How much compress text worth ?

[Obama]

Unpack speed using database?
And her size?

also depend on your compress size,if you compress much like 100k straight sure need more and more above.This like some theory you compress more you need more resources when you decompress.

[Obama]

I skim through this thread for the third time and it strikes me again that this is a "Nigerian Prince" kind of thing. Bogus claims for gullible audience. But what if this could be true? Well, it reminds me that patent offices in some countries are prohibited by law to grant patents related to any kind of perpetual motion machines. The laws must be amended to prohibit the possibility of compression below the entropy.

never trust me ? just come my home , need my home address?

[compgt]

Yes, 1,000,000 bytes to 1,028 bytes.
Yes,equal if try with short compress.
few GB.
Few day
Python,but i can use any language cause i got algorithm.
No idea,just offer me.

Man, 1028 bytes? Seems to me like my output 1K frequency table plus the famed 32-bit filesize.

You might have an algorithm for some tailored inputs, but sure you can't compress *all* the 1,000,000-byte random files into just 1028 bytes.

[Obama]

Man, 1028 bytes? Seems to me like my output 1K frequency table plus the famed 32-bit filesize.

You might have an algorithm for some inputs, but sure you can't compress *all* the 1,000,000-byte random files into just 1028 bytes.

haiz...This is real result,but i will try again.

[xinix]

Man, 1028 bytes? Seems to me like my output 1K frequency table plus the famed 32-bit filesize.

You might have an algorithm for some tailored inputs, but sure you can't compress *all* the 1,000,000-byte random files into just 1028 bytes.

He did not talk about all the random files.
He spoke only about texts in English.

[Obama]

He did not talk about all the random files.
He spoke only about texts in English.

yea,im not expert.

[compgt]

He did not talk about all the random files.
He spoke only about texts in English.

At first, he spoke of digits and letters, then he quoted 1,000,000 to 1028, bytes to bytes.

But that's implied when someone tells about an algorithm that all or almost all input files of sizes that large "can be compressed to that very small output size."

[xinix]

At first, he spoke of digits and letters, then he quoted 1,000,000 to 1028, bytes to bytes.

But that's implied when someone tells about an algorithm that all or almost all input files of sizes that large "can be compressed to that very small output size."

Do not worry)
He is about the text.

[Obama]

letters,numbers and some symbols on keyboard only

[Sportman]

few GB.
Few day

Is "few GB" a static fixed dictionary or altered and/or increased with every input?

How can it be a "Few day" while there was only 11:22 hour between the random text test file post and your answer or did you decompress it later?

[Obama]

Is "few GB" a static fixed dictionary or altered and/or increased with every input?

How can it be a "Few day" while there was only 11:22 hour between the random text test file post and your answer or did you decompress it later?

increased with every input
nope , you are right. Because i just split it and compress.That's why so fast complete.If normally need few days.

[Sportman]

increased with every input

If you take 100 different movies with 4GB file size each and convert them to characters you can compress and end with 10GB file size each and compress each 10GB file 900 times to 11MB file size each, how much is your dictionary increased after compressing that 100 movies?

[Obama]

If you take 100 different movies with 4GB file size each and convert them to characters you can compress and end with 10GB file size each and compress each 10GB file 900 times to 11MB file size each, how much is your dictionary increased after compressing that 100 movies?

good question,never think before.I think i need a super computer.

[Obama]

We do not know whether to patent it.
Since you need more information about the algorithm.
___
By the way, how much can you compress book1?
___
Have you tried to decode the archive and check the MD5 files?

Done,just few hours,the result is 847 bytes.

[xinix]

Done,just few hours,the result is 847 bytes.

Thank.
Interesting.
Do you have the opportunity to put this 847 byte file here?
Only compressed file.
I think we can squeeze it again.

[Obama]

Thank.
Interesting.
Do you have the opportunity to put this 847 byte file here?
Only compressed file.
I think we can squeeze it again.

Sorry , i can't.

[CompressMaster]

We are unable to help you more if you don´t post compressed sample. As I told you earlier, it could be possible (I´m pretty sure) to compress it more, but we haven´t at least one compressed sample from you. I know, you are worried that we can steal your intellectual property or algorithm, but if you post ONLY COMPRESSED SAMPLE, you´re definitely safe.

[JamesB]

Thank.
Interesting.
Do you have the opportunity to put this 847 byte file here?
Only compressed file.
I think we can squeeze it again.

Absolutely... I can squeeze it to zero! I include the contents here:
Sorry Obama, I beat you to it.

Given infinite time I can decompress it and get the original back too, although you do have to manually check which of the infinite number of files produced contained the original. We can just solve that by MAGIC though.

[pklat]

never trust me ? just come my home , need my home address?

you have a home? get outta here..

anyway, it has already been mathematically proven that anything can be compressed to '42'

[Obama]

Absolutely... I can squeeze it to zero! I include the contents here:
Sorry Obama, I beat you to it.

Given infinite time I can decompress it and get the original back too, although you do have to manually check which of the infinite number of files produced contained the original. We can just solve that by MAGIC though.

Well played,mathematics is magic.Whoa , i just know it.

[Obama]

you have a home? get outta here..

anyway, it has already been mathematically proven that anything can be compressed to '42'

42 ? 42 percentage ?

[Obama]

We are unable to help you more if you don´t post compressed sample. As I told you earlier, it could be possible (I´m pretty sure) to compress it more, but we haven´t at least one compressed sample from you. I know, you are worried that we can steal your intellectual property or algorithm, but if you post ONLY COMPRESSED SAMPLE, you´re definitely safe.

im not worry who will steal , just saw a lot of people just joke me as rude , if im really an liar , why not i just play some money game instead of wasting time here ? By the way maybe i will free it to anyone because i dont have money to apply patent .

[JamesB]

im not worry who will steal , just saw a lot of people just joke me as rude , if im really an liar , why not i just play some money game instead of wasting time here ? By the way maybe i will free it to anyone because i dont have money to apply patent .

For what it's worth, I don't think you're a liar, just very mistaken!

Have you actually got a decompression tool too, or is that still to come? I've lost track of the number of times I thought I'd got a gain only to realise not, once I've written the other side.

[Obama]

For what it's worth, I don't think you're a liar, just very mistaken!

Have you actually got a decompression tool too, or is that still to come? I've lost track of the number of times I thought I'd got a gain only to realise not, once I've written the other side.

Yes , i got decompression method but my computer can't handle it. You dont believe is your problem,since i never said it for specific area user only not for anyone.cheer

[Obama]

2775460411
2765412996
2785364017
2776981798
2788069581
2769237148
2751382143
2763501651
2765834776
2777448626
2755710260
2745331510
2756296992
2769762005
2768305865
2773441655
2741270275
2759264545
2771185391
2763739105
2767894572
2762234063
2747222905
2786711997
2742299449
2748179827
2777237900
2775018839
2777891886
2752604238
2771948247
2772265712
2773068156
2741194368
2764268943
2755464476
2763943272
2772266303
2754117930
2757034129
2751141164
2777463519
2735319384
2770340835
2769108962
2764063863
2764335262
2735035139
2770350540
2767334090
2770639285
2749435384
2762017107
2780526469
2757808565
2761550839
2749887586
2767779801
2760537739
2788723550
2755890551
2743612606
2762751948
2750009189
2757876692
2760192769
2735954631
2762112871
2773530848
2746415610
2753700656
2752628298
2751899160
2758006965
2738922378
2765012166
2748086687
2735007503
2765121647
2760174287
2755230363
2740743873
2732911584
2770479726
2759456230
2762326355
2763598947
2766197932
2759386501
2741745720
2797043803
2753973313
2765321540
2765697711
2734879301
2765824477
2777002487
2755933664
2736573155
2776948962
2747351694
2769646759
2726225298
2762013008
2765362533
2776272967
2738166205
2726526707
2747627333
2769087919
2768610714
2770406031
2744627470
2735625509
2767426168
2776238387
2752885266
2759342339
2761701270
2746585924
2763241655
2736137332
2773688543
2759639764
2758332090
2756179638
2758587344
2791045038
2774454950
2762515264
2758373542
2757049243
2770728165
2765604408
2764334116
2747598144
2742611372
2761981281
2749131029
2754198923
2755120256
2771365991
2755833594
2736117174
2776279357
2773906848
2792851146
2806352020
2767578437
2760305590
2758523191
2760243356
2752767179
1567154670



This is compress code for book 1

[xinix]

2775460411
2765412996
2785364017
...
2760243356
2752767179
1567154670



This is compress code for book 1

paq8p_sh could once again compress - 597 bytes (597 bytes)

[Shelwien]

I guess these are floats?
551 bytes with tpnibble+cdm.

[Obama]

I guess these are floats?
551 bytes with tpnibble+cdm.

You mean the data or? (float ?)

[Shelwien]

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Single...g-point_format
Could be the type of variables you used to store symbol intervals with arithmetic coding.
Also provides a reasonable explanation for your compression ratio.

[JamesB]

Yes , i got decompression method but my computer can't handle it. You dont believe is your problem,since i never said it for specific area user only not for anyone.cheer

I work in a scientific establishment - my natural state is a sceptic!

If you've created a compression algorithm but haven't demonstrated the decompression algorithm because "my computer can't handle it", and have got magic ratios an order of magnitude more than anyone else, then no - I don't believe you've found a new method. I do believe that you think you have, but without a viable demonstration Occam's Razor tells us it's more likely to be a bug than it is something fantastic. Sorry.

I'm not trying to be mean here, but to save you effort long term. Be a sceptic too!