3 ms·
What a surprisingly content-free article from MIT. What bound did they break? By how much? In what domain does the bound apply? (There is no one "compressio
by colanderman 12y ago
What a surprisingly content-free article from MIT.
What bound did they break? By how much? In what domain does the bound apply?
(There is no one "compression bound" for lossless compression; there exist infinitely many lossless compression schemes which can compress at least one sequence of arbitrary length to a single bit, and every lossless compression scheme must have an expected compression ratio over all data of 1:1. Hence knowing the domain constraints is important!)
- judk 12y agoIt's not surprising, it's technologyreview, which spun out from student newspaper to linkbaity web tabloid a few years ago. In this case, however the original paper (already linked in the HN comments) is itself a linkbaity title with content-free abstract.
- kerkeslager 12y agoYeah, I mean, if you ignore domain constraints, the following is a great compression algorithm: $infile = $ARGS[1] $outfile = $ARGS[2] touch $outfile This was one of my favorite examples in Data Structures and Algorithms in college.
- colanderman 12y agoExcept that's not lossless like I qualified.
- 3327 12y agoSurprisingly "empty" article. "Well folks we've just lowered the bound on data compression - there you have it." No reference, No Paper not even an example of how it applies. I hope an editor notices it and they pull it out - pretty embarrassing.
- grkvlt 12y ago> Ref: arxiv.org/abs/1011.4609 Bounds from a Card Trick At the bottom of the article