Wow, this thread was going crazy while I was away.
Let me ask; does the Math fit the People or the People fit the Math ?
On another matter you sound versed in high order math. I have been working on a formula compression algorithm in ternary logic where the resulting answer from a given formula is a large number resulting in 1's and 0's. But the logic handles 3 states +0- for the calculations.
The concept is to reduce extremely large numbers to a basic formula of x^y^z with each having 256 possibilities. And with encoding the meta data for a file and looping at each stage and keeping track of the loops and metadata while encoding such into the original binary file: to end up with a extremely small file <1000 Kb that represents the variables to be put into a Universal Formula that when decompress represents the original file.
I have achieved a 98% compression on a 1 MB randomly generated file. Most of the remaining 2% is metadata for the program. Scaling is the issue, if versed in complexity theory (which is what most people quote to prove a flaw in the logic) I state that because the resulting answer will "Always" be consist of 1's and 0's that theory does not apply.
I need to prove the algorithm with large files, the down side is on decompression the file must expand to 8-10 times its original size.
Thats fine with relatively small files but in order to add to the Complexity Theory, I need to prove extremely large numbers. That is where thine problem lie.
Any thoughts?
The cool thing so far, is a 1 Gb file can be compress to the 1Mb or less. The bandwidth savings will be a fortune for lots of people. Not to mention say good bye to file sharing. My ultimate goal is to be able to print out a single sheet with the variable and meta data that can be physically entered into a program to be decompressed to the original file.
Track That !!!
Lol--nice try, but you're about 7 years too late to snipe me on bogus compression schemes. Have fun writing your Universal Formula though 
. Regarding "does the Math fit the People or the People fit the Math?" I'm not sure what you mean by this. Surely you're not arguing that descriptions of "the way things are" should be considered normative! Because if you are....well.....entropy. Hope you didn't just commit suicide there. Or go all Agent Smith trying to take down the planet. Order of any kind is an aberration.
Incidentally, if one wants to live without employing, lending, renting, or otherwise exploiting others, he will have to work.
Not sure where you get the idea that all employing, lending, renting, etc. is exploitation. Power/knowledge asymmetries provide the opportunity for exploitation, but definitely don't necessitate it. Just like I can continue being smarter than the general population and still act morally I can be in roles of leadership and responsibility, genuinely working away providing real value for myself and others. Sameness and fairness are very different. I just have to face my own conscience for how I discharge myself in those situations. And my presence in the market as a leader helps to destroy the competitiveness of unethical power-holders. I just need to be wary of my own desire to exploit my position for personal gain, like any other leader. When you realise that CEO's, etc. are just social leaders like any other power holders, you begin to be scared that we have a tendency to select heavily for narcissism in those roles.
As an aside, I'm a business owner. But there are definitely differences amongst my peers for those who try to make their businesses' operations mutually beneficial, and those who are ultimately just exploitative.
Quote
The mathematics on this is pretty simple to measure from a perspective of game theory. If you have information and power symmetries all exchanges will tend toward mutual benefit. As information or power asymmetries are introduced, the exchanger who is "upstream" of the asymmetry will tend to end up as the "more equal" partner, all other things being equal.
Math? That is Business 101Let me ask; does the Math fit the People or the People fit the Math ?
On another matter you sound versed in high order math. I have been working on a formula compression algorithm in ternary logic where the resulting answer from a given formula is a large number resulting in 1's and 0's. But the logic handles 3 states +0- for the calculations.
The concept is to reduce extremely large numbers to a basic formula of x^y^z with each having 256 possibilities. And with encoding the meta data for a file and looping at each stage and keeping track of the loops and metadata while encoding such into the original binary file: to end up with a extremely small file <1000 Kb that represents the variables to be put into a Universal Formula that when decompress represents the original file.
I have achieved a 98% compression on a 1 MB randomly generated file. Most of the remaining 2% is metadata for the program. Scaling is the issue, if versed in complexity theory (which is what most people quote to prove a flaw in the logic) I state that because the resulting answer will "Always" be consist of 1's and 0's that theory does not apply.
I need to prove the algorithm with large files, the down side is on decompression the file must expand to 8-10 times its original size.
Thats fine with relatively small files but in order to add to the Complexity Theory, I need to prove extremely large numbers. That is where thine problem lie.
Any thoughts?
The cool thing so far, is a 1 Gb file can be compress to the 1Mb or less. The bandwidth savings will be a fortune for lots of people. Not to mention say good bye to file sharing. My ultimate goal is to be able to print out a single sheet with the variable and meta data that can be physically entered into a program to be decompressed to the original file.
Track That !!!
. Regarding "does the Math fit the People or the People fit the Math?" I'm not sure what you mean by this. Surely you're not arguing that descriptions of "the way things are" should be considered normative! Because if you are....well.....entropy. Hope you didn't just commit suicide there. Or go all Agent Smith trying to take down the planet. Order of any kind is an aberration.At the end of the day, no outside force is going to make the "more equal" behave one way or another. But if they want to face their own consciences there's really no avoiding that they have to be the ones working to keep exchanges mutually beneficial.
+1Incidentally, if one wants to live without employing, lending, renting, or otherwise exploiting others, he will have to work.
Not sure where you get the idea that all employing, lending, renting, etc. is exploitation. Power/knowledge asymmetries provide the opportunity for exploitation, but definitely don't necessitate it. Just like I can continue being smarter than the general population and still act morally I can be in roles of leadership and responsibility, genuinely working away providing real value for myself and others. Sameness and fairness are very different. I just have to face my own conscience for how I discharge myself in those situations. And my presence in the market as a leader helps to destroy the competitiveness of unethical power-holders. I just need to be wary of my own desire to exploit my position for personal gain, like any other leader. When you realise that CEO's, etc. are just social leaders like any other power holders, you begin to be scared that we have a tendency to select heavily for narcissism in those roles.
As an aside, I'm a business owner. But there are definitely differences amongst my peers for those who try to make their businesses' operations mutually beneficial, and those who are ultimately just exploitative.