On Friday, November 8, 2013 7:55:18 AM UTC+5:30, jonas wrote: > Den fredagen den 8:e november 2013 kl. 03:17:36 UTC+1 skrev Chris Angelico: > > On Fri, Nov 8, 2013 at 1:05 PM, jonas.thornvall wrote: > > > I guess what matter is how fast an algorithm can encode and decode a big > > > number, at least if you want to use it for very big sets of random data, > > > or losless video compression?
> > I don't care how fast. I care about the laws of physics :) You can't > > stuff more data into less space without losing some of it. > > Also, please lose Google Groups, or check out what other people have > > said about making it less obnoxious. > > ChrisA > Please, you are he obnoxious, so fuck off or go learn about > reformulation of problems. Every number has an infinite number of > arithmetical solutions. So every number do has a shortest > arithmetical encoding. And that is not the hard part to figure out, > the hard part is to find a generic arithmetic encoding. Since we are discussing profound matters such as cosmic laws, here's my 'all-universal' law: When you engage with a troll you get trolled. -- https://mail.python.org/mailman/listinfo/python-list
