But copying CW isn't like trying to understand natural language. If computers can now beat grandmasters at chess, computers should be able to copy any code that a good operator can decipher. I don't even think we need more powerful computers; we just need better algorithms.
73! Dan KB6NU ---------------------------------------------------------- CW Geek and ARRL Volunteer Instructor Read my ham radio blog at http://www.kb6nu.com LET'S REALLY MAKE THE ARRL THE NATIONAL ASSOCIATION FOR HAM RADIO On Jan 21, 2009, at 6:18 PM, Sverre Holm wrote: > Simon (HB9DRV) wrote: > >>> ...but the Morse code decoding needs some work. > >> I agree - I would love to have a month later this year to work on CW >> decoding. I have no doubts that a computer can decode better than a >> human, >> just needs someone (!) to write the decoder. > > Oh, ye of great faith! > > Just think of what a hard time computers have with tough processing > problems like recognition of natural language, > i.e. freely spoken speech with a machine that is not trained by > that particular speaker. How easy it is for a human, and > how hard it is for a machine even after decades of work by lots of > people. > > > Sverre > LA3ZA _______________________________________________ Elecraft mailing list Post to: [email protected] You must be a subscriber to post to the list. Subscriber Info (Addr. Change, sub, unsub etc.): http://mailman.qth.net/mailman/listinfo/elecraft Help: http://mailman.qth.net/subscribers.htm Elecraft web page: http://www.elecraft.com
