Hi Dick:
I agree with you.
Although this kind of robot operators (software and hardware) could
possibly be perfected to unsuspected levels, I'm quiet sure they could never
be better than a CW op like you. Furthermore, they won´t be able to win as
many CQ WW contests as you did from 9Y :-)
This machines could become really efficient, but I don't believe contests
organizers will allow them.
I cannot imagine a robot category in CQWW.
Anyway artificial intelligence is here to stay.
Martin, LW9EUJ.
----- Original Message -----
From: Richard J. Norton <ae327@lafn.org>
To: <cq-contest@contesting.com>
Sent: Wednesday, May 31, 2000 3:52 PM
Subject: Re: [CQ-Contest] Robot Op Challenge
>
> N4ZR said -
>
> >Recently I saw a message posted (here, I think) in which the writer
> took
> >for granted that computer robot ops already exist that can do as well
> as a
> >skilled human in operating a contest. The writer said that it is
> only
> >because of the programmers' forbearance that these robots have not
> taken over.
>
> "Taken over" likely refers to overpopulating the bands, not winning
> the contests.
>
> The reason that robots have not been released is that, with our
> limited spectrum available, it has been felt to be bad policy to allow
> a frequency/channel to be usurped by an unattended machine.
>
> Do you think that 100 CQing robots would impact 40 meter DX contesting
> positively ?
>
> Do you think "single operators" each "managing" 6 robots calling CQ
> on 6 bands in a computer interleaved pattern would impact contesting
> positively?
>
> 73,
>
> Dick Norton, N6AA
>
>
>
> --
> CQ-Contest on WWW: http://www.contesting.com/_cq-contest/
> Administrative requests: cq-contest-REQUEST@contesting.com
>
--
FAQ on WWW: http://www.contesting.com/3830faq.html
Submissions: 3830@contesting.com
Administrative requests: 3830-REQUEST@contesting.com
Problems: owner-3830@contesting.com
|