One of the key purposes of the amateur radio service is experimentation. This brings with it the risk that I might inadvertently disrupt other communication services, potentially endangering human lives. The tests/licensing guarantees a minimum level of competence to mitigate that risk, while the clear-text and station identification requirements makes it possible to tell me to stop it if I do end up disrupting other services.
I see it comparable to our driver license system. Yes it invades our freedom somewhat, but it reduces a lot of human suffering.
As far as your encryption concerns go, you have to go to extra effort for any of your ham transmissions to be heard by the whole world. Generally it's just a mile or two radius, line of site, only to those who are listening during the short interval while you are transmitting. Far, far different from posting something on the internet.
My main point being that amateur radio only has security through obscurity as it only takes one device locally listening/relaying your signal to invalidate the distance assumption in the same way people posting things online thought 'nobody's ever going to care about this post' all those years ago. A key difference being that you have no option to encrypt and the other party doesn't need to MITM you to get any potentially interesting information.
Being heard by the whole region is even worse.
So, how can I prevent the people in my region from hearing my plans when I broadcast them unencrypted?
> Far, far different from posting something on the internet.
I don't use public Internet fora as a cell phone replacement.
You advocated using amateur radio in that capacity.
FRS: unencrypted, type accepted radios only. Extremely low radiated power and sensitivity.
GMRS: Gotta pay $70 to the gubment every 10 years, type accepted only, unencrypted.
MURS: Unencrypted (mode restricted), and very few usable channels, type accepted.
CB: Unencrypted, unwieldy equipment, full of lunatics, type accepted.
At the end of the day, you live in a society that requests you follow some laws and get licenses for things that can effect others. The encryption issue is contentious and not entirely one-sided but realistically you're far more likely to be bothered over the public bands and the security risk you fear is rather non-existent. I don't exactly know of a hams being kidnapped or attacked in the streets. The US is far safer now that it ever has been on a crime level so having some trust in your fellow man is not unwarranted.
If you really want to be left alone, use Fusion or Dstar over simplex :)
I wouldn't use ham radio as a replacement for normal cell phone personal chatter, but more for updates "Hey dad, me and Judy are going to that cave we saw last year, will call you when we're back out. KG12345 signing off" or "Help, my father fell off a cliff on the John Doe trail about a mile from the trailhead"
It's a broadcast channel, not a private channel, so don't use it for personal chatter that you wouldn't want other people to overhear. Using some common sense eliminates the privacy risk of other people overhearing you
Actually, I really appreciate this sentiment.
One thing that has always seemed odd to me (as a non-HAM with a marginal interest in RF comms) is how authoritarian and ... adherent the community is.
There is no deviation from the established regulations and a striking lack of interest in even discussing amendments or alternatives to the rules.
Whether it is the prohibition of encrypted comms or the radio typing categories (that cause me to respond to fire calls with, literally, three radios in my hand) you will find very little sympathy or enthusiasm for stepping outside the party line even a bit.
... which surprises me because you'd think HAM would be skew libertarian ... or something like that ...
If you want to go off and be a pirate you can probably get away with it, given that the top selling walkie talkie on amazon is an incorrectly marketed ham handheld that can also broadcast on public safety/police frequencies, with or without being set to them. I wouldn't advise it though because if you do get caught they tend to make an example of you, and if you know enough to not get caught, you can easily pass the tech test and beyond so just get licensed for the cost of a happy meal and enjoy.
Personally, I actually support having encrypted sub bands like we have for everything else, with the exception that station ident should be in the clear and I would like to see the tech test be easier.
What I'd want would basically be tinc or another P2P VPN via radio. Like WiFi meshnet, but not limited to line of sight.
As for wifi, it's worth noting that while you can get a ton of gain, you do so by making the signal directional so long story short you always cover very roughly the same volume, be it a long super skinny wedge, medium donut or a small sphere.
But then, here I am on a wired uplink. I guess it's just that I trust my understanding of nested VPN chains in Linux. And that I trust the hardware and software enough.
Android and iOS, though, I don't understand or trust.
You make a good point about WiFi. Not going transcontinental with that. Except adjacent continents, maybe.
More to the point, why would I want to have to get the government's permission in order to talk on it?
Also:
> If you like outdoor activities in areas where cell phone coverage is poor (camping, hiking, skiing, dense urban gatherings)
If you mention this as a possible use, mention that it is illegal to encrypt amateur radio communications, so you must broadcast your family's information and plans for the world to hear. That's quite the security risk.