dexdex > 3 hours ago
Jorge_Stolfi > 1 hour ago
(3 hours ago)dexdex Wrote: You are not allowed to view links. Register or Login to view.One thing I would say is one can probably arrange these options in a sequence of slowest to fastest. My personal ranking would be: enciphered text > faithful copy > sloppy copy > meaningless gibberish
dexdex > 1 hour ago
oshfdk > 1 hour ago
(3 hours ago)dexdex Wrote: You are not allowed to view links. Register or Login to view.(3 hours ago)oshfdk Wrote: You are not allowed to view links. Register or Login to view.It may be possible to separate implausible from plausible, but I think that's about it without some additional data.
Sure, but that's something, no?
dexdex > 1 hour ago
oshfdk > 45 minutes ago
(1 hour ago)dexdex Wrote: You are not allowed to view links. Register or Login to view.Is it eliminating possibilities, no - but forming an opinion without a decipherment is worthwhile both from a personal (what I feel) and practical (What's worth considering first) point of view.
pjburkshire > 37 minutes ago
(1 hour ago)dexdex Wrote: You are not allowed to view links. Register or Login to view.
dexdex > 29 minutes ago
(37 minutes ago)pjburkshire Wrote: You are not allowed to view links. Register or Login to view.(1 hour ago)dexdex Wrote: You are not allowed to view links. Register or Login to view.
I definitely would consider the enciphered text less likely than gibberish if producing the enciphered text takes 50 times longer. And I would consider it even less likely if it takes a hundred times longer. Is it eliminating possibilities, no - but forming an opinion without a decipherment is worthwhile both from a personal (what I feel) and practical (What's worth considering first) point of view. This question has bearing on forming an opinion, because the times of production are obviously gonna differ - but I am unable to say exactly how much, so I am unable to update my balance of probabilities on the matter. Which is why I'm curious if someone more knowledgeable can pitch in.