"Well that's a TWO BIT description if ever there was one :-)
Some one has been at the wobbly bob again
And we had just one coincidental detection all night , despite there
being 14 active
monitors' , strangely from 18:55 to 22:55 , there are no false dynamic
detections
showing on my local copy , now what are the odds of that happening ,
may be
page 70 will reveal all ?
Next it be that no one can win the lottery as the odds are over 40^6
:1
Mines a Pint or 568.261485 millilitres if we want to be exact
now dose that include the head or not ? is nothing exact :(
G,)
--------------------------------------------------
From: "wolf_dl4yhf" <[email protected]>
Sent: Wednesday, May 20, 2015 9:40 PM
To: <[email protected]>
Subject: 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
all.
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
distance).
Well just my two pence of wisdom. I don't use Opera and don't think I ever
will.
Cheers,
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
|
