Groups | Search | Server Info | Keyboard shortcuts | Login | Register [http] [https] [nntp] [nntps]

Groups > comp.compression > #718

Re: disclosure versus proof

Show all headers | View raw

jules Gilbert wrote:
> On Jan 3, 2:19 pm, stan <smo...@exis.net> wrote:
>> Jim Leonard wrote:
>> > On Jan 2, 4:37 pm, jules Gilbert <jules.sto...@gmail.com> wrote:
>> >> People say they want proof, really they want disclosure.
>>
>> > It is possible to provide proof without disclosing the exact method:
>>
>> <snip - man pulling back curtain to reveal the true nature of the wizard>
>>
>> Haven't we been here before? I did watch the twilight zone marathon
>> over the new year, nevertheless I think we've done this before.
>>
>> Sisyphus
>
> Don't worry Sisyphus, the idea that I can distribute a decompressor
> and associated compressed files and not have it reverse engineered is
> one of the most foolish assertions I have read;  Some have suggested
> that plan to me, I hope their motivations were innocent.

As noted, I'm sure I've heard this before. You don't think
verification is possible without disclosure, and you've stated so
repeatedly.

So if I have it straight, you are clever enough to come up with a
technique that nobody has ever seen and apparently even defies known
established science yet you aren't clever enough to come up with a
technique to provide verification without disclosure. 

With your fear of disclosure why even continue to talk about what you
are working on?  Aren't you afraid of terribly clever hackers
targeting you and your incredibly valuable technique?

Sisyphus, again

Back to comp.compression | Previous | Next — Previous in thread | Next in thread | Find similar | Unroll thread

Thread

disclosure versus proof jules Gilbert <jules.stocks@gmail.com> - 2012-01-02 14:37 -0800
  Re: disclosure versus proof pfraser <pete_fraser@comcast.net> - 2012-01-02 15:05 -0800
    Re: disclosure versus proof Michael <michaelhh@gmail.com> - 2012-01-02 23:00 -0800
      Re: disclosure versus proof jules Gilbert <jules.stocks@gmail.com> - 2012-01-03 04:22 -0800
    Re: disclosure versus proof jules Gilbert <jules.stocks@gmail.com> - 2012-01-03 03:42 -0800
      Re: disclosure versus proof Jim Leonard <mobygamer@gmail.com> - 2012-01-03 07:48 -0800
  Re: disclosure versus proof Thomas Richter <thor@math.tu-berlin.de> - 2012-01-03 13:33 +0100
  Re: disclosure versus proof Jim Leonard <mobygamer@gmail.com> - 2012-01-03 08:04 -0800
    Re: disclosure versus proof stan <smoore@exis.net> - 2012-01-03 14:19 -0500
      Re: disclosure versus proof jules Gilbert <jules.stocks@gmail.com> - 2012-01-04 01:16 -0800
        Re: disclosure versus proof glen herrmannsfeldt <gah@ugcs.caltech.edu> - 2012-01-04 12:18 +0000
        Re: disclosure versus proof Jim Leonard <mobygamer@gmail.com> - 2012-01-04 08:06 -0800
          Re: disclosure versus proof jules Gilbert <jules.stocks@gmail.com> - 2012-01-05 02:30 -0800
            Re: disclosure versus proof Jim Leonard <mobygamer@gmail.com> - 2012-01-06 13:45 -0800
              Re: disclosure versus proof jules Gilbert <jules.stocks@gmail.com> - 2012-01-08 11:48 -0800
                Re: disclosure versus proof pfraser <pete_fraser@comcast.net> - 2012-01-08 14:06 -0800
                Re: disclosure versus proof stan <smoore@exis.net> - 2012-01-08 17:06 -0500
        Re: disclosure versus proof stan <smoore@exis.net> - 2012-01-05 22:06 -0500
          Re: disclosure versus proof jules Gilbert <jules.stocks@gmail.com> - 2012-01-06 10:35 -0800

csiph-web