4 ms·
My first thought at seeing something pretty in so few bytes was: “perhaps you could just run through every value in each of those 484 bytes and find other gems
by callumprentice 2y ago
My first thought at seeing something pretty in so few bytes was: “perhaps you could just run through every value in each of those 484 bytes and find other gems in there too” then I did the math - or tried to… :)
- grishka 2y agoJust a reminder that most of the modern cryptography uses keys that are at most 32 bytes.
- dahart 2y agoCheck out the BBC micro version in 432 chars (443 bytes). https://bbcmic.ro/?t=9ctpk https://bbcmic.ro/?t=9ctpk ... That cuts your problem down by a factor of ~5.5e98. ;) Or even a lot more if you limit to readable ascii. I'd be curious if you did that how many of the tries would result in a valid runnable program.
- tromp 2y agoYou don't need to go anywhere near 400 bytes to find inscrutable programs, if your programming language is concise enough. Even 8 bytes, or 64 bits to be precise, offers plenty unchartered territory for finding new gems in lambda calculus [1], one such recent discovery being a 49 bit program whose output exceeds Graham's number. [1] https://oeis.org/A333479 https://oeis.org/A333479
- zarathustreal 2y agoHonestly why bother with actual bytes? Why not just take Wolfram’s approach of looking through programs encoded as cellular automata?
- jakeogh 2y agoFrom the oeis link: https://tromp.github.io/blog/2023/11/24/largest-number https://tromp.github.io/blog/2023/11/24/largest-number
- tromp 2y agoAcutally, I only learned about the 49 bit program after writing that blog entry. It is described in https://github.com/tromp/AIT/blob/master/fast_growing_and_conjectures/melo.lam https://github.com/tromp/AIT/blob/master/fast_growing_and_co...