[time-nuts] WWVB new modulation

WB6BNQ wb6bnq at cox.net
Fri Nov 23 00:49:49 UTC 2012


Hal,

It is worse than that !  John P Lowe, Broadcast Manager for NIST, stated to me
that "HE" was the person who invented the new modulation scheme.  If that is the
case then it belongs to all of us.  AND that is, precisely, why they are
publishing this modulation scheme.

What I find interesting is this private company started up while JP Lowe was
"inventing" this modulation scheme and requesting patents at the same time.  Does
the word COLLUSION come to mind ?  Yet JP lowe claims he has no stake or interest
in this new company.

WELL, I am having a hard time with that very point.  Equally interesting is that
no public input was sought prior to considering this modulation scheme.  Why is
that you ask ?  Most likely because everyone that actually uses 60 KHz for what
it was intended for would be raising hell about it.

What about the public ?  This new scheme is suppose to allow for additional
services.  What could you possibly add that would be of advantage that is not
available in a number of easier methods like AM/FM radio and TV for disseminating
information.  This, of course, completely ignores the Internet.  As it is now,
the public buys WWVB clocks because they really believe the damn thing is
accurate, which it is truly not.

So, to cut down on the controversy, they wait till they are ready to do it and
then just spring on us like it is a done deal.

As most people are rather passive in nature, they knew no major negative fallout
would occur.  Fallout being like a large group of people  petitioning their
representatives against it and so forth.

Making it worse is the fact that all the major time and frequency companies
abandoned their 60 KHz equipment line in favor of GPS.  Sure GPS is better than
60 KHz, but one of these days something is going to f**kup the GPS system enough
to cause problems.  They already got rid of LORAN and they will probably find a
way to get rid VOR, so flying will become an "F" ticket ride.

This modulation scheme is just another blunder, not unlike Lightsquared,
manipulating the public TEAT to pay for it.

Oh, just my two cents,

Bill....WB6BNQ


Hal Murray wrote:

> jimlux at earthlink.net said:
> > Actually, I think the developing company does have patents on some of  the
> > receiver implementations.  You can probably design around them.
>
> What's the fine print in this area?  Does NIST have any PR blurbs covering
> patents?
>
> Common sense, politics, and patents makes for a horrible mess.
>
> I think I'd be happy if the developing company got a head start.  That could
> be a reasonable trade for a lot of engineering/support during testing.
>
> I think I'd be unhappy if they got a patent on a receiving technique that was
> obvious to one skilled in the art (or whatever the magic patent phrase is)
> after you looked at the description of the modulation/encoding technique.
> That's assuming that NIST didn't get a broad free-to-use license for that
> patent for listening to WWVB.
>
> Another way to view this mess is the general topic of patents in standards.
> WWVB isn't in the same class of "standards" as IETF/IEEE/ANSI/ISO type
> documents, but given that it's a government monopoly, it's as good (or
> better) than any other standard.
>
> --
> These are my opinions.  I hate spam.
>
> _______________________________________________
> time-nuts mailing list -- time-nuts at febo.com
> To unsubscribe, go to https://www.febo.com/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/time-nuts
> and follow the instructions there.




More information about the time-nuts mailing list