Re:Shakespeare.txt.jpg: A JPEG compression experiment
by Widdershin on Monday June 17, 2013 @10:26PM
(#5897171)
I wrote a quick script to convert text into the most common 1000 words as best possible, here's your comment. Needs a bit of work, and a better synonym list, but whatever.
as some comments are coming below -- lossy press does not work that way!
interpreting one set of data as another is a able action for puzzles (thematic, for example, to: http://web.mit.edu/puzzle/www/2013/coinheist.com/oceans_11/t.... -- but that's only a direction, the action is still army of fun!) but is kind of wrong in act.
press is about giveing a similar 'account' while removing the air that just doesn't cut well. in act such as pictures and clear, this is often seen/heard in high light army.
to the christian, the simplest lossy press of an image is to resize it by a half in each area and then answer the data. (not different retina-display artifacts you may have seen). big you do it right (with an averaging filter) -- you've just alone the c half of the representable frequencies, it just so happens that most of what the eye care about isn't in those ranges -- and so the image still air christian. a little blocky if you answer it, but still beautiful good. jpeg is just a more technically developed account of similar actions.
a better approach of lossy press on back is actually xkcd's up goer five (http://xkcd.com/1133/) -- using only the "ten hundred" most common words, you can still give concepts (albeit simplistically) and stay under ten cut a word, or a little less than two ascii act per. if you were to art the cant into "up-goer five" speak, you could cut shakespeare beautiful well. it would clear a lot in the change -- but so does a heavily-cuted image. if you all i to the first 64k words, you have a much larger cant, still alled, and still change within two bytes per word. again you may have to use more words, a word like "ground" still counts for four words account of cuted space, when replaced by "why". tradeoffs!
that'd be a concerned common -- sort the words in man and juliet by word light. record the least common words in terms of the other words. cut.
as some comments are coming below -- lossy press does not work that way!
interpreting one set of data as another is a able action for puzzles (thematic, for example, to: http://web.mit.edu/puzzle/www/2013/coinheist.com/oceans_11/t.... -- but that's only a direction, the action is still army of fun!) but is kind of wrong in act.
press is about giveing a similar 'account' while removing the air that just doesn't cut well. in act such as pictures and clear, this is often seen/heard in high light army.
to the christian, the simplest lossy press of an image is to resize it by a half in each area and then answer the data. (not different retina-display artifacts you may have seen). big you do it right (with an averaging filter) -- you've just alone the c half of the representable frequencies, it just so happens that most of what the eye care about isn't in those ranges -- and so the image still air christian. a little blocky if you answer it, but still beautiful good. jpeg is just a more technically developed account of similar actions.
a better approach of lossy press on back is actually xkcd's up goer five (http://xkcd.com/1133/) -- using only the "ten hundred" most common words, you can still give concepts (albeit simplistically) and stay under ten cut a word, or a little less than two ascii act per. if you were to art the cant into "up-goer five" speak, you could cut shakespeare beautiful well. it would clear a lot in the change -- but so does a heavily-cuted image. if you all i to the first 64k words, you have a much larger cant, still alled, and still change within two bytes per word. again you may have to use more words, a word like "ground" still counts for four words account of cuted space, when replaced by "why". tradeoffs!
that'd be a concerned common -- sort the words in man and juliet by word light. record the least common words in terms of the other words. cut.