you don't need a license.
>

I would'nt yank it too much. To charge someone with something in the
States, you need some smidgin of evidence. According to recent
treaties, to extradite someone from the like of .ie, you need
nothing, just a message from someone official in the US.


-- 
greymaus.ireland.ie
Just_Another_Grumpy_Old_Man

On Sun, 11 Feb 2018 07:00:56 -0700, Peter Flass
<peter...@yahoo.com> wrote:

>JimP <solo...@gmail.com> wrote:
>> On 11 Feb 2018 10:49:36 GMT, Huge <Huge@nowhere.much.invalid> wrote:
>> 
>>> On 2018-02-10, Andreas Kohlbach <a...@spamfence.net> wrote:
>>> 
>>> [22 lines snipped]
>>> 
>>>> I love Number Stations. No idea what their purpose is today, just loving
>>>> them. :-)
>>>> 
>>>> Could put up my own station, announcing random numbers. Having some three
>>>> letter agencies wasting their time investigating. *g*
>>> 
>>> *laugh8 What a marvellous idea!!!
>>> 
>>> I've a radio amatuer licence - I wonder what the authorities would think
>>> of a synthesised voice announcing random 5 letter groups?
>> 
>> In the U.S., which I know you aren't here, its illegal for cryptic
>> coded messages to be sent by ham radio operators.
>> 
>> Saw an argument about this on a ham radio forum. Was digital 'plain
>> speech' ? What about CW ? etc. I just ignored it except for randomly
>> reading one or two posts.
>
>Surprised they're still arguing this. Digital packet radio has been around
>"forever", based on the AlohaNet. The KA9Q tcp/ip package was developed, as
>the name suggests for ham radio.

Some ham radio forums just talk and help, other ham radio forums like
to argue over nothing.

They were arguing over FT8, PSK31, etc.

On 11/02/2018 14:09, Bob Eager wrote:
> On Sun, 11 Feb 2018 07:30:27 -0600, JimP wrote:
> 
>> On 11 Feb 2018 10:49:36 GMT, Huge <Huge@nowhere.much.invalid> wrote:
> 
>>> I've a radio amatuer licence - I wonder what the authorities would think
>>> of a synthesised voice announcing random 5 letter groups?
>>
>> In the U.S., which I know you aren't here, its illegal for cryptic coded
>> messages to be sent by ham radio operators.
> 
> Clause 2.87 of the UK licence forbids use of encryption except under
> certain exceptional circumstances. I guess you'd have to prove the groups
> were random.
> 
> And you still have to broadcast the callsign regularly.
> 

But the licence does not prohibit encypherment.

For those in the know, Morse is not a code, it is a cypher, and
it was probably Vail, Morse's technician who derived it, and
so it is not Morse Code, but Vail Cypher.

Something was lost in the spirit of amateur radio when the
requirement for new licensees to spend the first year
on Morse (Wrongly called CW which was an improvement
over Logarithmic Decrement) with a limit of 10W.

A lot of recent so-called radio amateurs know nothing
abiut the internals of their rigs, a bit like
so-called computer scientists being completely clueless
  about the computer internals and being completely lost
if not using Unix / Linux and C.

On 11/02/2018 14:44, JimP wrote:
> On Sun, 11 Feb 2018 07:00:56 -0700, Peter Flass
> <peter...@yahoo.com> wrote:
> 
>> JimP <solo...@gmail.com> wrote:
>>> On 11 Feb 2018 10:49:36 GMT, Huge <Huge@nowhere.much.invalid> wrote:
>>>
>>>> On 2018-02-10, Andreas Kohlbach <a...@spamfence.net> wrote:
>>>>
>>>> [22 lines snipped]
>>>>
>>>>> I love Number Stations. No idea what their purpose is today, just loving
>>>>> them. :-)
>>>>>
>>>>> Could put up my own station, announcing random numbers. Having some three
>>>>> letter agencies wasting their time investigating. *g*
>>>>
>>>> *laugh8 What a marvellous idea!!!
>>>>
>>>> I've a radio amatuer licence - I wonder what the authorities would think
>>>> of a synthesised voice announcing random 5 letter groups?
>>>
>>> In the U.S., which I know you aren't here, its illegal for cryptic
>>> coded messages to be sent by ham radio operators.
>>>
>>> Saw an argument about this on a ham radio forum. Was digital 'plain
>>> speech' ? What about CW ? etc. I just ignored it except for randomly
>>> reading one or two posts.
>>
>> Surprised they're still arguing this. Digital packet radio has been around
>> "forever", based on the AlohaNet. The KA9Q tcp/ip package was developed, as
>> the name suggests for ham radio.
> 
> Some ham radio forums just talk and help, other ham radio forums like
> to argue over nothing.
> 
> They were arguing over FT8, PSK31, etc.
> 

The first and only real digital mode is hand-keyed Morse.

On 2/11/2018 2:30 AM, ma...@mail.com wrote:
> On 2018-02-10, Peter Flass <peter...@yahoo.com> wrote:
>> Andreas Kohlbach <a...@spamfence.net> wrote:
>>> On Fri, 9 Feb 2018 16:43:52 -0700, Peter Flass wrote:
>>>>
>>>> <hanc...@bbs.cpcn.com> wrote:
>>>>> In 1963, Western Union, under contract with the US Air Force, installed
>>>>> a nationwide nuclear weapon detonation detection system.  If there
>>>>> was an attack, the airforce would be immediately notified.
>>>>>
>>>>> The system worked by having special sensors that would only be
>>>>> triggered by the intense light of a nuclear weapon.  Other light
>>>>> (sunlight, lightning, etc) would not affect it.  Upon receipt of
>>>>> the blast light, the sensor would send a off signal before the blast
>>>>> shock wave (travels slower) and destroyed the sensor and wires.
>>>>> Areas would have multiple sensors in case one was destroyed.
>>>>>
>>>>> The sensors and warning system is described in the WUTR:
>>>>> http://massis.lcs.mit.edu/telecom-archives/archives/technical/western-union-tech-review/17-1/p032.htm
>>>>>
>>>>
>>>> There is a story that there is one radio station in Russia (Moscow)  that
>>>> broadcasts nothing but a continuous tone. Supposedly, if it ever stops
>>>> broadcasting it will trigger a fail-safe launch on nukes. I read a story
>>>> about this, but later it turned up in several factual contexts.
>>>
>>> I love Number Stations. No idea what their purpose is today, just loving
>>> them. :-)
>>>
>>> Could put up my own station, announcing random numbers. Having some three
>>> letter agencies wasting their time investigating. *g*
>>
>> A web site would be funny - just a blank screen with a constantly changing
>> sequence of  numbers.
>>
> 
> Radio better, even one using Morse, you need good power to get
> internet

It's not easy to tell who's listening to a radio station. If you have 
state level resources, it's a lot easier to determine who is 
connecting to any particular website.

On Sun, 11 Feb 2018 15:00:30 GMT, Huge <Huge@nowhere.much.invalid>
wrote: 

> On 2018-02-11, Peter Flass <peter...@yahoo.com> wrote:
>> JimP <solo...@gmail.com> wrote:
>>> On 11 Feb 2018 10:49:36 GMT, Huge <Huge@nowhere.much.invalid> wrote:
>>> 
>>>> On 2018-02-10, Andreas Kohlbach <a...@spamfence.net> wrote:
>>>> 
>>>> [22 lines snipped]
>>>> 
>>>>> I love Number Stations. No idea what their purpose is today, just
>>>>> loving them. :-)
>>>>> 
>>>>> Could put up my own station, announcing random numbers. Having
>>>>> some three letter agencies wasting their time investigating. *g*
>>>> 
>>>> *laugh8 What a marvellous idea!!!
>>>> 
>>>> I've a radio amatuer licence - I wonder what the authorities would
>>>> think of a synthesised voice announcing random 5 letter groups?
>>> 
>>> In the U.S., which I know you aren't here, its illegal for cryptic
>>> coded messages to be sent by ham radio operators.
> 
> Same here. But if it's random, it isn't "cryptic coded".   :o)
> 
>>> 
>>> Saw an argument about this on a ham radio forum. Was digital 'plain
>>> speech' ? What about CW ? etc. I just ignored it except for randomly
>>> reading one or two posts.
>>
>> Surprised they're still arguing this.
> 
> Radio amateurs are the ultimate barrack-room lawyers.
> 
> 
Top tip:
Do *not* get involved with uk.radio.amateur or uk.legal

-- 
Bah, and indeed, Humbug.

On Sun, 11 Feb 2018 18:25:52 -0000 (UTC), "Kerr-Mudd,John"
<nots...@invalid.org> wrote:

>On Sun, 11 Feb 2018 15:00:30 GMT, Huge <Huge@nowhere.much.invalid>
>wrote: 
>
>> On 2018-02-11, Peter Flass <peter...@yahoo.com> wrote:
>>> JimP <solo...@gmail.com> wrote:
>>>> On 11 Feb 2018 10:49:36 GMT, Huge <Huge@nowhere.much.invalid> wrote:
>>>> 
>>>>> On 2018-02-10, Andreas Kohlbach <a...@spamfence.net> wrote:
>>>>> 
>>>>> [22 lines snipped]
>>>>> 
>>>>>> I love Number Stations. No idea what their purpose is today, just
>>>>>> loving them. :-)
>>>>>> 
>>>>>> Could put up my own station, announcing random numbers. Having
>>>>>> some three letter agencies wasting their time investigating. *g*
>>>>> 
>>>>> *laugh8 What a marvellous idea!!!
>>>>> 
>>>>> I've a radio amatuer licence - I wonder what the authorities would
>>>>> think of a synthesised voice announcing random 5 letter groups?
>>>> 
>>>> In the U.S., which I know you aren't here, its illegal for cryptic
>>>> coded messages to be sent by ham radio operators.
>> 
>> Same here. But if it's random, it isn't "cryptic coded".   :o)
>> 
>>>> 
>>>> Saw an argument about this on a ham radio forum. Was digital 'plain
>>>> speech' ? What about CW ? etc. I just ignored it except for randomly
>>>> reading one or two posts.
>>>
>>> Surprised they're still arguing this.
>> 
>> Radio amateurs are the ultimate barrack-room lawyers.
>> 
>> 
>Top tip:
>Do *not* get involved with uk.radio.amateur or uk.legal

It never ceases to amaze me how non-lawyers will argue to death points
that the courts have long since nailed down.

On 2018-02-11, J  Clarke <jclarke...@gmail.com> wrote:
> On Sun, 11 Feb 2018 18:25:52 -0000 (UTC), "Kerr-Mudd,John"
><nots...@invalid.org> wrote:
>
>>On Sun, 11 Feb 2018 15:00:30 GMT, Huge <Huge@nowhere.much.invalid>
>>wrote: 
>>
>>> On 2018-02-11, Peter Flass <peter...@yahoo.com> wrote:
>>>>> Saw an argument about this on a ham radio forum. Was digital 'plain
>>>>> speech' ? What about CW ? etc. I just ignored it except for randomly
>>>>> reading one or two posts.
>>>>
>>>> Surprised they're still arguing this.
>>> 
>>> Radio amateurs are the ultimate barrack-room lawyers.
>>> 
>>> 
>>Top tip:
>>Do *not* get involved with uk.radio.amateur or uk.legal
>
> It never ceases to amaze me how non-lawyers will argue to death points
> that the courts have long since nailed down.

or ignore


-- 
greymaus.ireland.ie
Just_Another_Grumpy_Old_Man

On 2018-02-12, ma...@mail.com <ma...@mail.com> wrote:
> On 2018-02-11, J  Clarke <jclarke...@gmail.com> wrote:
>> On Sun, 11 Feb 2018 18:25:52 -0000 (UTC), "Kerr-Mudd,John"
>><nots...@invalid.org> wrote:
>>
>>>On Sun, 11 Feb 2018 15:00:30 GMT, Huge <Huge@nowhere.much.invalid>
>>>wrote: 
>>>
>>>> On 2018-02-11, Peter Flass <peter...@yahoo.com> wrote:
>>>>>> Saw an argument about this on a ham radio forum. Was digital 'plain
>>>>>> speech' ? What about CW ? etc. I just ignored it except for randomly
>>>>>> reading one or two posts.
>>>>>
>>>>> Surprised they're still arguing this.
>>>> 
>>>> Radio amateurs are the ultimate barrack-room lawyers.
>>>> 
>>>> 
>>>Top tip:
>>>Do *not* get involved with uk.radio.amateur or uk.legal
>>
>> It never ceases to amaze me how non-lawyers will argue to death points
>> that the courts have long since nailed down.
>
> or ignore
>
>

Example; here in the Republic, the first official language is Gaelic.
In a case years ago, I suggested to our barrister  that he refers to
the Act in question in its Gaelic Version,

"Don't even think of that, if we won on that point, it would put the
whole Irish legal system in doubt,"


-- 
greymaus.ireland.ie
Just_Another_Grumpy_Old_Man

On 12 Feb 2018 11:25:47 GMT
ma...@mail.com wrote:

> Example; here in the Republic, the first official language is Gaelic.
> In a case years ago, I suggested to our barrister  that he refers to
> the Act in question in its Gaelic Version,
> 
> "Don't even think of that, if we won on that point, it would put the
> whole Irish legal system in doubt,"

	At that point I would have had a hard time resisting trying to find
a barrister who would go for it.

-- 
Steve O'Hara-Smith                          |   Directable Mirror Arrays
C:\>WIN                                     | A better way to focus the sun
The computer obeys and wins.                |    licences available see
You lose and Bill collects.                 |    http://www.sohara.org/

<ma...@mail.com> wrote:
> On 2018-02-12, ma...@mail.com <ma...@mail.com> wrote:
>> On 2018-02-11, J  Clarke <jclarke...@gmail.com> wrote:
>>> On Sun, 11 Feb 2018 18:25:52 -0000 (UTC), "Kerr-Mudd,John"
>>> <nots...@invalid.org> wrote:
>>> 
>>>> On Sun, 11 Feb 2018 15:00:30 GMT, Huge <Huge@nowhere.much.invalid>
>>>> wrote: 
>>>> 
>>>>> On 2018-02-11, Peter Flass <peter...@yahoo.com> wrote:
>>>>>>> Saw an argument about this on a ham radio forum. Was digital 'plain
>>>>>>> speech' ? What about CW ? etc. I just ignored it except for randomly
>>>>>>> reading one or two posts.
>>>>>> 
>>>>>> Surprised they're still arguing this.
>>>>> 
>>>>> Radio amateurs are the ultimate barrack-room lawyers.
>>>>> 
>>>>> 
>>>> Top tip:
>>>> Do *not* get involved with uk.radio.amateur or uk.legal
>>> 
>>> It never ceases to amaze me how non-lawyers will argue to death points
>>> that the courts have long since nailed down.
>> 
>> or ignore
>> 
>> 
> 
> Example; here in the Republic, the first official language is Gaelic.
> In a case years ago, I suggested to our barrister  that he refers to
> the Act in question in its Gaelic Version,
> 
> "Don't even think of that, if we won on that point, it would put the
> whole Irish legal system in doubt,"
> 
> 

Makes me wonder about EU regulations that have to be translated into <many>
"official" languages, although I think I read that some are more official
than others.

-- 
Pete