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

Groups > comp.compression > #823 > unrolled thread

Modulus, Factoring and Compressing random data

Back to article view | Back to comp.compression

Contents

  Modulus, Factoring and Compressing random data Ernst <Ernst_Berg@sbcglobal.net> - 2012-01-24 09:46 -0800
    Re: Modulus, Factoring and Compressing random data Earl_Colby_Pottinger <earlcolby.pottinger@sympatico.ca> - 2012-01-24 13:03 -0800
      Re: Modulus, Factoring and Compressing random data Ernst <Ernst_Berg@sbcglobal.net> - 2012-01-24 14:52 -0800
        Re: Modulus, Factoring and Compressing random data jacko <jackokring@gmail.com> - 2012-01-24 15:25 -0800
          Re: Modulus, Factoring and Compressing random data Ernst <Ernst_Berg@sbcglobal.net> - 2012-01-24 16:49 -0800
            Re: Modulus, Factoring and Compressing random data Earl_Colby_Pottinger <earlcolby.pottinger@sympatico.ca> - 2012-01-24 18:55 -0800
              Re: Modulus, Factoring and Compressing random data jacko <jackokring@gmail.com> - 2012-01-24 19:23 -0800
                Re: Modulus, Factoring and Compressing random data Ernst <Ernst_Berg@sbcglobal.net> - 2012-01-24 21:08 -0800
              Re: Modulus, Factoring and Compressing random data Ernst <Ernst_Berg@sbcglobal.net> - 2012-01-24 20:50 -0800
    Re: Modulus, Factoring and Compressing random data Robert Wessel <robertwessel2@yahoo.com> - 2012-01-25 00:09 -0600
      Re: Modulus, Factoring and Compressing random data Ernst <Ernst_Berg@sbcglobal.net> - 2012-01-24 23:51 -0800
        Re: Modulus, Factoring and Compressing random data Robert Wessel <robertwessel2@yahoo.com> - 2012-01-25 02:28 -0600
          Re: Modulus, Factoring and Compressing random data Ernst <Ernst_Berg@sbcglobal.net> - 2012-01-25 02:54 -0800
          Re: Modulus, Factoring and Compressing random data Ernst <Ernst_Berg@sbcglobal.net> - 2012-01-25 03:08 -0800
        Re: Modulus, Factoring and Compressing random data Ernst <Ernst_Berg@sbcglobal.net> - 2012-01-24 23:58 -0800
      Re: Modulus, Factoring and Compressing random data Ernst <Ernst_Berg@sbcglobal.net> - 2012-01-25 00:08 -0800
      Re: Modulus, Factoring and Compressing random data Ernst <Ernst_Berg@sbcglobal.net> - 2012-01-25 02:40 -0800
        Re: Modulus, Factoring and Compressing random data Robert Wessel <robertwessel2@yahoo.com> - 2012-01-25 05:25 -0600
          Re: Modulus, Factoring and Compressing random data Ernst <Ernst_Berg@sbcglobal.net> - 2012-01-25 05:20 -0800
          Re: Modulus, Factoring and Compressing random data Ernst <Ernst_Berg@sbcglobal.net> - 2012-01-25 12:12 -0800
            Re: Modulus, Factoring and Compressing random data Earl_Colby_Pottinger <earlcolby.pottinger@sympatico.ca> - 2012-01-25 13:32 -0800
              Re: Modulus, Factoring and Compressing random data James Dow Allen <jdallen2000@yahoo.com> - 2012-01-25 14:33 -0800
                Re: Modulus, Factoring and Compressing random data Robert Wessel <robertwessel2@yahoo.com> - 2012-01-25 17:43 -0600
                  Re: Modulus, Factoring and Compressing random data Ernst <Ernst_Berg@sbcglobal.net> - 2012-01-25 19:00 -0800
                    Re: Modulus, Factoring and Compressing random data Earl_Colby_Pottinger <earlcolby.pottinger@sympatico.ca> - 2012-01-26 07:17 -0800
                  Re: Modulus, Factoring and Compressing random data David Thompson <dave.thompson2@verizon.net> - 2012-02-08 06:06 -0500
                    Re: Modulus, Factoring and Compressing random data Earl_Colby_Pottinger <earlcolby.pottinger@sympatico.ca> - 2012-02-08 07:30 -0800
              Re: Modulus, Factoring and Compressing random data Ernst <Ernst_Berg@sbcglobal.net> - 2012-01-25 15:19 -0800
    Re: Modulus, Factoring and Compressing random data Ernst <Ernst_Berg@sbcglobal.net> - 2012-01-26 02:20 -0800
      Re: Modulus, Factoring and Compressing random data Earl_Colby_Pottinger <earlcolby.pottinger@sympatico.ca> - 2012-01-26 07:25 -0800
        Re: Modulus, Factoring and Compressing random data Ernst <Ernst_Berg@sbcglobal.net> - 2012-01-26 18:52 -0800
          Re: Modulus, Factoring and Compressing random data Thomas Richter <thor@math.tu-berlin.de> - 2012-01-27 09:25 +0100
            Re: Modulus, Factoring and Compressing random data Ernst <Ernst_Berg@sbcglobal.net> - 2012-01-27 12:01 -0800
            Re: Modulus, Factoring and Compressing random data Ernst <Ernst_Berg@sbcglobal.net> - 2012-01-27 12:12 -0800
              Re: Modulus, Factoring and Compressing random data Ernst <Ernst_Berg@sbcglobal.net> - 2012-01-27 16:13 -0800
                Re: Modulus, Factoring and Compressing random data Thomas Richter <thor@math.tu-berlin.de> - 2012-01-28 11:22 +0100
                  Re: Modulus, Factoring and Compressing random data Ernst <Ernst_Berg@sbcglobal.net> - 2012-01-28 13:59 -0800
                    Re: Modulus, Factoring and Compressing random data Thomas Richter <thor@math.tu-berlin.de> - 2012-01-30 09:49 +0100
                      Re: Modulus, Factoring and Compressing random data stan <smoore@exis.net> - 2012-01-30 08:51 -0500
                        Re: Modulus, Factoring and Compressing random data Ernst <Ernst_Berg@sbcglobal.net> - 2012-01-30 08:51 -0800
                      Re: Modulus, Factoring and Compressing random data Ernst <Ernst_Berg@sbcglobal.net> - 2012-01-30 08:38 -0800
                        Re: Modulus, Factoring and Compressing random data stan <smoore@exis.net> - 2012-01-30 18:44 -0500
                          Re: Modulus, Factoring and Compressing random data Ernst <Ernst_Berg@sbcglobal.net> - 2012-01-30 15:49 -0800
                            Re: Modulus, Factoring and Compressing random data Ernst <Ernst_Berg@sbcglobal.net> - 2012-01-30 16:27 -0800
                              Re: Modulus, Factoring and Compressing random data Thomas Richter <thor@math.tu-berlin.de> - 2012-01-31 08:46 +0100
                                Re: Modulus, Factoring and Compressing random data Ernst <Ernst_Berg@sbcglobal.net> - 2012-01-31 03:58 -0800
                                  Re: Modulus, Factoring and Compressing random data Thomas Richter <thor@math.tu-berlin.de> - 2012-01-31 21:58 +0100
                            Re: Modulus, Factoring and Compressing random data stan <smoore@exis.net> - 2012-01-31 07:41 -0500
                              Re: Modulus, Factoring and Compressing random data Ernst <Ernst_Berg@sbcglobal.net> - 2012-01-31 15:27 -0800
                                Re: Modulus, Factoring and Compressing random data Ernst <Ernst_Berg@sbcglobal.net> - 2012-01-31 16:06 -0800
                                  Re: Modulus, Factoring and Compressing random data stan <smoore@exis.net> - 2012-02-01 07:47 -0500
                                    Re: Modulus, Factoring and Compressing random data Ernst <Ernst_Berg@sbcglobal.net> - 2012-02-01 09:38 -0800
                                      Re: Modulus, Factoring and Compressing random data "George Johnson" <matrix29@charter.net> - 2012-02-02 08:10 -0500
                                    Re: Modulus, Factoring and Compressing random data Ernst <Ernst_Berg@sbcglobal.net> - 2012-02-01 20:22 -0800
                                      Re: Modulus, Factoring and Compressing random data stan <smoore@exis.net> - 2012-02-02 06:31 -0500
                                        Re: Modulus, Factoring and Compressing random data Ernst <Ernst_Berg@sbcglobal.net> - 2012-02-02 14:15 -0800
                                        Re: Modulus, Factoring and Compressing random data Ernst <Ernst_Berg@sbcglobal.net> - 2012-02-02 19:18 -0800
                                          Re: Modulus, Factoring and Compressing random data "George Johnson" <matrix29@charter.net> - 2012-02-07 06:21 -0500
                                Re: Modulus, Factoring and Compressing random data stan <smoore@exis.net> - 2012-01-31 19:06 -0500
                                  Re: Modulus, Factoring and Compressing random data Ernst <Ernst_Berg@sbcglobal.net> - 2012-01-31 19:15 -0800
                                    Re: Modulus, Factoring and Compressing random data stan <smoore@exis.net> - 2012-02-01 08:24 -0500
                                      Re: Modulus, Factoring and Compressing random data Ernst <Ernst_Berg@sbcglobal.net> - 2012-02-01 09:54 -0800
                                      Re: Modulus, Factoring and Compressing random data Jim Leonard <mobygamer@gmail.com> - 2012-02-01 11:00 -0800
                                        Re: Modulus, Factoring and Compressing random data Ernst <Ernst_Berg@sbcglobal.net> - 2012-02-01 21:19 -0800
                                          Re: Modulus, Factoring and Compressing random data Jim Leonard <mobygamer@gmail.com> - 2012-02-02 07:15 -0800
                                      Re: Modulus, Factoring and Compressing random data Ernst <Ernst_Berg@sbcglobal.net> - 2012-02-01 20:25 -0800
                                        Re: Modulus, Factoring and Compressing random data stan <smoore@exis.net> - 2012-02-02 07:07 -0500
                                          Re: Modulus, Factoring and Compressing random data Ernst <Ernst_Berg@sbcglobal.net> - 2012-02-02 19:35 -0800
                                            Re: Modulus, Factoring and Compressing random data "George Johnson" <matrix29@charter.net> - 2012-02-07 06:33 -0500
                                  Re: Modulus, Factoring and Compressing random data Ernst <Ernst_Berg@sbcglobal.net> - 2012-01-31 18:51 -0800
                                    Re: Modulus, Factoring and Compressing random data Sebastian <s.gesemann@gmail.com> - 2012-02-01 03:51 -0800
                                      Re: Modulus, Factoring and Compressing random data Ernst <Ernst_Berg@sbcglobal.net> - 2012-02-01 09:34 -0800
                                    Re: Modulus, Factoring and Compressing random data stan <smoore@exis.net> - 2012-02-01 08:53 -0500
                                      Re: Modulus, Factoring and Compressing random data Ernst <Ernst_Berg@sbcglobal.net> - 2012-02-01 20:31 -0800
                                        Re: Modulus, Factoring and Compressing random data stan <smoore@exis.net> - 2012-02-02 07:18 -0500
                          Re: Modulus, Factoring and Compressing random data Ernst <Ernst_Berg@sbcglobal.net> - 2012-01-30 16:47 -0800
                            Re: Modulus, Factoring and Compressing random data Ernst <Ernst_Berg@sbcglobal.net> - 2012-01-30 17:00 -0800
                              Re: Modulus, Factoring and Compressing random data Ernst <Ernst_Berg@sbcglobal.net> - 2012-01-30 18:55 -0800
                            Re: Modulus, Factoring and Compressing random data stan <smoore@exis.net> - 2012-01-31 08:10 -0500
                              Re: Modulus, Factoring and Compressing random data Earl_Colby_Pottinger <earlcolby.pottinger@sympatico.ca> - 2012-01-31 11:31 -0800
                                Re: Modulus, Factoring and Compressing random data Noob <root@127.0.0.1> - 2012-02-02 11:11 +0100
                                  Re: Modulus, Factoring and Compressing random data Ernst <Ernst_Berg@sbcglobal.net> - 2012-02-02 14:05 -0800
                                    Re: Modulus, Factoring and Compressing random data stan <smoore@exis.net> - 2012-02-08 13:35 -0500
                                Re: Modulus, Factoring and Compressing random data Noob <root@127.0.0.1> - 2012-02-02 11:24 +0100
                                  Re: Modulus, Factoring and Compressing random data Noob <root@127.0.0.1> - 2012-02-02 12:52 +0100
                                  Re: Modulus, Factoring and Compressing random data Ernst <Ernst_Berg@sbcglobal.net> - 2012-02-02 14:06 -0800
                    Re: Modulus, Factoring and Compressing random data Sebastian <s.gesemann@gmail.com> - 2012-01-30 07:09 -0800
                      Re: Modulus, Factoring and Compressing random data Ernst <Ernst_Berg@sbcglobal.net> - 2012-01-30 07:45 -0800
                        Re: Modulus, Factoring and Compressing random data Sebastian <s.gesemann@gmail.com> - 2012-01-30 09:42 -0800
                          Re: Modulus, Factoring and Compressing random data Ernst <Ernst_Berg@sbcglobal.net> - 2012-01-30 10:19 -0800
                          Re: Modulus, Factoring and Compressing random data Ernst <Ernst_Berg@sbcglobal.net> - 2012-01-30 12:05 -0800
                            Re: Modulus, Factoring and Compressing random data Jim Leonard <mobygamer@gmail.com> - 2012-01-30 14:40 -0800
                              Re: Modulus, Factoring and Compressing random data Ernst <Ernst_Berg@sbcglobal.net> - 2012-01-30 15:11 -0800
                                Re: Modulus, Factoring and Compressing random data Ernst <Ernst_Berg@sbcglobal.net> - 2012-01-30 15:43 -0800
                              Re: Modulus, Factoring and Compressing random data Ernst <Ernst_Berg@sbcglobal.net> - 2012-01-30 14:52 -0800
                            Re: Modulus, Factoring and Compressing random data Sebastian <s.gesemann@gmail.com> - 2012-01-31 04:31 -0800
                              Re: Modulus, Factoring and Compressing random data Ernst <Ernst_Berg@sbcglobal.net> - 2012-01-31 14:21 -0800
                                Re: Modulus, Factoring and Compressing random data pfraser <pete_fraser@comcast.net> - 2012-01-31 15:04 -0800
                                  Re: Modulus, Factoring and Compressing random data Noob <root@127.0.0.1> - 2012-02-01 10:50 +0100
                                    Re: Modulus, Factoring and Compressing random data Ernst <Ernst_Berg@sbcglobal.net> - 2012-02-01 20:19 -0800
                              Re: Modulus, Factoring and Compressing random data jacko <jackokring@gmail.com> - 2012-02-02 00:51 -0800
                                Re: Modulus, Factoring and Compressing random data Thomas Richter <thor@math.tu-berlin.de> - 2012-02-02 10:09 +0100
                                  Re: Modulus, Factoring and Compressing random data jacko <jackokring@gmail.com> - 2012-02-02 11:43 -0800
                                    Re: Modulus, Factoring and Compressing random data Sebastian <s.gesemann@gmail.com> - 2012-02-03 01:21 -0800
                                      Re: Modulus, Factoring and Compressing random data Sebastian <s.gesemann@gmail.com> - 2012-02-03 02:43 -0800
                                        Re: Modulus, Factoring and Compressing random data Ernst <Ernst_Berg@sbcglobal.net> - 2012-02-04 15:42 -0800
                                  Re: Modulus, Factoring and Compressing random data Ernst <Ernst_Berg@sbcglobal.net> - 2012-02-02 13:53 -0800
                                    Re: Modulus, Factoring and Compressing random data stan <smoore@exis.net> - 2012-02-08 13:32 -0500
                                Re: Modulus, Factoring and Compressing random data Sebastian <s.gesemann@gmail.com> - 2012-02-02 01:56 -0800
                                  Re: Modulus, Factoring and Compressing random data Ernst <Ernst_Berg@sbcglobal.net> - 2012-02-02 13:54 -0800
                                Re: Modulus, Factoring and Compressing random data Ernst <Ernst_Berg@sbcglobal.net> - 2012-02-02 12:59 -0800
                                Re: Modulus, Factoring and Compressing random data Ernst <Ernst_Berg@sbcglobal.net> - 2012-02-02 12:47 -0800
                                  Re: Modulus, Factoring and Compressing random data Ernst <Ernst_Berg@sbcglobal.net> - 2012-02-02 23:54 -0800
                                    Re: Modulus, Factoring and Compressing random data stan <smoore@exis.net> - 2012-02-08 13:22 -0500
                                  Re: Modulus, Factoring and Compressing random data Earl_Colby_Pottinger <earlcolby.pottinger@sympatico.ca> - 2012-02-04 20:45 -0800
            Re: Modulus, Factoring and Compressing random data Noob <root@127.0.0.1> - 2012-01-30 15:32 +0100
    Re: Modulus, Factoring and Compressing random data "George Johnson" <matrix29@charter.net> - 2012-02-02 06:34 -0500
    Re: Modulus, Factoring and Compressing random data "George Johnson" <matrix29@charter.net> - 2012-02-02 07:29 -0500
    Re: Modulus, Factoring and Compressing random data "George Johnson" <matrix29@charter.net> - 2012-02-02 07:46 -0500

Page 5 of 6 — ← Prev page 1 2 3 4 [5] 6  Next page →

#935

Earl_Colby_Pottinger wrote:

> There also is the fact he claims to have a working factoring program,
> but still has not factored one of the unsolved RSA numbers to prove
> that his program works.

which reminds me of one legendary JSH post

JSH wrote:

> Solving the factoring problem has long been the last thing I wanted to
> do.  Almost every time I'd buy something online I'd tell myself, why
> mess this up?  And ask myself if there wasn't another way.
>
> Now the factoring problem IS solved (again) and watching the reaction
> of the newsgroups and the continued lack of proper reaction by the
> cryptological and mathematical communities, I realize it was,
> unfortunately necessary.
>
> We could still have days to go while the bizarre and stupid denial
> continues.  Which begs for explanation.
>
> So why'd you do it?  Why did so many of you lie about so many
> mathematical discoveries for so many years, and ignore warnings that
> if necessary I'd solve the factoring problem and now act like I didn't
> when I did (for the second time)?
>
> My analysis: women
>
> My analysis is that for many of you your egos are wrapped up in your
> supposed discoveries and accomplishments as mathematicians, and my
> research takes that away from you, so to keep from looking into the
> eyes of your wives or girlfriends, and seeing the disappointment or
> worse, you just lied, and lied, and have kept lying.
>
> I guess it's evolutionary, but so weird to have $5 trillion U.S. plus
> wiped from the world economy because some dudes didn't want to
> disappoint their women.
>
> Such is life.
>
>
> James Harris

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]

#954

On Feb 2, 2:11 am, Noob <r...@127.0.0.1> wrote:
> Earl_Colby_Pottinger wrote:
> > There also is the fact he claims to have a working factoring program,
> > but still has not factored one of the unsolved RSA numbers to prove
> > that his program works.
>
> which reminds me of one legendary JSH post
>
> JSH wrote:
> > Solving the factoring problem has long been the last thing I wanted to
> > do.  Almost every time I'd buy something online I'd tell myself, why
> > mess this up?  And ask myself if there wasn't another way.
>
> > Now the factoring problem IS solved (again) and watching the reaction
> > of the newsgroups and the continued lack of proper reaction by the
> > cryptological and mathematical communities, I realize it was,
> > unfortunately necessary.
>
> > We could still have days to go while the bizarre and stupid denial
> > continues.  Which begs for explanation.
>
> > So why'd you do it?  Why did so many of you lie about so many
> > mathematical discoveries for so many years, and ignore warnings that
> > if necessary I'd solve the factoring problem and now act like I didn't
> > when I did (for the second time)?
>
> > My analysis: women
>
> > My analysis is that for many of you your egos are wrapped up in your
> > supposed discoveries and accomplishments as mathematicians, and my
> > research takes that away from you, so to keep from looking into the
> > eyes of your wives or girlfriends, and seeing the disappointment or
> > worse, you just lied, and lied, and have kept lying.
>
> > I guess it's evolutionary, but so weird to have $5 trillion U.S. plus
> > wiped from the world economy because some dudes didn't want to
> > disappoint their women.
>
> > Such is life.
>
> > James Harris

James there is a time problem for non-quantum methods.  This Recursive
Modulus is no better than others because of that however, it is a
simple thing to set the M of M mod N to the factor plus a little more
and watch as it ticks off with the iteration of M = M-1 and then
"finds" the factor.  That is trivial and I provided code in this
thread so you can see it in action for yourself.
 I think we can all agree guessing where the factor is has papers
written about it for those wishing to find that Starting M of N mod M
recursive which is in relative search distance away but if a person
guesses one less they will spend a long time with no results perhaps
for the two primes.
 What was posted if you go back is that Recursive Modulus reports
factors but not for all iterations of M.  It reports composite factors
as well as primes and hopefully like for smaller numbers such as 64
bits it reports prime factors for many different values of M of N mod
M recursive.
 All those things together mean if you have a spare computer you can
take a chance that recursive modulus will report the RSA factors even
if M of N mod M recursive is not a factor.  That is from the direct
observations.
 The worst case is that there will be only two "hits" for a range of M
== Rsa2048- 1 to M == 1 of N mod M

 So anyone who can code can write their own function.  I understand
that it is better that reported results are reproduced independently.
I'm hopeful that the snippit of code I provided is enough but I am
available to help debug code if it is in C.. Sorry I only know C well
enough.

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]

#1016

Ernst wrote:
>
> James there is a time problem for non-quantum methods.  This Recursive
> Modulus is no better than others because of that however, it is a
> simple thing to set the M of M mod N to the factor plus a little more
> and watch as it ticks off with the iteration of M = M-1 and then
> "finds" the factor.  

Actually the existence of better methods (less resources) makes
recursive modulus worse.

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]

#936

Earl_Colby_Pottinger wrote:

> There also is the fact he claims to have a working factoring program,
> but still has not factored one of the unsolved RSA numbers to prove
> that his program works.

By the way, I, too, have "solved" the factoring problem.
Here is my implementation, in bc.
It uses the fancy modulo operation. A lot.

define foo(n)
{
  m = sqrt(n)
  for (i = 3; i <= m; i += 2)
    if (n%i == 0) { print i, " " ; return trialdiv(n/i) }
  return n
}

Banzai!

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]

#939

Noob wrote:

> Earl_Colby_Pottinger wrote:
> 
>> There also is the fact he claims to have a working factoring program,
>> but still has not factored one of the unsolved RSA numbers to prove
>> that his program works.
> 
> By the way, I, too, have "solved" the factoring problem.
> Here is my implementation, in bc.
> It uses the fancy modulo operation. A lot.
> 
> define foo(n)
> {
>   m = sqrt(n)
>   for (i = 3; i <= m; i += 2)
>     if (n%i == 0) { print i, " " ; return trialdiv(n/i) }
>   return n
> }

s/trialdiv/foo of course.

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]

#953

On Feb 2, 2:24 am, Noob <r...@127.0.0.1> wrote:
> Earl_Colby_Pottinger wrote:
> > There also is the fact he claims to have a working factoring program,
> > but still has not factored one of the unsolved RSA numbers to prove
> > that his program works.
>
> By the way, I, too, have "solved" the factoring problem.
> Here is my implementation, in bc.
> It uses the fancy modulo operation. A lot.
>
> define foo(n)
> {
>   m = sqrt(n)
>   for (i = 3; i <= m; i += 2)
>     if (n%i == 0) { print i, " " ; return trialdiv(n/i) }
>   return n
>
> }
>
> Banzai!

That is Euler's square method yes?

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]

#881

On 28 Jan., 22:59, Ernst wrote:
>
> So if this has been known forever why then have none of you found
> at least the first three factors of Million Digit file?

I don't know whether somebody tried to factor this million digit
number (or smaller chunks of it). But I'm almost sure about that some
people tried to use factorization as part of a general purpose data
compression tool. I just don't know what they were thinking and why
they even tried to do that. My guess is that they were not educated
enough to be able to realize that what they were doing is pointless.

> I'm the uneducated one here.

If you want to learn what data compression is about, go to a library,
grab "Introduction to data compression" by K. Sayood or something like
that, and read it. That's one of the books our coding theory professor
recommended to us students (about 8 years ago or so, when I was in
college). This class and this book was really eye opening. It is
possible, though, that to comprehend the book's content you might have
to brush up some math basics first. It is also possible -- even highly
likely -- that once you understand its content, you will lose interest
in the million digits challange.

Cheers!
SG

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]

#882

On Jan 30, 7:09 am, Sebastian <s.gesem...@gmail.com> wrote:
> On 28 Jan., 22:59, Ernst wrote:
>
>
>
> > So if this has been known forever why then have none of you found
> > at least the first three factors of Million Digit file?
>
> I don't know whether somebody tried to factor this million digit
> number (or smaller chunks of it). But I'm almost sure about that some
> people tried to use factorization as part of a general purpose data
> compression tool. I just don't know what they were thinking and why
> they even tried to do that. My guess is that they were not educated
> enough to be able to realize that what they were doing is pointless.
>
> > I'm the uneducated one here.
>
> If you want to learn what data compression is about, go to a library,
> grab "Introduction to data compression" by K. Sayood or something like
> that, and read it. That's one of the books our coding theory professor
> recommended to us students (about 8 years ago or so, when I was in
> college). This class and this book was really eye opening. It is
> possible, though, that to comprehend the book's content you might have
> to brush up some math basics first. It is also possible -- even highly
> likely -- that once you understand its content, you will lose interest
> in the million digits challenge.
>
> Cheers!
> SG

 It's a tool I would say. Factoring that is. I haven't worked with
factoring myself but I wish to comfort you that I can code this in
ways I doubt you know about. All of it 1 to 1.
I have never conformed to what is see as standard data compression
methodologies when it comes to million digit challenge,  What would be
the point?
 I believe every one when it has been said Million Digit is not
compressible. That means everything you know is not enough when it
comes to this Challenge..
 That means someone has to "invent" something new.

 This challenge gives me something to focus my programming interest
on.
 So thanks for the recommendation as always but no book I know tells
me how to invent something new. .
 That point is widely ignored too often since conformity is a powerful
force in social settings.
 Thanks for replying.

 Since you have finished school, have you seen the recursive modulus
method any place?  That is a book I wish to read right now.

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]

#885

On 30 Jan., 16:45, Ernst wrote:
>
> I have never conformed to what is see as standard data compression
> methodologies when it comes to million digit challenge,  What would be
> the point?
> I believe every one when it has been said Million Digit is not
> compressible. That means everything you know is not enough when it
> comes to this Challenge..
> That means someone has to "invent" something new.

These books are not only about practical algorithms people came up
with to solve certain problems. They are also about the fundamental
theory which applies to every possible compression "methodology". So,
the well-developed theory also applies to everything you might come up
with. It is simply foolish to dismiss these theoretical data
compression basics.

> So thanks for the recommendation as always but no book I know tells
> me how to invent something new. .
> That point is widely ignored too often since conformity is a powerful
> force in social settings.

This is _exactly_ the kind of talk one can expect from cranks. They
massivly underrate the importance of education. Of course, you are
different. You just want to be a free spirit and keep an open mind.

> have you seen the recursive modulus method any place?

Number theory is not one of my interests.

Cheers!
SG

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]

#887

On Jan 30, 9:42 am, Sebastian <s.gesem...@gmail.com> wrote:
> On 30 Jan., 16:45, Ernst wrote:
>
>
>
> > I have never conformed to what is see as standard data compression
> > methodologies when it comes to million digit challenge,  What would be
> > the point?
> > I believe every one when it has been said Million Digit is not
> > compressible. That means everything you know is not enough when it
> > comes to this Challenge..
> > That means someone has to "invent" something new.
>
> These books are not only about practical algorithms people came up
> with to solve certain problems. They are also about the fundamental
> theory which applies to every possible compression "methodology". So,
> the well-developed theory also applies to everything you might come up
> with. It is simply foolish to dismiss these theoretical data
> compression basics.
>
> > So thanks for the recommendation as always but no book I know tells
> > me how to invent something new. .
> > That point is widely ignored too often since conformity is a powerful
> > force in social settings.
>
> This is _exactly_ the kind of talk one can expect from cranks. They
> massivly underrate the importance of education. Of course, you are
> different. You just want to be a free spirit and keep an open mind.
>
> > have you seen the recursive modulus method any place?
>
> Number theory is not one of my interests.
>
> Cheers!
> SG

 So Recursive Modulus is real.  No one can point to a reference where
I can read more and I may have made the discovery of the method first.
That's where things are.
 Having to prove theory is not necessary.  It does a thing and that is
good enough for me.
 If you find a reference to someone using the recursive method please
let me know.

 That would be helpful.

 Thanks for stopping by.. I wondered where you guys were.

Ernst

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]

#888

On Jan 30, 9:42 am, Sebastian <s.gesem...@gmail.com> wrote:
> On 30 Jan., 16:45, Ernst wrote:
>
>
> This is _exactly_ the kind of talk one can expect from cranks. They
> massivly underrate the importance of education. Of course, you are
> different. You just want to be a free spirit and keep an open mind.
>
> > have you seen the recursive modulus method any place?
>
> Number theory is not one of my interests.
>
> Cheers!
> SG


 Oh man I missed your bating with the crank label. Do you hate Jews
and Queers too?
 So what is so "Crank" about sharing what I discovered?

 Who says I won't read those books some time?

What I notice is that having an education doesn't stop people from
being a crank.
But your "crank" is about isolating a class of people and making
yourself look and feel good by dehumanizing others.
I am not making any claims that can't be proven.

 So if you were looking for some action at my expense you need to go
fuck yourself first before you get any of me.  Cool?

But hey thanks for replying anyway.

Ernst

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]

#889

On Jan 30, 2:05 pm, Ernst <Ernst_B...@sbcglobal.net> wrote:
>  Oh man I missed your bating with the crank label. Do you hate Jews
> and Queers too?

I don't think you understand what a Crank is: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Crank_(person)

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]

#890

On Jan 30, 2:40 pm, Jim Leonard <mobyga...@gmail.com> wrote:
> On Jan 30, 2:05 pm, Ernst <Ernst_B...@sbcglobal.net> wrote:
>
> >  Oh man I missed your bating with the crank label. Do you hate Jews
> > and Queers too?
>
> I don't think you understand what a Crank is:http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Crank_(person)

Let me try this again..  Here is your new link http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Crank_%28person%29

 I believe in working million digits because I already know for a fact
that data is fluid.

 The Million digit file is a great data set.  Nothing works on it so
methods can be tested against it.
 We all know failure in an experiment can be as good as success.
Million Digit file is a really hard case.  I like that file.  I know
it rather well and I trust it.
 I trust it  It can be trusted. Rand would say so and so would Mark
Nelson.


 Ernst

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]

#894

On Jan 30, 3:11 pm, Ernst <Ernst_B...@sbcglobal.net> wrote:
> On Jan 30, 2:40 pm, Jim Leonard <mobyga...@gmail.com> wrote:
>
> > On Jan 30, 2:05 pm, Ernst <Ernst_B...@sbcglobal.net> wrote:
>
> > >  Oh man I missed your bating with the crank label. Do you hate Jews
> > > and Queers too?
>
> > I don't think you understand what a Crank is:http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Crank_(person)
>
> Let me try this again..  Here is your new linkhttp://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Crank_%28person%29
>
>  I believe in working million digits because I already know for a fact
> that data is fluid.
>
>  The Million digit file is a great data set.  Nothing works on it so
> methods can be tested against it.
>  We all know failure in an experiment can be as good as success.
> Million Digit file is a really hard case.  I like that file.  I know
> it rather well and I trust it.
>  I trust it  It can be trusted. Rand would say so and so would Mark
> Nelson.
>
>  Ernst

Let me save folks the need to link. I support Wikipedia so I will use
some of that donation right here right now

---
"Crank" is a pejorative term used for a person who unshakably holds a
belief that most of his or her contemporaries consider to be false.[1]
A crank belief is so wildly at variance with those commonly held as to
be ludicrous to many. Cranks characteristically dismiss all evidence
or arguments which contradict their own unconventional beliefs, making
rational debate an often futile task; this is the essential defining
characteristic of the crank: being impervious to facts, evidence, and
rational inference.

Common synonyms for "crank" include crackpot and kook. A crank differs
from a fanatic in that the subject of the fanatic's obsession is
either not necessarily widely regarded as wrong or not necessarily a
"fringe" belief. Similarly, the word quack is reserved for someone who
promotes a medical remedy or practice that is widely considered to be
ineffective; this term however does not imply any deep belief in the
idea or product they are attempting to sell. Crank may also refer to
an ill-tempered individual or one who is in a bad mood, but that usage
is not the subject of this article.

Although a crank's beliefs seem ridiculous to experts in the field,
cranks are sometimes very successful in convincing non-experts of
their views. A famous example is the Indiana Pi Bill where a state
legislature nearly wrote into law a crank result in geometry.

-------------------

So the Example in this thread is a method of finding factors.
It was posted and open to all to examine.

Is it Crank or Fact.. Are you guys assholes or friends?

Let me know..
You are not my peers.

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]

#892

On Jan 30, 2:40 pm, Jim Leonard <mobyga...@gmail.com> wrote:
> On Jan 30, 2:05 pm, Ernst <Ernst_B...@sbcglobal.net> wrote:
>
> >  Oh man I missed your bating with the crank label. Do you hate Jews
> > and Queers too?
>
> I don't think you understand what a Crank is:http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Crank_(person)

What link?  Better go back and enter it again because Wikipedia seems
to think it's a bad idea too..

 And I understand very well.

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]

#902

On 30 Jan., 21:05, Ernst wrote:
> So what is so "Crank" about sharing what I discovered?

The things you wrote I responded to had little to do with sharing
ideas and more with your dismissive attitude towards well-established
fundamental information theory. I get that you feel like these
theories won't be of any use to you, possibly even poisening your
mind. But that's where you are wrong and that's what I was trying to
tell you.

SG

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]

#909

On Jan 31, 4:31 am, Sebastian <s.gesem...@gmail.com> wrote:
> On 30 Jan., 21:05, Ernst wrote:
>
> > So what is so "Crank" about sharing what I discovered?
>
> The things you wrote I responded to had little to do with sharing
> ideas and more with your dismissive attitude towards well-established
> fundamental information theory. I get that you feel like these
> theories won't be of any use to you, possibly even poisoning your
> mind. But that's where you are wrong and that's what I was trying to
> tell you.
>
> SG

That is a bullshit cover your ass reply.

 You are an asshole. You have been an asshole and with this bullshit
explanation you are still being an asshole. You are forgetting I have
been reading you for years.

 My new name for you is asshole.

Your full name is Authoritarian Asshole.

 You pushed the name calling one too far and you broke it asshole..
This is your fault.
 If you guys can call me a Kook or a Crank get ready for me to give
you all names.
 Tit for Tat See how you like it.

I am changing the game.

Read you later Mr. Authoritarian Asshole

  Ernst

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]

#910

Ernst wrote:

>
> That is a bullshit cover your ass reply.
>
>   You are an asshole. You have been an asshole and with this bullshit
> explanation you are still being an asshole. You are forgetting I have
> been reading you for years.
>
>   My new name for you is asshole.
>
> Your full name is Authoritarian Asshole.
>
>   You pushed the name calling one too far and you broke it asshole..
> This is your fault.
>   If you guys can call me a Kook or a Crank get ready for me to give
> you all names.
>   Tit for Tat See how you like it.
>
> I am changing the game.
>
> Read you later Mr. Authoritarian Asshole
>

Eric Cartman? Is that you?

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]

#916

pfraser wrote:

> Eric Cartman? Is that you?

"You WILL respect my AUTHORITY."

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]

#927

On Feb 1, 1:50 am, Noob <r...@127.0.0.1> wrote:
> pfraser wrote:
> > Eric Cartman? Is that you?
>
> "You WILL respect my AUTHORITY."

I love the humor.

 I had a busy day friends.  I did get the new quad-core and it
wouldn't boot since I bet the Phenom II is not the same as the pre-
Phenom quads' and tris' were a bit different and mother boards don't
all have a front bus according to the technician I had do the work.

 This reply is as good as any to say what I have to say today.

 I thought about the social conflict that happens here.  The Kooks,
Morons and Cranks that are such an issue that some feel they can take
liberty.

 There are two classifications I cam up with. Two is an easy number
but doesn't completely define the kinds of people that have come here
in the past ten years.  I will have been involved in some way with
this forum for ten years come June 2012.

 I see a classification based on the professional science person and
the non-professional person.
 That isn't to say that there is only one kind; such as, you are a
science or kook.  No I am saying that there are those to who the rules
of the scientific community where what the do, say and publish makes
ore breaks them. This I beleve is the root of the label Kook or Crank.
 I can understand how frightening it must be to find oneself who is
trying to make a career in the sciences to be judged to be something
less than a success. Maybe even worse. On that an entire philosophy
and perhaps an issue of measure is defined.
 So to call someone a kook or a crank actually depends on one being a
peer. A peer is the scientific realm relative to that philosophy or
measure. This would also be the foundation of social structure with
those hoping to get a career in the sciences such as the young.  I am
sure the University experience is wonderful as are those who are
sincerely the product of education.  However, that is but one side of
the two I mentioned.

 The other side is where the common people come in.  This traditional
excluded from the Usenet in it's infancy for example but not limited
to any one walk of life.
 Those who come here have ideas that may not coincide with established
norms or even accepted scientific results.  Thus the label of Kook or
Crank is applied in some cases.
 The main difference is that for Scientific side there are Peers and
on Common people side there is Friends.
 The two have to live together here I conjecture or there will always
be war.

 I am not a Peer. I'd like to think I could be but my life is half
over and the best I have done is work for hourly wages.
 What I always hope for when I come to comp.compression is I can have
a warm friend experience because I am in between to planes of
existence metaphorically. By that colorful descriptor I mean that my
Mother's prediction has come true.
 My Mother told me when I was 17 or so that I would be the smartest
Okie on the bus when I was grown.  It was a metaphor I never forgot
and bless her heart it is a story her stroke took from here memory and
she laughed again to hear the prediction she made all those years ago
when we spoke yesterday.
 Now that is really where and who I am.  I am a working class non-
science working class man.
 That often means I am thinking about and interested in things better
associated with a science professional.  That often puts me at odds
with my neighbours and co-workers.
 I mean who casually slips into conversation about data compression or
encoding as they mop floors or weld steel beams?  It's the odd
smartest okie on the bus that become alone there to be really honest.

 Then I try to come here for example or other forums and interact to
gain that which we all want.

 So There is a difference between the science professional and that
psychology and the bus rid the rest of us take but, that doesn't mean
that good things come from only those in the science classification.

 So if people like Sebastian and other enforce the rules of the
science professional world on the non-science professionals we get
this Mr. Asshole result.

 There has to be a balance between abstract and precision that accepts
both.

 I hope this is a well thought out post.

 I have always valued this forum and I am not able to appreciate the
width and breath of all the things I assume many of the official
scientific types collectively have been exposed to and have access to
in their daily employment or relative activities.  Indeed it is good
that we have people who are able to do such but they are not all
people hence the second classification of non-peer types where the
logic of motives become more fuzzy and the labels of Kook and Crank,
to name a couple, become tools.

 So I am the smarted okie on the bus and I am not a peer.  I have been
in and out here for 10 years and yes I work on the Million Digit
challenge. That Challenge is considered Crank and Kook if you are a
Peer and so without differentiation we have become lazy and seek to
blurr the line and simply judge blindly.

 So there I hope is a goodly input of calm and compassionate thought
aimed at peace rather than war.

Thanks..

 On my reporting the factoring method.. Count the number of
congratulations I got.  Not one because I am being treated as a Peer
and not a Friend.

There is a difference for me because this is my passion and hobby not
my hope of a career in limbo.  Hence I cannot be a crank or a kook but
I can be discriminated against in this forum over the years. I can be
cheated of friendship and community and labelled by the very people we
hope are smart enough to be the actual science types.

  Think for a minute that perhaps I have no other contact with those
who can understand my hobby and say that to come and get an
interaction that the smartest okie has to get spanked like the guys in
Animal House every time and you see why I have decided that after
fighting with Sebastian year after year and having someone who is a
science type kick me to the curb on peer-review standards is really
wrong.  He just couldn't resist doing it again and again habitually
but actuality in a rote sense.

 So Now you guys know more about me.  I am not about to quit trying
this challenge after all these years and I am not in a career about
it.

 I will post this now and hope for the best.

It is Friends vs Peers it is Common vs Professional and we all must
get along.

Names such as Kook and crank are for those who are professional types
if you haven't noticed :) Pun intended.

Ernst

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]

Page 5 of 6 — ← Prev page 1 2 3 4 [5] 6  Next page →

Back to top | Article view | comp.compression

csiph-web