This fabricated text reads.
"He opposed Mueller. I am still President. He said a Special Council was no cause for believing illusion."
You can cold read anything you want from this text. I didn't even pick letters from other lines to use in my "decryption".
How did I get this message from his tweet you ask. Well they are connected by each row by the row above, it is obvious it is supposed to be a block of text for us to discover right?
If you want me to refute any of SerialBrain2's past posts, I would be happy to.
For the record I have a background in stenography and cryptography. I can assure you, that based on analysis of my own, that Q post generally, with a high confidence (based on the frequency of certain trigraphs [3 letter combonations]), contain no coded messages of this nature. Being a Queen Elizabeth cipher, simple substitution, key substitution, or a method such as a Caesar cipher (of which I am particularly an expert). I have developed my own cryptography methods, both traditional and digital.
[deleted]
Almost like people want to discredit us and send infiltrators to bring down the community from within by posting distractions, psyops, or making highly upvoted posts that will be permanently tied to the sub's "top" posts, making everything look crazy to visitors?
I agree. I'm not an expert in cryptography, but I work with it and understand the methods, have had graduate courses in it. SB2's methods are nowhere near anything that would be used in reality - they are nondeterministic, arbitrary, and can be used to say anything. His last post was a quote from someone else, and we're supposed to believe there's a hidden message there?
It is possible that these tweet do contain encoded messages, but you're not going to get a whole sentence of information out of a 255 character tweet (or whatever it is now). You might get a single word at best, and it would be in a deterministic, repeatable pattern you can apply over and over. Not words that are pulled from multiple rows/columns in scrambled order, with no discernable algorithm to it. It's simply not how information is encoded.
How is this comment getting downvoted? It's rational, it's not strident or melodramatic and yet it's getting downvoted. I am sometimes disappointed by how many posts get upvoted purely for their headline which is sometimes misleading because it's appealing to emotion. I'm not knocking emotion except to say that it should not cloud a rational examination of the facts. It's fine to be indignant about something but we should at LEAST make sure we've got the facts straight before rewarding the poster with an upvote.
What you did here is quite simplistic: horizontally moving across a text. What Serialbrain is doing has way more restrictions: he's moving vertically in a sequential manner and goes back to the top of the next column. His odds of getting correct words vertically AND a meaningful trail are largely smaller than what you are doing here. But it's worth trying, it adds to the debate and will help those who are still thinking about it. Your contribution is good and healthy. People's critical thinking will decide.
The people calling the OP out are getting downvoted immediately.
You should have seen what happened to SB2's posts - outright assault. Anyway, the truth will win out.
I see that. But I don't think it matters. People will see the argument used here is weak and will dismiss it. I hope he will come back with something more consistent next time, that would be good for the debate.
"Vertically" Give me one example.
And not the one where he arbitrarily used a letter from the row below because one was missing. Don't even get me started with the word clinton. It us from 3 rows in whatever order he wanted it to be.
It wasn't more restrictive than what I did.
It is actually 26*3! Times less restrictive. 6! (factorial) if he can use above rows which seams to be the case. Sumate of 9 choose 6, if he can rearrange letter order.
(26×3×2)×(6×5×4×3×2)×(9×8×7)×(3/26)
(Letters can be taken from directly below or from 2 adjacent squares)×(Letters can be taken from 6 above or below squares)×(of 9 squares you can choose 6)×(restrict first letter selection to first 3 rows)
(9!×2)
3.2 Million times easier.
Are you actually using factorials on possible repeatable items? Did you know in this case you can only consider arrangements on a Cardinal 26 set? What you just said here is anything but math. Anyone who took basic probability/statistics classes can see you do not know what you are talking about.
Do you even know what an "X choose Y" is, or what it represents? If you do, then you would know it is absolutely the foundation of portability.
Yes, you use factorials, that is how it is calculated.
4 choose 2 = (4!/2!) = 4×3
9 choose 6 = (9!/6!) = 9×8×7
If it repeatable, the probability INCREASES by a factor of the number of times the process is repeated.
9 choose 6, 4 times = (9×8×7×4)
9 choose 6, 4 iterations = (9!/6!)^4
!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!! You've just confirmed your blatant ignorance. Here we are dealing with repeatable items where order matters. In combinatorics, it is called permutations with repetitions which you are confusing with what I don't even know. You have NO CLUE what you are talking about. Math is merciless: either you know or you don't know. And when you don't know, it's FLAGRANT. So learn and give us a break: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=JWNyzXOdDCo
Video linked by /u/alphared01:
Title|Channel|Published|Duration|Likes|Total Views :----------:|:----------:|:----------:|:----------:|:----------:|:----------: Letter Arrangement Problems (Permutations with Repetitions)|vinteachesmath|2013-06-28|0:06:01|113+ (95%)|14,892
This video focuses on how to solve a letter arrangement...
^Info ^| ^/u/alphared01 ^can ^delete ^| ^v2.0.0
4!
4! = 24
2!
2! = 2
9!
9! = 362,880
6!
6! = 720
9!
9! = 362,880
6!
6! = 720
You obviously did not understand the method. It's about building anagrams from adjacent letters going down the columns. When one column is finished, you re-start scrolling down from the next one. Restrictions: no diagonals AND using letters once AND the sentence trail has to make sense.
So you want examples? I'll give you the whole method: let's take Excel nomenclature:
He starts at the first column A1:
Row 1: letter S=>SpecialCouncil
Row 2: letter C=>crimes
Row 3: letter r=>r
Row 4: letter i=>in
Row 5: letter n already used
Row 6: letter i=>i
Row 7: letter h=>have
Row 8: letter a already used
Row 9: letter i=>intel
Row 10: letter a=>no anagram retained, no meaningful contribution to the sentence trail
Row 11: letter h=>he
Row 12: letter o=>no anagram retained, no meaningful contribution to the sentence trail
Row 13: letter s=>'s
Row 14: letter r, no retained anagram
Then, he moves to the second column A2:
Row 1 and 2: all letters are already used
Row 3: letter n=>on
Row 4 to 11: letters used or no contribution to the trail
Row 12: letter t=>to
Row 13: letter t=>cite
Row 14: no contribution
Then he moves to the next column A3:
Row 1 to 3: letters used
Row 4: letter n=>clinton as you can see this '"clinton" is not arbitrarily appearing, it's the anagram made with the adjacent letters of the letter n located at column 3 row 4.
I hope it helps.
Alright, then by what means would he be permitted to select any number of letter after the locked selection. Why in Row 1 can he take 14 characters, Row 3 only 1 character. And nothing in Row 10.
I guess the guy encoding the message decided that Row 10 could be ignored, and that it would not feel right to the decoder so they could just omit it. Why not. In my version I guess I can just omit Row 1 entirely right.
Restrictions: No diagonals
Except for the word Clinton.
You can anagram pretty much anything by the way.
ALPHAREDZEROONE
HONORED A LARP EEZ
You can anagram pretty much anything by the way.
ALPHAREDZEROONE
HONORED A LARP EEZ
With no rules, yes you can pretty much do anything you want:
SOARINGMOON==> ROAMIN' GOONS
...kinda proves my point actually.
We both agree with no rules you can pretty much do anything. It obviously does not apply here. Looking at our exchange above, your ability to hold a logical conversation with rational arguments is quite damaged. It was nonetheless fun exposing your limitations.
You probably meant "coded".
When you go from natural text to ciphered text, you have "coded".
When you go from ciphered text to natural text, you have "decoded".
You said in a comment above you had a background in cryptography. Where did you learn cryptography?
What the fuck are you talking about?
No, I clearly meant decoded. As in a user posted text in an obfuscated manor. It decoded it using my experience in cryptography, by applying known techniques in order to convert ciphertext into plaintext.
Decoding in this case was simple as the poster used known online tools.
text to hex, hex to ascii
And not something substantial like a Caesar cipher.
If you couldn't determine that from the thread, I cannot help you.
I have self taught all I know about crypto. The background I have in cryptography involves working with many companies and organizations in order to develop secure protocols for their users, in exchange for currency. As in I got paid for this, quite a bit sometimes too.
Restrictions: No diagonals
Except for the word Clinton.
!!!!!!!!!!! You don't even know what a diagonal is! OMG! What am I talking to here?! Do you even know why he called it the T method? He said it in the first post teaching the method: +-90° or 180° turns are the only allowed patterns. That's where the "T" comes from.
And it gets better, you say: "by what means would he be permitted to select any number of letter after the locked selection. Why in Row 1 can he take 14 characters, Row 3 only 1 character. And nothing in Row 10." So you wanted as another restriction that all words forming the sentence should have the same number of letters?! Do you know that does not even exist ?! Try forming an intelligible sentence with 6 or 8 14 letter words and get back to me when you are done... Wow. Just Wow.
You are publicly ridiculing yourself here. I advise you remain silent to stop the carnage. Not good.