Post by @ai6yr@m.ai6yr.org

WTF is wrong with these folks. They are deliberately breaking a ham radio protocol to prevent open source... apparently one developer wants full ownership of this and is willing to take his ball home. I'm boycotting the whole thing.

(This is why I haven't EVER been a fan of VARA)

"...The new VARA HF 4.9.1 update contains a date-triggered protocol change that takes effect on January 1, 2027, effectively breaking compatibility with older software and the community-developed Xara modem (0:00 - 4:45).

Key takeaways:

Forced incompatibility: Testing proves that after the January 1, 2027 threshold, stations running version 4.9.1 will no longer connect to those using the previous 4.8.9 version (3:32 - 4:45).
Infrastructure risk: The update threatens the stability of *Winlink RMS* gateways and bulletin board systems. If operators do not upgrade in unison, the resulting "fracture" could disrupt vital emergency communication networks (13:19 - 15:45).
Ownership concerns: The host highlights the risks of relying on closed-source protocols in amateur radio, especially following the sudden disappearance of the open-source Xara project shortly before this breaking update (6:52 - 12:45)...."

#VARA #hamradio #winlink

#vara #winlink #hamradio

1 Boost

0 Likes

Michael K Johnson

@mcdanlj@social.makerforums.info 53 min. ago

@ai6yr Having read at least one redditor say that as a winlink sysop, if they stand up a mercury modem, winlink won't even list their node, is concerning.

The timing is pretty good for actually having open source modes that compete, and tools that integrate across protocols. The question is whether winlink is so bedded in vara that they'll break this opportunity for open, standard protocols.

vbradio 🎙️🌐

@vbradio@mastodon.sdf.org 2 hr. ago

@ai6yr ooh that explains why SDRoxide dropped it like a hot potato

:mastodon: Joltrast

@ras@sunny.garden 3 hr. ago

@ai6yr How timely. I was just thinking this week if ham was worth investigating further. I guess not.

AI6YR Ben

@ai6yr@m.ai6yr.org 3 hr. ago

@ras It is, but not this particular branch of software.

AI6YR Ben

@ai6yr@m.ai6yr.org 3 hr. ago

I have asked this question since day one on this thing.

https://m.ai6yr.org/@ai6yr/110176026938118788

Douglas

@douglasvb@m.ai6yr.org 3 hr. ago

@ai6yr I'm surprised that's even legal.

AI6YR Ben

@ai6yr@m.ai6yr.org 3 hr. ago

@douglasvb no FAA requirement that what is transmitted over the air is not proprietary, only that it can be decoded somehow and is unencrypted.

Iris Young (he/they/she) (PhD)

@iris@neuromatch.social 8 min. ago

@ai6yr @douglasvb I wonder if there's a legal case to be made that if something can be decoded but only with proprietary software, that's effectively a weak form of encrypted?

みやくモード

@ryan@social.miyaku.media 3 hr. ago

@ai6yr do you know what the complaint in the C&D they sent to the open implementation was then? i would have figured DMCA (doesn’t apply if they don’t call it encryption) or patent infringement (doesn’t seem like it would apply if they can change the protocol to break it)

1 more reply

irrational method

@IrrationalMethod@social.coop 3 hr. ago

@ai6yr @douglasvb
(You mean FCC? It's been that kind of a week...)

See also PACTOR IV.

There's a requirement to publish specifications for the mode, but there's nothing stopping someone from using a proprietary mode, even one encumbered with patents that make it effectively only available to those who have paid.

1+ more replies

Douglas

@douglasvb@m.ai6yr.org 3 hr. ago

@ai6yr absolutely bananas. And the OSS community hasn't built a replacement with a convenient plug-in system that someone could separately release code for that would allow decoding?

🤔

Doug Bostrom

@Doug_Bostrom@scicomm.xyz 3 hr. ago

@ai6yr

Time for a fork?

AI6YR Ben

@ai6yr@m.ai6yr.org 3 hr. ago

@Doug_Bostrom There was a fork, they sent them a cease and desist and lawyers. All source code has disappeared.

Scott VO1BAY

@scott@mastodon.clitheroe.ca 3 hr. ago

@ai6yr @Doug_Bostrom Xara wasn't a fork, I believe it to be an LLM reverse engineering effort, though I haven't spent much effort studying the source beyond a cursory glance to confirm my hunch.

But it raises a secondary issue, IMO, which is that LLM baselined modulations and modes do not meaningfully contribute to the corpus of knowledge and understanding of how to write advanced RF code. Yes, you've got bit-identical output, but you don't know how you did it from first principles.

Scott VO1BAY

@scott@mastodon.clitheroe.ca 3 hr. ago

@ai6yr @Doug_Bostrom I'm not saying everyone needs to know how to write an OFDM modulation, it's certainly beyond my math capabilities at present (though I'd love to learn even how to learn this, one day, time permitting)

But being beholden to code that you can only maintain with LLM assistance is, I would suggest, only some degree of separation from a black box - it might as well be a proprietary library in some regards.

1 more reply

Doug Bostrom

@Doug_Bostrom@scicomm.xyz 3 hr. ago

@ai6yr

Cripes.

Your point about emergency comms is concerning.

AI6YR Ben

@ai6yr@m.ai6yr.org 3 hr. ago

@Doug_Bostrom Relying on a proprietary protocol that is run by a stingy developer interested in only making money on licensing fees = recipe for disaster.