Asklemmy

43786 readers

1097 users here now

A loosely moderated place to ask open-ended questions

Search asklemmy 🔍

If your post meets the following criteria, it's welcome here!

Open-ended question
Not offensive: at this point, we do not have the bandwidth to moderate overtly political discussions. Assume best intent and be excellent to each other.
Not regarding using or support for Lemmy: context, see the list of support communities and tools for finding communities below
Not ad nauseam inducing: please make sure it is a question that would be new to most members
An actual topic of discussion

Looking for support?

Looking for a community?

Lemmyverse: community search
sub.rehab: maps old subreddits to fediverse options, marks official as such
[email protected]: a community for finding communities

~Icon~ ~by~ ~@Double_[email protected]~

founded 5 years ago

MODERATORS

[email protected]

Could modern computers decipher hieroglyphics if we never found the Rosetta Stone? (self.asklemmy)

submitted 1 year ago by saywhatisabigw to c/[email protected]

18 comments fedilink hide all child comments

What if we never found the Rosetta Stone and could not read ancient Egyptian hieroglyphics. Could computers or AI decipher them today?

you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments

[–] [email protected] 1 points 1 year ago* (last edited 1 year ago)

The question specified present technology, which is how I answered. I'd guess that an algorithm that can find a reasonable interpretation of any corpus of text in a reasonable time period exists, it's just it hasn't been made.

For really small corpuses there might be more than one interpretation. The Voynich manuscript can probably only be read one way (or zero, but I've seen convincing arguments for 1).