Anton > 29-08-2019, 07:14 PM
(29-08-2019, 04:49 PM)nablator Wrote: You are not allowed to view links. Register or Login to view.There is no test that can identify meaninglessness in general. Trying an infinite number of known and unknown codes, ciphers and steganography methods with all possible combinations and variants, keys, parameters, on an infinite number of meaningful texts is impossible.
Torsten > 30-08-2019, 10:31 AM
(29-08-2019, 07:18 AM)nickpelling Wrote: You are not allowed to view links. Register or Login to view.Torsten: re-reading your 2019 article and looking at your source code, you term certain high-frequency pairs of glyphs (such as ‘ol’ and ‘dy’) as ‘ligatures’, and yet treat them in the same way as ‘o’ and ‘l’ (i.e. individual glyphs).
(29-08-2019, 07:18 AM)nickpelling Wrote: You are not allowed to view links. Register or Login to view.They are not consistently physically joined on the page, so are not actual ‘ligatures’.
(29-08-2019, 07:18 AM)nickpelling Wrote: You are not allowed to view links. Register or Login to view.* Why would the original person doing the auto-copying have treated them in a special way?
(29-08-2019, 07:18 AM)nickpelling Wrote: You are not allowed to view links. Register or Login to view.* Why are there so many manually added substitution cases in your code on github?
Davidsch > 30-08-2019, 11:57 AM
nickpelling > 30-08-2019, 02:15 PM
-JKP- > 30-08-2019, 10:14 PM
(30-08-2019, 02:15 PM)nickpelling Wrote: You are not allowed to view links. Register or Login to view.Torsten: my proposed explanation for tightly bound pairs of letters begins with a specific, historically attested cipher mechanism - verbose cipher. This is a starting point that requires pairs of shapes to be locked together.
Your autocopying hypothesis, however, has no requirement for letters to be locked together. ..
nickpelling > 30-08-2019, 10:28 PM
nickpelling > 30-08-2019, 10:37 PM
(30-08-2019, 10:14 PM)-JKP- Wrote: You are not allowed to view links. Register or Login to view.This is the main difference I have with Torsten's description of the text and my perception of the text, and I'm glad you brought it up Nick, but I still like what Torsten is doing, regardless of whether I agree with an autocopying hypothesis.
Torsten > 30-08-2019, 11:45 PM
(30-08-2019, 02:15 PM)nickpelling Wrote: You are not allowed to view links. Register or Login to view.Torsten: my proposed explanation for tightly bound pairs of letters begins with a specific, historically attested cipher mechanism - verbose cipher. This is a starting point that requires pairs of shapes to be locked together.
(30-08-2019, 02:15 PM)nickpelling Wrote: You are not allowed to view links. Register or Login to view.[/font]Your autocopying hypothesis, however, has no requirement for letters to be locked together. ...
nickpelling > 31-08-2019, 08:40 AM
Torsten > 01-09-2019, 11:11 AM
(31-08-2019, 08:40 AM)nickpelling Wrote: You are not allowed to view links. Register or Login to view.Torsten: EVA is a stroke-based transcription alphabet, nothing more. It was designed to help communication between researchers who are exploring different groupings of strokes into tokens, e.g. for the kind of edge cases you cite. It was never designed to be interpreted as a decryptive or a linguistic alphabet. Please stay on topic.