On Thursday, May 21, 2015 08:47:46 you wrote:
> Hello Wolf,
> well said.
What happens if someone flood the internet 'deep search' channel wit a lot of
fake callsign etc etc?
Can someone test this flood?
73 de Claudio IK2PII
> From the IARU R1 VHF managers handbook:
> A valid contact is one where both operators have copied both callsigns, the
> report and an unambiguous confirmation. However no recourse should be made
> during the contact to obtain the required information, change of
> frequency, antenna direction, etc. via other methods such as the Internet,
> DX Cluster, talk-back on another band, telephone etc.
> Similar statements are found in other documents such as contest and award
> 73, Rik ON7YD - OR7T
> Van: [email protected]
> [[email protected]] namens wolf_dl4yhf
> [[email protected]] Verzonden: woensdag 20 mei 2015 22:40
> Aan: [email protected]
> Onderwerp: Re: LF: MF 630m: False Decode or Real?
> Hi Jochen,
> I think the discussion about Opera's own 'deep search' mode (or whatever
> the proper name is) was done here (or on "the other" reflector) over a
> year ago, and the main problem I see is that the 'real time web-based
> exchange' of currently active stations means fooling oneself.
> Consider this: You know there are only four possible callsigns which
> have been transmitting, so in reality the software only has to decide
> for a TWO BIT number. Much easier than "really" decoding the entire
> number of message bits in an Opera message.
> In my very personal point of view, this 'real time web exchange of
> stations (calls) which are currently transmitting' should not be used at
> For comparison, Markus' (DF6NM's) own deep search uses a quite large
> table which is *static*, which means that his decoder has no chance to
> play unfair (because it doesn't know who's currently active or not), and
> it also doesn't know what others receive (over the internet). What I
> don't know is how many stations are currently in that list, and thus how
> many bits the algorithm effectively has to "decode" (well, it doesn't
> really decode, it also makes a best guess from a limited number of list
> entries to chose from).
> All the additional data which look as if they were "decoded" (eg "VK3ELV
> ... 140w + Top loaded L 18m vert 80m horz") have been taken from a
> database (***including the callsign***), not radio .. the only real
> information is the '- 37 dB' report, and the two question marks which
> imho may as well have been ten or twenty (considering the season and the
> Well just my two pence of wisdom. I don't use Opera and don't think I
> ever will.
> Wolf .
> Am 20.05.2015 22:03, schrieb J. Althoff:
> > Hi Wolf,
> > You are not disappointing me at all. I put this issue under discussion
> > myself.
> > Please share your opinion about this to this topic to us in detail. Maybe
> > I missed A discussion about this before, but I am very interested in
> > arguments about this Topic.
> > Thanks, Jochen
> > -= DF1VB =-
> > -= KH2MM =-
> > Jochen Althoff
> > [email protected]
> > +491712020206
> >> Am 20.05.2015 um 21:44 schrieb wolf_dl4yhf <[email protected]>:
> >> Sorry to dissapoint you but .. no, no, no, and again, no.
> >> 73,
> >> Wolf
> >> Am 20.05.2015 20:02, schrieb Jochen Althoff:
> >>> Just popped up at my RX:
> >>> 17:52 477 VK3ELV de DF1VB/3 Op8 Deep Search ?? 16348 km -37 dB in
> >>> Dortmund with 140w + Top loaded L 18m vert 80m horz
> >>> Any comments welcome
> >>> 73, Jochen
Claudio Pozzi - rispondere a [email protected]
ZE-Light e ZE-Pro: servizi zimbra per caselle con dominio email.it, per tutti
Offerta fino al 6 Giugno Bambini gratis formula All Inclusive a euro 41,00
all'hotel Queen Mary di Cattolica, Ingresso omaggio giornaliero alla Spa
Clicca qui: http://adv.email.it/cgi-bin/foclick.cgi?mid=13463&d=22-5