> We can't trust non-licensed human operators to not take the volume to 11, and TX when they shouldn't. Id rather have hardware blobs that enforce FCC law than locked down devices.
But then, wouldn't it be better to have the power limit baked into hardware instead of it being just a software limitation? Sure, this would add a little more burden to hw manufacturers. But not only would it allow for open firmwares, it would also be better at preventing the scenario the FCC is worrying about: with the limit being in software, with some effort someone could still reverse engineer the blob and disable the limit.
Manufactures like to do it in firmware because then they can use the same hardware worldwide. If they find sales are higher than forecast in Europe say, and lower than forecast in the US they can just flash more units at the factory with EU firmware and less with US firmware.
A good middle ground would be to have two blobs, one for low level radio control and one for everything else. The low level radio blob can be locked down so that only blobs signed by the manufacturer can be loaded. The everything else blob can be easily replaceable.
But then, wouldn't it be better to have the power limit baked into hardware instead of it being just a software limitation? Sure, this would add a little more burden to hw manufacturers. But not only would it allow for open firmwares, it would also be better at preventing the scenario the FCC is worrying about: with the limit being in software, with some effort someone could still reverse engineer the blob and disable the limit.