[lug] IP: FCC forces Ham radio operators to use Windows (fwd from: dave at farber.net)

Mon Apr 1 17:56:04 MST 2002

I just went poking around on the site, and this appears to kinda be FUD.
The ULS system is mostly gone now, replaced with CORES and FRN numbers,
and I haven't found any pages that are not letting me "in" with either
Netscape or Mozilla on a RH 7.x machine.  [Well, I did later... read on.]

One page is whining about needing to enable Java (not Javascript) in
Mozilla before entering the filing system... hmmm... something I forgot to
do on this machine...

Ah... found it.  In the ULS online pages for initial registration there's
an error message "This plugin only runs on Win95/NT."  So it's a plugin
thing.  And the pages for updates don't appear to use the plugin.

There's probably a proper plugin for Linux out there, and it just needs to
be loaded... I'm not going to mess with it... but I am grumpy about the
issue -- here's my real beef:

For those trying to make it a Winblows vs. Linux thing, the site works
fine on my Mac.  :-)  Netscape and Explorer... at least last time I
updated my license info.  Because if I remember correctly I had similar
problems with the site and just tried it on the Mac and... it worked.
Under MacOS.  Of course, the same problems would resurface under Linux on
that Mac.  Haven't tried under OSX.

But anyway, once we take away the misinformation that there's some
sinister play to support Microsoft at work in the FCC (FUD) and look at
the real root cause, there's still a problem.  A lack of web developers in
professional positions willing to follow the standards because they can do
"neat" stuff if they use the browser-specific crap-ola.

Also, the FCC could have simply required W3C HTML standards be followed
(or even proposed standards during development if it takes them that long
to build their sites) when their site was designed, but they didn't.
Agreed...  but someone wanted the site to look pretty for "the boss"
somewhere.

The website is not well designed, but not many are.  The really gross one
is that it also includes bug information in the source code...  (they put
their bug numbers in sections of the source that's viewable by the
public... "fixes bug #12345" type stuff... uhhhh duhhh?)... yuck.

But I'm pretty sure in the past I've usually been able to navigate it okay
with SOME browser in Linux -- not always the SAME browser I started with
on the site.

Agreed that they should be looking at interoperability more than they
do.   Having to have three browsers loaded to get through the site is
kinda silly... but nothing to freak out about.  If theirs were the only
site that blew up my Linux browsers, and if the Linux browser folks didn't
have the source sitting right there in front of them to fix many of the
interoperability issues, (instead we get a new browser and desktop every
year instead of quality ones -- why is that I wonder?), I'd start worrying
then.

Yes, that "Windows only" plugin is a definite faux-paux, but I bet if you
read their web logs that 99%+ of their traffic is from M$ Windows users on
M$ browsers.  That's not the FCC's fault -- we all know THAT problem is
more the SEC's fault than the FCC's.  The FCC is just a big dumb slow
organization building their website to match their userbase.

Nate, nate at natetech.com

Evelyn Mitchell wrote:

> ----- Forwarded message from Dave Farber <dave at farber.net> -----
>
> Delivered-From: owner-ip-sub-1-outgoing at admin.listbox.com
> User-Agent: Microsoft-Entourage/10.0.0.1331
> Date: Mon, 01 Apr 2002 18:20:12 -0500
> Subject: IP: FCC forces Ham radio operators to use Windows
> From: Dave Farber <dave at farber.net>
> To: ip <ip-sub-1 at majordomo.pobox.com>
> In-Reply-To: <3CA8E5BD.E23A1B5A at ultradevices.com>
> Reply-To: farber at cis.upenn.edu
> X-Spam-Status: No, hits=-5.0 required=5.0 tests=IN_REP_TO version=2.11
> X-QMScan-UniqueID: 1212-3ca8eb89-3b4b0826 at backup.tummy.com
>
> ------ Forwarded Message
> From: "Robert J. Berger" <rberger at ultradevices.com>
> Organization: UltraDevices, Inc
> Date: Mon, 01 Apr 2002 14:57:01 -0800
> To: Dewayne Hendricks <dewayne at warpspeed.com>, Dave Farber
> <farber at cis.upenn.edu>
> Subject: FCC forces Ham radio operators to use Windows
>
> FCC forces Ham radio operators to use Windows
> http://www.idg.net/go.cgi?id=659653
>
> Applying for or renewing an amateur radio license? If you ain't using
> Microsoft Windows, fugetaboutit.
>
> Summary
> 'Linux? Step to the back of the bus, please. This section is reserved
> for Windows users only.' That's the message everyone but Microsoft
> Windows users get when they wish to do more than browse the FCC's Web
> site. Ironic that an agency bearing the name 'communications' does
> such a lousy job of it. (1,200 words)
>
> By Joe Barr
>
> (LinuxWorld) -- Early in January, I sent e-mail to each of the four
> FCC commissioners: Michael Powell, Kathleen Abernathy, Michael Copps,
> and Kevin Martin.  Their names are displayed prominently on the FCC
> homepage (see Resources for the URL) so it seemed completely natural
> and fitting that I contact them about a problem on the FCC Web
> site. My complaint was that certain functionality on the site is not
> available to me because I use Linux instead of Windows. I never
> received a response from any commissioner.
>
> I first became aware of the problem last year when a friend of mine, a
> lawyer and Linux aficionado, sent me a copy of a letter he had mailed
> to FCC Chairman Michael Powell. The letter asked that the FCC stop the
> "wholly unnecessary and entirely unconscionable" practice of providing
> online license renewals for amateur radio licenses only to users of
> Windows. Like me, my friend never received a reply.
>
> Then I pretty much forgot about the issue. After all, it did not
> affect my daily life. Recently I began studying for a ham license. I
> mentioned that to another friend who happens to be a licensed amateur
> radio operator. That reminded her that she needed to report a recent
> change of address to the FCC. When she tried to do so from my desktop
> computer, the following pop-up window appeared in the browser:
>
> Ugly, isn't it? Not just the popup. Not just the message. I mean the
> fact that the FCC is helping Microsoft in its illegal practices to
> maintain its monopoly. Intentional or not, that's the result
> here. Moreover, it appears to have been in place since the ULS first
> went online. I found a newsgroup post from August of 1999 that said "I
> did notice one of the other FCC Web page popped up with a window
> saying 'This plug-in is only available for Windows 95/98'. I have no
> clue what the plug-in did."
>
> Whoever wrote the ULS applications, and thus far, I haven't been able
> to learn where it came from, or who currently maintains it, used
> JavaScript for the task. There is huge irony in this because
> JavaScript, like Java itself, was designed to provide interoperability
> across different platforms. To fashion a Windows-only JavaScript
> application requires either deliberate intent or myopic programmers. I
> asked some JavaScript experts how to create Windows-only code. Most
> opined it is the result of using Microsoft's ActiveX. If they are
> right, it means this site's functionality not only flies in the face
> of interoperability and open access to all, it's fundamentally
> insecure as well.
>
> In my e-mail to the commissioners I wrote, "The problem as reported to
> me -- and as confirmed by a friend this past weekend -- is that
> certain functionality on the FCC Web site is available only to Windows
> users.  Specifically, the JavaScript or CGI used to allow Ham radio
> operators to update their licensing information online. This leaves
> Hams using Macintosh, Linux, OS/2, FreeBSD, OpenBSD and other
> operating systems out in the cold."
>
> I also asked the obvious question, "As the Internet, HTML, and Java
> are all about the interoperability of different types of computers and
> software platforms, how does it come about that a governmental agency
> implements a solution available only to a single platform?" I noted
> that since JavaScript works on many different platforms, making a
> JavaScript application "Windows only" seems to require deliberate
> intent.
>
> Mr. Barr calls Washington After a week, and not a word in reply from
> any of the FCC commissioners, I took it to the next level: I picked up
> the phone and called the FCC. When I asked to speak to their media
> relations people, the operator asked what my call was about. When I
> said it was about functionality on the FCC Web site, they directed my
> call not to public relations, but to David Kitzmiller, the FCC
> Webmaster.
>
> Kitzmiller knew which corner of the bureaucracy to look in for
> answers, even though it didn't fall directly under his purview. He
> copied me on a portion of the e-mail he sent to the Wireless
> Telecommunications Bureau (WTB), who evidently is responsible for
> relations with the contractor providing the ULS services.
>
> His e-mail appeared to be aimed at the right people, asking that they
> do the right things to fix the problem.  In addition, he asked that
> they update the site's help and support pages to explain the
> situation. He concluded it by saying "let me know what happens with
> this, since we get quite a few e-mails to webmaster at fcc.gov on this
> subject." That was January 15, 2002.
>
> For several weeks afterwards, I would query Kitzmiller for the latest
> status on the fix. Finally, I exhausted his patience. He told me on
> February 22 that he had been told by someone or something called
> "TPTB" at the WTB that the problem was bigger than they first
> thought. However, he went on to say that it would still be fixed. He
> quoted TPTB saying, "The FCC is in the process of revising the
> software and the revised software will work with Linux. The first
> application to be revised will be License Search later this month.
> Other ULS applications will follow."
>
> Here we are a month beyond the promised date for implementing the
> first fix, and it still isn't in place.  Neither have the help/support
> pages been updated as Kitzmiller requested.
>
> Some active Ham friends of mine have suggested that the FCC site is in
> violation of Section 508 of the Rehabilitation Act, §1194.22, which
> defines access requirements for government Web sites among other
> things. I've asked the GSA this question directly, but have yet to
> receive a reply.
>
> Time for the soapbox I can almost understand the buffoonery of the FCC
> commissioners. Colin Powell's son Michael and the others have other
> things to do than be concerned about ordinary citizens trying to avail
> themselves of ordinary services on their Web site. They certainly
> can't be held accountable if the FCC's Web site is "accidentally"
> helping Microsoft maintain its malignant monopoly. In fact, they can't
> even be counted on to answer their mail: paper or electronic. They are
> busy with other things. They have bigger fish to fry.
>
> Bigger fish like making sure the cable companies are unfettered by the
> regulations that bind their broadband competition at the Baby
> Bells. And defending themselves from the rash of lawsuits that action
> has spawned.
>
> Some of their bigger fish don't live in the corporate pond, but in the
> pond of public morality. Like the integrity (or lack thereof) of
> individual amateur radio operators. Like Kevin Mitnick, for
> example. Mitnick has held and used his Ham license for 25 years. The
> FCC blocked his recent application for renewal, and not on the basis
> of any misuse of the license, but because he was convicted of computer
> crime.
>
> Sagging as they must be under the weight of those awesome
> responsibilities, it's easy to see why I was pointed away from them
> and towards Kitzmiller. Speaking of Kitzmiller, I just received an
> update from him this morning. (Ed. Barr wrote this Friday, March 28,
> 2002.) Kitzmiller wrote that the License Search application is now
> "available." When I raced to the Web site to try it, the new "Linux
> friendly" version had yet to appear. It does sound as if it is on the
> way, however. Maybe folks who don't do Windows won't have to ride in
> the back of this bus for too much longer.
>
> About the author
> Joe Barr is a freelance journalist covering Linux, open source, and
> network security. His 'Open Source' column has been a regular feature
> of LinuxWorld.com since its inception. As far as we know, he is the
> only living journalist whose works have appeared both in phrack, the
> legendary underground zine, and IBM Personal Systems Magazine.
>
> --
> Robert J. Berger
> UltraDevices, Inc.
> 257 Castro Street, Suite 223 Mt. View CA. 94041
> Email: rberger at ultradevices.com http://www.ultradevices.com
> Voice: 650-237-0334 Fax: 408-490-2868
>
> ------ End of Forwarded Message
>
> For archives see:
> http://www.interesting-people.org/archives/interesting-people/
>
> ----- End forwarded message -----
>
> --
> Regards,                    tummy.com, ltd
> Evelyn Mitchell             Linux Consulting since 1995
> efm at tummy.com               Senior System and Network Administrators
>                            http://www.tummy.com/
> _______________________________________________
> Web Page:  http://lug.boulder.co.us
> Mailing List: http://lists.lug.boulder.co.us/mailman/listinfo/lug