this post was submitted on 21 Jan 2026
420 points (100.0% liked)

World News

52363 readers
2150 users here now

A community for discussing events around the World

Rules:

Similarly, if you see posts along these lines, do not engage. Report them, block them, and live a happier life than they do. We see too many slapfights that boil down to "Mom! He's bugging me!" and "I'm not touching you!" Going forward, slapfights will result in removed comments and temp bans to cool off.

We ask that the users report any comment or post that violate the rules, to use critical thinking when reading, posting or commenting. Users that post off-topic spam, advocate violence, have multiple comments or posts removed, weaponize reports or violate the code of conduct will be banned.

All posts and comments will be reviewed on a case-by-case basis. This means that some content that violates the rules may be allowed, while other content that does not violate the rules may be removed. The moderators retain the right to remove any content and ban users.


Lemmy World Partners

News !news@lemmy.world

Politics !politics@lemmy.world

World Politics !globalpolitics@lemmy.world


Recommendations

For Firefox users, there is media bias / propaganda / fact check plugin.

https://addons.mozilla.org/en-US/firefox/addon/media-bias-fact-check/

founded 2 years ago
MODERATORS
you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
[–] perestroika@slrpnk.net 14 points 4 days ago* (last edited 4 days ago) (2 children)

I've seen tests where a reasonably equipped military vehicle could not detect a drone in the air near them transfering video, because the data link was roving through a band of several gigahertz at a thousand hops per second.

If you stay close to the noise floor, especially if you use parts of spectrum that others are using (very impolite, but people who don't want to be caught are unexceptionally impolite)... good luck to the catchers. Especially if the signal occurs at a pre-agreed time and remains short (read: don't try sending video, send something SMS sized).

[–] fullsquare@awful.systems 7 points 3 days ago* (last edited 3 days ago) (2 children)

yes i know how spread spectrum schemes work, but this is not really practical or relevant here

for spread spectrum things to work you need some wide bandwidth, this works great for microwaves where you can spread your 90GHz band signal so that it covers 5GHz, you can't have a signal centered on 5MHz that is 5GHz wide; HF is relevant because while microwaves work with this microwaves are line of sight only and most people's line of sight still terminates in their own country. if you live on a lone hill next to border good for you, but the rest would need to use HF to get out, and there's simply not that much bandwidth available in the first place, which would make any scheme like this extremely slow if at all viable. and you can still jam it

i don't assume that satellite repeaters would be a viable option because satellite, or any other receiving party for that matter, would need to be aware of modulation scheme to receive it in the first place, so it only works if your international contacts are pre-arranged, and even then you need radio that has much larger bandwidth that is usually available. yapping on LSB or narrow digimodes will get you heard within continental range, but also it will get you noticed, but if you hide from your adversary you also hide from everyone else not in the know. and even then, you can still get noticed, because it's under noise level only at some distance from you

also some of these schemes require precise time to be known, and if you have gps jammed you'll get extra problems from that

[–] northface@lemmy.ml 1 points 3 days ago

You could also resort to good old code books and hide your communication in plain sight, instead of trying to evade surveillance with technical tricks that are easily detected.

[–] perestroika@slrpnk.net 1 points 3 days ago* (last edited 3 days ago) (1 children)

Thanks for contructive criticism. :)

A compact antenna for long bandwidth: wind a spiral. For 40 meters, you could could make a spiral of 1.6 m outer diameter ("a bit less than average human height"), 10 cm inner diameter and 15 turns of wire (if I used the calculator correctly). Not a terribly efficient antenna, but a very compact one for given wavelength.

Examples:

https://sergeev.io/projects/spiral-dipole/

https://www.avalonarc.org.uk/2019/10-27-an-80m-spiral-loop.html

https://sa0pej.wordpress.com/build-page-nvis-spiral-loop-antenna/

(I especially like the last one, third generation is made of copper tape and sized like a laptop computer, and the guy in Sweden is getting reception from as far as the Far East.)

I have heard (myself I don't use HF) that HF radios work tolerably with an antenna horizontally on a car roof (could be a truck bed). But it's true that there is little bandwidth on such frequencies. As for throughput: a channel that is 9 KHz wide is supposed to transfer 9.6 kbit / s with military data radios (with ionosphere reflection, despite all the multipathing that it causes - I have not checked, but recall a scientific paper telling so). A reasonable detection avoidance technique might be broadcasting from a depressed location or an urban canyon with tall ground clutter. You'd want the direction finder to chase reflections.

Even more fun scenarios exist: launch your guerilla transmitter on a free flight balloon, and will have plentiful line of sight. Essentially a pseudosatellite.

[–] fullsquare@awful.systems 0 points 3 days ago (1 children)

this is just a really extravagant heater, physics forbids antenna this small to have good radiation resistance. for your contrived below noise communications scheme, you need more bandwidth that is physically possible on hf, yet you choose antenna design that is even less wideband than regular dipole. 40m of wire is for 80m band, which is usable more often in this configuration, ignoring everything else

As for throughput: a channel that is 9 KHz wide is supposed to transfer 9.6 kbit / s

5500kbps in extremely favourable conditions is your peak attainable speed, bandwiths in normal radios are narrower

A reasonable detection avoidance technique might be broadcasting from a depressed location or an urban canyon with tall ground clutter

if you don't want anyone to hear you

launch your guerilla transmitter on a free flight balloon, and will have plentiful line of sight.

with what power source? better study for and get your license, start using radio and stop embarrassing yourself

[–] UnspecificGravity@piefed.social 2 points 4 days ago (1 children)
[–] perestroika@slrpnk.net 3 points 4 days ago* (last edited 4 days ago) (1 children)

Good luck sending an e-mail that can't be filtered and blocked or traffic analyzed, even if the content is encrypted.

As a minimum before trying, I would advise a peer to peer mix network (TOR, I2P). But repressive governments block those as well as they can, and may pay users a visit if they suspect something.

[–] UnspecificGravity@piefed.social 3 points 4 days ago* (last edited 4 days ago) (1 children)

It is a thousand times more easy to send a secure electronic message then to broadcast an untraceable radio transmission to someone if any physical distance.

Any government they is locking down electronic communication that effectively would fine your radio based solution trivial to intercept and trace.

[–] Melvin_Ferd@lemmy.world 1 points 3 days ago

It is 1000 times easier to get a message out online then in person but we still dress in furry suits and go stand outside buildings.