Re: [wsjt-devel] Someone released an Auto CQ mod - my 2 cents

[Gene Marsh via wsjt-devel]

.-.  .-. 

... as a massive stroke survivor (7/25/14).

Keep pounding away!

73 de W8NET Miles / “Gene”
Secretary, Portage County Amateur Radio Service (PCARS)
3905 Century Club - Master #47
Licensed since 1974

> On Apr 3, 2019, at 6:10 PM, Topher Petty  wrote:
> 
> Jari:
> 
> Just keep doing what you're doing. As a fellow handicapped HAM, I say do what 
> you enjoy. 
> 
> I've been known to send off the occasional email to other operators who are 
> experiencing issues with their rigs, and I do so in as helpful of a tone as I 
> can... Some really try to fix it, and others could care less...
> 
> If you know you're not a robot, then those emails mean nothing, and you can 
> just smile and realize that the people sending those emails have nothing 
> better to do than to bother you with meaningless messages about things they 
> don't know anything about.
> 
> Hopefully we'll get the chance to work!
> 
> 73 de AI8W, Chris
> 
>> On Wed, Apr 3, 2019 at 3:32 PM Gary Hinson  wrote:
>> Hi Tom.
>> 
>>  
>> 
>> Yes, a robot FT8 CQer that instantly jumped to the frequencies of its chosen 
>> callers would be a nightmare, especially if it then stayed put to call CQ.
>> 
>>  
>> 
>> There are still quite a few [human|robot] stations who either don’t 
>> understand or simply disagree with split-by-default on FT8 … but month by 
>> month ever since FT8 was released the proportion has steadily fallen.  
>> Today, I suspect many of them are newcomers to FT8, used to 
>> simplex-by-default on the legacy modes.   [Personally, I’d welcome the 
>> option for the auto-responder to drop simplex callers to the bottom of its 
>> priority list, but maybe that’s just me.]
>> 
>>  
>> 
>> Re propagation, I believe we are at the bottom of the solar cycle about now. 
>>  About a year ago I saw a report of the first new-cycle sunspot (with a 
>> different magnetic polarity?) so hopefully we’re on the up.  Now’s a good 
>> time to get your fill of low-band DX!   [In just a few years when 
>> propagation is better and the FT8 frequencies become crowded, 
>> auto-responding to the weakest callers first will make even more sense.]
>> 
>>  
>> 
>> 73
>> Gary  ZL2iFB
>> 
>>  
>> 
>> From: Tom Ramberg via wsjt-devel  
>> Sent: 04 April 2019 00:38
>> To: WSJT software development 
>> Cc: Tom Ramberg 
>> Subject: Re: [wsjt-devel] Someone released an Auto CQ mod - my 2 cents
>> 
>>  
>> 
>> Hello Jari, I’m happy to see  that we’ve made contact on my little 
>> JW-expedition. These days it seems that SSB is closed from here, but a few 
>> FT8 signals are maiking it. As far as robots are concerned, I cannot do 
>> coding, but I wonder if the urge to have the «hold tx freq» unticked is 
>> robotic or human? Anyway, that is the most annoying habit of all, wether its 
>> a human or a robot. As soon as I’ve found a clear spot, you can bet on 
>> someone either calling me on the frequency, or starts calling somebody else. 
>> And believe me, propagation being what it is these days on 78 degrees 
>> northern latitude, that is more than enough to make me lose a qso. If the 
>> frequency was Clear, no qsy should be necessary (like in SSB), but here I 
>> have to jump all the time. Gary, so much  for Your point no. 4.
>> 
>>  
>> 
>> 73 de Tom from JQ78tf
>> 
>>  
>> 
>> Sendt fra E-post for Windows 10
>> 
>>  
>> 
>> Fra: Gary Hinson
>> Sendt: onsdag 3. april 2019 kl. 02:18
>> Til: 'WSJT software development'
>> Emne: Re: [wsjt-devel] Someone released an Auto CQ mod - my 2 cents
>> 
>>  
>> 
>> Hi Jari,
>> 
>>  
>> 
>> I look forward to making contact with you some day.   You’re definitely not 
>> the only disabled DXer and, yes, you should be flattered that we can’t 
>> readily tell as much from the far side.  Amateur radio is a great leveler!
>> 
>>  
>> 
>> So, how might we identify fully-automated/robotic FT8 stations?  That’s a 
>> good question.  We could do with an amateur radio version of the Turing test.
>> 
>>  
>> 
>> Here are some possible indicators of automation/robotic FT8 operation:
>> 
>> · Operating 24x7, or at least for extended periods whereas most hams 
>> would need or choose to take breaks;
>> 
>> · Operating simultaneously on several bands and/or modes – not just 
>> CQing on repeat but making conventional QSOs in parallel, beyond SO2R;
>> 
>> · Alw

Re: [wsjt-devel] Someone released an Auto CQ mod - my 2 cents

[Gary McDuffie]

> On Apr 3, 2019, at 13:28, Gary Hinson  wrote:
> 
>  [In just a few years when propagation is better and the FT8 frequencies 
> become crowded, auto-responding to the weakest callers first will make even 
> more sense.]

I’ve wanted this feature for a long time.  Not necessarily the lowest/weakest, 
but lower than a value that I set.  It was supposedly included in fox/hound, 
but I haven’t used it that mode since early testing days of it and don’t know 
if it is still there or not.  I am not interested in F/H, but would like the 
option, for normal operation, to highlight or somehow mark the ones weaker than 
what I set.  As far as auto-response goes, I don’t use it (call 1st), because I 
rarely call CQ.

Gary - AG0N

___
wsjt-devel mailing list
wsjt-devel@lists.sourceforge.net
https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/wsjt-devel

Re: [wsjt-devel] Someone released an Auto CQ mod - my 2 cents

[Topher Petty]

Jari:

Just keep doing what you're doing. As a fellow handicapped HAM, I say do
what you enjoy.

I've been known to send off the occasional email to other operators who are
experiencing issues with their rigs, and I do so in as helpful of a tone as
I can... Some really try to fix it, and others could care less...

If you know you're not a robot, then those emails mean nothing, and you can
just smile and realize that the people sending those emails have nothing
better to do than to bother you with meaningless messages about things they
don't know anything about.

Hopefully we'll get the chance to work!

73 de AI8W, Chris

On Wed, Apr 3, 2019 at 3:32 PM Gary Hinson  wrote:

> Hi Tom.
>
>
>
> Yes, a robot FT8 CQer that instantly jumped to the frequencies of its
> chosen callers would be a nightmare, especially if it then stayed put to
> call CQ.
>
>
>
> There are still quite a few [human|robot] stations who either don’t
> understand or simply disagree with split-by-default on FT8 … but month by
> month ever since FT8 was released the proportion has steadily fallen.
> Today, I suspect many of them are newcomers to FT8, used to
> simplex-by-default on the legacy modes.   [Personally, I’d welcome the
> option for the auto-responder to drop simplex callers to the bottom of its
> priority list, but maybe that’s just me.]
>
>
>
> Re propagation, I believe we are at the bottom of the solar cycle about
> now.  About a year ago I saw a report of the first new-cycle sunspot (with
> a different magnetic polarity?) so hopefully we’re on the up.  Now’s a good
> time to get your fill of low-band DX!   [In just a few years when
> propagation is better and the FT8 frequencies become crowded,
> auto-responding to the *weakest callers first* will make even more sense.]
>
>
>
> 73
> Gary  ZL2iFB
>
>
>
> *From:* Tom Ramberg via wsjt-devel 
> *Sent:* 04 April 2019 00:38
> *To:* WSJT software development 
> *Cc:* Tom Ramberg 
> *Subject:* Re: [wsjt-devel] Someone released an Auto CQ mod - my 2 cents
>
>
>
> Hello Jari, I’m happy to see  that we’ve made contact on my little
> JW-expedition. These days it seems that SSB is closed from here, but a few
> FT8 signals are maiking it. As far as robots are concerned, I cannot do
> coding, but I wonder if the urge to have the «hold tx freq» unticked is
> robotic or human? Anyway, that is the most annoying habit of all, wether
> its a human or a robot. As soon as I’ve found a clear spot, you can bet on
> someone either calling me on the frequency, or starts calling somebody
> else. And believe me, propagation being what it is these days on 78 degrees
> northern latitude, that is more than enough to make me lose a qso. If the
> frequency was Clear, no qsy should be necessary (like in SSB), but here I
> have to jump all the time. Gary, so much  for Your point no. 4.
>
>
>
> 73 de Tom from JQ78tf
>
>
>
> Sendt fra E-post <https://go.microsoft.com/fwlink/?LinkId=550986> for
> Windows 10
>
>
>
> *Fra: *Gary Hinson 
> *Sendt: *onsdag 3. april 2019 kl. 02:18
> *Til: *'WSJT software development' 
> *Emne: *Re: [wsjt-devel] Someone released an Auto CQ mod - my 2 cents
>
>
>
> Hi Jari,
>
>
>
> I look forward to making contact with you some day.   You’re definitely
> not the only disabled DXer and, yes, you should be flattered that we can’t
> readily tell as much from the far side.  Amateur radio is a great leveler!
>
>
>
> So, how might we identify fully-automated/robotic FT8 stations?  That’s a
> good question.  We could do with an amateur radio version of the Turing
> test <https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Turing_test>.
>
>
>
> Here are some possible *indicators* of automation/robotic FT8 operation:
>
> · Operating 24x7, or at least for extended periods whereas most
> hams would need or choose to take breaks;
>
> · Operating simultaneously on several bands and/or modes – not
> just CQing on repeat but making conventional QSOs in parallel, beyond SO2R;
>
> · Always and only using auto-sequencing with standard messages –
> no friendly greetings or off-the-cuff comments and responses during or at
> the end of their QSOs, easily confused by out-sequence-of and custom
> messages;
>
> · Static audio frequency for all transmissions – no QSYing to
> avoid QRM;
>
> · Regularly timed band-changes e.g. moving to LF at 1700z daily,
> or exactly one hour before local sunset maybe;
>
> · Absence from DXpedition fox-n-hounds pileups – for now, at
> least (and hopefully forever!);
>
> · Frank admissions by their operators, or evasive/dubious answers
> if challenged about this.
&g

Re: [wsjt-devel] Someone released an Auto CQ mod - my 2 cents

[Gary Hinson]

Hi Tom.

 

Yes, a robot FT8 CQer that instantly jumped to the frequencies of its chosen 
callers would be a nightmare, especially if it then stayed put to call CQ.

 

There are still quite a few [human|robot] stations who either don’t understand 
or simply disagree with split-by-default on FT8 … but month by month ever since 
FT8 was released the proportion has steadily fallen.  Today, I suspect many of 
them are newcomers to FT8, used to simplex-by-default on the legacy modes.   
[Personally, I’d welcome the option for the auto-responder to drop simplex 
callers to the bottom of its priority list, but maybe that’s just me.]

 

Re propagation, I believe we are at the bottom of the solar cycle about now.  
About a year ago I saw a report of the first new-cycle sunspot (with a 
different magnetic polarity?) so hopefully we’re on the up.  Now’s a good time 
to get your fill of low-band DX!   [In just a few years when propagation is 
better and the FT8 frequencies become crowded, auto-responding to the weakest 
callers first will make even more sense.]

 

73
Gary  ZL2iFB

 

From: Tom Ramberg via wsjt-devel  
Sent: 04 April 2019 00:38
To: WSJT software development 
Cc: Tom Ramberg 
Subject: Re: [wsjt-devel] Someone released an Auto CQ mod - my 2 cents

 

Hello Jari, I’m happy to see  that we’ve made contact on my little 
JW-expedition. These days it seems that SSB is closed from here, but a few FT8 
signals are maiking it. As far as robots are concerned, I cannot do coding, but 
I wonder if the urge to have the «hold tx freq» unticked is robotic or human? 
Anyway, that is the most annoying habit of all, wether its a human or a robot. 
As soon as I’ve found a clear spot, you can bet on someone either calling me on 
the frequency, or starts calling somebody else. And believe me, propagation 
being what it is these days on 78 degrees northern latitude, that is more than 
enough to make me lose a qso. If the frequency was Clear, no qsy should be 
necessary (like in SSB), but here I have to jump all the time. Gary, so much  
for Your point no. 4.

 

73 de Tom from JQ78tf

 

Sendt fra E-post <https://go.microsoft.com/fwlink/?LinkId=550986>  for Windows 
10

 

Fra: Gary Hinson <mailto:g...@isect.com> 
Sendt: onsdag 3. april 2019 kl. 02:18
Til: 'WSJT software development' <mailto:wsjt-devel@lists.sourceforge.net> 
Emne: Re: [wsjt-devel] Someone released an Auto CQ mod - my 2 cents

 

Hi Jari,

 

I look forward to making contact with you some day.   You’re definitely not the 
only disabled DXer and, yes, you should be flattered that we can’t readily tell 
as much from the far side.  Amateur radio is a great leveler!

 

So, how might we identify fully-automated/robotic FT8 stations?  That’s a good 
question.  We could do with an amateur radio version of the Turing test 
<https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Turing_test> .

 

Here are some possible indicators of automation/robotic FT8 operation:

* Operating 24x7, or at least for extended periods whereas most hams 
would need or choose to take breaks;

* Operating simultaneously on several bands and/or modes – not just 
CQing on repeat but making conventional QSOs in parallel, beyond SO2R; 

* Always and only using auto-sequencing with standard messages – no 
friendly greetings or off-the-cuff comments and responses during or at the end 
of their QSOs, easily confused by out-sequence-of and custom messages;

* Static audio frequency for all transmissions – no QSYing to avoid QRM;

* Regularly timed band-changes e.g. moving to LF at 1700z daily, or 
exactly one hour before local sunset maybe;

* Absence from DXpedition fox-n-hounds pileups – for now, at least (and 
hopefully forever!);

* Frank admissions by their operators, or evasive/dubious answers if 
challenged about this.

None of these is definitive, though, and all could be defeated if someone was 
determined, competent and perverse enough to do so.  In fact, technical 
challenge is a driver for much of amateur radio.  Mastering the technology is 
highly motivational for some, even if things lose their attraction and become 
boring once mastered.  Further tranches of hobbyists love tinkering with 
technology designed by others, or building stuff, or using it for social 
reasons, or pushing back the frontiers of science, or fixing and maintaining 
stuff, or collecting it, or competing with it … or whatever.  To my mind, it’s 
unreasonable and unrealistic to expect everyone else to conform to our 
individual perspectives.  Tolerance and consideration towards others are a 
necessary part of the hobby since we share so much – not least the airwaves.

73
Gary  ZL2iFB

 

From: Jari A mailto:oh2...@gmail.com> > 
Sent: 03 April 2019 09:46
To: WSJT software development mailto:wsjt-devel@lists.sourceforge.net> >
Subject: Re: [wsjt-devel] Someone released an Auto CQ mod - my 2 cents

 

Hi Guys, this is OH2FQV / Jari

Re: [wsjt-devel] Someone released an Auto CQ mod - my 2 cents

[Tom Ramberg via wsjt-devel]

Hello Jari, I’m happy to see  that we’ve made contact on my little 
JW-expedition. These days it seems that SSB is closed from here, but a few FT8 
signals are maiking it. As far as robots are concerned, I cannot do coding, but 
I wonder if the urge to have the «hold tx freq» unticked is robotic or human? 
Anyway, that is the most annoying habit of all, wether its a human or a robot. 
As soon as I’ve found a clear spot, you can bet on someone either calling me on 
the frequency, or starts calling somebody else. And believe me, propagation 
being what it is these days on 78 degrees northern latitude, that is more than 
enough to make me lose a qso. If the frequency was Clear, no qsy should be 
necessary (like in SSB), but here I have to jump all the time. Gary, so much  
for Your point no. 4.

73 de Tom from JQ78tf

Sendt fra E-post for Windows 10

Fra: Gary Hinson
Sendt: onsdag 3. april 2019 kl. 02:18
Til: 'WSJT software development'
Emne: Re: [wsjt-devel] Someone released an Auto CQ mod - my 2 cents

Hi Jari,

I look forward to making contact with you some day.   You’re definitely not the 
only disabled DXer and, yes, you should be flattered that we can’t readily tell 
as much from the far side.  Amateur radio is a great leveler!

So, how might we identify fully-automated/robotic FT8 stations?  That’s a good 
question.  We could do with an amateur radio version of the Turing test.

Here are some possible indicators of automation/robotic FT8 operation:
• Operating 24x7, or at least for extended periods whereas most hams would need 
or choose to take breaks;
• Operating simultaneously on several bands and/or modes – not just CQing on 
repeat but making conventional QSOs in parallel, beyond SO2R; 
• Always and only using auto-sequencing with standard messages – no friendly 
greetings or off-the-cuff comments and responses during or at the end of their 
QSOs, easily confused by out-sequence-of and custom messages;
• Static audio frequency for all transmissions – no QSYing to avoid QRM;
• Regularly timed band-changes e.g. moving to LF at 1700z daily, or exactly one 
hour before local sunset maybe;
• Absence from DXpedition fox-n-hounds pileups – for now, at least (and 
hopefully forever!);
• Frank admissions by their operators, or evasive/dubious answers if challenged 
about this.
None of these is definitive, though, and all could be defeated if someone was 
determined, competent and perverse enough to do so.  In fact, technical 
challenge is a driver for much of amateur radio.  Mastering the technology is 
highly motivational for some, even if things lose their attraction and become 
boring once mastered.  Further tranches of hobbyists love tinkering with 
technology designed by others, or building stuff, or using it for social 
reasons, or pushing back the frontiers of science, or fixing and maintaining 
stuff, or collecting it, or competing with it … or whatever.  To my mind, it’s 
unreasonable and unrealistic to expect everyone else to conform to our 
individual perspectives.  Tolerance and consideration towards others are a 
necessary part of the hobby since we share so much – not least the airwaves.
73
Gary  ZL2iFB

From: Jari A  
Sent: 03 April 2019 09:46
To: WSJT software development 
Subject: Re: [wsjt-devel] Someone released an Auto CQ mod - my 2 cents

Hi Guys, this is OH2FQV / Jari

I'm handicap operator, within my physical limitations, main thing I do at my 
day time is working on 20m FT8. I dont have much else to do. I spend most of my 
hours with pc and radio. I may have 50 qso's per day, even more if theres extra 
activity on the band.

I have had few emails to telling me to stop my illegal robot/ automated 
operation on FT8.

The truth: I do everything manually. I dont even use JTalert to assits. 
I'm so ilirate, that I cant do programing, or so to automate my operations. 

There do are stations with automation, but I'm not one of those.

I'm sorta flattered of having those comments of being machine like operator 

I dont know, but doing mass working with stations is fun for me,  as much fun 
like at the fair to shot down disks (ducks) with crooked BB-gun. 
Shot and ding - and make guy in the booth frustrated... 

Please dont get upset with me, I'm just silly old man having fun - manually

Very best regards,

: Jari / oh2fqv

On Tue, Apr 2, 2019 at 9:15 PM Gary McDuffie  wrote:


> On Mar 31, 2019, at 17:02, Jim Shorney  wrote:
> 
> The guy seems to be on the air making FT8 contacts just about every time I 
> turn it on

Must be CO8LY (I think that’s his suffix).  I see him on the air every time I 
walk into the shack.

I suspect that the Antarctic station that was active yesterday was a robot.  
Why?  Because from early morning to evening, his operation never changed that I 
saw.  He called CQ, came back to people who apparently didn’t hear him, ran to 
the end of the watchdog, and immediately called CQ again the next sequence.  He

Re: [wsjt-devel] Someone released an Auto CQ mod - my 2 cents

[Gary Hinson]

Hi Jari,

 

I look forward to making contact with you some day.   You’re definitely not the 
only disabled DXer and, yes, you should be flattered that we can’t readily tell 
as much from the far side.  Amateur radio is a great leveler!

 

So, how might we identify fully-automated/robotic FT8 stations?  That’s a good 
question.  We could do with an amateur radio version of the Turing test 
<https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Turing_test> .

 

Here are some possible indicators of automation/robotic FT8 operation:

*   Operating 24x7, or at least for extended periods whereas most hams 
would need or choose to take breaks;
*   Operating simultaneously on several bands and/or modes – not just CQing 
on repeat but making conventional QSOs in parallel, beyond SO2R; 
*   Always and only using auto-sequencing with standard messages – no 
friendly greetings or off-the-cuff comments and responses during or at the end 
of their QSOs, easily confused by out-sequence-of and custom messages;
*   Static audio frequency for all transmissions – no QSYing to avoid QRM;
*   Regularly timed band-changes e.g. moving to LF at 1700z daily, or 
exactly one hour before local sunset maybe;
*   Absence from DXpedition fox-n-hounds pileups – for now, at least (and 
hopefully forever!);
*   Frank admissions by their operators, or evasive/dubious answers if 
challenged about this.

None of these is definitive, though, and all could be defeated if someone was 
determined, competent and perverse enough to do so.  In fact, technical 
challenge is a driver for much of amateur radio.  Mastering the technology is 
highly motivational for some, even if things lose their attraction and become 
boring once mastered.  Further tranches of hobbyists love tinkering with 
technology designed by others, or building stuff, or using it for social 
reasons, or pushing back the frontiers of science, or fixing and maintaining 
stuff, or collecting it, or competing with it … or whatever.  To my mind, it’s 
unreasonable and unrealistic to expect everyone else to conform to our 
individual perspectives.  Tolerance and consideration towards others are a 
necessary part of the hobby since we share so much – not least the airwaves.

73
Gary  ZL2iFB

 

From: Jari A  
Sent: 03 April 2019 09:46
To: WSJT software development 
Subject: Re: [wsjt-devel] Someone released an Auto CQ mod - my 2 cents

 

Hi Guys, this is OH2FQV / Jari

 

I'm handicap operator, within my physical limitations, main thing I do at my 
day time is working on 20m FT8. I dont have much else to do. I spend most of my 
hours with pc and radio. I may have 50 qso's per day, even more if theres extra 
activity on the band.

 

I have had few emails to telling me to stop my illegal robot/ automated 
operation on FT8.

 

The truth: I do everything manually. I dont even use JTalert to assits. 

I'm so ilirate, that I cant do programing, or so to automate my operations. 

 

There do are stations with automation, but I'm not one of those.

 

I'm sorta flattered of having those comments of being machine like operator 

 

I dont know, but doing mass working with stations is fun for me,  as much fun 
like at the fair to shot down disks (ducks) with crooked BB-gun. 
Shot and ding - and make guy in the booth frustrated... 

 

Please dont get upset with me, I'm just silly old man having fun - manually

 

Very best regards,

 

: Jari / oh2fqv

 

On Tue, Apr 2, 2019 at 9:15 PM Gary McDuffie mailto:mcduf...@ag0n.net> > wrote:



> On Mar 31, 2019, at 17:02, Jim Shorney  <mailto:jshor...@inebraska.com> > wrote:
> 
> The guy seems to be on the air making FT8 contacts just about every time I 
> turn it on

Must be CO8LY (I think that’s his suffix).  I see him on the air every time I 
walk into the shack.

I suspect that the Antarctic station that was active yesterday was a robot.  
Why?  Because from early morning to evening, his operation never changed that I 
saw.  He called CQ, came back to people who apparently didn’t hear him, ran to 
the end of the watchdog, and immediately called CQ again the next sequence.  He 
never moved more than 3 cycles (Hertz for the kids) all day.  I don’t think he 
worked much either.  I was surprised at how many people he replied to with an r 
report, and didn’t complete the QSO.  He always ran the length of his watchdog 
though and immediately called CQ again without moving or pausing.

Gary - AG0N

___
wsjt-devel mailing list
wsjt-devel@lists.sourceforge.net <mailto:wsjt-devel@lists.sourceforge.net> 
https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/wsjt-devel

___
wsjt-devel mailing list
wsjt-devel@lists.sourceforge.net
https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/wsjt-devel

Re: [wsjt-devel] Someone released an Auto CQ mod - my 2 cents

[Jari A]

Hi Guys, this is OH2FQV / Jari

I'm handicap operator, within my physical limitations, main thing I do at
my day time is working on 20m FT8. I dont have much else to do. I spend
most of my hours with pc and radio. I may have 50 qso's per day, even more
if theres extra activity on the band.

I have had few emails to telling me to stop my illegal robot/ automated
operation on FT8.

The truth: I do everything manually. I dont even use JTalert to assits.
I'm so ilirate, that I cant do programing, or so to automate my operations.

There do are stations with automation, but I'm not one of those.

I'm sorta flattered of having those comments of being machine like
operator

I dont know, but doing mass working with stations is fun for me,  as much
fun like at the fair to shot down disks (ducks) with crooked BB-gun.
Shot and ding - and make guy in the booth frustrated...

Please dont get upset with me, I'm just silly old man having fun - manually

Very best regards,

: Jari / oh2fqv

On Tue, Apr 2, 2019 at 9:15 PM Gary McDuffie  wrote:

>
>
> > On Mar 31, 2019, at 17:02, Jim Shorney  wrote:
> >
> > The guy seems to be on the air making FT8 contacts just about every time
> I turn it on
>
> Must be CO8LY (I think that’s his suffix).  I see him on the air every
> time I walk into the shack.
>
> I suspect that the Antarctic station that was active yesterday was a
> robot.  Why?  Because from early morning to evening, his operation never
> changed that I saw.  He called CQ, came back to people who apparently
> didn’t hear him, ran to the end of the watchdog, and immediately called CQ
> again the next sequence.  He never moved more than 3 cycles (Hertz for the
> kids) all day.  I don’t think he worked much either.  I was surprised at
> how many people he replied to with an r report, and didn’t complete the
> QSO.  He always ran the length of his watchdog though and immediately
> called CQ again without moving or pausing.
>
> Gary - AG0N
>
> ___
> wsjt-devel mailing list
> wsjt-devel@lists.sourceforge.net
> https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/wsjt-devel
>
___
wsjt-devel mailing list
wsjt-devel@lists.sourceforge.net
https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/wsjt-devel

Re: [wsjt-devel] Someone released an Auto CQ mod - my 2 cents

[Gary McDuffie]

> On Mar 31, 2019, at 17:02, Jim Shorney  wrote:
> 
> The guy seems to be on the air making FT8 contacts just about every time I 
> turn it on

Must be CO8LY (I think that’s his suffix).  I see him on the air every time I 
walk into the shack.

I suspect that the Antarctic station that was active yesterday was a robot.  
Why?  Because from early morning to evening, his operation never changed that I 
saw.  He called CQ, came back to people who apparently didn’t hear him, ran to 
the end of the watchdog, and immediately called CQ again the next sequence.  He 
never moved more than 3 cycles (Hertz for the kids) all day.  I don’t think he 
worked much either.  I was surprised at how many people he replied to with an r 
report, and didn’t complete the QSO.  He always ran the length of his watchdog 
though and immediately called CQ again without moving or pausing.

Gary - AG0N

___
wsjt-devel mailing list
wsjt-devel@lists.sourceforge.net
https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/wsjt-devel

Re: [wsjt-devel] Someone released an Auto CQ mod - my 2 cents

[Bill Frantz]

On 3/31/19 at 1:02 PM, aa...@ambersoft.com (Dave AA6YQ) wrote:

+ that WSJT-X can also support unattended operation, but there 
is a huge difference between allowing WSJT-X to handle the next 
response to your CQ while you refresh your coffee, and allowing 
an application to call CQ and make QSOs 7x24 while you are at 
work or sleeping or out for a bike ride.


The regulations say, "the control operator must be at the 
control point." It is generally agreed that the control point is 
where illegal operation can be stopped. There is nothing in the 
regs about automatic transmission and may contest operators use 
automatic CQing.


So, running for coffee is probably close enough to the control 
point, particularly if you do it during the receive phase. The 
others take you away for long enough that you can't maintain 
effective control.


One kind of automatic operation that would probably be applauded 
by many hams is the ability to send an emergency message, 
automatically repeating the attempt until the message is received.


The FT8 protocol algorithms, with their weak signal performance 
and automatic error checking and correction are attractive for 
such a system. I see the transmitting station compressing the 
message and sending it in binary chunks using a small number of 
consecutive 15 second phases as a transmission window. When the 
transmission window is finished, he receiving station requests 
retransmission of missing/erroneous chunks. When the complete 
message has been received, the receiving station reassembles the 
message and reverses the compression.


Setting up the transmission involves short messages between the 
sending receiving stations verifying they are can communicate 
and setting up any parameters needed. These startup messages 
might be sent occasionally over periods of hours.



It is probably not possible to control how people use wsjt-x and 
its protocols by technical means. It can be automated using 
available computer automation software. It can be downloaded and 
modified by anyone. The ways of controlling its use are the same 
for all the other modes, social pressure.


We have seen bad key clicks controlled by social pressure, and 
disqualification in some contests. The same applies to SSB 
splatter and PSK31 over driven audio. The same mechanism applies 
to how the available bandwidth is used. We have an informal 
agreement that contests will avoid the WARC bands, which seems 
to be a good compromise between the many hams who contest, and 
those who want to be able to operate away from wall-to-wall signals.

---
Bill Frantz| When all else fails: Voice   | Periwinkle
(408)356-8506  | and CW.  | 16345 
Englewood Ave
www.pwpconsult.com |  | Los Gatos, 
CA 95032




___
wsjt-devel mailing list
wsjt-devel@lists.sourceforge.net
https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/wsjt-devel

Re: [wsjt-devel] Someone released an Auto CQ mod - and Neil's 2 cents

[rOn Pfeiffer]

If the FCC says it is illegal and you can detect an automated BOT; then it is 
your 
responsibility to report it to the FCC.


> On April 1, 2019 at 10:18 AM Neil Zampella  wrote:
> 
> 
> Georg,
> 
> there's a difference between receiving Tx and just sending out a 'spot',
> and calling CQ & making QSOs without anyone in front of the rig.    That
> is illegal in the US, and other countries, but not in all.
> 
> Neil, KN3iLZ
> 
> On 4/1/2019 9:57 AM, Georg wrote:
> > Well, my WSJTx receives 24/7 and fully automatically sends all
> > received stations to PSK-reporter...
> >
> > I know there is a difference... but I don‘t understand all the fuss.
> >
> > Bots are easily recognizable. So just ignore them or use them to your
> > advantage.
> >
> > 73‘s
> >
> > Georg
> > NZ1C/DJ6GI
> >
> > Am 01.04.2019 um 08:58 schrieb Neil Zampella  > <mailto:ne...@techie.com>>:
> >
> >> Hi Wolfgang,
> >>
> >> glad to hear your view from across the pond, however, in the US any
> >> sort of 'autobot' is illegal as these are not operating as beacons,
> >> but as stations with 2 way communications.   You have to have a human
> >> behind the rig/monitor to control the station here.
> >>
> >> I may have conflated the eBay posting with the QRZ posting, but with
> >> them popping up (so to speak) within days of one another it seemed to
> >> be a bit more than just a coincidence, although it turns out it was.
> >>
> >> 73s,
> >>
> >> Neil, KN3ILZ
> >>
> >> On 4/1/2019 3:40 AM, Wolfgang wrote:
> >>> Re: [wsjt-devel] Someone released an Auto CQ mod - and Neil's 2
> >>> cents Hello Neil,
> >>>
> >>> you mix up your personal view of the scenario!
> >>>
> >>> - long time ago there was a Ham in Greece, made some robot add-ons with
> >>> a keyboard macro language and after revealing his activities he was
> >>> blocked
> >>> by the WSJT-X team in the source code ;-) The case can be found in the
> >>> [wsjt-devel] email archive.
> >>>
> >>> - the one on ebay is (was) written in a macro language (most probably
> >>> 'AutoHotkey') and compiled into binaries. This guy inserts the
> >>> buyers call
> >>> sign into the macro-code to prevent sharing the software, but the
> >>> seller stayed
> >>> anonymous. This was an add-on, or external software, simulates key
> >>> strokes
> >>> etc. without any change in the source code or binaries of WSJT-X at
> >>> all.
> >>> Apparently the person wanted to make money with his external add-on
> >>> software.
> >>> Questionable software, but not illegal in some contries. Offer has
> >>> been removed
> >>> in ebay listings. Bad luck, business model lasted short ;-)
> >>>
> >>> - SQ9FVE modified the source code and added some interresting
> >>> functions plus
> >>> the optional robot function and a change of the GUI in WSJT-X. He
> >>> published
> >>> the binaries in the QRZ.COM <http://QRZ.COM> forum for free. This
> >>> was clearly a breach of GPL,
> >>> because he did not publish the source code and mentioned originators
> >>> of the
> >>> source etc. etc. Download link has been removed.
> >>>
> >>> Looks like 'a storm in a glass of water' right now...
> >>>
> >>> There is a huge number of WSJT-X users with a very wide spectrum of
> >>> personalities
> >>> around the globe. Right now, this local monday morning in Europe,
> >>> pskreporter.info <http://pskreporter.info>
> >>> lists the impressive number of 519.066 FT8 counts over the last two
> >>> hours :-)
> >>>
> >>> So, some have fear of clones, some want to run their robots. But
> >>> those are only
> >>> a few of them. Sooner or later all this will be history.
> >>>
> >>> 73's de OE1MWW
> >>> Wolfgang
> >>>
> >>> Monday, April 1, 2019, 2:51:59 AM, you wrote:
> >>>
> >>>
> >>> There was some 'rage' Joe .. but those people were few and far
> >>> between, and after a few days they were recognized, and the callsign
> >>> was passed around as a 'bot' and ignored by many.
> >>>
&g

Re: [wsjt-devel] Someone released an Auto CQ mod - and Neil's 2 cents

[Neil Zampella]

Georg,

there's a difference between receiving Tx and just sending out a 'spot',
and calling CQ & making QSOs without anyone in front of the rig.    That
is illegal in the US, and other countries, but not in all.

Neil, KN3iLZ

On 4/1/2019 9:57 AM, Georg wrote:

Well, my WSJTx receives 24/7 and fully automatically sends all
received stations to PSK-reporter...

I know there is a difference... but I don‘t understand all the fuss.

Bots are easily recognizable. So just ignore them or use them to your
advantage.

73‘s

Georg
NZ1C/DJ6GI

Am 01.04.2019 um 08:58 schrieb Neil Zampella mailto:ne...@techie.com>>:


Hi Wolfgang,

glad to hear your view from across the pond, however, in the US any
sort of 'autobot' is illegal as these are not operating as beacons,
but as stations with 2 way communications.   You have to have a human
behind the rig/monitor to control the station here.

I may have conflated the eBay posting with the QRZ posting, but with
them popping up (so to speak) within days of one another it seemed to
be a bit more than just a coincidence, although it turns out it was.

73s,

Neil, KN3ILZ

On 4/1/2019 3:40 AM, Wolfgang wrote:

Re: [wsjt-devel] Someone released an Auto CQ mod - and Neil's 2
cents Hello Neil,

you mix up your personal view of the scenario!

- long time ago there was a Ham in Greece, made some robot add-ons with
a keyboard macro language and after revealing his activities he was
blocked
by the WSJT-X team in the source code ;-) The case can be found in the
[wsjt-devel] email archive.

- the one on ebay is (was) written in a macro language (most probably
'AutoHotkey') and compiled into binaries. This guy inserts the
buyers call
sign into the macro-code to prevent sharing the software, but the
seller stayed
anonymous. This was an add-on, or external software, simulates key
strokes
etc. without any change in the source code or binaries of WSJT-X at
all.
Apparently the person wanted to make money with his external add-on
software.
Questionable software, but not illegal in some contries. Offer has
been removed
in ebay listings. Bad luck, business model lasted short ;-)

- SQ9FVE modified the source code and added some interresting
functions plus
the optional robot function and a change of the GUI in WSJT-X. He
published
the binaries in the QRZ.COM <http://QRZ.COM> forum for free. This
was clearly a breach of GPL,
because he did not publish the source code and mentioned originators
of the
source etc. etc. Download link has been removed.

Looks like 'a storm in a glass of water' right now...

There is a huge number of WSJT-X users with a very wide spectrum of
personalities
around the globe. Right now, this local monday morning in Europe,
pskreporter.info <http://pskreporter.info>
lists the impressive number of 519.066 FT8 counts over the last two
hours :-)

So, some have fear of clones, some want to run their robots. But
those are only
a few of them. Sooner or later all this will be history.

73's de OE1MWW
Wolfgang

Monday, April 1, 2019, 2:51:59 AM, you wrote:


There was some 'rage' Joe .. but those people were few and far
between, and after a few days they were recognized, and the callsign
was passed around as a 'bot' and ignored by many.

However, now you have someone who is modifying the code to do this
and, according to the eBay post will 'personalize' the code with
your callsign, then sell you the compiled program.

Different scenario !!

Neil, KN3ILZ


<https://www.avast.com/sig-email?utm_medium=email&utm_source=link&utm_campaign=sig-email&utm_content=emailclient>
Virenfrei. www.avast.com
<https://www.avast.com/sig-email?utm_medium=email&utm_source=link&utm_campaign=sig-email&utm_content=emailclient>


<#DAB4FAD8-2DD7-40BB-A1B8-4E2AA1F9FDF2>

___
wsjt-devel mailing list
wsjt-devel@lists.sourceforge.net
<mailto:wsjt-devel@lists.sourceforge.net>
https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/wsjt-devel



---
This email has been checked for viruses by AVG.
https://www.avg.com
___
wsjt-devel mailing list
wsjt-devel@lists.sourceforge.net
https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/wsjt-devel

Re: [wsjt-devel] Someone released an Auto CQ mod - and Neil's 2 cents

[Joe]

I'm curious as to how someone knows someone is running a BOT or not?

I mean if the system is running perfectly, and or the operator is also 
on top of things. How can someone on the other end tell the difference?


Just curious...

Joe WB9SBD
Sig
The Original Rolling Ball Clock
Idle Tyme
Idle-Tyme.com
http://www.idle-tyme.com
On 4/1/2019 7:58 AM, Neil Zampella wrote:


Hi Wolfgang,

glad to hear your view from across the pond, however, in the US any 
sort of 'autobot' is illegal as these are not operating as beacons, 
but as stations with 2 way communications.   You have to have a human 
behind the rig/monitor to control the station here.


I may have conflated the eBay posting with the QRZ posting, but with 
them popping up (so to speak) within days of one another it seemed to 
be a bit more than just a coincidence, although it turns out it was.


73s,

Neil, KN3ILZ

On 4/1/2019 3:40 AM, Wolfgang wrote:
Re: [wsjt-devel] Someone released an Auto CQ mod - and Neil's 2 cents 
Hello Neil,


you mix up your personal view of the scenario!

- long time ago there was a Ham in Greece, made some robot add-ons with
a keyboard macro language and after revealing his activities he was 
blocked

by the WSJT-X team in the source code ;-) The case can be found in the
[wsjt-devel] email archive.

- the one on ebay is (was) written in a macro language (most probably
'AutoHotkey') and compiled into binaries. This guy inserts the buyers 
call
sign into the macro-code to prevent sharing the software, but the 
seller stayed
anonymous. This was an add-on, or external software, simulates key 
strokes

etc. without any change in the source code or binaries of WSJT-X at all.
Apparently the person wanted to make money with his external add-on 
software.
Questionable software, but not illegal in some contries. Offer has 
been removed

in ebay listings. Bad luck, business model lasted short ;-)

- SQ9FVE modified the source code and added some interresting 
functions plus
the optional robot function and a change of the GUI in WSJT-X. He 
published
the binaries in the QRZ.COM forum for free. This was clearly a breach 
of GPL,
because he did not publish the source code and mentioned originators 
of the

source etc. etc. Download link has been removed.

Looks like 'a storm in a glass of water' right now...

There is a huge number of WSJT-X users with a very wide spectrum of 
personalities
around the globe. Right now, this local monday morning in Europe, 
pskreporter.info
lists the impressive number of 519.066 FT8 counts over the last two 
hours :-)


So, some have fear of clones, some want to run their robots. But 
those are only

a few of them. Sooner or later all this will be history.

73's de OE1MWW
Wolfgang

Monday, April 1, 2019, 2:51:59 AM, you wrote:


There was some 'rage' Joe .. but those people were few and far 
between, and after a few days they were recognized, and the callsign 
was passed around as a 'bot' and ignored by many.


However, now you have someone who is modifying the code to do this 
and, according to the eBay post will 'personalize' the code with your 
callsign, then sell you the compiled program.


Different scenario !!

Neil, KN3ILZ


<https://www.avast.com/sig-email?utm_medium=email&utm_source=link&utm_campaign=sig-email&utm_content=emailclient> 
	Virenfrei. www.avast.com 
<https://www.avast.com/sig-email?utm_medium=email&utm_source=link&utm_campaign=sig-email&utm_content=emailclient> 



<#DAB4FAD8-2DD7-40BB-A1B8-4E2AA1F9FDF2>



___
wsjt-devel mailing list
wsjt-devel@lists.sourceforge.net
https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/wsjt-devel


___
wsjt-devel mailing list
wsjt-devel@lists.sourceforge.net
https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/wsjt-devel

Re: [wsjt-devel] Someone released an Auto CQ mod - and Neil's 2 cents

[Georg]

Well, my WSJTx receives 24/7 and fully automatically sends all received 
stations to PSK-reporter...

I know there is a difference... but I don‘t understand all the fuss. 

Bots are easily recognizable. So just ignore them or use them to your 
advantage. 

73‘s

Georg
NZ1C/DJ6GI 

> Am 01.04.2019 um 08:58 schrieb Neil Zampella :
> 
> Hi Wolfgang,
> 
> glad to hear your view from across the pond, however, in the US any sort of 
> 'autobot' is illegal as these are not operating as beacons, but as stations 
> with 2 way communications.   You have to have a human behind the rig/monitor 
> to control the station here.
> 
> I may have conflated the eBay posting with the QRZ posting, but with them 
> popping up (so to speak) within days of one another it seemed to be a bit 
> more than just a coincidence, although it turns out it was.
> 
> 73s,
> 
> Neil, KN3ILZ
> 
>> On 4/1/2019 3:40 AM, Wolfgang wrote:
>> Hello Neil, 
>> 
>> you mix up your personal view of the scenario! 
>> 
>> - long time ago there was a Ham in Greece, made some robot add-ons with 
>> a keyboard macro language and after revealing his activities he was blocked 
>> by the WSJT-X team in the source code ;-) The case can be found in the 
>> [wsjt-devel] email archive. 
>> 
>> - the one on ebay is (was) written in a macro language (most probably 
>> 'AutoHotkey') and compiled into binaries. This guy inserts the buyers call 
>> sign into the macro-code to prevent sharing the software, but the seller 
>> stayed 
>> anonymous. This was an add-on, or external software, simulates key strokes 
>> etc. without any change in the source code or binaries of WSJT-X at all. 
>> Apparently the person wanted to make money with his external add-on 
>> software. 
>> Questionable software, but not illegal in some contries. Offer has been 
>> removed 
>> in ebay listings. Bad luck, business model lasted short ;-) 
>> 
>> - SQ9FVE modified the source code and added some interresting functions plus 
>> the optional robot function and a change of the GUI in WSJT-X. He published 
>> the binaries in the QRZ.COM forum for free. This was clearly a breach of 
>> GPL, 
>> because he did not publish the source code and mentioned originators of the 
>> source etc. etc. Download link has been removed. 
>> 
>> Looks like 'a storm in a glass of water' right now... 
>> 
>> There is a huge number of WSJT-X users with a very wide spectrum of 
>> personalities 
>> around the globe. Right now, this local monday morning in Europe, 
>> pskreporter.info 
>> lists the impressive number of 519.066 FT8 counts over the last two hours 
>> :-) 
>> 
>> So, some have fear of clones, some want to run their robots. But those are 
>> only 
>> a few of them. Sooner or later all this will be history. 
>> 
>> 73's de OE1MWW 
>> Wolfgang 
>> 
>> Monday, April 1, 2019, 2:51:59 AM, you wrote: 
>> 
>> 
>> There was some 'rage' Joe .. but those people were few and far between, and 
>> after a few days they were recognized, and the callsign was passed around as 
>> a 'bot' and ignored by many. 
>> 
>> However, now you have someone who is modifying the code to do this and, 
>> according to the eBay post will 'personalize' the code with your callsign, 
>> then sell you the compiled program. 
>> 
>> Different scenario !! 
>> 
>> Neil, KN3ILZ 
>> 
>> 
>>  Virenfrei. www.avast.com
> ___
> wsjt-devel mailing list
> wsjt-devel@lists.sourceforge.net
> https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/wsjt-devel
___
wsjt-devel mailing list
wsjt-devel@lists.sourceforge.net
https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/wsjt-devel

Re: [wsjt-devel] Someone released an Auto CQ mod - and Neil's 2 cents

[Neil Zampella]

Hi Wolfgang,

glad to hear your view from across the pond, however, in the US any sort
of 'autobot' is illegal as these are not operating as beacons, but as
stations with 2 way communications.   You have to have a human behind
the rig/monitor to control the station here.

I may have conflated the eBay posting with the QRZ posting, but with
them popping up (so to speak) within days of one another it seemed to be
a bit more than just a coincidence, although it turns out it was.

73s,

Neil, KN3ILZ

On 4/1/2019 3:40 AM, Wolfgang wrote:

Re: [wsjt-devel] Someone released an Auto CQ mod - and Neil's 2 cents
Hello Neil,

you mix up your personal view of the scenario!

- long time ago there was a Ham in Greece, made some robot add-ons with
a keyboard macro language and after revealing his activities he was
blocked
by the WSJT-X team in the source code ;-) The case can be found in the
[wsjt-devel] email archive.

- the one on ebay is (was) written in a macro language (most probably
'AutoHotkey') and compiled into binaries. This guy inserts the buyers
call
sign into the macro-code to prevent sharing the software, but the
seller stayed
anonymous. This was an add-on, or external software, simulates key
strokes
etc. without any change in the source code or binaries of WSJT-X at all.
Apparently the person wanted to make money with his external add-on
software.
Questionable software, but not illegal in some contries. Offer has
been removed
in ebay listings. Bad luck, business model lasted short ;-)

- SQ9FVE modified the source code and added some interresting
functions plus
the optional robot function and a change of the GUI in WSJT-X. He
published
the binaries in the QRZ.COM forum for free. This was clearly a breach
of GPL,
because he did not publish the source code and mentioned originators
of the
source etc. etc. Download link has been removed.

Looks like 'a storm in a glass of water' right now...

There is a huge number of WSJT-X users with a very wide spectrum of
personalities
around the globe. Right now, this local monday morning in Europe,
pskreporter.info
lists the impressive number of 519.066 FT8 counts over the last two
hours :-)

So, some have fear of clones, some want to run their robots. But those
are only
a few of them. Sooner or later all this will be history.

73's de OE1MWW
Wolfgang

Monday, April 1, 2019, 2:51:59 AM, you wrote:


There was some 'rage' Joe .. but those people were few and far
between, and after a few days they were recognized, and the callsign
was passed around as a 'bot' and ignored by many.

However, now you have someone who is modifying the code to do this
and, according to the eBay post will 'personalize' the code with your
callsign, then sell you the compiled program.

Different scenario !!

Neil, KN3ILZ


<https://www.avast.com/sig-email?utm_medium=email&utm_source=link&utm_campaign=sig-email&utm_content=emailclient>
Virenfrei. www.avast.com
<https://www.avast.com/sig-email?utm_medium=email&utm_source=link&utm_campaign=sig-email&utm_content=emailclient>


<#DAB4FAD8-2DD7-40BB-A1B8-4E2AA1F9FDF2>



---
This email has been checked for viruses by AVG.
https://www.avg.com
___
wsjt-devel mailing list
wsjt-devel@lists.sourceforge.net
https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/wsjt-devel

Re: [wsjt-devel] Someone released an Auto CQ mod - and Neil's 2 cents

[Wolfgang]

Title: Re: [wsjt-devel] Someone released an Auto CQ mod - and Neil's 2 cents


Hello Neil, 

you mix up your personal view of the scenario! 

- long time ago there was a Ham in Greece, made some robot add-ons with  
a keyboard macro language and after revealing his activities he was blocked  
by the WSJT-X team in the source code ;-) The case can be found in the  
[wsjt-devel] email archive. 

- the one on ebay is (was) written in a macro language (most probably 
'AutoHotkey') and compiled into binaries. This guy inserts the buyers call  
sign into the macro-code to prevent sharing the software, but the seller stayed  
anonymous. This was an add-on, or external software, simulates key strokes  
etc. without any change in the source code or binaries of WSJT-X at all.  
Apparently the person wanted to make money with his external add-on software.  
Questionable software, but not illegal in some contries. Offer has been removed  
in ebay listings. Bad luck, business model lasted short ;-) 

- SQ9FVE modified the source code and added some interresting functions plus  
the optional robot function and a change of the GUI in WSJT-X. He published  
the binaries in the QRZ.COM forum for free. This was clearly a breach of GPL,  
because he did not publish the source code and mentioned originators of the  
source etc. etc. Download link has been removed. 

Looks like 'a storm in a glass of water' right now... 

There is a huge number of WSJT-X users with a very wide spectrum of personalities  
around the globe. Right now, this local monday morning in Europe, pskreporter.info  
lists the impressive number of 519.066 FT8 counts over the last two hours :-)  

So, some have fear of clones, some want to run their robots. But those are only  
a few of them. Sooner or later all this will be history. 

73's de OE1MWW 
Wolfgang 

Monday, April 1, 2019, 2:51:59 AM, you wrote: 


There was some 'rage' Joe .. but those people were few and far between, and after a few days they were recognized, and the callsign was passed around as a 'bot' and ignored by many. 

However, now you have someone who is modifying the code to do this and, according to the eBay post will 'personalize' the code with your callsign, then sell you the compiled program. 

Different scenario !! 

Neil, KN3ILZ 

 
	
  
		Virenfrei. www.avast.com 		
	

 


___
wsjt-devel mailing list
wsjt-devel@lists.sourceforge.net
https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/wsjt-devel

Re: [wsjt-devel] Someone released an Auto CQ mod - my 2 cents

[Neil Zampella]

There was some 'rage' Joe .. but those people were few and far between,
and after a few days they were recognized, and the callsign was passed
around as a 'bot' and ignored by many.

However, now you have someone who is modifying the code to do this and,
according to the eBay post will 'personalize' the code with your
callsign, then sell you the compiled program.

Different scenario !!

Neil, KN3ILZ

On 3/31/2019 6:38 PM, Joe wrote:

Thing that is funny about this rage?

People are fuming about how someone modified the program to make a
robot QSO Maker.

Where was all the rage when it was like a week after FT-8 was first
released. where someone automated it way back then? I mean it was very
simple to do. No coding skills or anything at all.

Take a small free program like "Auto Mouse Click" and 5 minutes later,
you have a QSO Robot.

Funny, never heard any rage back then.

Joe WB9SBD
Sig
The Original Rolling Ball Clock
Idle Tyme
Idle-Tyme.com
http://www.idle-tyme.com
On 3/31/2019 2:52 PM, James Shaver wrote:

Add me to that list. Well said, as always, Bill.

Jim S.
N2ADV

On Mar 31, 2019, at 2:11 PM, Bobby Chandler mailto:bob...@bellsouth.net>> wrote:


Bravo Bill! I agree 100%.
Bobby/N4AU
*From:* Bill Somerville
*Sent:* Sunday, March 31, 2019 11:53 AM
*To:* wsjt-devel@lists.sourceforge.net
*Subject:* Re: [wsjt-devel] Someone released an Auto CQ mod - my 2 cents
On 31/03/2019 17:12, Carey Fisher wrote:

All I have to say, and I've been saying for some time now, is that
maybe developers will now think twice before releasing software
such as this as Open Source.


Carey,

that shows a major misunderstanding of both Open Source software and
the complexity of WSJT-X. WSJT-X uses two major components provided
by third-party teams that are themselves Open Source. There are no
other free equivalent components of sufficient quality and scope and
writing our own would take many man-years of effort and ongoing
maintenance. These components give us an essential leg up to
providing a portable cross-platform application of the highest
quality with reasonable development timescales. There are reasons
why many closed source applications are Windows only and these
factors are high on the list.

Aside from that, of the latest two "robot" offerings being touted,
one does not require any changes to WSJT-X source code and the other
is being offered as a contribution with the contentious robotic
parts removed. Either way the WSJT team have no interest in WSJT-X
being used as a QSO robot and the automation that has been provided
already is only in response to large scale user demand. For example
auto-sequencing and "Call 1st" were deemed necessary for FT8 because
the small thinking time between decodes completing and the next
transmission period requires super-human concentration and reaction
times. For QSO modes like FT8 we have a basic user interface rule
that each QSO must be initiated by some operator action, e.g.
calling CQ or replying to a CQ. At the end of a QSO for normal DX
contacts the user has the final say on whether a completed QSO is
logged, WSJT-X will prompt the user to log a QSO but they must take
further action to confirm a good contact or reject a bad one. There
are other operator aids for high QSO rate situations, like contest
operating and running a rare and popular DX operation, related to
logging QSOs but the requirement for an operator action to initiate
each QSO is always maintained.

What is worth noting is that the small WSJT development team expends
a lot of thought and time on how to combat rogue patched versions
and add-on tools that attempt to exceed the levels of automation we
deem sufficient. These are either misguided or malicious. This
detracts from core development and maintenance and we would rather
not have to give up that effort.

On a personal note; my opinion on QSO robots, aside from their
questionable legality in many countries, is that most Amateur Radio
operators would not consider a QSO with a machine to be worthwhile
and to find out that they had done so unknowingly would be very
annoying. For those that attempt to deploy such robots, I suggest
they go a step further and dispense with the radio equipment and use
their PC skills to mock up the certificates and awards and print
them directly, that way no one else is being disappointed and they
can save themselves a whole lot of cost and time building,
operating, and maintaining an Amateur Radio station.

73
Bill
G4WJS.




___
wsjt-devel mailing list
wsjt-devel@lists.sourceforge.net
<mailto:wsjt-devel@lists.sourceforge.net>
https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/wsjt-devel
___
wsjt-devel mailing list
wsj

Re: [wsjt-devel] Someone released an Auto CQ mod - my 2 cents

[Jim Shorney]

A while back a Cuban surfaced on one of the Facebook groups describing a system 
he was coding that sounded very much like a QSO robot. After some blow back 
from other group members he backpedaled and claimed that was not at all what he 
was doing. Still, I wonder. The guy seems to be on the air making FT8 contacts 
just about every time I turn it on

73

-Jim
NU0C

On Sun, 31 Mar 2019 17:38:17 -0500
Joe  wrote:

> Thing that is funny about this rage?
> 
> People are fuming about how someone modified the program to make a robot 
> QSO Maker.
> 
> Where was all the rage when it was like a week after FT-8 was first 
> released. where someone automated it way back then? I mean it was very 
> simple to do. No coding skills or anything at all.
> 
> Take a small free program like "Auto Mouse Click" and 5 minutes later, 
> you have a QSO Robot.
> 
> Funny, never heard any rage back then.
> 
> Joe WB9SBD


___
wsjt-devel mailing list
wsjt-devel@lists.sourceforge.net
https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/wsjt-devel

Re: [wsjt-devel] Someone released an Auto CQ mod - my 2 cents

[Joe]

Thing that is funny about this rage?

People are fuming about how someone modified the program to make a robot 
QSO Maker.


Where was all the rage when it was like a week after FT-8 was first 
released. where someone automated it way back then? I mean it was very 
simple to do. No coding skills or anything at all.


Take a small free program like "Auto Mouse Click" and 5 minutes later, 
you have a QSO Robot.


Funny, never heard any rage back then.

Joe WB9SBD
Sig
The Original Rolling Ball Clock
Idle Tyme
Idle-Tyme.com
http://www.idle-tyme.com
On 3/31/2019 2:52 PM, James Shaver wrote:

Add me to that list. Well said, as always, Bill.

Jim S.
N2ADV

On Mar 31, 2019, at 2:11 PM, Bobby Chandler <mailto:bob...@bellsouth.net>> wrote:



Bravo Bill! I agree 100%.
Bobby/N4AU
*From:* Bill Somerville
*Sent:* Sunday, March 31, 2019 11:53 AM
*To:* wsjt-devel@lists.sourceforge.net
*Subject:* Re: [wsjt-devel] Someone released an Auto CQ mod - my 2 cents
On 31/03/2019 17:12, Carey Fisher wrote:
All I have to say, and I've been saying for some time now, is that 
maybe developers will now think twice before releasing software such 
as this as Open Source.


Carey,

that shows a major misunderstanding of both Open Source software and 
the complexity of WSJT-X. WSJT-X uses two major components provided 
by third-party teams that are themselves Open Source. There are no 
other free equivalent components of sufficient quality and scope and 
writing our own would take many man-years of effort and ongoing 
maintenance. These components give us an essential leg up to 
providing a portable cross-platform application of the highest 
quality with reasonable development timescales. There are reasons why 
many closed source applications are Windows only and these factors 
are high on the list.


Aside from that, of the latest two "robot" offerings being touted, 
one does not require any changes to WSJT-X source code and the other 
is being offered as a contribution with the contentious robotic parts 
removed. Either way the WSJT team have no interest in WSJT-X being 
used as a QSO robot and the automation that has been provided already 
is only in response to large scale user demand. For example 
auto-sequencing and "Call 1st" were deemed necessary for FT8 because 
the small thinking time between decodes completing and the next 
transmission period requires super-human concentration and reaction 
times. For QSO modes like FT8 we have a basic user interface rule 
that each QSO must be initiated by some operator action, e.g. calling 
CQ or replying to a CQ. At the end of a QSO for normal DX contacts 
the user has the final say on whether a completed QSO is logged, 
WSJT-X will prompt the user to log a QSO but they must take further 
action to confirm a good contact or reject a bad one. There are other 
operator aids for high QSO rate situations, like contest operating 
and running a rare and popular DX operation, related to logging QSOs 
but the requirement for an operator action to initiate each QSO is 
always maintained.


What is worth noting is that the small WSJT development team expends 
a lot of thought and time on how to combat rogue patched versions and 
add-on tools that attempt to exceed the levels of automation we deem 
sufficient. These are either misguided or malicious. This detracts 
from core development and maintenance and we would rather not have to 
give up that effort.


On a personal note; my opinion on QSO robots, aside from their 
questionable legality in many countries, is that most Amateur Radio 
operators would not consider a QSO with a machine to be worthwhile 
and to find out that they had done so unknowingly would be very 
annoying. For those that attempt to deploy such robots, I suggest 
they go a step further and dispense with the radio equipment and use 
their PC skills to mock up the certificates and awards and print them 
directly, that way no one else is being disappointed and they can 
save themselves a whole lot of cost and time building, operating, and 
maintaining an Amateur Radio station.


73
Bill
G4WJS.




___
wsjt-devel mailing list
wsjt-devel@lists.sourceforge.net 
<mailto:wsjt-devel@lists.sourceforge.net>

https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/wsjt-devel
___
wsjt-devel mailing list
wsjt-devel@lists.sourceforge.net 
<mailto:wsjt-devel@lists.sourceforge.net>

https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/wsjt-devel



___
wsjt-devel mailing list
wsjt-devel@lists.sourceforge.net
https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/wsjt-devel


___
wsjt-devel mailing list
wsjt-devel@lists.sourceforge.net
https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/wsjt-devel

Re: [wsjt-devel] Someone released an Auto CQ mod - my 2 cents

[rjai...@gmail.com]

Sorry guys - pandora's box has already been opened. I do not support
automatic, unattended robot QSOs (which are illegal in USA and some
other countries) but to ignore it as not happening is denying reality.
Stathis has demonstrated this some months ago and I am certain that
many are using his technique (macros) without modifying WSJT-X source.

What we can hope is that people exercise their good judgment and not
abuse it. Or just realize that some people will always "cheat" and
live by your own moral compass.

Ria
N2RJ

On Sun, 31 Mar 2019 at 17:58, Jim Brown  wrote:
>
> On 3/31/2019 9:53 AM, Bill Somerville wrote:
> > most Amateur Radio operators would not consider a QSO with a machine to
> > be worthwhile and to find out that they had done so unknowingly would be
> > very annoying.
>
> That depends on what you might be trying to accomplish. I certainly
> would automate my FT8 operation in this manner, but about a year ago I
> made a QSO with a robot KX3 floating from KH6 to the west coast of NA on
> a scientific raft studying oceanography of some sort. That QSO went into
> my log, because my operation was not robotic! And it filled in a very
> rare CQ Field for that award.
>
> Likewise, if I'm trying to add EU countries on 160M, I really don't care
> what is creating and controlling the signal on the other end of the QSO.
> My accomplishment is building RX and TX antennas that will get my signal
> from near San Francisco 6,000 miles over the auroral oval to EU, and dig
> that station's signal out of the noise. When I count that for DXCC, I
> did my part of the work.
>
> OTOH, I do view auto-CQ in any form, attended or not, as cluttering up
> the spectrum. I almost never call CQ using FT8 on any band but 6M, and
> even there do so sparingly. And I'm talking about the auto-repeat CQ
> built into WSJT-X.
>
> 73, Jim K9YC
>
>
> ___
> wsjt-devel mailing list
> wsjt-devel@lists.sourceforge.net
> https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/wsjt-devel



-- 
Ria Jairam, N2RJ
Director, Hudson Division
ARRL - The national association for Amateur Radio™
+1.973.594.6275
https://hudson.arrl.org
n...@arrl.org


___
wsjt-devel mailing list
wsjt-devel@lists.sourceforge.net
https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/wsjt-devel

Re: [wsjt-devel] Someone released an Auto CQ mod - my 2 cents

[Jim Brown]

On 3/31/2019 9:53 AM, Bill Somerville wrote:
most Amateur Radio operators would not consider a QSO with a machine to 
be worthwhile and to find out that they had done so unknowingly would be 
very annoying.


That depends on what you might be trying to accomplish. I certainly 
would automate my FT8 operation in this manner, but about a year ago I 
made a QSO with a robot KX3 floating from KH6 to the west coast of NA on 
a scientific raft studying oceanography of some sort. That QSO went into 
my log, because my operation was not robotic! And it filled in a very 
rare CQ Field for that award.


Likewise, if I'm trying to add EU countries on 160M, I really don't care 
what is creating and controlling the signal on the other end of the QSO. 
My accomplishment is building RX and TX antennas that will get my signal 
from near San Francisco 6,000 miles over the auroral oval to EU, and dig 
that station's signal out of the noise. When I count that for DXCC, I 
did my part of the work.


OTOH, I do view auto-CQ in any form, attended or not, as cluttering up 
the spectrum. I almost never call CQ using FT8 on any band but 6M, and 
even there do so sparingly. And I'm talking about the auto-repeat CQ 
built into WSJT-X.


73, Jim K9YC


___
wsjt-devel mailing list
wsjt-devel@lists.sourceforge.net
https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/wsjt-devel

Re: [wsjt-devel] Someone released an Auto CQ mod - my 2 cents

[Carey Fisher]

Hi Bill,
Thank you for the detailed discussion of the considerations that the dev
group has taken. And you're right: if I had thought a little bit more about
the licensing, I would have realized that you have used components (qt
etc?) that are under GPL or LGPL (or others) that require works using them
to also be issued as open source with the same license terms. My error and
I apologize.
I'm just unhappy to see the excellent work the dev team has done become
corrupted with unfortunate mods.
I want to thank you and the dev team for the excellent product. I really
enjoy ham radio more than I have in many years since y'all produced FT8!
73, Carey, WB4HXE

On Sun, Mar 31, 2019 at 12:56 PM Bill Somerville 
wrote:

> On 31/03/2019 17:12, Carey Fisher wrote:
>
> All I have to say, and I've been saying for some time now, is that maybe
> developers will now think twice before releasing software such as this as
> Open Source.
>
> Carey,
>
> that shows a major misunderstanding of both Open Source software and the
> complexity of WSJT-X. WSJT-X uses two major components provided by
> third-party teams that are themselves Open Source. There are no other free
> equivalent components of sufficient quality and scope and writing our own
> would take many man-years of effort and ongoing maintenance. These
> components give us an essential leg up to providing a portable
> cross-platform application of the highest quality with reasonable
> development timescales. There are reasons why many closed source
> applications are Windows only and these factors are high on the list.
>
> Aside from that, of the latest two "robot" offerings being touted, one
> does not require any changes to WSJT-X source code and the other is being
> offered as a contribution with the contentious robotic parts removed.
> Either way the WSJT team have no interest in WSJT-X being used as a QSO
> robot and the automation that has been provided already is only in response
> to large scale user demand. For example auto-sequencing and "Call 1st" were
> deemed necessary for FT8 because the small thinking time between decodes
> completing and the next transmission period requires super-human
> concentration and reaction times. For QSO modes like FT8 we have a basic
> user interface rule that each QSO must be initiated by some operator
> action, e.g. calling CQ or replying to a CQ. At the end of a QSO for normal
> DX contacts the user has the final say on whether a completed QSO is
> logged, WSJT-X will prompt the user to log a QSO but they must take further
> action to confirm a good contact or reject a bad one. There are other
> operator aids for high QSO rate situations, like contest operating and
> running a rare and popular DX operation, related to logging QSOs but the
> requirement for an operator action to initiate each QSO is always
> maintained.
>
> What is worth noting is that the small WSJT development team expends a lot
> of thought and time on how to combat rogue patched versions and add-on
> tools that attempt to exceed the levels of automation we deem sufficient.
> These are either misguided or malicious. This detracts from core
> development and maintenance and we would rather not have to give up that
> effort.
>
> On a personal note; my opinion on QSO robots, aside from their
> questionable legality in many countries, is that most Amateur Radio
> operators would not consider a QSO with a machine to be worthwhile and to
> find out that they had done so unknowingly would be very annoying. For
> those that attempt to deploy such robots, I suggest they go a step further
> and dispense with the radio equipment and use their PC skills to mock up
> the certificates and awards and print them directly, that way no one else
> is being disappointed and they can save themselves a whole lot of cost and
> time building, operating, and maintaining an Amateur Radio station.
>
> 73
> Bill
> G4WJS.
> ___
> wsjt-devel mailing list
> wsjt-devel@lists.sourceforge.net
> https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/wsjt-devel
>


-- 
Carey Fisher
careyfis...@gmail.com
___
wsjt-devel mailing list
wsjt-devel@lists.sourceforge.net
https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/wsjt-devel

Re: [wsjt-devel] Someone released an Auto CQ mod - my 2 cents

[Dave AA6YQ]

+ AA6YQ comments below

Regulations aside, why did we become hams?  If all you want is to collect QSO’s 
without being actually involved, why spend the time and money on education and 
equipment?  Sorry, I vote against further animation of FT8 or any other 
protocol.  Some automation is helpful, too be sure, but there is such a thing 
as too much.

+ I don't care whether other hams are curious experimenters or appliance 
operators. Amateur radio encompasses a broad range of activities; no one op is 
likely to pursue all of them. Who am I to say what others should do?

+ However, we all share the RF spectrum we've been granted, and we are expected 
to courteously share that spectrum with our fellow operators worldwide. That 
means listening to a frequency before transmitting on it. That means politely 
QSYing when a change in propagation causes two previously independent QSOs to 
QRM each other.

+ There is currently only one FT8 "watering hole" defined on each band 
(ignoring the frequencies used for Fox/Hound operations). Yes, you can operate 
FT8 outside a "watering hole", but doing so makes you invisible to the majority 
of FT8 ops who are operating within a watering hole. So the public release of 
an application that makes it easy for any user to setup his or her station for 
unattended 7x24 FT8 operation with the goal of working every station not yet 
worked should be chilling. The FT8 watering holes are already quite busy; 
imagine what will happen when the unattended stations of several thousand users 
around the world jump in.

+ SQ9FVE created this application by modifying the WSJT-X source code. He 
claims in



+ that WSJT-X can also support unattended operation, but there is a huge 
difference between allowing WSJT-X to handle the next response to your CQ while 
you refresh your coffee, and allowing an application to call CQ and make QSOs 
7x24 while you are at work or sleeping or out for a bike ride.

+ I was unable to convince SQ9VFE that a public release of his application is 
irresponsible. My advice to DXers is to work what you need soon, because the 
FT8 watering holes may be overrun by unattended stations.

+ As for the wisdom of making WSJT-X open source, I will point out that the 
fully documented PSKCore library developed by Moe AE4JY has been available for 
nearly 20 years, and could be used to create an application that does in PSK31 
what SQ9VFE's application does in FT8: enable unattended operation. No 
developer ever took that step, presumably because they understood the damage it 
could do.

73,

   Dave, AA6YQ




___
wsjt-devel mailing list
wsjt-devel@lists.sourceforge.net
https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/wsjt-devel

Re: [wsjt-devel] Someone released an Auto CQ mod - my 2 cents

[James Shaver]

Add me to that list. Well said, as always, Bill. 

Jim S. 
N2ADV 

> On Mar 31, 2019, at 2:11 PM, Bobby Chandler  wrote:
> 
> Bravo Bill! I agree 100%.
>  
> Bobby/N4AU
>  
> From: Bill Somerville
> Sent: Sunday, March 31, 2019 11:53 AM
> To: wsjt-devel@lists.sourceforge.net
> Subject: Re: [wsjt-devel] Someone released an Auto CQ mod - my 2 cents
>  
>> On 31/03/2019 17:12, Carey Fisher wrote:
>> All I have to say, and I've been saying for some time now, is that maybe 
>> developers will now think twice before releasing software such as this as 
>> Open Source.
> Carey,
> 
> that shows a major misunderstanding of both Open Source software and the 
> complexity of WSJT-X. WSJT-X uses two major components provided by 
> third-party teams that are themselves Open Source. There are no other free 
> equivalent components of sufficient quality and scope and writing our own 
> would take many man-years of effort and ongoing maintenance. These components 
> give us an essential leg up to providing a portable cross-platform 
> application of the highest quality with reasonable development timescales. 
> There are reasons why many closed source applications are Windows only and 
> these factors are high on  the list.
> 
> Aside from that, of the latest two "robot" offerings being touted, one does 
> not require any changes to WSJT-X source code and the other is being offered 
> as a contribution with the contentious robotic parts removed. Either way the 
> WSJT team have no interest in WSJT-X being used as a QSO robot and the 
> automation that has been provided already is only in response to large scale 
> user demand. For example auto-sequencing and "Call 1st" were deemed necessary 
> for FT8 because the small thinking time between decodes completing and the 
> next transmission period requires super-human concentration and reaction 
> times. For QSO modes like FT8 we have a basic user interface rule that each 
> QSO must be initiated by some operator action, e.g. calling CQ or replying to 
> a CQ. At the end of a QSO for normal DX contacts the user has the final say 
> on whether a completed QSO is logged, WSJT-X will prompt the user to log a 
> QSO but they must take further action to confirm a good contact or reject a 
> bad one. There are other operator aids for high QSO rate situations, like 
> contest operating and running a rare and popular DX operation, related to 
> logging QSOs but the requirement for an operator action to initiate each QSO 
> is always maintained.
> 
> What is worth noting is that the small WSJT development team expends a lot of 
> thought and time on how to combat rogue patched versions and add-on tools 
> that attempt to exceed the levels of automation we deem sufficient. These are 
> either misguided or malicious. This detracts from core development and 
> maintenance and we would rather not have to give up that effort.
> 
> On a personal note; my opinion on QSO robots, aside from their questionable 
> legality in many countries, is that most Amateur Radio operators would not 
> consider a QSO with a machine to be worthwhile and to find out that they had 
> done so unknowingly would be very annoying. For those that attempt to deploy 
> such robots, I suggest they go a step further and dispense with the radio 
> equipment and use their PC skills to mock up the certificates and awards and 
> print them directly, that way no one else is being disappointed and they can 
> save themselves a whole lot of cost and time building, operating, and 
> maintaining an Amateur Radio station.
> 
> 73
> Bill
> G4WJS.
> 
> ___
> wsjt-devel mailing list
> wsjt-devel@lists.sourceforge.net
> https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/wsjt-devel
> ___
> wsjt-devel mailing list
> wsjt-devel@lists.sourceforge.net
> https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/wsjt-devel
___
wsjt-devel mailing list
wsjt-devel@lists.sourceforge.net
https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/wsjt-devel

Re: [wsjt-devel] Someone released an Auto CQ mod - my 2 cents

[Dan Malcolm]

Correction: If all you is to collect QSO’s without actually being involved, 
makes no sense to me.  Seems like buying a good book just to look at, without 
reading it.

__
Dan – K4SHQ

From: Dan Malcolm [mailto:k4...@outlook.com]
Sent: Sunday, March 31, 2019 2:25 PM
To: 'WSJT software development' 
Subject: Re: [wsjt-devel] Someone released an Auto CQ mod - my 2 cents

Regulations aside, why did we become hams?  If all you want is to collect QSO’s 
without being actually involved, why spend the time and money on education and 
equipment?  Sorry, I vote against further animation of FT8 or any other 
protocol.  Some automation is helpful, too be sure, but there is such a thing 
as too much.

Just my $0.02.
__
Dan – K4SHQ

From: w2ctx [mailto:w2...@comcast.net]
Sent: Sunday, March 31, 2019 1:49 PM
To: WSJT software development 
mailto:wsjt-devel@lists.sourceforge.net>>
Subject: Re: [wsjt-devel] Someone released an Auto CQ mod - my 2 cents

How does the system know the frequency is not in use before transmitting?




Sent from my Verizon, Samsung Galaxy smartphone

 Original message 
From: Dave AA6YQ mailto:aa...@ambersoft.com>>
Date: 3/31/19 2:30 PM (GMT-05:00)
To: 'WSJT software development' 
mailto:wsjt-devel@lists.sourceforge.net>>
Subject: Re: [wsjt-devel] Someone released an Auto CQ mod - my 2 cents

+ AA6YQ comments below

Why not. Amateur Radio was supposed to be experimental.

+ The experiment could be conducted without making it easy for users to setup 
unattended 7x24 CQing and QSO completion. Think the FT8 "watering holes" are 
packed now? Wait until there are several thousand unattended stations around 
the world continuously CQing and attempting to work every callsign they haven't 
yet worked.





___
wsjt-devel mailing list
wsjt-devel@lists.sourceforge.net<mailto:wsjt-devel@lists.sourceforge.net>
https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/wsjt-devel
___
wsjt-devel mailing list
wsjt-devel@lists.sourceforge.net
https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/wsjt-devel

Re: [wsjt-devel] Someone released an Auto CQ mod - my 2 cents

[Dan Malcolm]

Regulations aside, why did we become hams?  If all you want is to collect QSO’s 
without being actually involved, why spend the time and money on education and 
equipment?  Sorry, I vote against further animation of FT8 or any other 
protocol.  Some automation is helpful, too be sure, but there is such a thing 
as too much.

Just my $0.02.
__
Dan – K4SHQ

From: w2ctx [mailto:w2...@comcast.net]
Sent: Sunday, March 31, 2019 1:49 PM
To: WSJT software development 
Subject: Re: [wsjt-devel] Someone released an Auto CQ mod - my 2 cents

How does the system know the frequency is not in use before transmitting?




Sent from my Verizon, Samsung Galaxy smartphone

 Original message 
From: Dave AA6YQ mailto:aa...@ambersoft.com>>
Date: 3/31/19 2:30 PM (GMT-05:00)
To: 'WSJT software development' 
mailto:wsjt-devel@lists.sourceforge.net>>
Subject: Re: [wsjt-devel] Someone released an Auto CQ mod - my 2 cents

+ AA6YQ comments below

Why not. Amateur Radio was supposed to be experimental.

+ The experiment could be conducted without making it easy for users to setup 
unattended 7x24 CQing and QSO completion. Think the FT8 "watering holes" are 
packed now? Wait until there are several thousand unattended stations around 
the world continuously CQing and attempting to work every callsign they haven't 
yet worked.





___
wsjt-devel mailing list
wsjt-devel@lists.sourceforge.net<mailto:wsjt-devel@lists.sourceforge.net>
https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/wsjt-devel
___
wsjt-devel mailing list
wsjt-devel@lists.sourceforge.net
https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/wsjt-devel

Re: [wsjt-devel] Someone released an Auto CQ mod - my 2 cents

[w2ctx]

How does the system know the frequency is not in use before transmitting?Sent 
from my Verizon, Samsung Galaxy smartphone
 Original message From: Dave AA6YQ  Date: 
3/31/19  2:30 PM  (GMT-05:00) To: 'WSJT software development' 
 Subject: Re: [wsjt-devel] Someone released 
an Auto CQ mod - my 2 cents + AA6YQ comments belowWhy not. Amateur Radio was 
supposed to be experimental. + The experiment could be conducted without making 
it easy for users to setup unattended 7x24 CQing and QSO completion. Think the 
FT8 "watering holes" are packed now? Wait until there are several thousand 
unattended stations around the world continuously CQing and attempting to work 
every callsign they haven't yet 
worked.___wsjt-devel mailing 
listwsjt-devel@lists.sourceforge.nethttps://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/wsjt-devel___
wsjt-devel mailing list
wsjt-devel@lists.sourceforge.net
https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/wsjt-devel

Re: [wsjt-devel] Someone released an Auto CQ mod - my 2 cents

[Dave AA6YQ]

+ AA6YQ comments below

Why not. Amateur Radio was supposed to be experimental. 

+ The experiment could be conducted without making it easy for users to setup 
unattended 7x24 CQing and QSO completion. Think the FT8 "watering holes" are 
packed now? Wait until there are several thousand unattended stations around 
the world continuously CQing and attempting to work every callsign they haven't 
yet worked.





___
wsjt-devel mailing list
wsjt-devel@lists.sourceforge.net
https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/wsjt-devel

Re: [wsjt-devel] Someone released an Auto CQ mod - my 2 cents

[Bobby Chandler]

Bravo Bill! I agree 100%.

Bobby/N4AU

From: Bill Somerville 
Sent: Sunday, March 31, 2019 11:53 AM
To: wsjt-devel@lists.sourceforge.net 
Subject: Re: [wsjt-devel] Someone released an Auto CQ mod - my 2 cents

On 31/03/2019 17:12, Carey Fisher wrote:

  All I have to say, and I've been saying for some time now, is that maybe 
developers will now think twice before releasing software such as this as Open 
Source.
Carey,

that shows a major misunderstanding of both Open Source software and the 
complexity of WSJT-X. WSJT-X uses two major components provided by third-party 
teams that are themselves Open Source. There are no other free equivalent 
components of sufficient quality and scope and writing our own would take many 
man-years of effort and ongoing maintenance. These components give us an 
essential leg up to providing a portable cross-platform application of the 
highest quality with reasonable development timescales. There are reasons why 
many closed source applications are Windows only and these factors are high on 
the list.

Aside from that, of the latest two "robot" offerings being touted, one does not 
require any changes to WSJT-X source code and the other is being offered as a 
contribution with the contentious robotic parts removed. Either way the WSJT 
team have no interest in WSJT-X being used as a QSO robot and the automation 
that has been provided already is only in response to large scale user demand. 
For example auto-sequencing and "Call 1st" were deemed necessary for FT8 
because the small thinking time between decodes completing and the next 
transmission period requires super-human concentration and reaction times. For 
QSO modes like FT8 we have a basic user interface rule that each QSO must be 
initiated by some operator action, e.g. calling CQ or replying to a CQ. At the 
end of a QSO for normal DX contacts the user has the final say on whether a 
completed QSO is logged, WSJT-X will prompt the user to log a QSO but they must 
take further action to confirm a good contact or reject a bad one. There are 
other operator aids for high QSO rate situations, like contest operating and 
running a rare and popular DX operation, related to logging QSOs but the 
requirement for an operator action to initiate each QSO is always maintained.

What is worth noting is that the small WSJT development team expends a lot of 
thought and time on how to combat rogue patched versions and add-on tools that 
attempt to exceed the levels of automation we deem sufficient. These are either 
misguided or malicious. This detracts from core development and maintenance and 
we would rather not have to give up that effort.

On a personal note; my opinion on QSO robots, aside from their questionable 
legality in many countries, is that most Amateur Radio operators would not 
consider a QSO with a machine to be worthwhile and to find out that they had 
done so unknowingly would be very annoying. For those that attempt to deploy 
such robots, I suggest they go a step further and dispense with the radio 
equipment and use their PC skills to mock up the certificates and awards and 
print them directly, that way no one else is being disappointed and they can 
save themselves a whole lot of cost and time building, operating, and 
maintaining an Amateur Radio station.

73
Bill
G4WJS.









___
wsjt-devel mailing list
wsjt-devel@lists.sourceforge.net
https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/wsjt-devel
___
wsjt-devel mailing list
wsjt-devel@lists.sourceforge.net
https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/wsjt-devel

Re: [wsjt-devel] Someone released an Auto CQ mod - my 2 cents

[Bill Somerville]

On 31/03/2019 17:12, Carey Fisher wrote:
All I have to say, and I've been saying for some time now, is that 
maybe developers will now think twice before releasing software such 
as this as Open Source.


Carey,

that shows a major misunderstanding of both Open Source software and the 
complexity of WSJT-X. WSJT-X uses two major components provided by 
third-party teams that are themselves Open Source. There are no other 
free equivalent components of sufficient quality and scope and writing 
our own would take many man-years of effort and ongoing maintenance. 
These components give us an essential leg up to providing a portable 
cross-platform application of the highest quality with reasonable 
development timescales. There are reasons why many closed source 
applications are Windows only and these factors are high on the list.


Aside from that, of the latest two "robot" offerings being touted, one 
does not require any changes to WSJT-X source code and the other is 
being offered as a contribution with the contentious robotic parts 
removed. Either way the WSJT team have no interest in WSJT-X being used 
as a QSO robot and the automation that has been provided already is only 
in response to large scale user demand. For example auto-sequencing and 
"Call 1st" were deemed necessary for FT8 because the small thinking time 
between decodes completing and the next transmission period requires 
super-human concentration and reaction times. For QSO modes like FT8 we 
have a basic user interface rule that each QSO must be initiated by some 
operator action, e.g. calling CQ or replying to a CQ. At the end of a 
QSO for normal DX contacts the user has the final say on whether a 
completed QSO is logged, WSJT-X will prompt the user to log a QSO but 
they must take further action to confirm a good contact or reject a bad 
one. There are other operator aids for high QSO rate situations, like 
contest operating and running a rare and popular DX operation, related 
to logging QSOs but the requirement for an operator action to initiate 
each QSO is always maintained.


What is worth noting is that the small WSJT development team expends a 
lot of thought and time on how to combat rogue patched versions and 
add-on tools that attempt to exceed the levels of automation we deem 
sufficient. These are either misguided or malicious. This detracts from 
core development and maintenance and we would rather not have to give up 
that effort.


On a personal note; my opinion on QSO robots, aside from their 
questionable legality in many countries, is that most Amateur Radio 
operators would not consider a QSO with a machine to be worthwhile and 
to find out that they had done so unknowingly would be very annoying. 
For those that attempt to deploy such robots, I suggest they go a step 
further and dispense with the radio equipment and use their PC skills to 
mock up the certificates and awards and print them directly, that way no 
one else is being disappointed and they can save themselves a whole lot 
of cost and time building, operating, and maintaining an Amateur Radio 
station.


73
Bill
G4WJS.

___
wsjt-devel mailing list
wsjt-devel@lists.sourceforge.net
https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/wsjt-devel

Re: [wsjt-devel] Someone released an Auto CQ mod - my 2 cents

[Carey Fisher]

All I have to say, and I've been saying for some time now, is that maybe
developers will now think twice before releasing software such as this as
Open Source.

On Sun, Mar 31, 2019 at 11:00 AM Jim Shorney  wrote:

>
> That statement so totally proves that you missed the point of my comment.
>
>
> On Sun, 31 Mar 2019 11:01:54 +0200
> Georg  wrote:
>
> > Why not. Amateur Radio was supposed to be experimental.
> >
> > > Am 31.03.2019 um 00:08 schrieb Jim Shorney :
> > >
> > >
> > > And this helps improve one's skill as an operator HOW?
> > >
> > > 73
> > >
> > > -Jim
> > > NU0C
> > >
> > >
> > >
> > >
> > > On Sat, 30 Mar 2019 13:53:39 -0700
> > > Al Pawlowski  wrote:
> > >
> > >> I do not have a problem with an auto-cq per se. Getting outraged
> before it’s been tried, or is causing an actual problem, seems to be
> "putting the cart before the horse" to me.
> > >>
> > >> Personally, I would not mind being able to tell my radio “Alexa, get
> me a bora bora QSL” - maybe using “callsign/AI”. Now, that would be
> interesting automation, maybe, a real innovation and, maybe, not too far
> off.
> > >>
> > >>
> > >> Al Pawlowski, K6AVP
> > >> Los Osos, CA USA
>
>
> ___
> wsjt-devel mailing list
> wsjt-devel@lists.sourceforge.net
> https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/wsjt-devel
>


-- 
Carey Fisher
careyfis...@gmail.com
___
wsjt-devel mailing list
wsjt-devel@lists.sourceforge.net
https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/wsjt-devel

Re: [wsjt-devel] Someone released an Auto CQ mod - my 2 cents

[Jim Shorney]

That statement so totally proves that you missed the point of my comment.


On Sun, 31 Mar 2019 11:01:54 +0200
Georg  wrote:

> Why not. Amateur Radio was supposed to be experimental. 
> 
> > Am 31.03.2019 um 00:08 schrieb Jim Shorney :
> > 
> > 
> > And this helps improve one's skill as an operator HOW?
> > 
> > 73
> > 
> > -Jim
> > NU0C
> > 
> > 
> > 
> > 
> > On Sat, 30 Mar 2019 13:53:39 -0700
> > Al Pawlowski  wrote:
> >   
> >> I do not have a problem with an auto-cq per se. Getting outraged before 
> >> it’s been tried, or is causing an actual problem, seems to be "putting the 
> >> cart before the horse" to me.
> >> 
> >> Personally, I would not mind being able to tell my radio “Alexa, get me a 
> >> bora bora QSL” - maybe using “callsign/AI”. Now, that would be interesting 
> >> automation, maybe, a real innovation and, maybe, not too far off.
> >> 
> >> 
> >> Al Pawlowski, K6AVP
> >> Los Osos, CA USA  


___
wsjt-devel mailing list
wsjt-devel@lists.sourceforge.net
https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/wsjt-devel

Re: [wsjt-devel] Someone released an Auto CQ mod

[Neil Zampella]

The original 'for sale' thread was removed I believe, but the threads
about that thread go on and on and on


On 3/30/2019 2:49 PM, Tag Loomis (Tag) wrote:

The post has NOT been removed, just the links to the software

On Sat, Mar 30, 2019 at 11:47 AM Tom Melvin mailto:t...@tkrh.co.uk>> wrote:

Hi All

Don’t want to get into a protected discussion on this as I suspect
the Dev list is not suitable for some of it.

Take the automatic QSO Mod (I thought JTDX did that already) out
of the equation, there are a couple of other features I saw in the
posting that could be incorporated into the mainstream release:

Filter to exclude some prefixes - perhaps a local always on (JTDX
Robot), want to filter, great add the callsign to a filter list,
supports (simple) wildcard, want to ignore all Scotland, for
example, add GM* - They won’t appear.

Noise issues - filter station above and below a certain Db reports.

Can’t cope with the colour settings, can display new calls only -
filter out worked before to narrow down the ‘hit’ list.

Those three I can see being helpful and useful.

While I am against the Auto CQ option - would like to point out -
the station posting on QRZ is European, in the UK at least,
extract from Licence:


10(1) The Licensee may conduct Unattended Operation of Radio
Equipment provided that any such operation is consistent with the
terms of this Licence. Additional restrictions which apply to the
Unattended Operation of Beacons are specified in Schedule 2 to
this Licence.



So in some parts of the world it’s legal, In looking at schedule 2
- I would watch calling WSPR a beacon. UK licence excludes any
form of beacons between 3.6Mhz and 28Mhz - even then the 80m and
10m bands it is only for DF hunting. Basically 4m upwards with a
pile of other restrictions is ok - So any form of WSPR on HF is
(as far as I can tell - would love to be corrected) illegal if its
called a beacon.

Tom

P.S. I don’t like censorship so if the QRZ post has been removed
it is a little worrying at what else are we not being told - It
may be against FCC regs but not all of us are governed by them.


--
73’s

Tom
GM8MJV (IO85)





On 30 Mar 2019, at 15:23, Topher Petty mailto:ai8...@gmail.com>> wrote:


That's not only against the spirit of Amateur Radio, but it's
also against FCC rules regarding unattended operation. FT8 is NOT
a beacon, and doesn't fall under those rules.

Anyone who uses this deserves to be flogged repeatedly with a wet
noodle, and, if they're in the States, fined to the fullest
extent of the regulations.

WSPR is a beacon, FT8 is not. This pisses me off to no end.

de AI8W, Chris

On Fri, Mar 29, 2019 at 2:28 PM Tag Loomis mailto:tag.loo...@gmail.com>> wrote:

Sorry, but some [expletive deleted] released an Auto CQ and
Auto Responder mod to WSJT-X

https://forums.qrz.com/index.php?threads/wsjt-x-full-auto-mod.652050/

I know there’s not much to be done about it, but man this
makes me mad!


-Stephen ‘Tag’ Loomis / N0TTL
___
wsjt-devel mailing list
wsjt-devel@lists.sourceforge.net

https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/wsjt-devel

___
wsjt-devel mailing list
wsjt-devel@lists.sourceforge.net

https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/wsjt-devel


___
wsjt-devel mailing list
wsjt-devel@lists.sourceforge.net

https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/wsjt-devel




---
This email has been checked for viruses by AVG.
https://www.avg.com
___
wsjt-devel mailing list
wsjt-devel@lists.sourceforge.net
https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/wsjt-devel

Re: [wsjt-devel] Someone released an Auto CQ mod - my 2 cents

[Thomas Kocourek]

I would like to remind everyone that our beloved hobby is NOT the Internet.
Whether a fully automated station is permitted or not permitted under the
respective country's regulation, removing the operator from control of a
transmission (auto-CQ, etc.) degrades the hobby.

Ask yourself this: Why bother doing the hobby if you are willing to
relinquish control to some program? Do you want a DXCC award so badly that
you are willing to rationalise the thought of using auto-CQ?

73 de N4FWD

On Sun, Mar 31, 2019, 5:25 AM Georg  wrote:

> Why not. Amateur Radio was supposed to be experimental.
>
> > Am 31.03.2019 um 00:08 schrieb Jim Shorney :
> >
> >
> > And this helps improve one's skill as an operator HOW?
> >
> > 73
> >
> > -Jim
> > NU0C
> >
> >
> >
> >
> > On Sat, 30 Mar 2019 13:53:39 -0700
> > Al Pawlowski  wrote:
> >
> >> I do not have a problem with an auto-cq per se. Getting outraged before
> it’s been tried, or is causing an actual problem, seems to be "putting the
> cart before the horse" to me.
> >>
> >> Personally, I would not mind being able to tell my radio “Alexa, get me
> a bora bora QSL” - maybe using “callsign/AI”. Now, that would be
> interesting automation, maybe, a real innovation and, maybe, not too far
> off.
> >>
> >>
> >> Al Pawlowski, K6AVP
> >> Los Osos, CA USA
> >
> >
> >
> > ___
> > wsjt-devel mailing list
> > wsjt-devel@lists.sourceforge.net
> > https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/wsjt-devel
>
>
> ___
> wsjt-devel mailing list
> wsjt-devel@lists.sourceforge.net
> https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/wsjt-devel
>
___
wsjt-devel mailing list
wsjt-devel@lists.sourceforge.net
https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/wsjt-devel

Re: [wsjt-devel] Someone released an Auto CQ mod - my 2 cents

[Georg]

Why not. Amateur Radio was supposed to be experimental. 

> Am 31.03.2019 um 00:08 schrieb Jim Shorney :
> 
> 
> And this helps improve one's skill as an operator HOW?
> 
> 73
> 
> -Jim
> NU0C
> 
> 
> 
> 
> On Sat, 30 Mar 2019 13:53:39 -0700
> Al Pawlowski  wrote:
> 
>> I do not have a problem with an auto-cq per se. Getting outraged before it’s 
>> been tried, or is causing an actual problem, seems to be "putting the cart 
>> before the horse" to me.
>> 
>> Personally, I would not mind being able to tell my radio “Alexa, get me a 
>> bora bora QSL” - maybe using “callsign/AI”. Now, that would be interesting 
>> automation, maybe, a real innovation and, maybe, not too far off.
>> 
>> 
>> Al Pawlowski, K6AVP
>> Los Osos, CA USA
> 
> 
> 
> ___
> wsjt-devel mailing list
> wsjt-devel@lists.sourceforge.net
> https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/wsjt-devel


___
wsjt-devel mailing list
wsjt-devel@lists.sourceforge.net
https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/wsjt-devel

Re: [wsjt-devel] Someone released an Auto CQ mod - my 2 cents

[Jim Shorney]

And this helps improve one's skill as an operator HOW?

73

-Jim
NU0C




On Sat, 30 Mar 2019 13:53:39 -0700
Al Pawlowski  wrote:

> I do not have a problem with an auto-cq per se. Getting outraged before it’s 
> been tried, or is causing an actual problem, seems to be "putting the cart 
> before the horse" to me.
> 
> Personally, I would not mind being able to tell my radio “Alexa, get me a 
> bora bora QSL” - maybe using “callsign/AI”. Now, that would be interesting 
> automation, maybe, a real innovation and, maybe, not too far off.
> 
> 
> Al Pawlowski, K6AVP
> Los Osos, CA USA



___
wsjt-devel mailing list
wsjt-devel@lists.sourceforge.net
https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/wsjt-devel

Re: [wsjt-devel] Someone released an Auto CQ mod - my 2 cents

[Carey Fisher]

"I do not have a problem with an auto-cq per se."
Surely you can't be serious!

On Sat, Mar 30, 2019 at 4:57 PM Al Pawlowski  wrote:

> I do not have a problem with an auto-cq per se. Getting outraged before
> it’s been tried, or is causing an actual problem, seems to be "putting the
> cart before the horse" to me.
>
> Personally, I would not mind being able to tell my radio “Alexa, get me a
> bora bora QSL” - maybe using “callsign/AI”. Now, that would be interesting
> automation, maybe, a real innovation and, maybe, not too far off.
>
>
> Al Pawlowski, K6AVP
> Los Osos, CA USA
>
>
>
> On Mar 30, 2019, at 11:49, wsjt-devel-requ...@lists.sourceforge.net wrote:
>
> Subject: Re: [wsjt-devel] Someone released an Auto CQ mod
>
>
> ___
> wsjt-devel mailing list
> wsjt-devel@lists.sourceforge.net
> https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/wsjt-devel
>


-- 
Carey Fisher
careyfis...@gmail.com
___
wsjt-devel mailing list
wsjt-devel@lists.sourceforge.net
https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/wsjt-devel

Re: [wsjt-devel] Someone released an Auto CQ mod - my 2 cents

[Dave AA6YQ]

+ AA6YQ comments below

I do not have a problem with an auto-cq per se. Getting outraged before it’s 
been tried, or is causing an actual problem, seems to be "putting the cart 
before the horse" to me.

Personally, I would not mind being able to tell my radio “Alexa, get me a bora 
bora QSL” - maybe using “callsign/AI”. Now, that would be interesting 
automation, maybe, a real innovation and, maybe, not too far off.

+ Imagine several thousand hams around the world saying "Alexa, get me an FT8 
QSO with every station that I haven't already worked", and configuring their 
stations to call CQ and make QSOs 24x7 until the task is complete.

+ Do we really need to wait to see whether this would cause a problem?

  73,

   Dave, AA6YQ




___
wsjt-devel mailing list
wsjt-devel@lists.sourceforge.net
https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/wsjt-devel

Re: [wsjt-devel] Someone released an Auto CQ mod - my 2 cents

[Al Pawlowski]

I do not have a problem with an auto-cq per se. Getting outraged before it’s 
been tried, or is causing an actual problem, seems to be "putting the cart 
before the horse" to me.

Personally, I would not mind being able to tell my radio “Alexa, get me a bora 
bora QSL” - maybe using “callsign/AI”. Now, that would be interesting 
automation, maybe, a real innovation and, maybe, not too far off.


Al Pawlowski, K6AVP
Los Osos, CA USA



> On Mar 30, 2019, at 11:49, wsjt-devel-requ...@lists.sourceforge.net wrote:
> 
> Subject: Re: [wsjt-devel] Someone released an Auto CQ mod
> 

___
wsjt-devel mailing list
wsjt-devel@lists.sourceforge.net
https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/wsjt-devel

Re: [wsjt-devel] Someone released an Auto CQ mod

[Tag Loomis (Tag)]

The post has NOT been removed, just the links to the software

On Sat, Mar 30, 2019 at 11:47 AM Tom Melvin  wrote:

> Hi All
>
> Don’t want to get into a protected discussion on this as I suspect the Dev
> list is not suitable for some of it.
>
> Take the automatic QSO Mod (I thought JTDX did that already) out of the
> equation, there are a couple of other features I saw in the posting that
> could be incorporated into the mainstream release:
>
> Filter to exclude some prefixes - perhaps a local always on (JTDX Robot),
> want to filter, great add the callsign to a filter list, supports (simple)
> wildcard, want to ignore all Scotland, for example, add GM* - They won’t
> appear.
>
> Noise issues - filter station above and below a certain Db reports.
>
> Can’t cope with the colour settings, can display new calls only - filter
> out worked before to narrow down the ‘hit’ list.
>
> Those three I can see being helpful and useful.
>
> While I am against the Auto CQ option - would like to point out - the
> station posting on QRZ is European, in the UK at least, extract from
> Licence:
>
> 10(1) The Licensee may conduct Unattended Operation of Radio Equipment
> provided that any such operation is consistent with the terms of this
> Licence. Additional restrictions which apply to the Unattended Operation of
> Beacons are specified in Schedule 2 to this Licence.
>
>
>
> So in some parts of the world it’s legal, In looking at schedule 2 - I
> would watch calling WSPR a beacon. UK licence excludes any form of beacons
> between 3.6Mhz and 28Mhz - even then the 80m and 10m bands it is only for
> DF hunting. Basically 4m upwards with a pile of other restrictions is ok -
> So any form of WSPR on HF is (as far as I can tell - would love to be
> corrected) illegal if its called a beacon.
>
> Tom
>
> P.S. I don’t like censorship so if the QRZ post has been removed it is a
> little worrying at what else are we not being told - It may be against FCC
> regs but not all of us are governed by them.
>
>
> --
> 73’s
>
> Tom
> GM8MJV (IO85)
>
>
>
>
>
> On 30 Mar 2019, at 15:23, Topher Petty  wrote:
>
> That's not only against the spirit of Amateur Radio, but it's also against
> FCC rules regarding unattended operation. FT8 is NOT a beacon, and doesn't
> fall under those rules.
>
> Anyone who uses this deserves to be flogged repeatedly with a wet noodle,
> and, if they're in the States, fined to the fullest extent of the
> regulations.
>
> WSPR is a beacon, FT8 is not. This pisses me off to no end.
>
> de AI8W, Chris
>
> On Fri, Mar 29, 2019 at 2:28 PM Tag Loomis  wrote:
>
>> Sorry, but some [expletive deleted] released an Auto CQ and Auto
>> Responder mod to WSJT-X
>>
>> https://forums.qrz.com/index.php?threads/wsjt-x-full-auto-mod.652050/
>>
>> I know there’s not much to be done about it, but man this makes me mad!
>>
>>
>> -Stephen ‘Tag’ Loomis / N0TTL
>> ___
>> wsjt-devel mailing list
>> wsjt-devel@lists.sourceforge.net
>> https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/wsjt-devel
>>
> ___
> wsjt-devel mailing list
> wsjt-devel@lists.sourceforge.net
> https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/wsjt-devel
>
>
> ___
> wsjt-devel mailing list
> wsjt-devel@lists.sourceforge.net
> https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/wsjt-devel
>
___
wsjt-devel mailing list
wsjt-devel@lists.sourceforge.net
https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/wsjt-devel

Re: [wsjt-devel] Someone released an Auto CQ mod

[Tom Melvin]

Hi All

Don’t want to get into a protected discussion on this as I suspect the Dev list 
is not suitable for some of it.

Take the automatic QSO Mod (I thought JTDX did that already) out of the 
equation, there are a couple of other features I saw in the posting that could 
be incorporated into the mainstream release:

Filter to exclude some prefixes - perhaps a local always on (JTDX Robot), want 
to filter, great add the callsign to a filter list, supports (simple) wildcard, 
want to ignore all Scotland, for example, add GM* - They won’t appear.

Noise issues - filter station above and below a certain Db reports.

Can’t cope with the colour settings, can display new calls only - filter out 
worked before to narrow down the ‘hit’ list.

Those three I can see being helpful and useful.

While I am against the Auto CQ option - would like to point out - the station 
posting on QRZ is European, in the UK at least, extract from Licence:

> 10(1) The Licensee may conduct Unattended Operation of Radio Equipment 
> provided that any such operation is consistent with the terms of this 
> Licence. Additional restrictions which apply to the Unattended Operation of 
> Beacons are specified in Schedule 2 to this Licence.



So in some parts of the world it’s legal, In looking at schedule 2 - I would 
watch calling WSPR a beacon. UK licence excludes any form of beacons between 
3.6Mhz and 28Mhz - even then the 80m and 10m bands it is only for DF hunting. 
Basically 4m upwards with a pile of other restrictions is ok - So any form of 
WSPR on HF is (as far as I can tell - would love to be corrected) illegal if 
its called a beacon.

Tom

P.S. I don’t like censorship so if the QRZ post has been removed it is a little 
worrying at what else are we not being told - It may be against FCC regs but 
not all of us are governed by them.


--
73’s

Tom
GM8MJV (IO85)





On 30 Mar 2019, at 15:23, Topher Petty  wrote:

> That's not only against the spirit of Amateur Radio, but it's also against 
> FCC rules regarding unattended operation. FT8 is NOT a beacon, and doesn't 
> fall under those rules.
> 
> Anyone who uses this deserves to be flogged repeatedly with a wet noodle, 
> and, if they're in the States, fined to the fullest extent of the regulations.
> 
> WSPR is a beacon, FT8 is not. This pisses me off to no end.
> 
> de AI8W, Chris
> 
> On Fri, Mar 29, 2019 at 2:28 PM Tag Loomis  wrote:
> Sorry, but some [expletive deleted] released an Auto CQ and Auto Responder 
> mod to WSJT-X
> 
> https://forums.qrz.com/index.php?threads/wsjt-x-full-auto-mod.652050/
> 
> I know there’s not much to be done about it, but man this makes me mad!
> 
> 
> -Stephen ‘Tag’ Loomis / N0TTL 
> ___
> wsjt-devel mailing list
> wsjt-devel@lists.sourceforge.net
> https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/wsjt-devel
> ___
> wsjt-devel mailing list
> wsjt-devel@lists.sourceforge.net
> https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/wsjt-devel

___
wsjt-devel mailing list
wsjt-devel@lists.sourceforge.net
https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/wsjt-devel

Re: [wsjt-devel] Someone released an Auto CQ mod

[Neil Zampella]

FWIW .. the QRZ admin removed the post and the file

Neil, KN3ILZ

On 3/29/2019 2:24 PM, Tag Loomis wrote:

Sorry, but some [expletive deleted] released an Auto CQ and Auto
Responder mod to WSJT-X

https://forums.qrz.com/index.php?threads/wsjt-x-full-auto-mod.652050/

I know there’s not much to be done about it, but man this makes me mad!


-Stephen ‘Tag’ Loomis / N0TTL


---
This email has been checked for viruses by AVG.
https://www.avg.com



___
wsjt-devel mailing list
wsjt-devel@lists.sourceforge.net
https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/wsjt-devel

Re: [wsjt-devel] Someone released an Auto CQ mod

[Topher Petty]

That's not only against the spirit of Amateur Radio, but it's also against
FCC rules regarding unattended operation. FT8 is NOT a beacon, and doesn't
fall under those rules.

Anyone who uses this deserves to be flogged repeatedly with a wet noodle,
and, if they're in the States, fined to the fullest extent of the
regulations.

WSPR is a beacon, FT8 is not. This pisses me off to no end.

de AI8W, Chris

On Fri, Mar 29, 2019 at 2:28 PM Tag Loomis  wrote:

> Sorry, but some [expletive deleted] released an Auto CQ and Auto Responder
> mod to WSJT-X
>
> https://forums.qrz.com/index.php?threads/wsjt-x-full-auto-mod.652050/
>
> I know there’s not much to be done about it, but man this makes me mad!
>
>
> -Stephen ‘Tag’ Loomis / N0TTL
> ___
> wsjt-devel mailing list
> wsjt-devel@lists.sourceforge.net
> https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/wsjt-devel
>
___
wsjt-devel mailing list
wsjt-devel@lists.sourceforge.net
https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/wsjt-devel

[wsjt-devel] Someone released an Auto CQ mod

[Tag Loomis]

Sorry, but some [expletive deleted] released an Auto CQ and Auto Responder mod 
to WSJT-X

https://forums.qrz.com/index.php?threads/wsjt-x-full-auto-mod.652050/ 


I know there’s not much to be done about it, but man this makes me mad!


-Stephen ‘Tag’ Loomis / N0TTL ___
wsjt-devel mailing list
wsjt-devel@lists.sourceforge.net
https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/wsjt-devel