Hacker News Reader

Comment by brightball | Hacker News Reader

I have noticed a correlation where the smartest tech people I know are also Ham operators.

Technical hobbyists also have a genuine interest in technical work.

Contrast this with the flood of new college graduates who have minimal interest in engineering, yet want the high salaries that tech was famous for (until recently).

I really wish I was more passionate about tech, but I'm not. I open IDE in my private time about once per year. Computers just aren't that fun to me anymore, they became the symbol of the absurdity of modern society. I greatly prefer to have a walk outside.

This is sad and I'd love to have my hobby back, but I don't see a way I could change this.

Well, anal_reactor, it can be about more than tech for techs sake. My side projects help actual people in the real world, so working on them feels like more than twiddling bits.

In most countries, the advanced class (or equivalent) is a licence to design, construct, and operate your own radio transmitter for experimental purposes. (Just about anyone with a serious interest in electronics has thought about building their own transmitter, I imagine.)

While a lot of people will dismiss ham radio as just a bunch of old farts talking about their diabetes, a lot of the actual joy of being a ham op is from experimenting. Whether it's from building radios and antennas, to attempting to overcome difficult atmospheric conditions, or just trying to see how many (or far) contacts can be made on super low power.

This type of thing usually requires curious people. And the smartest tech people I know, are the ones that are the most curious.

Hams are the quintessential "know just enough to be dangerous" people.

Don't get me wrong, I've come across a lot of wonderful, truly smart hams; but I've also witnessed many hams who really never should have gotten half-smart.

Hams are amateur electricians, hilarity /will/ ensue and it won't all be funny.

The smart ones know they just know enough to be dangerous - a foundation of knowledge, not the whole book.

Some of the best RF guys I know, have no formal training - because there is important theory around RF - it doesn't always work like projected.

In my industry a Ham Ticket has taken the place of a GROL as something employers look upon favorably, because it means you generally should already have a foundation of RF theory.

> employers look out for

As in, avoid? Or want?

Want, sorry it was unclear. Edited the original post to clarify.

What's dangerous about ham radio?

If you're broadcasting at higher powers (to send over longer distances) there are risks from high RF exposure and electrical hazards. The HAM radio license exams focus on these safety issues quite a bit.

RF exposure at the frequencies involved are basically non-harmful.

RF exposure on the ground from an aerial are likely non-harmful. Right next to the antenna can still give burns. There's also issues of arcing, lightning, and other electrical issues when dealing with high power radios.

Electricity is unforgiving and a lot of the safety rules in licenses above Technician try to instill that fact.

Sounds like you have never had an RF burn before. The sensation is a lot like a sunburn, but is hard to get if you are electrically close to the ground. Higher frequencies can still give you RF burns when you're standing on the ground.

Lots of people hurt themselves when falling off a ladder trying to put up an antenna.

Joking aside, there is a minor risk of RF burn if you do really stupid things that you have to learn not to do to get a license. I can’t really imagine someone getting hurt by the radios themselves.

depends on the transmission power and the equipment. any tube set can kick like a mule

Heart attack from arguing with OM on 75m

You can also easily cause interference, which might not be directly dangerous, but can certainly be problematic if you're causing problems on important communication channels.

Reply on news.ycombinator.com