linkfanel

> Please add terminator line and cookie support for map settings...

There is already a terminator, but maybe it got lost in cache issues. I've remedied to that anyway, you can also try refreshing the page.

> For example if I use map layout I need choose it after any refresh.

Yes, good point.

> Note that map tiles for Leaflet are now served by the same provider used by the TDoA extension and admin page GPS tab maps. This means KiwiSDR is paying for those tile serves out of the profits from selling KiwiSDRs

Indeed, many thanks to John for offering to cover the fees!

> Please add terminator line and cookie support for map settings...

There is already a terminator, but maybe it got lost in cache issues. I've remedied to that anyway, you can also try refreshing the page.

> For example if I use map layout I need choose it after any refresh.

Yes, good point.

> Note that map tiles for Leaflet are now served by the same provider used by the TDoA extension and admin page GPS tab maps. This means KiwiSDR is paying for those tile serves out of the profits from selling KiwiSDRs

Indeed, many thanks to John for offering to cover the fees!

> Please add terminator line and cookie support for map settings...

There is already a terminator, but maybe it got lost in cache issues. I've remedied to that anyway, you can also try refreshing the page.

> For example if I use map layout I need choose it after any refresh.

Yes, good point.

> Note that map tiles for Leaflet are now served by the same provider used by the TDoA extension and admin page GPS tab maps. This means KiwiSDR is paying for those tile serves out of the profits from selling KiwiSDRs

Indeed, many thanks to John for offering to cover the fees!

I don't own a KiwiSDR but I really feel the same frustration as you guys. I know how sometimes I struggle to get a slot on the one KiwiSDR that gets a good reception of the signal I'm trying to catch, so when I see in the user list slots taken for hours for stuff that I personally find pointless, I get a bit upset too. Sometimes I check and it's just static on that frequency in the middle of nowhere, sometimes I'm pretty sure that they're not even listening, that they're away from the computer but left the KiwiSDR open!

It's sure that some uses are a waste, like it was mentioned, commercial broadcasts also available on the web; unless you're checking radio propagation or something, but then you wouldn't keep it open continuously for extended amounts of time. But I don't think we should see restricting this as the only solution, that's pretty negative. Education works too. I know that maybe you don't want to go through such extremes, but maybe adding the web radio URL on the station tag would help steer people that way, who knows?

And again, as for the USAF HFGCS, or other channels, military or other, that operate on a fixed frequency round the clock, my approach for that is that if it's popular, someone should make an audio stream of it relayed on the web. That way, providing for bandwidth, any number of user can connect and listen to it at the same time, and only one receiver slot for everyone is ever tied down for it. So it's true that listening to HFGCS that way is not the best. However, that military network is indeed popular to some, because it carries strategic command messages (for example see http://eam.watch/). And people listen to it for hours because it's active all day and they're interested in monitoring all these messages.

And the fact that it would be automated, 24/7 and a machine, not even a human, doesn't mean it's a waste. It's actually smart, if they're recording. That way they can go back on the recording and spot on a spectrum view if and when there were any message, and recover them. Sometimes, for stations that are unpredictable and could transmit at any time within a span of hours, or maybe not at all, setting up these automated recordings is unfortunately the only practical way to monitor them, because there's no way to know. It might seem pointless but you'd be surprised at what random people try to achieve and how it actually does make sense.

Correct me if I'm wrong, but I get the impression that you guys get angered by particular individuals. That strikes me, because the internet is big, and I don't think it's very healthy to focus on policing individual users. The internet is full of trolls and idiots and you just got to let it slide and ignore them, otherwise I don't think it's healthy; not because of the impact of starting a "war" with them, but because of the impact on yourself trying to control that.

And at the same time, I know you paid for it and it's yours, but I don't see the point of encouraging KiwiSDR owners to feel like God (or a judge, or Santa if you want) and give good points and bad points to users based on what use they make of the receiving slots offered to them. I know that policing to ensure fairness between users is necessary, but in what I see here there is also some policing of what users choose to listen to. Nobody forces you to share your KiwiSDR with the public, and thank you all for doing so, but if you share it it's for a reason; so that users can enjoy the service, and they're still the best judges of how they would enjoy it best. So I think it's healthy to let them appreciate that; and I know it does try my patience too sometimes, but it's a good thing. And frankly when I see KiwiSDRs with several slots taken by WSPR autorun sessions, I don't understand that either

I appreciate how using frequency filters could be a solution, however I feel that jamming crosses a line that shocks me. I can't condone that, come on, jamming is bad?? From a technical and administration point of view, blocking is what is done against disruptive and malevolent users. Fortunately that doesn't seem to be much of a problem on the KiwiSDR network. And blocking is rarely used as a fairness tool, because there are proper and better tools to manage resource fairness. The listening time accounting and daily quota by user look like good features to me. What is your experience with that?

Hello,

I'm the maker of http://rx.linkfanel.net/ so I've thought a bit about these issues. In my opinion the upvotes on sdr.hu stem from a good intent, although they're not a terribly great or effective idea. It tends to be skewed towards older receivers, or receivers that are already popular - the only way to upvote is from the rated listing itself. I've emailed Andr?s back in February regarding the use of his data, one of the things I asked was:

"What would you think of using additional information to rank receivers, other than votes, for example visiter count or total listening time or rates of these? These would have to be reported by the receivers somehow. I guess more direct metrics like reception quality would be much harder to quantify."

His reply: "That's a good idea." However it wasn't actually followed by any positive development.

You also have to consider that a ranking "good" receivers at the top and "bad" receivers at the bottom is hardly an end by itself. There are many factors in which receiver one would pick, location would be a big one. Personally I look for a receiver in the area I'm interested in first, and then I try to pick one offering a quality reception, if there's more than one available. Of course this is tooting my own horn because I developped tools for that purpose.

I'd love to add some representation of receiver quality to my map, but I'd need usable data to base it on. Andr?s even declined to allow me to use his data at sdr.hu for my map.

Upvotes aren't terribly great. There could be more, possibly better metrics, like usage, that I mentioned to measure popularity. However just because a receiver is used at all times for some kind of monitoring doesn't mean it's actually popular. And popularity still does not equate quality.

Actual quality metrics would be better, but shortwave is complicated and as I said it's difficult. Could there be some kind of metric built in KiwiSDR based on signal-to-noise ratio? If I look at a waterfall display and see strong signals standing out of weak noise, that's a good indication, especially if across all the spectrum; and that might be something possible to automatically calculate.

The antenna field can be an indication of quality too, however not necessarily reliable or easily exploitable.

I've developped https://github.com/priyom/pavlova and found that the best approach to pick and rank good receivers was still to try and test them one by one, compare and get a subjective appreciation of how well they receive, and curate a list by hand. Even then that's a partial rating for a very narrow purpose.

Of course we should also help and make it easier to improve the setups and quality. Maybe filters could be bundled with the KiwiSDR when it's shipped, that might be the best way to be sure they make it to the people who should have them. Maybe there could be an interactive checklist in the admin page with items to tick to set up the receiver: registration, opening network access, proper antenna setup, installing filters, hunting for noise sources. It could calculate a score saying "your receiver is X % set up", like those online profiles do. Of course some people don't want to bother with that and have no advanced interest in making a great receiver; and that's okay too!