If you think about it, a piano has all the possible songs in it too!
πFS
181–190 of 224 posts
Re: πFS
#182Earlier quoted context omitted.
I wonder if we could mess with NSA-style surveillance by having a good chunk of the population streaming lots of random data over the internet. Essentially, Alice piping her /dev/random to Bob's /dev/null over netcat or something. Make a slick looking app that does it 24/7 in the background using excess bandwidth and tell people it sticks it to the NSA. Spy agencies would not only have to store it all in case it was…
That's known as cover traffic and is a tactic employed by many of the anonymity oriented overlay networks. I'll note that any observer already has this problem to the extent that video streams are also encrypted. However most observers presumably recognize the endpoints as well as being able to classify the traffic by means of statistical analysis. What might be useful would be a tool to generate arbitrary user data…
Local llms and diffusion models can help you with that.
Re: πFS
#183>One of the properties that π is conjectured to have is that it is normal conjectured Glad to see one of my pet points of pedantry come up. No non-constructed irrational number has never been proven to be normal or disjunctive.
Chaitin's constant does not count? Depends on your definition of constructed, but contrary to "easy" normal numbers such as Champernowne's constant, it's not defined by its sequence of digits.
Re: πFS
#184The design is very human
Re: πFS
#185If you think about it, a piano has all the possible songs in it too!
No it doesn't. Think of the intro of We'll rock you and show me how you perform that on your piano.
Re: πFS
#186No thanks, I have all the files I need right here in /dev/urandom.
Re: πFS
#187It is worth noting that as the length of data increases it becomes extremely unlikely that the index and length of the sequence within pi would actually be smaller than the data.
That just means you'll be creating even more valuable metadata to store your files. Win-win.
Re: πFS
#188Earlier quoted context omitted.
Yes. But /lossful/ compression: (scientific, philosophical etc.) laws compress an abstract narration of events into that tiny, hard, fundamental, predictive detail. (Then it depends on your concern: "Aagh, the aunt fell!" // "Oh yes, that'd be Newton")
> "Aagh, the aunt fell!" // "Oh yes, that'd be Newton" This is totally lost on me.
Compression minimizes the representation of information.
Laws (scientific, philosophical etc.) as compression represent the common side of classes of events - an abstraction of said events, stripping the irrelevant - irrelevant to some perspective, or irrelevant in a potential Procuste's bed. So, laws are compression, but a so extremely lossful compression that the loss can be relevant.
Brutally, "there may be more to the story of the fall of an elderly than just gravitation" - also in the sense that there are details behind the event.
Laws are compression - yes, with caveats.
On a more scientific, epistemological side: Einstein extended Newton covering more exceptions (reducing the abstraction - reducing the loss).
Re: πFS
#189Earlier quoted context omitted.
Yes. But /lossful/ compression: (scientific, philosophical etc.) laws compress an abstract narration of events into that tiny, hard, fundamental, predictive detail. (Then it depends on your concern: "Aagh, the aunt fell!" // "Oh yes, that'd be Newton")
> "Aagh, the aunt fell!" // "Oh yes, that'd be Newton" This is totally lost on me.
> This is totally lost on me.
Appears to be lossy then ;)
(Sorry, you have to admit that was too easy to not say)
Re: πFS
#190Where do you store the indices? Blockchain!