CQ-Contest
[Top] [All Lists]

Re: [CQ-Contest] Past Prediction of the Future of Contesting.

To: cq-contest@contesting.com
Subject: Re: [CQ-Contest] Past Prediction of the Future of Contesting.
From: Paul O'Kane <pokane@ei5di.com>
Date: Mon, 23 Aug 2021 01:11:50 +0100
List-post: <mailto:cq-contest@contesting.com>
On 22/08/2021 22:49, rjairam@gmail.com wrote:

<snip>
Hams being so anti technology is mind blowing. I have never seen such
a paradox except in ham radio.

(yes, it also talks about skill but that doesn't mean we have to shun
technology).

Not all technology is, by definition, appropriate.  When new technologies change the fundamental nature of an activity, the very thing that gives that activity its name, then the name needs to change accordingly.

After all, add an engine (200-year-old technology) and sailboat racing becomes powerboat racing.

The issue facing ham radio is that some technologies have the potential to eliminate operating skills entirely.   To object is not to be anti-technology - it is to be anti-inappropriate-technology.

There has to be limits - I suggest a digital non-proliferation treaty might be in order.

73,
Paul EI5DI





_______________________________________________
CQ-Contest mailing list
CQ-Contest@contesting.com
http://lists.contesting.com/mailman/listinfo/cq-contest
<Prev in Thread] Current Thread [Next in Thread>