In other words, every entry in the lookup can be mapped to a 0.8 KiB string. That means for any sequence longer than 0.8 KiB, there MUST be a permutation you can make which has no answer (pigeonhole principle). Because so many entries answers long structured sentences, short random ones must mostly be filtered out.
This text itself is past halfway to that limit. If I doubled the length then lookup-only is no longer possible and a logic parser is an absolute must. Applying compression to the query only increases what can be answered by a fixed factor.
I think you’re off by 2 bits (round up and don’t forget to always add 1 at the end), but regardless I think the comparison doesn’t work.
True that it would be comparable in size to a 0.8 KiB string but not necessarily in complexity. If his lookup table didn’t do it by character but by word or sound it could have a ton more information stored there.
Your comment stored as a string isn’t nearly maximally information dense, like you’ve made god’s info
No. Go read the wiki and then try working out how large 10^2000 is.
Then do some quick maths on the combinations of phonetics (read the comic again to work out why phonetics and not combinations of a-z characters).
Then have your mind blown by how many orders of magnitude you’re away from being correct.
Or be incurious and fail to take this opportunity to comprehend the universe a tiny bit better.
Log2(10^2000) = 6643 bits
In other words, every entry in the lookup can be mapped to a 0.8 KiB string. That means for any sequence longer than 0.8 KiB, there MUST be a permutation you can make which has no answer (pigeonhole principle). Because so many entries answers long structured sentences, short random ones must mostly be filtered out.
This text itself is past halfway to that limit. If I doubled the length then lookup-only is no longer possible and a logic parser is an absolute must. Applying compression to the query only increases what can be answered by a fixed factor.
I think you’re off by 2 bits (round up and don’t forget to always add 1 at the end), but regardless I think the comparison doesn’t work.
True that it would be comparable in size to a 0.8 KiB string but not necessarily in complexity. If his lookup table didn’t do it by character but by word or sound it could have a ton more information stored there.
Your comment stored as a string isn’t nearly maximally information dense, like you’ve made god’s info
going by phonemes, assuming we must alternate vowel and consonant phonemes, 10^2000 combinations covers a maximum length of about 1500 phonemes.
Humans have the ability to produce about 600 different consonant sounds and 200 vowel sounds so it seems safe to say all bases are covered.
More sounds doesn’t make it better lol. With that many, you get a max length of around 700-800 sounds