Post Race!

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Shaggy Hiker

The error is not in the binary, the error is in the description I gave, but it doesn't matter.

---

Nope, you said "I also see that there are some extra red bricks in the upper left corner of that picture, which are now covered by a raised bed, but would throw off the pattern in the picture". Which means that some of the binary encoded characters are no longer readable due to the placement of the extra red bricks and that generates a very obvious red coloured error that partially or entirely destroys the meaning of the message i.e. you confessed to vandalizing your own binary backyard. °o°

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Shaggy Hiker

According to rule #2, you ignore all red bricks when reading the pattern.

---

You only made those rules yesterday in an attempt to cover up your furtive backyard behaviours, and, as there is no way anyone else could possibly know them, said rules clearly cannot be taken seriously, or into account, when discussing the issue.:p

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Shaggy Hiker

The only thing that the red bricks can do is give you some hint as to which direction to read and possibly where to start reading, though they don't really do that. They are only a hint, though, and there is no absolute rule regarding the red bricks. While it is true that every eigth brick is red, that doesn't mean that every red brick is an eigth brick.

---

Every red brick was a delimiter separating each binary encoded character until, sadly, you put a red line through your message. :L

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Shaggy Hiker

It did get me thinking, though.

---

That wasn't my intention.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Shaggy Hiker

If you were to read the patter E-W or W-E rather than N-S, it would have no meaning. You have to read the patter N-S, but had I written a palindrome, and if you were to swap the endian nature of the bytes, you could read the pattern S-N, as well. I didn't write a palindrome, as there are few with meaning of the size I needed (maybe none). However, would it be possible to have created a pattern such that it would have one meaning when read N-S, and another meaning when read E-W? I believe that would not be possible without a much more liberal use of red bricks, but if I were to add a third rule:

3) Red bricks should be ignored.

---

No need for a third rule, you already invented that one yesterday.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Shaggy Hiker

then I think it would have been technically possible to encode a message both N-S as well as E-W, though without the red brick hints, it is unlikely that anybody would ever have known that there was a pattern, let alone been able to read it.

---

The obvious problem is that without knowing your rules there is no way anyone would ever be able to decipher the binary encoded characters. Worse is that the use of tri-coloured tiles, and sometimes it looks like more colours due to the different shades of tan and grey, makes it look like anything other than a binary pattern.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Shaggy Hiker

I also think that the character count in either direction would be radically reduced due to the need to use LOTS of red bricks in the pattern. Still, this would be an interesting excercise for a much larger area than the one I had. It would be a largely red pattern, but it would appear highly random.

---

I am still not convinced that it would look like anything other than a game of tetris.

Make sure you keep your binary safe from the
http://4.bp.blogspot.com/_Bv2JCUhRdU...inary_Main.jpg
http://fc03.deviantart.net/fs70/i/20...ar-d3jzlc1.png

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Witis

Nope, you said "I also see that there are some extra red bricks in the upper left corner of that picture, which are now covered by a raised bed, but would throw off the pattern in the picture". Which means that some of the binary encoded characters are no longer readable due to the placement of the extra red bricks and that generates a very obvious red coloured error that partially or entirely destroys the meaning of the message i.e. you confessed to vandalizing your own binary backyard. °o°

---

Sorry for misleading you. You have misunderstood that statement. The pattern I was refering to was the one mentioned in post #55820, which is not the binary message itself, but the hint pattern of the red bricks that could cause a person to realize that the bricks are not random, which could then lead them to figure out that it is ASCII. The extra red bricks may very well confuse them, as it has clearly confused you, but the red bricks have nothing to do with the binary message itself, which can't use red bricks since binary is always only 1 or 0. The extra red bricks could throw off a person who is both excessively pedantic, and utterly focused on whether or not there is a pattern in the red bricks.

It doesn't matter, though, because, as I already noted, the red bricks still follow a consistent rule. It's not quite the rule that I originally stated (sort of, since I never actually stated the rule incorrectly). In fact, having reviewed every post on the subject, I never made an incorrect statement, you just misinterpreted a few of them. However, I WAS thinking about the red bricks incorrectly, but I fixed that in the last post.

The bottom line is this: The pattern in the yard is correct. There are no errors based on the stated rules. My memory of the rules that were applied, just as my memory of the message itself, has faded, but the rules are there and can be discovered through examination of the pattern.

As for the idea that there is no way that anybody could figure it out. That's absurd. Though I never actually misstated the rule about the red bricks, I had forgotten it, and had to re-deduce the rule based on the pattern. The pattern of gray and tan bricks are far easier to work out, since they are straight up binary.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Witis

and sometimes it looks like more colours due to the different shades of tan and grey, makes it look like anything other than a binary pattern.

---

That's an artifact of the poor lighting in the picture. There isn't any perceptible variation in the shades of the actual bricks, even after all these years. They appear not to be affected by weather or sun. Unfortunately, due to the location, there was no way to get a good picture without waiting for an overcast day. The yard has very few places that are not impacted by shadow at any point in the day. Parts of the pattern are shaded at all times of day. Therefore, I really needed an overcast day to get reasonably constant lighting across the whole pattern. Overcast days happen only a few times a year out here, though, and then generally in the winter. I was much more interested in getting the pergola and the raised beds finished during the summer than getting a good picture. So, as washed out as it appears, it's just a camera effect and isn't reality. The actual color of the bricks is totally uniform.

Quote:

---

I am still not convinced that it would look like anything other than a game of tetris.

---

I'd be surprised if I could convince you of your own name.

I stopped reading both of your guy's posts in this thread mostly because I thought you guys were just jibjabbing. But are you guys actually having a serious conversation about binary?

1010010

Oh god, it's contagious.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by dday9

1010010

---

Ugh...

233223233

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by dclamp

I stopped reading both of your guy's posts in this thread mostly because I thought you guys were just jibjabbing. But are you guys actually having a serious conversation about binary?

---

If that's serious, the human race is doomed. Feel free to ignore it. Witis has focused on a mistake I sort of made when describing the pattern, and has elevated that casual comment to an absolute rule, despite my twice saying that it was a mistake (three times, now). If it were an absolute rule, then there would be a flaw in the pattern of my yard, but since it was a misstatement, or a poor interpretation of a true statement, it doesn't mean a darn thing.

Still, it's chit-chat, and this is the post race, so jibjabbing is better than some of the other drivel that has come before.

Well I didn't take any time to read any of the posts you guys were making, so I had no idea what the discussion was about. Glad you clarified it though.

Without further ado, 1010100101101

That's the other drivel.

So I've created a three post thread on the basics of Lua in the tutorial codebank. The forth post will be filled up with different starter projects, what projects do y'all have in mind?

I think a pig roast application would be the most appropriate. See this link:

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Luau

Ah, ok you want a boucherie. I'll make it happen.

Lua for luau....wow! See what u can do for a language...isn't that the point of the entire VB6 argument and all the polls? However, what u can do for vb6 is create more vitriol, whereas what u can do for Lua will result in a party.

My wife: Hunny, you can put your SD card in my USB port
Me: *palm on head*

Tell her your card is too big for her slot.

That ought to get a response.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Shaggy Hiker

Sorry for misleading you. You have misunderstood that statement. The pattern I was refering to was the one mentioned in post #55820, which is not the binary message itself, but the hint pattern of the red bricks that could cause a person to realize that the bricks are not random, which could then lead them to figure out that it is ASCII.

---

No misunderstanding, the red tiles in your backyard started as your binary delimiter.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Shaggy Hiker

The extra red bricks may very well confuse them, as it has clearly confused you,

---

No confusion, then you added some extra red tiles as fill which placed a red line through your binary message.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Shaggy Hiker

but the red bricks have nothing to do with the binary message itself, which can't use red bricks since binary is always only 1 or 0.

---

Yep, the red tiles only function as the delimiter or to throw an error.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Shaggy Hiker

The extra red bricks could throw off a person who is both excessively pedantic, and utterly focused on whether or not there is a pattern in the red bricks.

---

Excatly! The extra red tiles put a clear red error through your binary backyard and make it difficult or impossible to retrieve the hidden message. (._.)

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Shaggy Hiker

It doesn't matter, though, because, as I already noted, the red bricks still follow a consistent rule.

---

Yep they clearly function as a delimiter or to obfuscate the message.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Shaggy Hiker

It's not quite the rule that I originally stated (sort of, since I never actually stated the rule incorrectly).

---

You originally stated that every eighth bit was red to separate each character.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Shaggy Hiker

In fact, having reviewed every post on the subject, I never made an incorrect statement, you just misinterpreted a few of them.

---

I don't imagine I have misinterpreted any of your posts. :P

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Shaggy Hiker

However, I WAS thinking about the red bricks incorrectly, but I fixed that in the last post.

---

Are you referring to your latest third rule?

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Shaggy Hiker

The bottom line is this: The pattern in the yard is correct.

---

Except for the red tiles that you added to insert an error into your backyard.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Shaggy Hiker

There are no errors based on the stated rules.

---

What rules, the ones you invented a couple of days ago that no one else could possibly know or deduce?

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Shaggy Hiker

My memory of the rules that were applied, just as my memory of the message itself, has faded, but the rules are there and can be discovered through examination of the pattern.

---

No way, your new rules are so bizarre that you would have to explicitly add them into your backyard for them to have any effect, and would create so much embarrassment that you would never do it.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Shaggy Hiker

As for the idea that there is no way that anybody could figure it out. That's absurd.

---

Nope, not at all, you seem only to have convinced yourself that your new rules are intuitive and obvious to everyone looking at your backyard. In truth no one will ever deduce your latest rules or decipher your message due to the extra red tiles you added.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Shaggy Hiker

Though I never actually misstated the rule about the red bricks, I had forgotten it, and had to re-deduce the rule based on the pattern.

---

You mean you invented the rules a couple of days ago in an attempt to cover up the error you placed in your binary backyard. Most likely it was easier for you to insert a couple of red bricks to mark an error than complete more serious backyard alterations.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Shaggy Hiker

The pattern of gray and tan bricks are far easier to work out, since they are straight up binary.

---

Focusing on two tone binary tiles, perhaps with a couple of tiles with zeros and ones on them, would have created a very obviously binary backyard.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Shaggy Hiker

I'd be surprised if I could convince you of your own name.

---

Heh, I'll take that as a compliment. ☺