Winlink, ALE and other technologies are technical advances in radio that are GOOD for the users and GOOD for the advancement of the hobby.
Too broad a brush stroke on this one, but I agree that experimentation needs to continue.
ALE crashing in on an unoccupied frequency...sure it's no problem. ALE probing in the middle of your QSO, then two ops just suddenly popping in because their rigs told them the frequency 'works'...is no good.
Winlink... I'm on almost a crusade to stop Winlink and Pactor III...I'll give a bit of why.
Winlink's packet back ends intentionally disable DCD, meaning they will key down and blast a frequency with no regard to any other traffic that is already there, even with regard to other paclink or telpac traffic.
This is a horrific abomination and is literally polluting existing packet infrastructures. If existing packet or other traffic is there at the time, it will in turn interfere with the "Winlink" (I'll use that as the generic) traffic causing a log jam of noise and incredible breakdown and latency on the packet network.
Winlink front end allows users to attach any file they want, including something dumb like a 2MB pdf file and send it....this would take all day to send at 1200 baud under perfect conditions. Yes there are safe guards if you have an attendant watching, to cancel that transfer and black list that sending node, but the entire packet infrastructure is now crippled once that TX is made until it can be stopped and black listed.
I come from the viewpoint of using packet for EmmComm triage databases and BB's to manage shelter emergency traffic. Winlink is a massive disaster waiting to disable our networks...and we have many issues with Winlink users locally right now that consistently disrupt our drills and will be a massive issue in the event of a real disaster.
It's so bad that I've mapped out the QTHs of those with the interfering Winlink telpac nodes so we can take them out if something really happens in the region. They amount to intentional QRM and would be dealt with by the FCC if the ARRL hadn't been bought by SCS's lobbying efforts and endorsed this nonsense.
Pactor III is the protocol for packlink that Winlink uses on HF. You can't operate Pactor III unless you buy a modem from a sole source provider. They have a lock on the patent for the protocol and the hardware. Nobody knows what back doors they may have to be able to ...for example remotely shut down the entire Winlink system for whatever government pays them the most money for the rights.
The sole provider of these modems charges about $1500 entry level for their devices and is a non-US entity. The German government hasn't been very pleased with us as of late and I wouldn't want an "If all else fails" infrastructure dependent on a German owned company.
Winlink itself is completely closed source with only a few people with access to that source. It also depends only on Windows, which in turn is dependent on Microsoft tech support being online and available should you have trouble with your system....all not good in the event of a disaster. The software developers could easily disable the entire network should their own political views not align with those needing the network to survive.
Even an account for winlink isn't free and open. In order to get an account on the system, you are at the mercy of a newsgroup moderator to be approved. That is FAR from open. It is solely his choice to permit or not, your participation in what could be the last remaining means of communications infrastructure.
They currently tend to approve anyone, but what if they decide that you are a threat to the last remaining food in their area and they stop permitting people to get on the network? Or they chose to black out certain traffic from your area to keep you in the dark?
We as hams should not encourage any closed protocols whatsoever for disaster recovery infrastructure. We are handing our fates over to a very few select people....it is entirely too much trust to hand over. The very premise of what we do conflicts with this ideology.
I think that so few people understand how packet works or what it can do that this just slipped through quietly. It's time to snap people out of this and make them aware just how dangerous of a threat that Winlink is.
Yes Winlink has some nice concepts, but they can all be implemented in the clear and with open standards and peer review. There is no need to lock our most vital and vulnerable infrastructures into the hands of a very few.
