Can I gloat now?
So much for that Voynich manuscript “solution”
11–20 of 34 posts
Re: So much for that Voynich manuscript “solution”
#12"In 2015, Gibbs did an interview where he said that in five years, "I would like to think I could have a returnable series up and running." Considering the dubious accuracy of many History Channel "documentaries," he might just get his wish."
Ouch.
Re: So much for that Voynich manuscript “solution”
#13Can I gloat now? https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=15187695
I'd suggest you don't. Gibbs' attempt at deciphering the Voynich manuscript wasn't bad simply on the account of it's premises, but because it was something lazily slapped together without much further thought.
But a "logographic" approach to deciphering the manuscript might not be off the table.
Re: So much for that Voynich manuscript “solution”
#14Can I gloat now? https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=15187695
I'd suggest you don't. Gibbs' attempt at deciphering the Voynich manuscript wasn't bad simply on the account of it's premises, but because it was something lazily slapped together without much further thought. But a "logographic" approach to deciphering the manuscript might not be off the table.
Fair enough, then I won't. :-)
Re: So much for that Voynich manuscript “solution”
#15I'm going to go off on a tangent and complain about Ars Technica here. As a long-time reader of the site, it feels to me like lately (ie. around the time Conde Nast bought them) the quality started slowly but surely sliding down. This here is yet another minor data-point that reinforces that feeling. The original article covering the supposed discovery was written like it's pretty much a solved thing (yes, all the us…
Modern media^Wworld is all about having it both ways. They anger you, then beg for understanding.
Re: So much for that Voynich manuscript “solution”
#16I'm going to go off on a tangent and complain about Ars Technica here. As a long-time reader of the site, it feels to me like lately (ie. around the time Conde Nast bought them) the quality started slowly but surely sliding down. This here is yet another minor data-point that reinforces that feeling. The original article covering the supposed discovery was written like it's pretty much a solved thing (yes, all the us…
Ars is only as good as its authors - every time i am particularly impressed or displeased with an article, i check the author. Some patterns emerge.
Re: So much for that Voynich manuscript “solution”
#17I'm going to go off on a tangent and complain about Ars Technica here. As a long-time reader of the site, it feels to me like lately (ie. around the time Conde Nast bought them) the quality started slowly but surely sliding down. This here is yet another minor data-point that reinforces that feeling. The original article covering the supposed discovery was written like it's pretty much a solved thing (yes, all the us…
Ars is only as good as its authors - every time i am particularly impressed or displeased with an article, i check the author. Some patterns emerge.
Cyrus Farivar is one of the worst.
Re: So much for that Voynich manuscript “solution”
#18Ugh, this, the Somerton Man cipher as the Zodiac cipher are my top three to see cracked. Maybe someday...
Re: So much for that Voynich manuscript “solution”
#19I'm going to go off on a tangent and complain about Ars Technica here. As a long-time reader of the site, it feels to me like lately (ie. around the time Conde Nast bought them) the quality started slowly but surely sliding down. This here is yet another minor data-point that reinforces that feeling. The original article covering the supposed discovery was written like it's pretty much a solved thing (yes, all the us…
I’ve been downvoted (and upvoted a bit) on Ars Technica for a comment that contained nothing but facts that go against the Ars echo chamber. I don’t see that as often here on Hacker News
Re: So much for that Voynich manuscript “solution”
#20This looks like a lot of elitists trying to grab some notoriety for their niche projects. Inappropriate criticism by people who (quite obviously) want some credit for their time spent, rather bash a casual observer in lieu of that. His crime is putting together a contextual narrative based on some existing deductions. It's a health book - "sleuths that had already reached that conclusion". There was nothing spectacul…
I figured someone would post this take. I was right.