[flagged]
They will just take out new loans to service their old loans, rinse and repeat ad inifinitum.
Fable 5.1 Solves the Cyphral Distich, a 370-year-old cipher
441–450 of 571 posts
Re: Fable 5.1 Solves the Cyphral Distich, a 370-year-old cipher
#442I presume what the author did was plug Klaus Schmeh's top 50 unsolved ciphers at https://scienceblogs.de/klausis-krypto-kolumne/the-top-50-un... into Fable 5.1 and ask Fable 5.1 to have a go. On this kind of problem it always falls back to Opus 5 anyway so I save time by starting with Opus. The successor to Klaus's blog is Satoshi Tomokiyo's Cryptiana site, so a month ago I asked Opus 5 to scrape it all, rank them an…
Cipher noob question: is there any check that can be done to ensure a cipher is actually decodable? What if the author made a flaw when encoding it, so that it's not actually solvable?
Actually the article that you didn't bother to read mention a few encoding errors that Fable has been able to recover and point to the probable author's intent.
Re: Fable 5.1 Solves the Cyphral Distich, a 370-year-old cipher
#443Earlier quoted context omitted.
Why don’t you solve such problems?Being “not impressed” sounds more like a knowledge gap on your part than an informed opinion.
Pepper grinders have always impressed me, very effective devices, great at grinding out results, I mean pepper. I can't do it by hand at all!
Sure you can, its just difficult to the point of being infeasible
Re: Fable 5.1 Solves the Cyphral Distich, a 370-year-old cipher
#444Fast forward to mid-week, when we learn that some random cypherpunk had nonchalantly posted the solution at a late pandemic hour on a distant yet public server in the fediverse.
OK after having read this in full: apparently truly public but prior goes way back to 1653 instead of into the 2020s.. Cipherbrain folk were looking up the wrong page? Sweet ring of "auto research" / limitless attention is all you need..
Re: Fable 5.1 Solves the Cyphral Distich, a 370-year-old cipher
#445A very neat problem and result. I often find myself swinging between "It's so over" and "We're so back" - some days I roll out of bed thinking I could have Claude solve some random unproven OEIS sequence before breakfast; other days, I wake up in a cold sweat worried about the fate of humanity and what the world might look like in a decade. I think it's that I don't have a very high p(doom) or p(utopia), and I don't…
I appreciate reading this, for the past year or so as it pertains to AI, I've just not been able to settle my mind, and it's become a bit exhusting. I presumed I wasn't the only one who swings back and forth and it's comforting to read someone else post the same thing, makes me feel a less nutso. :)
Re: Fable 5.1 Solves the Cyphral Distich, a 370-year-old cipher
#446Earlier quoted context omitted.
[flagged]
Caesar cipher is probably something even an untrained person could decode. Probably something more complex like a vigenere cipher that is still trivial to decode if you are at all familiar crptanalysis, but would look impossible to someone untrained.
But OP didn't actually say they struggled to decipher themselves, or even tried at all, just that it had "no obvious key". Which doesn't make it sound like they attempted any kind of cryptanalysis, whether for a Caesar cipher or anything else before handing it off to ChatGPT.
Re: Fable 5.1 Solves the Cyphral Distich, a 370-year-old cipher
#447I have a feeling that this simply has been in the training data somewhere and Fable just resurfaced it. From my experience Fable is incredibly dumb. It cannot even produce coherent English text and makes basic logic mistakes even Qwen 27B would be ashamed of.
Re: Fable 5.1 Solves the Cyphral Distich, a 370-year-old cipher
#448> Various people attempted to decipher it, but it seems they were missing one crucial hint. They tried methods like frequency analysis, substitution, and homophonic substitution, and none of these approaches worked. That’s because they missed one easy clue. It appears that is not true. Someone here [1] has found a [German] blog [2] writing about this cipher. There are two comments (Jan and Helmut) from 2014 under the…
Seems like another case of LLMs taking credit for their training data without giving proper attribution, similar to the navier stokes case.
Except they didn't actually solve it, they just suggested it was a book cipher, which was a known strategy.
Re: Fable 5.1 Solves the Cyphral Distich, a 370-year-old cipher
#449Where are all the disease cures ?
Re: Fable 5.1 Solves the Cyphral Distich, a 370-year-old cipher
#450> Various people attempted to decipher it, but it seems they were missing one crucial hint. They tried methods like frequency analysis, substitution, and homophonic substitution, and none of these approaches worked. That’s because they missed one easy clue. It appears that is not true. Someone here [1] has found a [German] blog [2] writing about this cipher. There are two comments (Jan and Helmut) from 2014 under the…
That is like crediting a fan posting on Twitter "he should run it in for a touchdown instead of taking 3 points" instead of the coach who decided and implemented a play which actually won the football game.