3 ms·
...and still the killer is unknown. That's pretty good, IMO.
by thatwasunusual 6y ago
...and still the killer is unknown. That's pretty good, IMO.
- the_af 6y agoWhat's the connection between the killer's identity still being unknown and the strength of this cipher? The killer lied: the plaintext doesn't contain personal information, or if it does, it's a riddle unrelated to the cipher.
- evolve2k 6y agoThe killer sent three cipers, my reading is that maybe 1-2 are now solved, they are not all solved yet. Are they?
- camjohnson26 6y agoThey sent more than 3, the first 3 were solved quickly, this was a 4th that was sent years later. I believe the only undeciphered message is the text at the end of the 3rd cipher: ebeorietemethhpiti https://www.zodiacciphers.com/chronicle-letter.html https://www.zodiacciphers.com/chronicle-letter.html
- evolve2k 6y agoMy error, article header mentioned 3 and then later said there was a forth.
- thatwasunusual 6y ago> What's the connection between the killer's identity still being unknown and the strength of this cipher? Maybe none. This person killed several people, and THAT is your biggest problem?
- nl 6y ago> This person killed several people, and THAT is your biggest problem? There's a discussion about how strong the cipher is, and: thatwasunusual> ...and still the killer is unknown. That's pretty good, IMO. Someone pointed out that measuring the strength of the cipher by the fact that the killer is unknown is a bad metric, and you seem to believe this as a defence of murder? They are merely pointing out there is no connection between the fact the killer is unknown and if the cipher was strong or weak.