I'd rather willingly pay $5 for a Coke than have it cost $1 but not be available. Supply and Demand equalize, everybody wins. Here's something that's actually questionable.
How about when movie theatres FORBID you to bring your own food and drink inside, thus creating their own monopoly where they rip you off?
The SEC or Department of Justice should go after the RIAA for abusing their monopoly powers, but the artists should still be allowed to sign whatever contracts they want.
You're confused with the fact that to maintain a lower orbit, you must move faster (so centrifugal force cancels out gravity). But if you slow down, there is less centrigual force, gravity which is stronger the closer you get to earth pulls you down.
The challenger offered a random file of *ANY* size. I would have paid 100 bucks just to force him to make (and upload) a 100 terabyte file for me to "compress" (yeah right)
So you're running them through an external compressor (perhaps it removes strings with runs or something of the sort).
The problem is that you are reducing the size of compression resistant files very slightly, however you have no way to represent non-compression resistant files.
So if the random number generator happened to spit out three zeroes in a row, and your compressor would try to eliminate them, you could NOT compress the file (even increasing the size) because your decompressor ONLY decompresses "uncompressable" files.
If I took a piece of paper and cut it into pieces, the sum of the parts is equal to the whole, and that's what the challengee did IMO. It doesn't matter if the representation just so happens to use up more space, the challenge specified that OS was not important.
What I'm thinking of, is wouldn't it be possible to create a minimalist compression algorithm that tended to not affect the file size, but might deviate it in either direction by about 1% ?(enough to cover the overhead of the decompressor).
Of course, on average it would increase the size of the file, but as someone posted much earlier, all you have to do is decrease the total length by a single bit 1 out of 50 times.
The trick to that one is that there are infinitely many equivalent versions of the DeCSS source. You can add/remove whitespace, change the order of a few commands, etc.
So you take a whole bunch of mathematical numbers, and you take a whole bunch of versions of the source code, there's very likely to be a match.
BTW, Mathematics is an extremely high level language. I'll bet that if you were to actaully write a program to efficiently generate that prime number, it would be larger than (or very close to) the size of the DeCSS source itself.
If he just offered $5000 to whoever could meet the challenge, then I'd say that intent was very important, he could argue that the "compression" scheme was not practical...he shouldn't have to pay.
But he had no objection to accepting the $100. Money has already changed hands. Now that he lost the bet, he wants to just call the whole thing off and return the $100? I don't think so.
There are so many random files, that the length of the number of the compression resistant file would be very close (although slightly less) than the length of the file itself.
However, there should be no way for the decompressor to generate compression resistant files in order to enumerate them. If the files are compression resistant, they would have to be stored bit-for-bit inside the source of the decompressor, enlarging it.
The reason that porn dvds have more features is not that porn is more innovative than regular movies.
Regular movies are created for a regular screen in a regular theatre. The dvd doesn't do anything that the screen can't do.
Porn movies are often shot straight for DVD, so they can put the extra dvd stuff in there.
With a regular movie there's no real need for multiple angles anyway. I would like to movies as the director intended. Besides, with all the stunts and camera tricks they pull, it wouldn't be practical to shoot from simoutaneous angles.
Porn is the "real thing". no sleight of hand or anything so extra camera angles are practical.
Slashdot Mirror
I'd rather willingly pay $5 for a Coke than have it cost $1 but not be available. Supply and Demand equalize, everybody wins. Here's something that's actually questionable.
How about when movie theatres FORBID you to bring your own food and drink inside, thus creating their own monopoly where they rip you off?
Well, it's not as if they can enforce it.
I'll bet it's Ajax, but they paid a lot more for it.
So DVD movies cost about $1.00 now instead of $0.50? (Including labels and envelopes). Hell, it costs more to rent one from Blockbuster!
5-10 copies of the Gig [1-2 CDs each] for use by the band members to improve future performances.
So are you trying to tell me that the Gig can be anywhere from about 500 to 1500 Megs? What happened to standards!
The SEC or Department of Justice should go after the RIAA for abusing their monopoly powers, but the artists should still be allowed to sign whatever contracts they want.
You're confused with the fact that to maintain a lower orbit, you must move faster (so centrifugal force cancels out gravity). But if you slow down, there is less centrigual force, gravity which is stronger the closer you get to earth pulls you down.
Usually this is due to a lack of a good MIS person.
That is because if they were good, they wouldn't be MIS.
The challenger offered a random file of *ANY* size. I would have paid 100 bucks just to force him to make (and upload) a 100 terabyte file for me to "compress" (yeah right)
So you're running them through an external compressor (perhaps it removes strings with runs or something of the sort).
The problem is that you are reducing the size of compression resistant files very slightly, however you have no way to represent non-compression resistant files.
So if the random number generator happened to spit out three zeroes in a row, and your compressor would try to eliminate them, you could NOT compress the file (even increasing the size) because your decompressor ONLY decompresses "uncompressable" files.
He said "file size". He did not say "disk usage"
If I took a piece of paper and cut it into pieces, the sum of the parts is equal to the whole, and that's what the challengee did IMO. It doesn't matter if the representation just so happens to use up more space, the challenge specified that OS was not important.
What I'm thinking of, is wouldn't it be possible to create a minimalist compression algorithm that tended to not affect the file size, but might deviate it in either direction by about 1% ?(enough to cover the overhead of the decompressor).
Of course, on average it would increase the size of the file, but as someone posted much earlier, all you have to do is decrease the total length by a single bit 1 out of 50 times.
Out of curiosity is the offer still valid now that someone has won it? Not that I think I'll solve it anyway...but this looks like fun.
The trick to that one is that there are infinitely many equivalent versions of the DeCSS source. You can add/remove whitespace, change the order of a few commands, etc.
So you take a whole bunch of mathematical numbers, and you take a whole bunch of versions of the source code, there's very likely to be a match.
BTW, Mathematics is an extremely high level language. I'll bet that if you were to actaully write a program to efficiently generate that prime number, it would be larger than (or very close to) the size of the DeCSS source itself.
Grant? It was not "philanthropic" so to speak. Mike accepted the $100 he should be prepared to pay up.
If he just offered $5000 to whoever could meet the challenge, then I'd say that intent was very important, he could argue that the "compression" scheme was not practical...he shouldn't have to pay.
But he had no objection to accepting the $100. Money has already changed hands. Now that he lost the bet, he wants to just call the whole thing off and return the $100? I don't think so.
There are so many random files, that the length of the number of the compression resistant file would be very close (although slightly less) than the length of the file itself.
However, there should be no way for the decompressor to generate compression resistant files in order to enumerate them. If the files are compression resistant, they would have to be stored bit-for-bit inside the source of the decompressor, enlarging it.
They may want to consider attaching 15,000 handcuffs at 2 pounds apiece.
I'm sure handcuffs don't weigh that much. 900 grams, tops.
Just build a handle into the stupid thing AND HANDCUFF IT TO YOURSELF!
So when is someone going to make a web implementation of that SNL gameshow Food, Sex or Cars?
Here's the transcript if you don't know what I'm talking about.
CON: It's a friggin sweater! Who wants to wear a sweater on a warm sunny day?
It just proves that 43% of rapists are liars.
Hasn't it been estimated before that 5% of felons are wrongly convicted?
Now how does THAT fit into your statistics?
Did porn also pioneer SPAM before anyone else?
The reason that porn dvds have more features is not that porn is more innovative than regular movies.
Regular movies are created for a regular screen in a regular theatre. The dvd doesn't do anything that the screen can't do.
Porn movies are often shot straight for DVD, so they can put the extra dvd stuff in there.
With a regular movie there's no real need for multiple angles anyway. I would like to movies as the director intended. Besides, with all the stunts and camera tricks they pull, it wouldn't be practical to shoot from simoutaneous angles.
Porn is the "real thing". no sleight of hand or anything so extra camera angles are practical.
Why not get semiconductor tatoo ink?