> Sure a well programmed BOT could manage most of the 59+40 over QSOs with
> other english speaking Ops. {Assuming in this instance the BOT is
> programmed
> to handle english language QSOs}.
> But think of those QSO's carried out
> Down at 56 & below -
> In a 200 station pileup
> When the static is up
> etc. etc.
>
I get the sense that the robot in question is only calling CQ, necessitating
it's ability to not only differentiate between signals in a pileup, but to
handle weak sigs, also.
But, what if the robot was programmed to do nothing but scan the bands
looking for CQ's, reading the call, then either calling & working it or
moving on to the next one. At one time or another everyone will have CQ'ed
a bit during the contest. The indefatigeability (sp?) of the robot will
beat out a human every time: No lapses of concentration, no potty breaks,
no refrigerator breaks, no sleep breaks and no nodding off onto the
keyboard.
I'm not a computer person, but I have played with writing software and I
can't see how something like what I described above can't or hasn't yet been
done. Sure, there's going to be times the robot will bust QSO's because of
QSB or QRM, but it's going to make up for it in persistence.
I've got a computer that fits in the palm of my hand (Compaq Aero 1530).
The darn thing recognizes my handwriting most of the time, even on my bad
penmanship days.
I don't think the robot in question here is far away, Cormac. It may well
be among us now.
> No machine is likely to be capable of the level of incisiveness achievable
> by a human Op. After all just look at the only moderate success
> of cw / data
> mode decoding programs...
>
Look at what software is doing for the PSK31 mode. It's locking in a signal
that is so narrow and can be so weak as to not be audible to us, yet the
copy is at or near 100 percent.
> 73 & long live the human Op! :o)
I concur!
73,
dale, kg5u
--
CQ-Contest on WWW: http://www.contesting.com/_cq-contest/
Administrative requests: cq-contest-REQUEST@contesting.com
|