Asklemmy

43821 readers

1152 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
!lemmy411@lemmy.ca: a community for finding communities

~Icon~ ~by~ ~@Double_A@discuss.tchncs.de~

founded 5 years ago

MODERATORS

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

submitted 1 year ago by saywhatisabigw@lemmy.world to c/asklemmy@lemmy.ml

19 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

[–] random_character_a@lemmy.world 22 points 1 year ago

No. Link between sign and meaning (or sound) can be arbitrary.

If we knew that they were phonetic, we could get somewhere by comparing how human languages generally work, but even then we would need something to start with.

I'm guessing pure pictographs are harder, even with advanced comparative analysis.