Re:89, 263, 201, 500, 337, 480
by shmageggy on Friday December 18, 2015 @12:37PM
(#10759648)
Actually that's the one thing that makes me think that, hoax or not, there's something encrypted there. That string definitely has structure, indicating it was engineered, but it isn't perfectly sequential or linear, indicating that there may be undecoded information in it, perhaps another layer deeper. And why would the author go through so much trouble just to lead to nonsense cypher? Why not just skip that step?
[ Parent
| on HN ]
Re:89, 263, 201, 500, 337, 480
by colanderman on Friday December 18, 2015 @01:35PM
(#10760035)
Probably the differences from the alphabet are just mistakes. Ward meant to just encrypt the alphabet, but just copied down a couple numbers wrong, and did a couple twice.
Perhaps, but I think it equally or even more likely that it was intentional. This is someone who went through immense trouble to set up a system that is otherwise rather elaborate and detailed. Maybe he just hacked together the last bit and botched it with a ~25% error rate, or maybe there's more to the story that we've yet to figure out.