|
|
|
|
|
by gricardo99
1467 days ago
|
|
on the list? how about close to pointless? i don’t see how bootstrapping the decoding gets you to anything other than another inscrutable format of data. without context about the point and use of the data i can’t imagine it would have any use. you need to know about the display devices and human audio, visual sensory and perception capabilities to make any use of the data.
it would be like receiving some complex data format meant to generate a symphony of seismic waves that the observer enjoys through various specialized sensors, without knowing anything about this purpose of the data to begin with, let alone the many details specific to the use of the data by whatever devices “play” the data and how it’s perceived by the observer. |
|
If you intend to send lots of data (which, as you point out, you will have to, to give the receiver any chance of making sense of it), that may be a net win, even if you spend lots of time getting there.
You could, for example, teach that the bit pattern of ‘=‘ signals equality by sending simple math expressions
and later try to convey how run-length encoding works by reusing = in that context Easy for the receiver to figure out? Absolutely not, but if you give them a chance, they may figure it out, and if the alternative is that you can only send a third of the data, that may be the better choice.