Random Data Compression Conclusions
Paul
had success with compressing "Random" data. However, the rules of
compression theory prevail. I have come up with great information on apply
some algorithms to data and have been able to successfully compress already
compressed data. However, I believe most of these successes are merely the
product of finding some redundant data not compressed by the underlying
algorithm in the respective compressor. I will still be involved with
compression technologies as I have got some great beneficial data that is
derived from my "experiments". I know that many here have been critical and
I understand that is really based on your confidence in the established
theories behind data compression. I just wanted to humbly submit my
acknowledgement.
Paul
Earl_Colby_Pottinger
acknowledged that you have then decompressed and byte compared the
data from a decompressor to the original data source.
While it is possible that you found extra compression to squeeze out
of a file, it is still more likely that there is a bug in your
compression code and it is throwing out needed data.
Until you decompress the output of your compressor and then do a byte
compare to insure you got it all back, no-one can even believe that
you did the (possible but not confirmed) compression you now claim.
DO THE TESTS!!!!!
Jim Leonard
I didn't get that impression -- I think he was saying that he found an
issue with his method where it didn't behave the way he thought it
did, and that he was coming back to the group to inform us that our
advice was sound ("wanted to humbly submit my acknowledgement").
So, unlike 95% of the cranks that come here, he returned to tell us
that he figured out he was wrong. That is a *good* thing. That means
he learned from the experience.
Paul
"Earl_Colby_Pottinger" <earlcolby...@sympatico.ca> wrote in message
news:fe2394e0-0c66-45ba...@37g2000yqp.googlegroups.com...
No, I did do the decompression on that data. The problem was the data just
wasn't random enough. I'm not talking about the Random Million Digits bin
file as that one is very random. So much so that I was not able to compress
it. I have several decompressors and compressors for several different
algorithms.
Paul
Paul
"Jim Leonard" <Moby...@gmail.com> wrote in message
news:b534af09-823f-47e8...@k8g2000yqn.googlegroups.com...
Exactly Jim. As I said all along, I'm not a troll, was just under the
belief that it could be done. I'm now wiser.
Paul
Fibonacci Code
> "Jim Leonard" <MobyGa...@gmail.com> wrote in message
>
> - Show quoted text -
Paul,
You just need to share with me an algorithm that can
reduce 1 bit from a
random bit string 50% of the time, and we will go and compress the
random.bin to few Ks.
Regards,
Fibonacci.
Paul
"Fibonacci Code" <angl...@gmail.com> wrote in message
news:1c107a06-b3a4-4320...@c36g2000yqn.googlegroups.com...
Tell me WHY I need to do that?
Paul
Fibonacci Code
> "Fibonacci Code" <angli...@gmail.com> wrote in message
Tell me do you had that first, you don't have no point to give.
I have perfected the rocket launcher, I just need the warhead.
Fibonacci
Cheers.
Earl_Colby_Pottinger
> I [snip] have been able to successfully compress already
> compressed data. However, I believe most of these successes are merely the
> product of finding some redundant data not compressed by the underlying
> algorithm in the respective compressor.
Paul, if you are still reading here how much compression? Usually,
just a few percentage points don't mean much but if you have reached
double digits it could get interesting.
More important, it is time for you to study the work of the giants of
compression software who shoulders we present stand on and learn if
you are just duplicating what was already done, or if in fact you have
developed something totally new.
The reason I strongly suggest this is that combining diffirent
compression methods can sometimes result in far better compress
results. Try it, you still may end up teaching us something new.
Earl Colby Pottinger
PS. I need a grammar nazi. Should it be "who", "who's" or "whom" in
the second paragraph?
Jim Leonard
<earlcolby.pottin...@sympatico.ca> wrote:
> PS. I need a grammar nazi. Should it be "who", "who's" or "whom" in
> the second paragraph?
None of the above :-) "who shoulders we present stand on" should be
"whose shoulders we presently stand on".
Keith Thompson
Or, arguably, "on whose shoulders we presently stand", but the rule
about not ending a sentence with a preposition is controversial.
--
Keith Thompson (The_Other_Keith) ks...@mib.org <http://www.ghoti.net/~kst>
Nokia
"We must do something. This is something. Therefore, we must do this."
-- Antony Jay and Jonathan Lynn, "Yes Minister"
Earl_Colby_Pottinger
> Jim Leonard <MobyGa...@gmail.com> writes:
To both of you, thank you for the corrections.
michael
That reminds me of the Winston Churchill quote:
“This is the sort of English up with which I shall not put.”
jespermadsen
<earlcolby...@sympatico.ca> said:
Are there anyone who can give some pointers to "the work of the giants
of compression software"?
Willem
<snip>
) More important, it is time for you to study the work of the giants of
) compression software who shoulders we present stand on and learn if
) you are just duplicating what was already done, or if in fact you have
) developed something totally new.
<snip>
) PS. I need a grammar nazi. Should it be "who", "who's" or "whom" in
) the second paragraph?
"whose", I would say.
I'd make it "on whose shoulders we presently stand", though.
SaSW, Willem
--
Disclaimer: I am in no way responsible for any of the statements
made in the above text. For all I know I might be
drugged or something..
No I'm not paranoid. You all think I'm paranoid, don't you !
#EOT
Phil Carmody
... on whose ...
> Are there anyone who can give some pointers to "the work of the giants
> of compression software"?
Is there ... , "anyone" being singular like "one", and "someone".
Compression.info used to be a good portal with lots of references
and links elsewhere. However, it appears to not exist any more.
Charles Bloom's webpage (www.cbloom.com) seems to still have a
decent compression reference section, so I'd advise that.
Phil
--
If GML was an infant, SGML is the bright youngster far exceeds
expectations and made its parents too proud, but XML is the
drug-addicted gang member who had committed his first murder
before he had sex, which was rape. -- Erik Naggum (1965-2009)