post counts

[davar55]

Well, it's been a few months and fall is near: I'd like to request
a post count list again. No particular reason...

[Xyzzy]

Originally Posted by davar55

I'd like to request a post count list again.

[Uncwilly]

Originally Posted by Xyzzy

You have to try harder than that.

[ewmayer]

Originally Posted by Uncwilly

You have to try harder than that.

Any stronger method of encryption would risk running afoul of US crypto-export laws, and would mean the terrierists win, or something.

[science_man_88]

Originally Posted by ewmayer

Any stronger method of encryption would risk running afoul of US crypto-export laws, and would mean the terrierists win, or something.

if the names repeated the same letter a lot I'd say you could of use something like RLE to compress the data before what you did ( and yes I know there's ways to do that without the data repeating right next to each other).

[Xyzzy]

FWIW, we ran the list through a ROT13 encoder twice, just to be extra secure.

[ewmayer]

Originally Posted by Xyzzy

FWIW, we ran the list through a ROT13 encoder twice, just to be extra secure.

You realize that since I disallow images and page-selected colors, I am oblivious to your raspberry smilie, yes?

Hmmm ... the latest updated guidelines for personal crypto from the folks at The Intercept and the PGP Foundation are to run ROT13 four times (or ROT26 twice), double the previous recommendation. Supposedly that increases the level of safety by a similar amount as does doubling the length of one's RSA keys. I use the even-more-expensive 6-times approach, but I admit I'm paranoid.

[kladner]

Originally Posted by ewmayer

You realize that since I disallow images and page-selected colors, I am oblivious to your raspberry smilie, yes?

Hmmm ... the latest updated guidelines for personal crypto from the folks at The Intercept and the PGP Foundation are to run ROT13 four times (or ROT26 twice), double the previous recommendation. Supposedly that increases the level of safety by a similar amount as does doubling the length of one's RSA keys. I use the even-more-expensive 6-times approach, but I admit I'm paranoid.

I figure that if "THEY" want me, THEY can get me.

[davar55]

Originally Posted by ewmayer

You realize that since I disallow images and page-selected colors, I am oblivious to your raspberry smilie, yes?

Hmmm ... the latest updated guidelines for personal crypto from the folks at The Intercept and the PGP Foundation are to run ROT13 four times (or ROT26 twice), double the previous recommendation. Supposedly that increases the level of safety by a similar amount as does doubling the length of one's RSA keys. I use the even-more-expensive 6-times approach, but I admit I'm paranoid.

Wouldn't it be more time-efficient to just run it through ROT78 just once? Or for REAL security, just
jump it up a big notch and ROT780? I doubt ANYONE will EVER crack that!



And BTW your creativity in defeating the ulterior purpose of my request (in that I can read MY entry but
am lost in any comparison) is matched only by your sense of humor about it. The reverse is true, too.
Anyone have a mirror?

[LaurV]

Originally Posted by davar55

Wouldn't it be more time-efficient to just run it through ROT78 just once?

Hehe you had me here, I googled for it and found the naked ladies

[kladner]

Originally Posted by LaurV

Hehe you had me here, I googled for it and found the naked ladies

A Truly Rare Admission! (But a Very Clever Comeback, all the Same!)