Slashdot Mirror


AI May Have Finally Decoded the Mysterious 'Voynich Manuscript' (gizmodo.com)

An anonymous reader quotes a report from Gizmodo: Since its discovery over a hundred years ago, the 240-page Voynich manuscript, filled with seemingly coded language and inscrutable illustrations, of has confounded linguists and cryptographers. Using artificial intelligence, Canadian researchers have taken a huge step forward in unraveling the document's hidden meaning. Named after Wilfrid Voynich, the Polish book dealer who procured the manuscript in 1912, the document is written in an unknown script that encodes an unknown language -- a double-whammy of unknowns that has, until this point, been impossible to interpret. The Voynich manuscript contains hundreds of fragile pages, some missing, with hand-written text going from left to right. Most pages are adorned with illustrations of diagrams, including plants, nude figures, and astronomical symbols. But as for the meaning of the text -- nothing. No clue. For Greg Kondrak, an expert in natural language processing at the University of Alberta, this seemed a perfect task for artificial intelligence. With the help of his grad student Bradley Hauer, the computer scientists have taken a big step in cracking the code, discovering that the text is written in what appears to be the Hebrew language, and with letters arranged in a fixed pattern. To be fair, the researchers still don't know the meaning of the Voynich manuscript, but the stage is now set for other experts to join the investigation. The researchers used an AI to study "the text of the 'Universal Declaration of Human Rights' as it was written in 380 different languages, looking for patterns," reports Gizmodo. Following this training, the AI analyzed the Voynich gibberish, concluding with a high rate of certainty that the text was written in encoded Hebrew."

The researchers then entertained a hypothesis that the script was created with alphagrams, words in which text has been replaced by an alphabetically ordered anagram. "Armed with the knowledge that text was originally coded from Hebrew, the researchers devised an algorithm that could take these anagrams and create real Hebrew words." Finally, "the researchers deciphered the opening phrase of the manuscript" and ran it through Google Translate to convert it into passable English: "She made recommendations to the priest, man of the house and me and people." The study appears in Transactions of the Association of Computational Linguistics .

203 comments

  1. "Finally Decoded" by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 5, Insightful

    STOP using this phrase in each bi-weekly story about this book only to say at the bottom of each article it "isn't really decoded".

    It's "decoded" when the text is readable.

    1. Re:"Finally Decoded" by MrKaos · · Score: 2

      Finally Decoded using this one weird trick.

      --
      My ism, it's full of beliefs.
    2. Re:"Finally Decoded" by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Linguists hate this. Scientists in Cambridge have discovered a revolutionary new AI that will translate this ancient mystery

    3. Re:"Finally Decoded" by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      It's especially annoying since recently an old code was actually broken: 500 years ago, Ferdinand of Aragón used a glyph substitution code to communicate with one of his army commanders. One letter contained a partial decoded transcription, which was used like a kind of Rosetta stone to gradually decode more and more of the rest of the corpus.
      Now that's actual real news about decoding ancient manuscripts. But I guess since it isn't about Voynich it isn't sexy and not worth reporting on. Sigh.

  2. Re:Indian ... not hebrew by beep54 · · Score: 3, Insightful

    Citations sorely needed...

  3. Re:Indian ... not hebrew by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    [citation needed]

  4. Re:Indian ... not hebrew by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1

    Link to the results?

  5. Re:Indian ... not hebrew by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Especially since the indigenous peoples of North America didn't have any written languages.

  6. Lorem Ipsum by houghi · · Score: 5, Interesting

    What if they let loose the same AI on the Lorem Ipsum text that we know to be meaningless. Would it come to a similar conclusion? We humans want to see patters where there are none.

    --
    Don't fight for your country, if your country does not fight for you.
    1. Re:Lorem Ipsum by 91degrees · · Score: 2

      It's not completely meaninglessness though. I mean it's gobbledygook, but gobbledygook with Latin sentence structure and vocabulary.

    2. Re:Lorem Ipsum by Tsolias · · Score: 1

      patters where there are none

      does this mean that AI is some form of paranoia?

    3. Re:Lorem Ipsum by Dwedit · · Score: 5, Informative

      The lorem ipsum text actually means something though... (some words were removed)

      Nor again is there anyone who loves or pursues or desires to obtain pain of itself, because it is pain, but occasionally circumstances occur in which toil and pain can procure him some great pleasure. To take a trivial example, which of us ever undertakes laborious physical exercise, except to obtain some advantage from it? But who has any right to find fault with a man who chooses to enjoy a pleasure that has no annoying consequences, or one who avoids a pain that produces no resultant pleasure?

      On the other hand, we denounce with righteous indignation and dislike men who are so beguiled and demoralized by the charms of pleasure of the moment, so blinded by desire, that they cannot foresee the pain and trouble that are bound to ensue; and equal blame belongs to those who fail in their duty through weakness of will, which is the same as saying through shrinking from toil and pain.

    4. Re:Lorem Ipsum by Urinal+Pube · · Score: 1

      23

    5. Re:Lorem Ipsum by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      What did the second sentence decode as? A one time pad can be decoded as any particular message you want. That doesn't mean you have the right answer.

    6. Re:Lorem Ipsum by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 2, Informative

      Um, Lorem Ipsum isn't meaningless, it's Latin text copied from Cicero. We already know what it means. There goes your entire post.

    7. Re:Lorem Ipsum by FreshnFurter · · Score: 1

      https://lipsum.com/

      and I quote:
      "Lorem Ipsum comes from sections 1.10.32 and 1.10.33 of "de Finibus Bonorum et Malorum" (The Extremes of Good and Evil) by Cicero, written in 45 BC. "

    8. Re:Lorem Ipsum by Marxist+Hacker+42 · · Score: 1

      Lorem Ipsum isn't meaningless, it's latin.

      --
      SJW: a person who perceives an injustice, and while correcting it, commits a greater injustice.
    9. Re:Lorem Ipsum by Chris+Mattern · · Score: 1

      Lorem Ipsum is garbled text from Cicero; it was munged to produce the desired letter frequencies. It's pretty much gobbledygook.

    10. Re:Lorem Ipsum by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      It comes from something that means something. A text from Cicero, in fact. But lorem ipsum has been wrangled so much that it's pretty much not Latin. It's gibberish.

    11. Re: Lorem Ipsum by sound+vision · · Score: 1

      So maybe this is "Hebrew gobbledygook". What difference does it make?
      I'm still not convinced it's anything more than a sort of forgery, a faked artifact, and the only reason people care about it now is the circular "a bunch of previous people also cared about it".

    12. Re:Lorem Ipsum by BoogieChile · · Score: 2

      The Lorem Ipsum text, though, is based on something that Cicero wrote, but is definitely not coherent latin.

      where Cicero wrote;

      "Dolorem ipsum quia dolor sit amet, consectetur, adipisci velit, sed quia non numquam eius modi tempora incidunt ut labore et dolore magnam aliquam"

      Which is Latin, the Lorem Ipsum runs;

      "Lorem ipsum dolor sit amet, consectetur adipiscing elit, sed do eiusmod tempor incididunt ut labore et dolore magna aliqua"

      Which has some Latin words in it, but is mostly not.

    13. Re:Lorem Ipsum by houghi · · Score: 1

      Just because words have a meaning doe the text as a whole mean anything. From Google Translate:
      (generated from https://lipsum.com/)

      The refinancing. Maecenas was not the greatest of the lakes. In fact, as is evident from the laughter. Before the very first basketball set their jaws grief and clinical care; Now the arc of outdoor soccer or football sometimes football pool. Peanut prices have to pull classroom. Nothing but sit around. Gluten. Maecenas molestie justo. However, this nutrition propaganda. The lion until sterilized at dui invest in a smart and original. Sed ornare sapien quam, he wishes to makeup or the price of the quiver.

      The meaning of Lorem Ipsum is NOT the words. It is the layout of the words to make it look like text. The whole point of Lorem Ipsum is that it IS meaningless or better, the meaning is irrelevant.

      --
      Don't fight for your country, if your country does not fight for you.
    14. Re: Lorem Ipsum by 91degrees · · Score: 1

      It may well be, but at least we'll know.

      Sure, it's nothing more than a historical curiosity. Pretty much all we'll learn from this is related to the document. But some people are intrigued by a puzzle.

  7. So you wanna decode Alien... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    ...signals. God luck!

    1. Re: So you wanna decode Alien... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      According to the documentary Independence Day, itâ(TM)s not that hard.

  8. Re:Indian ... not hebrew by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1

    The book has been dated to around the middle of the 15th century. A native American language is highly unlikely.

  9. Re:Indian ... not hebrew by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0
  10. It's really RUSSIAN!!!! by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Don't translate it!!!

    Your brain will turn into mush from colluding with the RUSSIANS!! RUSSIANS!! RUSSIANS!!

    1. Re: It's really RUSSIAN!!!! by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Close enough. It is in fact a Polish fraud.

  11. Re:Amazing AI by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    AI can't make sweet love.

  12. Comment removed by account_deleted · · Score: 0

    Comment removed based on user account deletion

  13. Lololololol by bluegutang · · Score: 5, Insightful

    Failing to find any Hebrew scholars who could help validate their findings, the researchers eventually resorted to using Google Translate,

    (Source)

    This "research" is a joke.

    1. Re: Lololololol by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 5, Funny

      To be fair, pasting something into google counts as research for millenials.

    2. Re:Lololololol by Megol · · Score: 1

      From the paper:
      "According to a native speaker of the language,
      this is not quite a coherent sentence. However,
      after making a couple of spelling corrections,
      Google Translate is able to convert it into passable
      English: “She made recommendations to the priest,
      man of the house and me and people.”"

      So it is manually "corrected" input that produces that result.

      To show that this is a valid approach to decode the document they have to be able to decode larger parts of the text to something that make sense.
      That of course doesn't mean that it isn't a valid approach, there may have been deliberate misspellings by the writer before encryption and similar things. But unless they can produce longer readable texts IMO they haven't proved anything.

    3. Re:Lololololol by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1

      Failing to find any Hebrew scholars who could help validate their findings, the researchers eventually resorted to using Google Translate,

      (Source)

      This "research" is a joke.

      Let's assume all Hebrew scholars died out. They still left us with grammars and dictionaries. Any scientist (and contrary to what STEM people believe, there is Language Science) would not be stopped by that. I mean, they figured out Egyptian Hieroglyphs (with help from the Rosetta Stone), they figured out Linear B (a diphone system not actually suited for Greek used in Minoan accounting on thousands of loam slates preserved by an accidental fire) without such help.

      What kind of joke researcher has to strike up a cooperation with "Google Translate" to get at results?

    4. Re:Lololololol by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      What else would lonely computer scientists do? They did want to tell the university management they read the Voynich manuscript for stories, before their grant is cut off.

    5. Re:Lololololol by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1

      From the paper:
      "According to a native speaker of the language,

      Stop right there. There is no native speaker of classical Hebrew, and modern Hebrew is a very distinct reinvention quite certainly after creation of the Voynich Manuscript.

      Again, you need a Hebrew scholar here.

    6. Re:Lololololol by Luthair · · Score: 2

      Its Gizmodo, what do you expect from a tech blog?

    7. Re:Lololololol by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1

      And a shit one at that.

    8. Re:Lololololol by DRJlaw · · Score: 2

      This "research" is a joke.

      I disagree. How do you recruit a classical Hebrew scholar to validate your hypothesis and assist with additional work? Not i the Yellow Pages. You publish your intermediate results and hope that it tickles a suitable person's interest such that they join in the effort.

      You may as will declare Linus' work a joke. It's not as if Linux 0.12 was useful for much. It took a boatload of domain experts to bring it up to the capabilities that made people find it useful.

    9. Re:Lololololol by bickerdyke · · Score: 1

      So it is manually "corrected" input that produces that result.

      Yes... that's the best. After all, with carefully "corrected" input you're able to craft world class conspiration theories: https://www.youtube.com/watch?...

      To show that this is a valid approach to decode the document they have to be able to decode larger parts of the text to something that make sense.
      That of course doesn't mean that it isn't a valid approach, there may have been deliberate misspellings by the writer before encryption and similar things.

      Doesn't Hebrew have those Tetragramm thing where they leave out vowels

      But unless they can produce longer readable texts IMO they haven't proved anything.

      --
      bickerdyke
    10. Re:Lololololol by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Let's assume all Hebrew scholars died out.

      Hitler did try.

    11. Re:Lololololol by quantaman · · Score: 4, Insightful

      Failing to find any Hebrew scholars who could help validate their findings, the researchers eventually resorted to using Google Translate,

      (Source)

      This "research" is a joke.

      Why? Because the Hebrew scholars didn't want to participate?

      Google Translate botches modern languages. The fact that running their results through Google Translate gave them meaningful output suggests they have real data.

      --
      I stole this Sig
    12. Re:Lololololol by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Failing to find any Hebrew scholars who could help validate their findings

      Give them some benefit of doubt... it would've taken them some time to find some help. In the meantime, they used a quick, easy and cheap alternative which may or may not be so good as a real scholar. But it doesn't hurt anyone. All it means is that the findings should be taken with a giant spoon of salt.

    13. Re:Lololololol by vossman77 · · Score: 1

      I like to see machine learning fail and how it fails. Based on the assumption of an all or nothing training set, neural networks will be 100% confident in their choice and also wrong.

      This .gif shows three different hand positions that all communicate the number three:

      https://imgur.com/a/KFR2M

    14. Re:Lololololol by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      what? it's a recent invention? even if you were right about that part, how then, would a current speaker have any GD idea what they're reading?

      also, you do realize that hebrew has gone mostly unchanged since the unification of the Torah, right? as in: all bar mitzvahs require the new man to read from Torah. as in they've been reading from their holy book for thousands of years.

      if you are an adult jew, you should be able to read any hebrew after the introduction of vowels. and with only a little training you should be able to read ancieant hebrew. this isn't like old english.

    15. Re:Lololololol by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      From TFA:

      The researchers hypothesised the cipher acting on the Hebrew language could be an example of alphabetically ordered anagrams (called alphagrams), rearranging the order of letters in words, while dropping vowels.

      Funny. I speak Hebrew. There are no vowels in archaic Hebrew. They aren't usually written (even though there is a notation for them now) in modern Hebrew. I wouldn't trust Google translate's Hebrew at all. I'm surprised they couldn't find a single Hebrew speaker. There's a country where the official language is Hebrew. And the characters are in Unicode. They could have sent an e-mail. Sheesh.

    16. Re:Lololololol by AvitarX · · Score: 1

      I suspect that an AI may perhaps have been able to decode that hieroglyphs were the same as the Coptic cursive, and maybe even relate them to the existing coptic language.

      Maybe even in less time than the decades it took people to figure it out.

      --
      Wow, sent an e-mail as suggested when clicking on "use classic" banner, and got a fast response that addressed my msg
    17. Re:Lololololol by AvitarX · · Score: 1

      It actually would be a good test for their AI though, to see where it goes with solved languages.

      --
      Wow, sent an e-mail as suggested when clicking on "use classic" banner, and got a fast response that addressed my msg
    18. Re:Lololololol by drinkypoo · · Score: 1

      Google Translate botches modern languages. The fact that running their results through Google Translate gave them meaningful output suggests they have real data.

      That Google Translate produces errors when exposed to relatively comprehensible data does not mean that getting meaningful output from Google Translate implies that they have real data. You can't cite Translate's fallibility as an example of its utility.

      --
      "You're right," Fisheye says. "I should have set it on 'whip' or 'chop.'"
    19. Re:Lololololol by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1

      The dominant Hebrew vocabulary follows a few basic principles. Things can grow more complicated, but this is the base (and despite what another AC claims, has been the coherent base since before the written form of the language).

      Words have a three letter root, in the purest form, those three letters are a simple past-tense verb. Usage changes pronunciations, including a form for use as a noun (like farmer, ruler, baker, etc.).
      Letters are primarily consonants. This includes two silent letters that are used to anchor pronunciations, and two semi-consonants that can have their own vowel forms that are not replicated in the normal pronunciation cues.
      A variety of what in English are adjectives, adverbs, and the 'possessed by' concept are attached to base words as prefixes and suffixes.

      The "Tetragramm thing" are the four letters of the most personal and proper name of God. Jewish tradition was very cautious about misusing the name for generations, and as a result the exact pronunciation cues have been mostly forgotten. If anyone is curious, the letter structure is very likely the "noun form" of the Hebrew verb that most resembles the English "to be." As with English, it is an irregular verb in Hebrew, which makes it harder to reconstruct the pronunciation.

    20. Re:Lololololol by networkBoy · · Score: 1

      that would certainly boost (or destroy) any credibility in their current results.

      --
      whois gawk date unzip strip find touch finger mount join nice man top fsck grep eject more yes exit umount sleep dump
    21. Re:Lololololol by networkBoy · · Score: 1

      that's a 'W' a '3' and a schoolyard 'asshole'

      --
      whois gawk date unzip strip find touch finger mount join nice man top fsck grep eject more yes exit umount sleep dump
    22. Re:Lololololol by bluegutang · · Score: 3, Insightful

      But they didn't get meaningful output. They got "She made recommendations to the priest, man of the house and me and people". This makes little sense as the first line of a book on herbology. This is AFTER "making a couple of spelling corrections" (how many is a couple?) and AFTER "de-anagraming" every single word (i.e. arbitrary picking one of the thousands of permutations of letters in the word). Not to mention that Hebrew is written without vowels, so any string of several characters is as likely as not to be a word.

      When I was in high school I used a script to find dictionary anagrams of my name and my friends' name. A few of the anagrams looked pretty cool. Did they have any deeper meaning? Of course not. This is basically the same methodology.

    23. Re:Lololololol by Calydor · · Score: 1

      It makes lots of sense as the opening sentence for a herbology book. The person in question (she) has tried to (or wants to) give this information to the church, to authorities (my take on 'man of the house'), to the author and everyone else.

      Basically: This is a Public Domain license.

      --
      -=This sig has nothing to do with my comment. Move along now=-
    24. Re:Lololololol by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Exactly right. Given enough text and permutations, you can find just about anything. I immediately thought of Bible code when I saw this story. It turns out Herman Melville predicted the assassination of Martin Luther King, Jr. in Moby Dick! Amazing!

    25. Re:Lololololol by gman003 · · Score: 1

      Google Translate can also produce seemingly-sensible results when given senseless inputs. Getting some meaningful output is only a weak suggestion that they have meaningful inputs. They should not have published without finding at least one Hebrew scholar who would take a look at their work - and the fact that they couldn't convince anyone to do so is itself suggestive.

    26. Re:Lololololol by gwolf · · Score: 1

      To show that this is a valid approach to decode the document they have to be able to decode larger parts of the text to something that make sense.
      That of course doesn't mean that it isn't a valid approach, there may have been deliberate misspellings by the writer before encryption and similar things.

      Doesn't Hebrew have those Tetragramm thing where they leave out vowels

      The Tetragram means literally the Four Letters, that's how in the scriptures the name of God is written - And yes, as is the *usual practice* in Hebrew, vowels are left out. From those four letters, the naming "Jehova" is derived, although it could be read in several different ways.

      But, again, in Hebrew we do not write (most) vowels except when writing for children, or in several cases (such as bibles, prayer books and such) where the exact pronunciation is deemed required. Vowels can be identified (by a well-versed speaker) by context, even if two different words are written the same way.

    27. Re:Lololololol by Marxist+Hacker+42 · · Score: 1

      Given that languages change over time, it is quite possible that spelling (especially in a language that omits vowels) has also changed over time. And since the encoding method is alphagram (an anagram arranged alphabetically) you need to rearrange the letters to begin with to get something remotely coherent.

      --
      SJW: a person who perceives an injustice, and while correcting it, commits a greater injustice.
    28. Re:Lololololol by Marxist+Hacker+42 · · Score: 1

      Maybe instead of herbology, it's a cookbook.....with the wife making recommendations for dinner to the priest, man of the house, and me and the people.

      --
      SJW: a person who perceives an injustice, and while correcting it, commits a greater injustice.
    29. Re:Lololololol by DerekLyons · · Score: 1

      I disagree. How do you recruit a classical Hebrew scholar to validate your hypothesis and assist with additional work?

      You hit up people you know to see if they know any, or anyone who might know any. You ask around the faculty at the university you're associated with. You reach out to other researchers in the same field to see if they know someone or someone who might know someone. You hit Google and find scholars and reach out to them via email. Etc... etc...
       
      All of these are professional methods used routinely by serious researchers across any number of fields.
       

      You publish your intermediate results and hope that it tickles a suitable person's interest such that they join in the effort.

      This is exactly what you don't do unless and until all other approaches have failed to bear fruit. And even then, you plainly mark the results are preliminary and tentative
       
      I lack access to the relevant journal, so I have no way to ascertain if they did so. I would not be surprised to find that they did, and the "journalist" that wrote the Gizmodo article or the original University of Alberta press release (that Gizmodo copy-pasted from and failed to credit) simply left it out.
       

      You may as will declare Linus' work a joke. It's not as if Linux 0.12 was useful for much. It took a boatload of domain experts to bring it up to the capabilities that made people find it useful.

      Um, no. Linux was a part-time non professional project, this linguistics research was (at least in theory) a professional project. The two are in no way comparable.

    30. Re:Lololololol by rogoshen1 · · Score: 1

      think of it as a smoke-test to see if the overall approach makes sense. they'll likely take that as a sign they're on to something, finish the decoding - THEN hand the entire thing to a proper hebrew scholar, to do the final translation.

      you're focusing on the wrong part of this. =/

    31. Re:Lololololol by q4Fry · · Score: 1

      ... This is AFTER "making a couple of spelling corrections" (how many is a couple?) and AFTER "de-anagraming" every single word (i.e. arbitrary picking one of the thousands of permutations of letters in the word). ...

      When I was in high school I used a script to find dictionary anagrams of my name and my friends' name.

      This is fun. Now I can make up codes everywhere:

      Knew I saw in high school suede prints...

      Thanks for introducing me to their methodology. And you should bring those suede prints back. They'll be big.

    32. Re:Lololololol by Darinbob · · Score: 1

      Last year the theory was that it was a gynelogical text based upon the pictures, though the "encryption" was speculative. Ultimately however, the manuscript is just a manuscript. It's interesting as a puzzle but beyond that there will be no deep meanings uncovered or conspiracies unmaksed.

    33. Re:Lololololol by Darinbob · · Score: 1

      There is a distinct difference between modern Hebrew as spoken in daily life in Israel, and and Hebrew from 500 years ago. Every single language changes over time, Hebrew is no different. Just because one can read from the Torah does not mean they can speak classical Hebrew, but they can read it with some help and learning some words that are no longer in use, and phrases you will never hear on the streets of Tel Aviv.

      Modern Hebrew is also a relatively recent re-invention, it was kept alive before then as a language for religious purposes, but was very rarely a native language.

    34. Re:Lololololol by Dragonslicer · · Score: 1

      But they didn't get meaningful output. They got "She made recommendations to the priest, man of the house and me and people". This makes little sense as the first line of a book on herbology.

      In English, it makes little sense. Hebrew, especially ancient/Biblical Hebrew, uses different sentence structure, both in terms of word order and (lack of) punctuation. A better English translation could be something like "She has made many recommendations, first to the priest, then to her husband, then to me, and finally to everyone in town."

    35. Re:Lololololol by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1

      Vwls cn b idntfd (by a wll-vrsd spkr) by cntxt, evn if tw dffrnt wrds r wrttn th sm wy.

      FTFY.

      I did have to leave leading vowels and words made entirely of vowels in there, just so it didn't look too weird.

      The point, of course, being that Hebrew is written just like txtspk, nd mst ppl thse dys ndrstnd txtspk n/p. Nly old ppl weep 4 lang chngz.

    36. Re:Lololololol by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Pretty obvious that it's a cookbook. The front cover of the Voynich Manuscript translates:

      To Serve Man

    37. Re:Lololololol by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      what? it's a recent invention? even if you were right about that part, how then, would a current speaker have any GD idea what they're reading?

      Many of them don't. Changing that was part of the reason the language was reinvented and artificially established, first in literature, and then later on by Eliezer Ben-Yehuda as a spoken language. He prohibited his wife and children from speaking any other language in the house, and so his son can be considered the first "native" speaker of Modern Hebrew.

      But the bulk of Jews without special education living outside of Israel speak the words of service without knowing their meaning. The general communication language among Jews for past centuries before the reestablishment of Hebrew was Yiddish, a highly specialized German dialect written phonetically using Hebrew letters, and phonetically is how most Jews, if at all, were able to read the words of service. Both the Holocaust and the establishment of Israel with Modern Hebrew as its official language spelled the demise of Yiddish language and culture.

    38. Re:Lololololol by DRJlaw · · Score: 1

      You hit up people you know to see if they know any, or anyone who might know any. You ask around the faculty at the university you're associated with. You reach out to other researchers in the same field to see if they know someone or someone who might know someone. You hit Google and find scholars and reach out to them via email. Etc... etc...

      All of these are professional methods used routinely by serious researchers across any number of fields.

      Those are not the exlusive routes, especially when the intersection between computer science, the Univerversity of Alberta, and classical Hebrew scholarship is approximately 0.

      You publish your intermediate results and hope that it tickles a suitable person's interest such that they join in the effort.

      This is exactly what you don't do unless and until all other approaches have failed to bear fruit. And even then, you plainly mark the results are preliminary and tentative.

      The current publication proves that your statement is false. And they did mark their results so.

      I lack access to the relevant journal, so I have no way to ascertain if they did so. I would not be surprised to find that they did, and the "journalist" that wrote the Gizmodo article or the original University of Alberta press release (that Gizmodo copy-pasted from and failed to credit) simply left it out.

      And now you've invalidated your own thesis. TACL is a peer reviewed journal, and the article passed their publication standards. You're free to start your own journal and set your own publication standards, but do not pretend that your opinion is representative, authoritative, or otherwise based upon sufficient information to constitute valid criticism.

    39. Re:Lololololol by mcswell · · Score: 1

      You might change your mind after you read this: http://languagelog.ldc.upenn.e..., and some of the links there. (Mark Liberman is, btw, a very senior computational linguist.) Google Translate is now quite capable of turning gibberish into meaningful output.

    40. Re:Lololololol by mcswell · · Score: 1

      Remember, this is supposed to be an English translation of a putative Hebrew text (and that done with Google Translate); it is not the Hebrew text, nor even an interlinear (word for word, same order as Hebrew) gloss. So the word order and sentence structure is irrelevant (as is the lack of punctuation, which is not a matter of sentence structure anyway). What bluegutang was saying (as I read him) is that the sentence does not seem like one you'd find *in a book on herbology*.

    41. Re:Lololololol by DerekLyons · · Score: 1

      Those are not the exlusive routes, especially when the intersection between computer science, the Univerversity of Alberta, and classical Hebrew scholarship is approximately 0.

      If they are not exclusive routes, feel free to suggest others. Even with an intersection of approximately 0, it shouldn't be hard to find an expert. If they didn't try or couldn't find one that would participate, that in itself tells us something.
       

      The current publication proves that your statement is false. And they did mark their results so.

      Oh? How does the current publication prove me false? Since you have access to the relevant article, please quote me the portion that describes their search and the status of their results.
       

      I lack access to the relevant journal, so I have no way to ascertain if they did so. I would not be surprised to find that they did, and the "journalist" that wrote the Gizmodo article or the original University of Alberta press release (that Gizmodo copy-pasted from and failed to credit) simply left it out.

      And now you've invalidated your own thesis. TACL is a peer reviewed journal, and the article passed their publication standards.

      First, I allowed for the possibility I was wrong. Second, "peer review" is a process - not a stamp of quality.
       

      You're free to start your own journal and set your own publication standards, but do not pretend that your opinion is representative, authoritative, or otherwise based upon sufficient information to constitute valid criticism.

      My opinion is based on my experience and the information I have at hand - and it's quite sufficient to base valid criticism on.

    42. Re:Lololololol by DRJlaw · · Score: 1

      If they are not exclusive routes, feel free to suggest others.

      I did.

      First, I allowed for the possibility I was wrong. Second, "peer review" is a process - not a stamp of quality.

      Yet you reject that possibility at every turn. Also, peer review is a stamp a quality -- it is a process designed to establish a threshold of quality through the input of the reviewers. Journals may do so well or poorly -- TACL is fairly selective.

      My opinion is based on my experience and the information I have at hand.

      Logical fallacy -- appeal to authority. Also, what experience, pray tell? I've looked at what you've disclosed about yourself -- 0 involvement in academic publishing.

  14. Google Translate? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    "Armed with the knowledge that text was originally coded from Hebrew, the researchers devised an algorithm that could take these anagrams and create real Hebrew words." Finally, "the researchers deciphered the opening phrase of the manuscript" and ran it through Google Translate to convert it into passable English:

    Fuck no. This has presumably been written by a human who was in control of the process. You don't let something "impartial" like Google Translate at it which will not balk at making sense from noise. Instead you ask a Hebrew scholar to get a proper assessment of which actual language competency might be involved and reflected here (it's entirely possible that somebody created a joke using a dictionary but no language knowledge of his own to speak of, but even that can be figured out with human intelligence and knowledge).

  15. Re:Amazing AI by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Hi Al.

  16. Summary of Text by seven+of+five · · Score: 1

    In brief, the manuscript says, "Dear World, this is my esoteric theory of the nature of the universe. I wrote it because I am very very smart, and you should pay attention to me, and shower me with honors. Because it is esoteric and holds the key to all metaphysical knowledge, I have written it such that only the most intelligent and worthy may know its secrets. However, if no one decodes it, I will die happy because it proves I was the smartest person alive. Sincerely, Yaddayadda."

    1. Re:Summary of Text by Opportunist · · Score: 1

      So ... it was written by the medieval equivalent of some conspiracy theorist?

      --
      We used to have a Bill of Rights. Now, with the rights gone, all we have left is the bill.
    2. Re:Summary of Text by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Actually, here's the translation:

      "All brontosauruses are thin at one end, much much thicker in the middle and then thin again at the far end. That is my theory, it is mine and belongs to me, and I own it and what it is, too."

    3. Re:Summary of Text by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0
      Section 1 translates as follows:

      Behold, section one, where I shall reveal the true nature of popular entertainment. My first observation is that you have to be very smart to understand Rick and Morty. The humour is extremely subtle, and without a solid grasp of theoretical physics most of the jokes will go over a typical viewerâ(TM)s head. Thereâ(TM)s also Rickâ(TM)s nihilistic outlook, which is deftly woven into his characterisation- his personal philosophy draws heavily from Narodnaya Volya literature, for instance. The fans understand this stuff; they have the intellectual capacity to truly appreciate the depths of these jokes, to realise that theyâ(TM)re not just funny- they say something deep about LIFE. As a consequence people who dislike Rick & Morty truly ARE idiots- of course they wouldnâ(TM)t appreciate, for instance, the humour in Rickâ(TM)s existential catchphrase âoeWubba Lubba Dub Dub,â which itself is a cryptic reference to Turgenevâ(TM)s Russian epic Fathers and Sons. Iâ(TM)m smirking right now just imagining one of those addlepated simpletons scratching their heads in confusion as Dan Harmonâ(TM)s genius wit unfolds itself on their television screens. What fools.. how I pity them. And yes, by the way, i DO have a Rick & Morty tattoo. And no, you cannot see it. Itâ(TM)s for the ladiesâ(TM) eyes only- and even then they have to demonstrate that theyâ(TM)re within 5 IQ points of my own (preferably lower) beforehand. Nothin personnel kid

    4. Re:Summary of Text by networkBoy · · Score: 2

      actually a *very* possible hypothesis.

      --
      whois gawk date unzip strip find touch finger mount join nice man top fsck grep eject more yes exit umount sleep dump
  17. Re:Amazing AI by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    It's more like the Chess Turk phenomenon: it is really amazing what people can attribute to some mechanism given some steampunk explanation. If they had cracked this, there would be more than a single line making sense after Google Translate and a hopeful human not versed in Hebrew had a go at beating sense into line noise.

  18. Re:Indian ... not hebrew by K.+S.+Kyosuke · · Score: 1

    Is Mesoamerica considered a part of North America in English?

    --
    Ezekiel 23:20
  19. Voynich Manuscript is obviously an elaborate prank by pezpunk · · Score: 4, Insightful

    you would think over time people would become less gullible, not more.

    and sure, if you train an AI long and hard enough, it will probably be able to tickle out something that looks like meaning from that nonsense. just like if you train an AI to see dogs, it can identify weird dogs in literally any image.

    https://www.washingtonpost.com...

    --
    i could live a little longer in this prison
  20. this last one got debunked by Idimmu+Xul · · Score: 3, Informative

    https://arstechnica.com/scienc...

    its the puzzle that keeps on giving!

    --
    The problem with slashdot is that most of its users were bullied and stuffed into lockers as kids!
  21. One Line by NicknameUnavailable · · Score: 4, Insightful

    Is proof this is a fake. They ran their algorithm, got something almost sensible for the first sentence, and the rest was total gibberish but they needed to publish.

  22. XKCD uncovered its meaning long ago by Opportunist · · Score: 5, Insightful

    https://xkcd.com/593/

    It is obvious when you think about it...

    --
    We used to have a Bill of Rights. Now, with the rights gone, all we have left is the bill.
    1. Re:XKCD uncovered its meaning long ago by pr0t0 · · Score: 1

      Bah! I was just about to make this joke. I didn't know that xkcd already beat me to it!

      --
      I'm sorry, but your opinion seems to be wrong.
    2. Re:XKCD uncovered its meaning long ago by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1

      Like most things XKCD, he copied the idea. The Voynich manuscript being a D&D-manual like fiction is a pattern common in history.

      Many magic books, manuscripts and grimoires from 1100 AD onward were lists of daemons and spirits, their symbol, true name, physical characteristics, powers, and sometimes presents methods of control, beseechment, or protection.

      They were monster manuals. Gary Gygax would have seen them as... familiar.

  23. Re:Indian ... not hebrew by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0, Insightful

    That's ... not NORTH America you shitflooding trolling idiot.

  24. Re:Amazing AI by K.+S.+Kyosuke · · Score: 1

    Doesn't it happen with people that sometimes you admire their work, only for them to later tell you that they had no idea themselves what they were doing?

    --
    Ezekiel 23:20
  25. Re:Voynich Manuscript is obviously an elaborate pr by Opportunist · · Score: 1

    you would think over time people would become less gullible, not more.

    One would think so, but Creationism is on the rise again.

    --
    We used to have a Bill of Rights. Now, with the rights gone, all we have left is the bill.
  26. Using Google Translate to research it by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    To be fair, you have to have a very high IQ to understand the Voynich Manuscript. The apparently gibberish is extremely well-crafted, and without a solid grasp of linguistics most suggested translations will confuse a typical researcher's head. There's also the manuscript's occult outlook, which is deftly woven into its illustrations- its age-old philosophy draws heavily from Alchemy and Pagan allegory.

  27. The alphagram theory is easily disprovable by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    If it's contended that the words are encoded as alphagrams (e.g. the letters of the words are sorted in as specific order), all that's needed to disprove that is find a counterexample.

    On the first fucking page, there's a word transcribed as "ro" followed a few lines later by a word transcribed as "chtor".

    In other words, there is no consistent alphagram ordering. In one word, "r" comes before "o", while in another, "o" comes before "r".

    I would be a lot more convinced if they listed their claimed alphabetical order and showed what percentage of "words" follow that order.

    In short, Fuck computational linguistics. "Ooh, look at me! My field is so ill-defined, I can subscribe to any of dozens of contradictory models and still be taken seriously!"

    1. Re:The alphagram theory is easily disprovable by damn_registrars · · Score: 1

      You have that exactly backwards. The alphagram theory is very hard to disprove - even if it is also very hard to prove. There is no shortage of ways that one can redefine the concepts of "letters" and "words" to make them fit into the alphagram and to account for variations in it. Does our concept of a "letter" even mean much when we look at the script of the Voynich Manuscript? How do we define a "letter" for it, and how do we associate that concept of a letter with a "letter" in Hebrew of the time (and for that matter how do we decide on how to define Hebrew for the time when we're not exactly sure how old it is)?

      In other words they've come up with a great moving target for themselves here.

      --
      Damn_registrars has no butt-hole. Damn_registrars has no use for a butt-hole.
    2. Re:The alphagram theory is easily disprovable by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Well, no, the alphagram theory has to build on the existing definitions of "letters" (graphemes) and "words" agreed by consensus for the Voynich manuscript.

      Which is to say, it's agreed by most examining it that it's written left-to-right, top-to-bottom, using alphabetic letters and words (rather than ideograms), and that sufficient spacing delineates words from non-connected letters. There is no consensus on whether some symbols are unique letters or mere ligatures, nor is it certain the language absolutely has upper/lower case, although some letters are written as initial capitals in the same style as other medieval documents. It's also not certain if some of the graphemes we consider distinct today are actually variations of the same grapheme that changes depending on word position. But it is certain that some characters only appear in the middle of words, some characters are almost always seen together (like "q" is almost always followed by "u" in English), etc.

      The alphagram theory is building on top of this existing evidence, and if it doesn't, it has vastly more work to do before anyone gives it the slightest notice - this is academia, not the US presidency. Bullshitthing _lowers_ your standing.

      I picked "r" and "o" because they're standalone glyphs, they appear throughout the manuscript, and appear in the same position in their "words" but in opposite order.

      We are sure how old the manuscript is, the vellum and the ink have been dated to somewhere between 1404 and 1438.

  28. Re:Amazing AI by 110010001000 · · Score: 0

    I hear they are 3D printing a spaceship to take us to Mars.

  29. Probably Turkish or Indian by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Probably is Turkish or Indian in origin and is a medical text. It's probably not a cipher, just a dead language.

    1. Re:Probably Turkish or Indian by mcswell · · Score: 1

      There are enough modern Turkic and Indian (both Indo-Aryan and Dravidian) languages around that we can reconstruct past forms of those languages--not to mention that many of them have been written for longer than English. So no, if it were a Turkic, Indo-Aryan or Dravidian language, someone would likely have figured it out by now.

  30. Even talking about it is mysterious by ScentCone · · Score: 1

    Since its discovery over a hundred years ago, the 240-page Voynich manuscript, filled with seemingly coded language and inscrutable illustrations, of has confounded linguists and cryptographers.

    "of has confounded" - ?

    Ah, I get it. It's not terrible editing, it's more mysterious encryption!

    --
    Don't disappoint your bird dog. Go to the range.
  31. late to the party? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Wasn't it determined to be an encoded obgyn manual last year?

    1. Re:late to the party? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      That theory was from another smart-guy in the "tech industry" who was VERY QUICK to open his mouth on twitter, and was even more quickly debunked.

    2. Re:late to the party? by Darinbob · · Score: 1

      I don't necessarily think it was "debunked". It was incomplete, had some mistakes, but was it debunked in its entirety? It used an approach used by others in the past. I know the true believers hated it because it would mean the answer was very mundane (like 42).

  32. Re:Indian ... not hebrew by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1

    It's part of the North American continent.

  33. Re:Amazing AI by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Can AI help with your fat retarded ass?

  34. What if... by QuietLagoon · · Score: 1

    ... the text is really just gibberish, a practical joke created by the author, and the AI is just an ~infinite number of monkeys at an infinite number of typewriters~ type of thing, eventually "finding" something that may make sense.

    1. Re:What if... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      There is no AI. The University of Alberta just outsourced the task to Amazon Mechanical Turk. With nothing to base their guesses on, the Amazon slaves played Mad Libs with a Ouija board and threw the results across Google translate from English to Hebrew and back.

    2. Re:What if... by nealric · · Score: 1

      That's one of the theories. However, there have been attempts at statistical analysis that suggest total gibberish is unlikely. Moreover, that's a TON of work for a practical joke.

  35. Re: Amazing AI by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    The Electron rocket has 3D printed metal parts in the engine.
    Some new high end sportscar (forget which) has really organic-looking 3D printed metal brake calipers.

  36. Re: Amazing AI by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Sure they can. In Japan they only make love with AIs

  37. So by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    it's just more religious fuckwittery from that part of the world.

    Just what we need.

  38. No by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    It hasn't. And if you actually read about it, it was a tool used to assist humans, it was not fed the manuscript like cookie dough only to spit out delicious cookies later on. Enough with the clickbait and the hyperbole.

  39. Re:Voynich Manuscript is obviously an elaborate pr by pezpunk · · Score: 1

    fuck off, misogynist garbage.

    --
    i could live a little longer in this prison
  40. More "AI" bullshit by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    They use a buzzword to get into news feeds and obtain relevance and further funding. There is no AI, they didn't use AI, all they did is write some software to compare pieces of text.

    1. Re:More "AI" bullshit by 110010001000 · · Score: 1

      Software that compares text is AI in 2018. For example "diff" is an AI program.

    2. Re:More "AI" bullshit by lgw · · Score: 1

      You can't just use "diff" and call it AI.

      You have to use machine learning to train an algorithm at great expense (with clouds!) to compare two texts, until it does nearly as good a job as diff. Only then is it AI. AI isn't something any run-of-the-mill dev can do, after all, that's why it costs so much.

      --
      Socialism: a lie told by totalitarians and believed by fools.
  41. Chris McKinstry could have done this by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    AI Superstar K. Christopher McKinstry's GAC could have solved this if he didn't end his own life.

  42. Important? by bigdavex · · Score: 1

    The manuscript is considered the worldâ(TM)s most important cipher, one scrutinized by cryptographers, both professional and amateurs, for decades.

    The manuscript is intriguing, but we can't say it's important without knowing the message. It could be entirely meaningless.

    --
    -Dave
    1. Re:Important? by mcswell · · Score: 1

      Yeah, I wish someone would put as much effort into decoding Linear A (the language of the Minoans), and showing it to be the ancestral language of some present-day languages (or some extinct languages). It's of course possible that it _doesn't_ represent the ancestor of some modern languages, in which case it will be forever unknowable. And there's not much of it, so even if it was a language we can reconstruct by other means, we might not be able to confirm it.

    2. Re:Important? by RockDoctor · · Score: 1

      It could be entirely meaningless.

      Indeed, I've seen papers published - in about the last decade, showing that the Voynich textis statistically indistinguishable from what could be produced with a physical frame (to select letters) and a sheet or randomly distributed characters. Which is well in advance of cryptographic and statistical methods consonant with the historical record of the document, but otherwise well within the reach of inventors of the time. The diagrams seem rather more interesting.

      --
      Birds are not dinosaur descendants;birds are dinosaurs, for all useful meanings of "birds", "are" and "dinosaurs"
    3. Re:Important? by RockDoctor · · Score: 1

      Yeah, I wish someone would put as much effort into decoding Linear A (the language of the Minoans)

      I wonder how large the corpus of Linear A is, compared to the Voynich text. I would be surprised if the Linear A is the larger, but that is more likely to find more Linear A (in secure archaeological contexts) then it is to find a second Voynich manuscript.

      --
      Birds are not dinosaur descendants;birds are dinosaurs, for all useful meanings of "birds", "are" and "dinosaurs"
  43. is this research or "research" by aod7br7932 · · Score: 1

    They "decoded" but don't know the meaning of it?

  44. Overlooking the Obvious by CodeHog · · Score: 3, Funny

    "Drink your Ovaltine" - a crummy commercial.

    --
    Fat, drunk, and stupid is no way to go through life, son.
  45. Stop worrying about AIs... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    The AI book that everyone should get is available for pre-order. "Artificial Intelligence For Dummies" by John Paul Mueller and Luca Massaron.

  46. Last sentence translated! by Ecuador · · Score: 1

    "for dark is the suede that mows like a harvest"
    Wow, some pretty serious research here... /sarcasm.

    --
    Violence is the last refuge of the incompetent. Polar Scope Align for iOS
  47. Re:Voynich Manuscript is obviously an elaborate pr by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    does being against one woman mean he's against all women? are you a misandrist because you don't like him? cmon.

  48. Hebrew? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    As if that wasn't coded enough

  49. Re:Amazing AI by JLavezzo · · Score: 1

    That's exactly what an AI would say. You're an AI, aren't you?

  50. Re:Voynich Manuscript is obviously an elaborate pr by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Thankfully she didn't win! She was horrible. Trump has been pretty good so far!

  51. What if author made a mistake? by fluffernutter · · Score: 1

    I was saying this just the other day about the Zodiac killer's coded messages.. what if the author made a coding error? It would be so easy to do and just a couple errors could render the whole thing totally useless.

    --
    Laws are rules for the court, but merely a bottom bar to hit for life. Think beyond laws in your actions always.
  52. Re:Indian ... not hebrew by AvitarX · · Score: 1

    It's ambiguous, but acceptable use IMO (as an American).

    Often North America refers to the whole Continent, but usually just US, Mexico, Canada, (Greenland?).

    I believe the Mayans were into Mexico though, which is unambiguously North America.

    --
    Wow, sent an e-mail as suggested when clicking on "use classic" banner, and got a fast response that addressed my msg
  53. It has meaning? by GameboyRMH · · Score: 1

    I look forward to seeing the fully decoded text. Until now all indications were that it was a "spooky" coffee table book full of nonsense text.

    --
    "When information is power, privacy is freedom" - Jah-Wren Ryel
  54. Not knowing Hebrew may actually validate. by Mal-2 · · Score: 1

    If they can get coherent results using only machine translation, not understanding the base language themselves, this gives an even stronger claim in some ways that they have really cracked the code. We will know they aren't hand-tweaking the results to get what they want, because they don't actually know what they want. They only know what comes out the other end of the process.

    --
    How is the Riemann zeta function like Trump rallies? Both have an endless number of trivial zeros.
  55. Sounds like something Alex Jones could decipher by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    as an anti-Trump plot and then all the alt-right bros could parrot it in comments sections.

  56. INB4 by PPH · · Score: 1

    The Protocols of the Elders of Zion

    --
    Have gnu, will travel.
  57. To Serve Man... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    It's a cookbook!

  58. maybe the old traditions aren't entirely dead... by Thud457 · · Score: 0

    awesome First Post troll, look at all the biters

    --

    the preceding comment is my own and in no way reflects the opinion of the Joint Chiefs of Staff

  59. Indus Valley Language and Easter Island glyphs? by hduff · · Score: 1

    It will be exciting to see this process applied to the untranslated Indus Valley Language and Easter Island glyphs.

    http://content.time.com/time/w...

    --
    "I believe in Karma. That means I can do bad things to people all day long and I assume they deserve it." : Dogbert
  60. it is widely known by Thud457 · · Score: 1

    Everybody knows that the Voynich manuscript actually describes how to bypass the booby-traps on Oak Island to recover the Ark of the Covenant hidden there by Mayan Templars. I saw a documentary about that on the History Channel, Rick Only offered $50 for it.

    --

    the preceding comment is my own and in no way reflects the opinion of the Joint Chiefs of Staff

  61. Re: Indian ... not hebrew by reanjr · · Score: 1

    Well it's not South America, so which of the two American continents do you suppose it is?

  62. Book Title by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Not sure what to make of the decoded title - "To Serve Man"

    1. Re:Book Title by JMZero · · Score: 1

      I think you need to blow off a little more space dust there.

      --
      Let's not stir that bag of worms...
  63. not it does not by aepervius · · Score: 1

    Once you translate a LONG text , then YES it means you have soemthing. but analyzing a few words / a single sentence ? Time and time again we get news somebody found out the code on the infamous manuscript, and it NEVER pans out. Heck, if they got so much success for 1 sentence, WHY oh WHY there is no report on translating a whole page which would be a good evidence ? Instead we get this report about one sentence. Reproducibility is key to demonstrate that the manuscript is translated. If they got a page call me. Until then raise your skepticism shield, this is research result N+1 into pretending they found a solution.

    --
    C. Sagan : A demon haunted world:
    http://www.amazon.com/gp/product/0345409469/
    visit randi.org
  64. Re: Amazing AI by Joey+Vegetables · · Score: 1

    Which, strangely, doesn't seem to be helping with their birth rate problem.

  65. Wow! (not) by slashmydots · · Score: 1

    That's the biggest news since it was translated completely a year ago! Wow!

  66. Re:Amazing AI by smooth+wombat · · Score: 2

    AI can only know what humans know. If humans consider something impossible then so does the AI.

    All AI is doing is getting to answers faster than humans can.

    --
    We will bankrupt ourselves in the vain search for absolute security. -- Dwight D. Eisenhower
  67. Re:Indian ... not hebrew by Marxist+Hacker+42 · · Score: 1

    Links needed

    --
    SJW: a person who perceives an injustice, and while correcting it, commits a greater injustice.
  68. Re: Amazing AI by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Don't forget the 3D printed shower curtain rings.

  69. Yeah, right by wwalker · · Score: 1

    As soon as you see "anagram" mentioned as part of the process to decode a cipher, you can stop reading, it's not a solution. If you allow for an arbitrary arrangement of letters or symbols as part of the solution, you can arrive at pretty much *any* text as the result, with no real connection to the cipher you started with.

    1. Re:Yeah, right by Mal-2 · · Score: 1

      As soon as you see "anagram" mentioned as part of the process to decode a cipher, you can stop reading, it's not a solution. If you allow for an arbitrary arrangement of letters or symbols as part of the solution, you can arrive at pretty much *any* text as the result, with no real connection to the cipher you started with.

      Unfortunately, if that's what the author of the manuscript actually did, then it's a necessary step in making heads or tails of the text. There will be words and phrases that will be ambiguous because there is more than one possible unscrambling of the letters, but just because the encoding is lossy, that doesn't mean it's completely meaningless. I would have to imagine the author was aware of the potential for confusion and chose words that would not induce collisions that could not be resolved by context, assuming of course that it really is an alphabetically ordered anagram. It could be that it deviates from alphabetically ordered, say by placing the actual first letter of the word at the beginning, when necessary to resolve such ambiguity -- but they probably haven't gotten that far yet.

      --
      How is the Riemann zeta function like Trump rallies? Both have an endless number of trivial zeros.
    2. Re:Yeah, right by eggstasy · · Score: 1

      If I understood correctly, Alphagram is the result of sorting alphabetically the letters of a word, so there aren't many different combinations.
      I.e. encoding a message about a CAB, it would sort to ABC, and only ABC. When discussing SHEEP, you could only encode it to EEHPS.

    3. Re:Yeah, right by mcswell · · Score: 1

      I think what wwalker is saying is that going the opposite direction--from encoded to decoded--is impossibly ambiguous. This is particularly true of Semitic languages, where the root most often consists of three consonants. That implies that if you choose three letters, many permutations of those letters will be real roots. A few combinations, like 3 identical letters, or two identical letters at the beginning of the word (IIRC), can be ruled out, but most other combinations will be *some* root.

  70. Religious Kook Job? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Based upon the alleged translation, it sounds like the mystical writings of a religious nut. Those people are dedicated and have the time and motivation to produce such stuff.

    I used to know one such person. She would involve you in her never-ending stream of consciousness conversation; you were never privy to the beginning, and you never saw the end either. You'd get dropped into the middle and struggle constantly to try to figure out the basic landmarks, characters and plot points. Mostly you wanted to limit your time in the crazy zone.

    Makes sense to me. I vote that it was produced by some religious zealot.

    1. Re:Religious Kook Job? by Darinbob · · Score: 2

      A lot of scientific knowledge, especially medical, were secretive at some time. Knowledge was protected, guilds were formed to protect the secrets, and so forth. So texts would be written to be obscure, intentionally.

  71. Re:Voynich Manuscript is obviously an elaborate pr by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Don't feed the Trump trolls. They are desperate for attention and you just gave it some.

  72. Re:Indian ... not hebrew by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Actually, I apologize.

    I am very stupid, and was operating under the very stupid assumption that Central America isn't part of the North American Continent.

    Perhaps, one day, I will not be so very, very bad at geography.

  73. Re:Voynich Manuscript is obviously an elaborate pr by Darinbob · · Score: 1

    And flat earthers. Very strange, they were almost extinct. Similarly, conspiracy theorists seemed also to be on the decline but they're very common these days too.

  74. Re:You project your own issues onto me & fail by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    I've heard rumors that APK is another persona for Christopher Reimer

  75. Decoded by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Actually when it was decoded the researches found a url. They typed in the address and received the following message:

    Penis.

    Link

  76. Re:Indian ... not hebrew by angel'o'sphere · · Score: 1

    Slashdot history ... just search it.
    Or google ...

    --
    Cost free eBook I read (by iBook/Kobo/Amazon/ObookO/Gutenberg etc.): "The Green Odyssey" by Philip Jose Farmer.
  77. Re:Indian ... not hebrew by angel'o'sphere · · Score: 1

    citations are easy found via google, or other search engines.

    --
    Cost free eBook I read (by iBook/Kobo/Amazon/ObookO/Gutenberg etc.): "The Green Odyssey" by Philip Jose Farmer.
  78. Re:Indian ... not hebrew by Plus1Entropy · · Score: 1

    Lol, from angel'o'sphere?

    If they said the sky was blue I'd have to go outside and check.

    --
    Only crack the nuts that crack. You don't put the ones that don't crack in the sack.
  79. Re:Indian ... not hebrew by Marxist+Hacker+42 · · Score: 1

    SLASHDOT history? Well at least that gives me more of a clue. But that's a reference nearly as bad as the Weekly World News.

    --
    SJW: a person who perceives an injustice, and while correcting it, commits a greater injustice.
  80. Re:Indian ... not hebrew by Marxist+Hacker+42 · · Score: 2

    I think you were thinking of this: https://www.newscientist.com/article/dn24987-mexican-plants-could-break-code-on-gibberish-manuscript/, which is about the drawings in the manuscript, NOT the words. I suggest you ask your doctor about age related dementia.

    --
    SJW: a person who perceives an injustice, and while correcting it, commits a greater injustice.
  81. Re:Indian ... not hebrew by angel'o'sphere · · Score: 1

    No,
    I'm not thinking about hat.
    I'm thinking that I'm sitting in a mixed Mexican/Guamaltetic bar ... and that the people who speak the language in that manuscript lived around that area.
    And all this is known since a decade minimum ...
    Improve your google foo?

    --
    Cost free eBook I read (by iBook/Kobo/Amazon/ObookO/Gutenberg etc.): "The Green Odyssey" by Philip Jose Farmer.
  82. Re:Indian ... not hebrew by angel'o'sphere · · Score: 1

    Why?
    Put the manuscript name into the search box of /. you find about 4-5 stories, read them, filter for +5 comments.
    Easy ... probably more easy than googeling (I admit google is a bitch these days)

    --
    Cost free eBook I read (by iBook/Kobo/Amazon/ObookO/Gutenberg etc.): "The Green Odyssey" by Philip Jose Farmer.
  83. Take with a healthy dose of salt by OldSport · · Score: 1

    After all, you can enter random meaningless strings of nonsense Japanese characters into Google translate and it will fit the closest English it can to what you entered. You end up with some semblance of real English, but the original text was literally nonsense to begin with. (Although the result can be genius in its own way -- a while ago I tried one random string and Google returned "bitches in the sky." Not bad.)

  84. Re:Indian ... not hebrew by terjeber · · Score: 1

    Eh. No. You're trolling.

  85. Re:Indian ... not hebrew by Pseudonym · · Score: 2

    I don't know if you knew this, but patent nonsense is also easily found via Google and other search engines. This is especially true of the Voynich manuscript. This is one reason why it is considered courteous for a person making an argument to give some pointers as to which information they believe supports that argument.

    This is a random Internet comment section, so nobody expects a comprehensive literature review. But, you know, something.

    --
    sub f{($f)=@_;print"$f(q{$f});";}f(q{sub f{($f)=@_;print"$f(q{$f});";}f});
  86. They are relying on Google translate? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    To translate Hebrew to English? These seem like serious scientists, unable to wait five minutes to get a hold of a rabbi before publishing...

  87. Re:Voynich Manuscript is obviously an elaborate pr by GuB-42 · · Score: 1

    A prank or something written by a madman. Even if it is highly plausible, knowing what the prank is about is interesting by itself.
    It is noteworthy that it seems to follow patterns of natural languages (ex: Zipf law). So it is unlikely to be random.

  88. wait by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    didn't kabbala use to do something similar? Is this just a circular joke?

  89. sorry meant kabbalah...more info by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    From Wikipedia :-
    Linguistic mysticism of Hebrew
    Kabbalistic thought extended Biblical and Midrashic notions that God enacted Creation through the Hebrew language and through the Torah into a full linguistic mysticism. In this, every Hebrew letter, word, number, even accent on words of the Hebrew Bible contain esoteric meanings, describing the spiritual dimensions within exoteric ideas, and it teaches the hermeneutic methods of interpretation for ascertaining these meanings. Names of God in Judaism have further prominence, though fluidity of meaning turns the whole Torah into a Divine name.

    Maybe it is someones godly remix?

  90. The rules will match anything by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Look, they didn’t “use an AI”, they ran it through a pattern matching
    machine until they came up with a hit. And when they came up with a “hit”,
    it was an 80% match. Match to what? The encypherment they are proposing is
    alphabetically ordered acronyms.

    That’s a stunningly stupid way of encrypting a text, especially if it’s a
    reference work which you presumably want to read in real time, instead of
    having to laboriously decrypt it. Especially when that text contains
    technical terms and the encryption method is hugely lossy.

    Example:

    *Ahstt a gilnnnstuy dipstu awy fo ceginnprty a ettx, aceeillpsy fi ist a
    ceeeefnrr korw chhiw ouy abelmprsuy antw ot ader in aelr eimt, adeinst fo
    aghinv ot abilloorsuy cdeprty it. Aceeillpsy ehnw ahtt ettx acinnost
    accehilnt emrst adn eht ceinnoprty dehmot is eghluy lossy.*

    And it’s worse for Hebrew, because the triconsonantal root system it uses
    means that for any given word, there will usually be several anagrams of it
    which are also words. Oh, and worse again, because unpointed Hebrew doesn’t
    encode short vowels, so you can also add vowels back into the “decrypted”
    text until you get something you like.

    This is *Bible Code* level nonsense. What they’ve done is find that if you
    map the Voynich letters to one of any possible of the possible alphabets,
    and rearrange those letters in any way you want,then there’s almost a match
    to Hebrew, if you are allowed to pick which words you decrypt from the
    myriad of possiblities, add the missing vowels as you please, then correct
    the result until you get something meaningful out of Google Translate (and
    that’s a whole *other* bucket of worms). Also, let’s just ignore that many
    of the words in the Voynich manuscript don’t fit Hebrew word length
    patterns, and also let’s just ignore the 20% of words which *don’t *fit,
    even given the already extremely forgiving pick-and-mix method.

  91. Re: maybe the old traditions aren't entirely dead. by sound+vision · · Score: 1

    Much more interesting than all the totally predictable Russia trolls. If I didn't think Slashdot/Dice was so idiotic, I'd say the mass of Russia stories were a honeypot to gather IP addresses, linguistic analysis, etc. of the Russia trolls. But it's more believable to me they are just after traffic, any traffic. I wonder how many click on ads?

  92. Re:Voynich Manuscript is obviously an elaborate pr by Opportunist · · Score: 1

    My guess is that there's a connection. Some of those that take this bible thing serious think that their book could in some way be wrong if the Earth wasn't flat, so it MUST be flat because the book MUST be right.

    --
    We used to have a Bill of Rights. Now, with the rights gone, all we have left is the bill.
  93. Re:Voynich Manuscript is obviously an elaborate pr by Darinbob · · Score: 1

    Except that the book doesn't say that. Of course, when you get into people who are literalists then even obviously poetical statement is treated as literal truth.

    Flat earthers in my experience seem to be much more politically minded than religious, believing there's a big conspiracy out there to hide the truth. They're individuals, they don't learn flat earth beliefs from their parents or community, it's something they pick up as an adult.

  94. Re:Voynich Manuscript is obviously an elaborate pr by Opportunist · · Score: 1

    I've had my share of religiously motivated flat earthers. And yes, the bible actually talks about a firmament spanning above the earth and stuff, and for literalists this means that it cannot be a globe. Because on a globe, a "firmament above" is pretty much impossible.

    --
    We used to have a Bill of Rights. Now, with the rights gone, all we have left is the bill.
  95. Re:Indian ... not hebrew by Marxist+Hacker+42 · · Score: 1

    Nope, I can't find what you are talking about. Must have been that worm in your Tequila.

    --
    SJW: a person who perceives an injustice, and while correcting it, commits a greater injustice.
  96. Re:Indian ... not hebrew by Marxist+Hacker+42 · · Score: 1

    Just did that, only one of the six articles that come up even mention the New World, and it's a link back to the article I posted on biologists recognizing some of the drawings and nothing about the language at all.

    Crap in comments is just so much bragging, and is not to be taken seriously.

    --
    SJW: a person who perceives an injustice, and while correcting it, commits a greater injustice.
  97. Netflix, Hulu, or Amazon Video? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Which company will adapt the manuscript for TV? It has lots of words and stuff, but I need more visuals.

  98. Re:Indian ... not hebrew by mcswell · · Score: 1

    Yes, there are Mayan cities (and modern speakers of Mayan languages) in the states of Chiapas and Yucatan in Mexico, and (I'm guessing here) in states in between. I would think it shouldn't be hard to rule out Mayan languages for the Voynich ms, though, since their phonologies (and in particular their sets of phonemes) are quite different from typical European languages, or from Hebrew for that matter.

    BTW, in case anyone is wondering, the Aztecs (up in central Mexico) also had "books" (usually called codices), but the consensus is that until the arrival of the Spaniards (particularly the Spanish missionaries), these did not contain written language, only pictures and pictograms. Given that the Mayans a few hundred miles to the SE of the Aztecs had true writing, I suppose that if the Spaniards hadn't shown up, Nahuatl (the Aztecs' language) would have eventually gotten written down.

    As for the OP, I think the response here is quite correct: citation needed. Afaik, the Voynich ms has *not* been decoded (at least until now), and it almost certainly is not in any Amerindian language. And given that it's been dated to before 1440, and doesn't in the least resemble any Mayan or Aztec codices, it is highly unlikely to be in an Amerindian language, decoded or otherwise.

  99. Re:Indian ... not hebrew by angel'o'sphere · · Score: 1

    It is a still living middle or south american language, and the plants are from there, too.
    I don't remember if the script was invented by the author was also an old existing one.

    --
    Cost free eBook I read (by iBook/Kobo/Amazon/ObookO/Gutenberg etc.): "The Green Odyssey" by Philip Jose Farmer.
  100. Re:Indian ... not hebrew by angel'o'sphere · · Score: 1

    On an old iPad that is not so easy, as when you google in one tab, and come back to the /. awnser tab, it reloads the tab and you lose the message you have typed so far.
    Why don't you google 'voynich manuscript language' ... while there are now to many hits about the last 'finding' the older hits are still to find ...
    The plants are most certainly meso american, the question is still anout the language, some think arabic, some think a variant of an Aztec language. That was covered on /. already 3 or 4 times ladt 5 years ...

    --
    Cost free eBook I read (by iBook/Kobo/Amazon/ObookO/Gutenberg etc.): "The Green Odyssey" by Philip Jose Farmer.
  101. Re:Indian ... not hebrew by Marxist+Hacker+42 · · Score: 1

    The articles I found said nothing about the script, only about the plants. If you have something different, post a link.

    --
    SJW: a person who perceives an injustice, and while correcting it, commits a greater injustice.
  102. Re:Indian ... not hebrew by RockDoctor · · Score: 1

    On an old iPad that is not so easy [... woes ...]

    THIS is the vaunted wonderful user interface of the Apple-o-Sphere? By the four balls of Jesus Mary and Joseph, but that is laughably bad! I know that I got rid of my Apple device because I didn't like the user interface ... probably before the iPad physically existed (thinks - I still had my Psion with a touch screen and two week battery life) ... years ago nonetheless. But for fuck's sake, you;d hope that thy improved the UI/UX somewhere in the intervening years.

    If there was an iDevice seller in town, I'd be half-tempted to go there to have a laugh at how bad they still are.

    --
    Birds are not dinosaur descendants;birds are dinosaurs, for all useful meanings of "birds", "are" and "dinosaurs"
  103. Re:Indian ... not hebrew by angel'o'sphere · · Score: 1

    Well, it is an old iPad 2, running iOS 8.
    I did mot upgrade because the newer iOS versions were for a while plain ugly.
    E.g. the iBook reading App on this iPad still looks like a book. But Notes and Calendar are already plain ugly.
    From time to time I check newer iPads ... but the iBrooks App still is not back on its old level. The rest does not interest me much.
    Both google maps and apple maps are close to unusable for what a traveler is doing with a map app ...

    I have an Lenovo Yoga Book. Does not mount as USB drive ... the package description was unclear about the fact that it does not take a phone sim card ... the UI is ... well 'primitive?'

    I simply can not get it that Apple and Android developers create Apps that try to look like a 'Minority Report' future UI and are close to unusable ...

    E.g. on an iPad you can mot correct an incorrectly typed mail address. You have to delete it and type it again. Or copy paste it into the mail text, edit it there and copy paste it back.

    Android has no 'looking glass' to position the cursor if you want to correct some typing. But they have that "use the space bar as a scroll bar' to position the cursor. Some /. poster told me about that. Obviously on my Yoga book it only works with the on screen keyboard, and not with the watcom keyboard.

    The watcom keyboard includes a mouse pad. But multi touch to scroll and zoom does not work. Randomly however it scrolls down. Never made it to scroll up.

    Then again I read a few month ago that a certain browser (don't remember the brand) 'finally' added one screen down scrolling by pressing 'space'.

    A few weeks ago I realized my 'yoga book touch pad is scrolling down' comes from me accidentally hitting space.

    I never used in in any browser space bar to scroll a page. So when I read that a few weeks ago I tested it, as I could not believe it. For what actually do we have PgUp and PgDown?

    Anyway, so much to modern user interfaces ...

    --
    Cost free eBook I read (by iBook/Kobo/Amazon/ObookO/Gutenberg etc.): "The Green Odyssey" by Philip Jose Farmer.