Re: VMs: Solution guidelines

[Rene Zandbergen <r_zandbergen@xxxxxxxxx>]

--- Bruce Grant <bgrant@xxxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote:

> I agree with Larry that it would be useful to have
> some sort of  "protocol" at least as a guideline.

I agree as well. What's the name of the usenet
group on cryptography? They have similar rules
about posting new, supposedly uncrackable, ciphers.
Worth having a look at. GC made a clear reference
to it in his 'rant', but that's what rants do:
people don't take the contents seriously.

However, will it help us if it is ignored by
even only one frequent poster?

Maybe a step in the right direction would be
to require posts of this nature to present at
least a minimum amount of text (one page? 400
words?). Then everyone has the right to 
ignore posts which don't adhere to this ....

Really, what would help is if the poster of the
proposed solution shows that the encryption
method changes the statistical properties of
the plain text into those we see in the VMs
text. 
However, if the poster is not aware of these
properties.....

Cheers, Rene

__________________________________
Do you Yahoo!?
New Yahoo! Photos - easier uploading and sharing.
http://photos.yahoo.com/
______________________________________________________________________
To unsubscribe, send mail to majordomo@xxxxxxxxxxx with a body saying:
unsubscribe vms-list