this post was submitted on 10 May 2026
254 points (98.8% liked)

Ask Lemmy

39494 readers
1797 users here now

A Fediverse community for open-ended, thought provoking questions


Rules: (interactive)


1) Be nice and; have funDoxxing, trolling, sealioning, racism, toxicity and dog-whistling are not welcomed in AskLemmy. Remember what your mother said: if you can't say something nice, don't say anything at all. In addition, the site-wide Lemmy.world terms of service also apply here. Please familiarize yourself with them


2) All posts must end with a '?'This is sort of like Jeopardy. Please phrase all post titles in the form of a proper question ending with ?


3) No spamPlease do not flood the community with nonsense. Actual suspected spammers will be banned on site. No astroturfing.


4) NSFW is okay, within reasonJust remember to tag posts with either a content warning or a [NSFW] tag. Overtly sexual posts are not allowed, please direct them to either !asklemmyafterdark@lemmy.world or !asklemmynsfw@lemmynsfw.com. NSFW comments should be restricted to posts tagged [NSFW].


5) This is not a support community.
It is not a place for 'how do I?', type questions. If you have any questions regarding the site itself or would like to report a community, please direct them to Lemmy.world Support or email info@lemmy.world. For other questions check our partnered communities list, or use the search function.


6) No US Politics.
Please don't post about current US Politics. If you need to do this, try !politicaldiscussion@lemmy.world or !askusa@discuss.online


Reminder: The terms of service apply here too.

Partnered Communities:

Tech Support

No Stupid Questions

You Should Know

Reddit

Jokes

Ask Ouija


Logo design credit goes to: tubbadu


founded 2 years ago
MODERATORS
 

In the Lord of the Rings fandom there's a persistent debate whether balrogs, or Durin's Bane specifically, have wings. The text in Fellowship is ambiguous whether what it is describing are literal wings or something else wing-like.

you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
[–] early_riser@lemmy.world 4 points 2 days ago (1 children)

That being said, one can probably find similar arguments when phone came into mainstream

Speaking as someone who only got licensed in 2019 with almost zero exposure to the hobby prior, I get where this attitude comes from. Back in the day a new mode meant new (expensive) equipment which also took up space (the cost in terms of square-footage for a shack and antennas is overlooked IMO). Whereas now most things can be accomplished with a computer and sound card.

Also, ham radio for the most part is only fun when other people are doing it too. I love Hellschreiber but nobody else does, so I rarely get any contacts using Hell. I can see CW guys bemoaning the folks who moved from CW to FT8 because they only used CW because it's tolerant of low power or sub-optimal antennas, and FT8 was built with that scenario in mind.

On the other side ham radio is supposed to be about experimentation and trying new stuff. That's one of thee reasons given by the FCC for allocating spectrum for ham use. So of course new shiny modes are going to come up all the time, if they don't then the hobby is failing.

[–] 667@lemmy.radio 4 points 2 days ago

A fantastic point I hadn’t considered, new gear taking up more space. I would also try Hell but for the same issue you mentioned. I did SSTV a bit which is kind of neat.

I’ve tried JT65 a bunch on HF with no luck.