RE: VMs: No stats no fun

["GC" <glenclaston@xxxxxxxxxxx>]

Gabriel wrote:

> it is most relevant bit is that whenever people claim a solution
> or a method,
> this solution must account for all those statistics as well.
> Getting a "readable" text out of a number of transformations is
> not enough.
> Applying the method backwards (encoding a plaintext) which does not show
> comparable stats to those in the vms must be, obviously, wrong.

I would have to agree with this, but mind the fact that the ultimate
methodology will not be "machine readable" in any sense.  Rather, it will be
a conclusion that "works".  A human mind made this up, an element our stats
can't always account for.  Once the "logic" is reproduced, a pattern will
emerge, but that is not to say that the pattern is readily evident to our
current statistical analysis.  A case in point - most familiar with Lewis
Carroll's "Alice in Wonderland" know that it is a logical puzzle, but
without specific knowledge of the correct sociometric input, the puzzle
remains unsolved.  The VMS is to my mind, something on the same order, only
more text based than "sentence" based.  It has a cryptographic element, but
is not as mathematically inclined as we would hope, making us lean heavily
on the "logic" of the author.  My understanding here would be that "
personal logic" is a matter best left to the human mind, and not to the
machine.  It's a difficult road.

Just my opinion.

GC


______________________________________________________________________
To unsubscribe, send mail to majordomo@xxxxxxxxxxx with a body saying:
unsubscribe vms-list