News for hackers. Stuff that matters.

A comment on Shakespeare.txt.jpg: A JPEG compression experiment. Parent comment

Re:Shakespeare.txt.jpg: A JPEG compression experiment by drewcrawford on Monday June 17, 2013 @01:33PM (#5894550)
it's comomn kdownlege in inoitrmfaon thoery ciecrls taht you can reoerdr lttres in wrods and the relsut is pecfretly undeastnrdlabe as lnog as you keep the fsirt and lsat letrtes the smae.

http://ieeexplore.ieee.org/xpl/freeabs_all.jsp?arnumber=4126...

[ Parent | on HN ]
Re:Shakespeare.txt.jpg: A JPEG compression experiment by tbrownaw on Monday June 17, 2013 @02:59PM (#5895176)
http://www.mrc-cbu.cam.ac.uk/people/matt.davis/cmabridge/

I've written this page, to try to explain the science behind this meme. There are elements of truth in this, but also some things which scientists studying the psychology of language (psycholinguists) know to be incorrect.

The page also contains a number of counter-examples, show that the result often is not "pflteecry uaaedlbdrsntne".

[ Parent | on HN ]
Re:Shakespeare.txt.jpg: A JPEG compression experiment by VMG on Monday June 17, 2013 @01:36PM (#5894575)
That is more about built-in redundancy and error correction than lossy compression.
[ Parent | on HN ]
Re:Shakespeare.txt.jpg: A JPEG compression experiment by zokier on Monday June 17, 2013 @02:04PM (#5894780)
But such features could be exploited to make lossy compression. If humans can recognize words with some of the letters randomized, then there is no need to store those letters individually. Instead just insert random letters at decomperssion phase.
[ Parent | on HN ]
Re:Shakespeare.txt.jpg: A JPEG compression experiment by reeses on Tuesday June 18, 2013 @04:12PM (#5901738)
This is in fact not proven for the entire population.
[ Parent | on HN ]