4 ms·

Reduced without meaning loss: > Hackers exploit flawed proprietary code. (6w/45c -> 5w/40c)

• deleted 3y ago
  [deleted]
• evronm 3y ago
  Goddamn! I thought I was anal about efficiency...
• akomtu 3y ago
  The first 3 words carry the same information as: hackers hacked hackable proprietary code. So just "proprietary code hacked" is enough.
  • detrites 3y ago
    Agreed. Further reduced: > Proprietary code hack. (6w/45c -> 3w/22c: >50%)
    • r13a 3y ago
      As it's overwhelmingly code that is hacked, this is nearly lossless: Proprietary hack 2w/15c
      • JumpCrisscross 3y ago
        Phack 1w/5c
    • BasedAnon 3y ago
      This is too context dependent to be considered lossless.
• BasedAnon 3y ago
  You can get rid of 'flawed' since it's implicit in 'exploit'
  • rcme 3y ago
    The word exploit alone is ambiguous since it can also mean roughly “to use.”
    • deleted 3y ago
      [deleted]