“””[R]adio equipment [shall support] certain features in order to ensure that software can only be loaded into the radio equipment where the compliance of the combination of the radio equipment and software has been demonstrated.”””
Now I don’t think that’s a well written rule, but my problem is the specifics rather than the general idea. I think that either all broadcasts should be digitally signed, or it should not be possible for hackers to remotely modify many other people’s radios to broadcast false signals. (One-on-one modifications I don’t care about so much, but how do you write/pass such rules, given the difficulty getting people to care about or believe the scale difference between automated and manual hacking?)
I agree with you, but for anyone following EU rules and regulations, this ship has sailed a long time ago. Drugs, guns, radio are just part of a huge long list of "general purpose technology" that have been regulated out of existence.
That sounds like a hot take. I'm pretty sure most EU residents are very satisfied that they don't have to fea for their safety for gun violence when they walk home late at night or just in general.
>don't have to fea for their safety for gun violence when they walk home late at night or just in general.
Neither do "most US residents".
More to the point, your focus on guns is missing the larger point. There is very real and immediate dissatisfaction with the EU regulatory landscape. See: Brexit.
Like what? I'm not being flippant here, I'm really in the dark. What harm can one do with an SDR, and how does the potential for abuse compare to e.g. a cell phone?
You shouldn't ban general purpose technology because of particular bad uses.