Encryption

[nickk]

Our response sent to the FCC:

https://download.silicondust.com/docs/S ... 22-25).pdf

[NatHillIV]

FANTASTIC response Nick! Detailed and complete, and even I could understand it. I think any FCC commissioner could understand it as well.

I took the liberty of stealing this post from the AVS forum. I enjoyed reading them as well as your excellent response.

A couple of new public interest objections to the NAB petition have also been filed:
https://www.fcc.gov/ecfs/search/search- ... 1669608782
https://www.fcc.gov/ecfs/search/search- ... 1143994947

Here's my question. How in the WORLD can ATSC 3.0 ever gain traction when the leading selling ATSC 3.0 gateway manufacturer and the folks in charge of promoting the new standard have reached this point? We all know who the bad guys are here, I just don't understand how they can be that stupid? Makes no sense. Hopefully they come to their senses, but I'm beginning to have my doubts.

I almost wish ATSC 3.0 would just go away. I love the improved picture, but if I can't use a your gateway product, forget about it.

[techpro2004]

So my question is why not release flex 2.0 with a different chip.

[TPeterson]

So my question is why not release flex 2.0 with a different chip.

Because the goal posts would only move again. duh.

[jasonl]

So my question is why not release flex 2.0 with a different chip.

Because there's nothing wrong with the current chip. The primary law that Pearl referenced was designed to target network infrastructure and cell phones, two areas where Huawei and some of the others listed are some of the biggest players in the world. I don't know if Huawei and the others on the list have actually done anything wrong, but the possibility of them doing it is very real. The equipment that runs cell sites would have full access to everything running through it, and it would be very easy to put functions in the firmware/software to allow governments access to calls and data flowing through the equipment. A mere SoC would not have that level of exposure because the CPU doesn't have any kind of understanding of what it is doing, it's just manipulating bits that could be anything and do anything.