I pick the data compression algorithm to your challenge (because, I believe more people would know about and be interested in data compression, and algorithm is
more difficult to cheat than abstract theories):
Excerpt from https://groups.google.com/g/comp.theory/c/vSE_qYBEDf8/m/J3sLILkgAwAJ

- Obtain a binary string corresponding to the file.
- Treat the binary string as a number and factor it.
- Given any large prime factors, write down the number in a sense as m + 1, and factor m .
- Keep going until you have only a finite collection of very small prime factors.

------
Actually, just by seeing those sketch, I know I don't have to ask more.
1. By advertising PTIME, I would assume you don't understand real program, thus
algoritms. (Had anyone heard of a "PTIME sort" algorithm?).
2. From "Obtain a binary string corresponding to the file."
I would wonder what kind of system you were thinking?
3. I don't think you can factorize an average 20Mbyte image file in 100 years,
let alone the rest stuff and the basic: How can factorization compress data?
You just need to express your compression algorithm clearly. My premature
stereotype above can be ignored. I just want to know if I made a big mistake about you.

On Monday, March 14, 2022 at 5:01:07 AM UTC-4, wij wrote:
> I pick the data compression algorithm to your challenge (because, I believe more people would know about and be interested in data compression, and algorithm is
> more difficult to cheat than abstract theories):
> Excerpt from https://groups.google.com/g/comp.theory/c/vSE_qYBEDf8/m/J3sLILkgAwAJ
>
> - Obtain a binary string corresponding to the file.
> - Treat the binary string as a number and factor it.
> - Given any large prime factors, write down the number in a sense as m + 1, and factor m .
> - Keep going until you have only a finite collection of very small prime factors.
>
> ------
> Actually, just by seeing those sketch, I know I don't have to ask more.
> 1. By advertising PTIME, I would assume you don't understand real program, thus
> algoritms. (Had anyone heard of a "PTIME sort" algorithm?).
> 2. From "Obtain a binary string corresponding to the file."
> I would wonder what kind of system you were thinking?
> 3. I don't think you can factorize an average 20Mbyte image file in 100 years,
> let alone the rest stuff and the basic: How can factorization compress data?
> You just need to express your compression algorithm clearly. My premature
> stereotype above can be ignored. I just want to know if I made a big mistake about you.

I have the updated answer fully written out, and am checking it. It looks right. It contains no proofs; you get what you pay for, I just wrote an algorithm that looks right.

I'll check it over some more and post it later today or early tomorrow. I am not checking it over that much, just enough to make sure that it's right and fully error-free.

-Philip White

On Monday, March 14, 2022 at 11:34:54 AM UTC-4, B.H. wrote:
> On Monday, March 14, 2022 at 5:01:07 AM UTC-4, wij wrote:
> > I pick the data compression algorithm to your challenge (because, I believe more people would know about and be interested in data compression, and algorithm is
> > more difficult to cheat than abstract theories):
> > Excerpt from https://groups.google.com/g/comp.theory/c/vSE_qYBEDf8/m/J3sLILkgAwAJ
> >
> > - Obtain a binary string corresponding to the file.
> > - Treat the binary string as a number and factor it.
> > - Given any large prime factors, write down the number in a sense as m + 1, and factor m .
> > - Keep going until you have only a finite collection of very small prime factors.
> >
> > ------
> > Actually, just by seeing those sketch, I know I don't have to ask more.
> > 1. By advertising PTIME, I would assume you don't understand real program, thus
> > algoritms. (Had anyone heard of a "PTIME sort" algorithm?).
> > 2. From "Obtain a binary string corresponding to the file."
> > I would wonder what kind of system you were thinking?
> > 3. I don't think you can factorize an average 20Mbyte image file in 100 years,
> > let alone the rest stuff and the basic: How can factorization compress data?
> > You just need to express your compression algorithm clearly. My premature
> > stereotype above can be ignored. I just want to know if I made a big mistake about you.
> I have the updated answer fully written out, and am checking it. It looks right. It contains no proofs; you get what you pay for, I just wrote an algorithm that looks right.
>
> I'll check it over some more and post it later today or early tomorrow. I am not checking it over that much, just enough to make sure that it's right and fully error-free.
>
> -Philip White

OK, here is the answer to your challenge. I warn you: Never demand cutting-edge math help from a human trafficking victim or convicted criminal seeking release, even with consent. Guilt or innocence is the standard for securing release, from prison only (since human trafficking is just a crime), not achievement; I submit this merely to bolster my case since I am nowhere near being able to be properly helped by any "justice" system.

Here is the updated solution:

- Assume that this test for finding a j-digit base-10 prime number works: http://www.sci.brooklyn.cuny.edu/~yarmish/finding%20large%20primes%208.5x11.pdf
- We are given a very large number (that represents a file), m, to compress. Consider a number larger than 10^((1000)^10), for example.
- We seek a nearby power of a prime power (r^w=q)^k, in the sense that m - q^k is small. (The prime is r, and q = r^w.)
- Let b be the number of bits needed to express m.
- Use a calculator program to compute an approximation, a = 2^(b/9) .
- Round the value of a down to the nearest integer.
- Let d be the number of base-10 digits in a.
- Using the process linked to above, find the smallest-sized (storage-size-wise) prime number r and integer pair w such that r^w = q has (d-1) base-10 digits.
- Find the largest value k such that q^k is the largest possible integer such that this integer is less than m.
- Compute v = m - z * q^k, where z is selected to be the largest possible integer that that yields non-negative v, such that z < q .
- Record the values of the following 3-tuple: (r, w, k)
- Note that v < z * q^k , and thus it is much smaller than m.
- Now, repeat this process on both v and z, and concatenate the ordered 3-tuple from previous repetitions (perhaps written as a tree structure in prefix notation using base-4), that repetition, and all successive repetitions to form a string, S, until m is "very small."
- When you are done, write down the overall string, S, followed by the #-separated number 1 (if this is the first time th process is being run).
- Repeat the entire process above on S, taken as an integer, and increment the value of "1" to "2", "2" to "3", etc., as many times as desired; repeat until the string cannot be made smaller.

The big-picture version is: We find a very large but not too large “suitable new base” q to express m in. We record q as a prime power, the correct large power k it is raised to, and the value z it is multiplied by when we subtract from m to obtain v, the value that remains after subtracting the first base-q digit from m. We then repeat this process on v repeatedly until we deem that v is “small enough.” Based on careful selection of a in the process, we ensure that the length of m as a binary or base-10 string of bits/digits decreases by about 1/9 every time this process is applied, disregarding for now the size of recorded values of r, w, and k, which are relatively short strings that are recorded as part of the compressed string. By effectively multiplying the length of the string by approximately 8/9 each time we run the process, while writing down much smaller representations of the base q, which equals r^w, as we diminish the size of the original number m, we compress the string to be “much smaller,” vaguely speaking, than it started out being. Again, we can repeat this overall process with a recorded integer signifying the overall integer number of times the process has been run to make the string smaller and smaller, ultimately yielding a compressed string with an integer number of times to unpack it. It is easy to see that the string can be compressed and decompressed in polynomial time, with randomness needed for the primality test in the compression step.

Extremely succinct summary: Re-write a given large integer with a particular different, succinctly representable base that can be written as a prime power [1], and then recursively compress the leftmost digit of m in that base and the rest of the representation of m without that digit. Repeat this process itself, keeping track of how many times you’ve done it, until you have a string and integer pair that cannot be made any smaller.

Note: We would not want for the r value to be 2 every time, if we were indeed decreasing the string length by multiplying it by 8/9 each time; we want to decrease the size of the string each time we run the routine, so selecting large primes r will typically be what we want to do. No proof that we can “usually find” a suitably large prime value for r to minimize the size of (r,w) is included, although it seems to be true. Also, I haven’t fully established the exact effectiveness (i.e., worst-case extent of compression) of the algorithm presented, having not spent the time to write any proofs about this updated version of the idea. It looks very good, though.

[1] Think of writing “3^1000000” as (3,1000000) instead of in binary or base-10.

(I’m glad I decided to check this; I caught and fixed a few rather minor glitches.)

- - -

Write a response if you have an objection or have found a mistake. Try not to waste my time with fluff; present your argument carefully if you want to present one.

Of course, any mathematically literate person who gets programming and would give this a little thought would see that it is correct. I didn't write a full proof or check my work too many times over, though; you get what you pay for. Maybe if you present a coherent objection I'll write a proof establishing that you are wrong.

Don't say it was trivial to you, since you clearly didn't see it yourself.

How many more times are you going to lie to the world and insist that I am a scammer person and must prove otherwise by sharing math explanations with you? What are the consequences of doing that, even once? Do you insist that every innovator or student go through this process to prove his/her ability to be genuine? What will happen to American STEM because of this, is that your plan? It might work, I see that; who would want to major in STEM given the zero-ethics, zero-accountability culture of it, even in the US? Are you going to ask Grigori Perelman or Terence Tao if they are scammer people, too? Why is it just me, I wonder? What do institutions like Harvard and MIT have to say about this kind of dishonorable conduct, I wonder?

-Philip White (philipjwhite@yahoo.com)

On Tuesday, 15 March 2022 at 02:40:22 UTC+8, B.H. wrote:
> On Monday, March 14, 2022 at 11:34:54 AM UTC-4, B.H. wrote:
> > On Monday, March 14, 2022 at 5:01:07 AM UTC-4, wij wrote:
> > > I pick the data compression algorithm to your challenge (because, I believe more people would know about and be interested in data compression, and algorithm is
> > > more difficult to cheat than abstract theories):
> > > Excerpt from https://groups.google.com/g/comp.theory/c/vSE_qYBEDf8/m/J3sLILkgAwAJ
> > >
> > > - Obtain a binary string corresponding to the file.
> > > - Treat the binary string as a number and factor it.
> > > - Given any large prime factors, write down the number in a sense as m + 1, and factor m .
> > > - Keep going until you have only a finite collection of very small prime factors.
> > >
> > > ------
> > > Actually, just by seeing those sketch, I know I don't have to ask more.
> > > 1. By advertising PTIME, I would assume you don't understand real program, thus
> > > algoritms. (Had anyone heard of a "PTIME sort" algorithm?).
> > > 2. From "Obtain a binary string corresponding to the file."
> > > I would wonder what kind of system you were thinking?
> > > 3. I don't think you can factorize an average 20Mbyte image file in 100 years,
> > > let alone the rest stuff and the basic: How can factorization compress data?
> > > You just need to express your compression algorithm clearly. My premature
> > > stereotype above can be ignored. I just want to know if I made a big mistake about you.
> > I have the updated answer fully written out, and am checking it. It looks right. It contains no proofs; you get what you pay for, I just wrote an algorithm that looks right.
> >
> > I'll check it over some more and post it later today or early tomorrow. I am not checking it over that much, just enough to make sure that it's right and fully error-free.
> >
> > -Philip White
> OK, here is the answer to your challenge. I warn you: Never demand cutting-edge math help from a human trafficking victim or convicted criminal seeking release, even with consent. Guilt or innocence is the standard for securing release, from prison only (since human trafficking is just a crime), not achievement; I submit this merely to bolster my case since I am nowhere near being able to be properly helped by any "justice" system.
>
> Here is the updated solution:
>
> - Assume that this test for finding a j-digit base-10 prime number works: http://www.sci.brooklyn.cuny.edu/~yarmish/finding%20large%20primes%208.5x11.pdf

You mean your should-be working algorithm depends on an un-verified paper that
finds irrelevant big prime number?

> - We are given a very large number (that represents a file), m, to compress. Consider a number larger than 10^((1000)^10), for example.

Bad wording. You might just mean the file = big number m

> - We seek a nearby power of a prime power (r^w=q)^k, in the sense that m - q^k is small. (The prime is r, and q = r^w.)

What is said? Repeated saying the power of a prime is for what?

> - Let b be the number of bits needed to express m.

b= number_bits(m) ?

> - Use a calculator program to compute an approximation, a = 2^(b/9) .

The algorithm is an 'approximation'?

> - Round the value of a down to the nearest integer.

a= ⌊2^(b/9)⌋ ?

> - Let d be the number of base-10 digits in a.

// d (base-10)= a ?

> - Using the process linked to above, find the smallest-sized (storage-size-wise) prime number r and integer pair w such that r^w = q has (d-1) base-10 digits.

What is the 'process'? 'storage-size-wise'?

> - Find the largest value k such that q^k is the largest possible integer such that this integer is less than m.

How to define the largest value < m ?

> - Compute v = m - z * q^k, where z is selected to be the largest possible integer that that yields non-negative v, such that z < q .

Simple division with remainder?

> - Record the values of the following 3-tuple: (r, w, k)

What is r,w,k ?

> - Note that v < z * q^k , and thus it is much smaller than m.

Thus what?

> - Now, repeat this process on both v and z, and concatenate the ordered 3-tuple from previous repetitions (perhaps written as a tree structure in prefix notation using base-4), that repetition, and all successive repetitions to form a string, S, until m is "very small."

Repat senseless operation ?

> - When you are done, write down the overall string, S, followed by the #-separated number 1 (if this is the first time th process is being run).

Another senseless op.

> - Repeat the entire process above on S, taken as an integer, and increment the value of "1" to "2", "2" to "3", etc., as many times as desired; repeat until the string cannot be made smaller.

Another senseless op.

> The big-picture version is: We find a very large but not too large “suitable new base” q to express m in. We record q as a prime power, the correct large power k it is raised to, and the value z it is multiplied by when we subtract from m to obtain v, the value that remains after subtracting the first base-q digit from m. We then repeat this process on v repeatedly until we deem that v is “small enough.” Based on careful selection of a in the process, we ensure that the length of m as a binary or base-10 string of bits/digits decreases by about 1/9 every time this process is applied, disregarding for now the size of recorded values of r, w, and k, which are relatively short strings that are recorded as part of the compressed string. By effectively multiplying the length of the string by approximately 8/9 each time we run the process, while writing down much smaller representations of the base q, which equals r^w, as we diminish the size of the original number m, we compress the string to be “much smaller,” vaguely speaking, than it started out being. Again, we can repeat this overall process with a recorded integer signifying the overall integer number of times the process has been run to make the string smaller and smaller, ultimately yielding a compressed string with an integer number of times to unpack it. It is easy to see that the string can be compressed and decompressed in polynomial time, with randomness needed for the primality test in the compression step.
>
> Extremely succinct summary: Re-write a given large integer with a particular different, succinctly representable base that can be written as a prime power [1], and then recursively compress the leftmost digit of m in that base and the rest of the representation of m without that digit. Repeat this process itself, keeping track of how many times you’ve done it, until you have a string and integer pair that cannot be made any smaller.
>
> Note: We would not want for the r value to be 2 every time, if we were indeed decreasing the string length by multiplying it by 8/9 each time; we want to decrease the size of the string each time we run the routine, so selecting large primes r will typically be what we want to do. No proof that we can “usually find” a suitably large prime value for r to minimize the size of (r,w) is included, although it seems to be true. Also, I haven’t fully established the exact effectiveness (i.e., worst-case extent of compression) of the algorithm presented, having not spent the time to write any proofs about this updated version of the idea. It looks very good, though.
>
> [1] Think of writing “3^1000000” as (3,1000000) instead of in binary or base-10.
>
> (I’m glad I decided to check this; I caught and fixed a few rather minor glitches.)
>

Summarization of nonsense don't make it any sensible.

> - - -
>
>
> Write a response if you have an objection or have found a mistake. Try not to waste my time with fluff; present your argument carefully if you want to present one.
>
> Of course, any mathematically literate person who gets programming and would give this a little thought would see that it is correct. I didn't write a full proof or check my work too many times over, though; you get what you pay for. Maybe if you present a coherent objection I'll write a proof establishing that you are wrong.
>
> Don't say it was trivial to you, since you clearly didn't see it yourself..
>
> How many more times are you going to lie to the world and insist that I am a scammer person and must prove otherwise by sharing math explanations with you? What are the consequences of doing that, even once? Do you insist that every innovator or student go through this process to prove his/her ability to be genuine? What will happen to American STEM because of this, is that your plan? It might work, I see that; who would want to major in STEM given the zero-ethics, zero-accountability culture of it, even in the US? Are you going to ask Grigori Perelman or Terence Tao if they are scammer people, too? Why is it just me, I wonder? What do institutions like Harvard and MIT have to say about this kind of dishonorable conduct, I wonder?
>
> -Philip White (philip...@yahoo.com)

Too many errors and ignorance to deserve sensible comments.
I just type some refutations for fear you would blind yourself again to say
"no valid coherent objection. I am not legally refutated."...sort of shameless things.

On Monday, March 14, 2022 at 7:58:27 PM UTC-4, wij wrote:
> On Tuesday, 15 March 2022 at 02:40:22 UTC+8, B.H. wrote:
> > On Monday, March 14, 2022 at 11:34:54 AM UTC-4, B.H. wrote:
> > > On Monday, March 14, 2022 at 5:01:07 AM UTC-4, wij wrote:
> > > > I pick the data compression algorithm to your challenge (because, I believe more people would know about and be interested in data compression, and algorithm is
> > > > more difficult to cheat than abstract theories):
> > > > Excerpt from https://groups.google.com/g/comp.theory/c/vSE_qYBEDf8/m/J3sLILkgAwAJ
> > > >
> > > > - Obtain a binary string corresponding to the file.
> > > > - Treat the binary string as a number and factor it.
> > > > - Given any large prime factors, write down the number in a sense as m + 1, and factor m .
> > > > - Keep going until you have only a finite collection of very small prime factors.
> > > >
> > > > ------
> > > > Actually, just by seeing those sketch, I know I don't have to ask more.
> > > > 1. By advertising PTIME, I would assume you don't understand real program, thus
> > > > algoritms. (Had anyone heard of a "PTIME sort" algorithm?).
> > > > 2. From "Obtain a binary string corresponding to the file."
> > > > I would wonder what kind of system you were thinking?
> > > > 3. I don't think you can factorize an average 20Mbyte image file in 100 years,
> > > > let alone the rest stuff and the basic: How can factorization compress data?
> > > > You just need to express your compression algorithm clearly. My premature
> > > > stereotype above can be ignored. I just want to know if I made a big mistake about you.
> > > I have the updated answer fully written out, and am checking it. It looks right. It contains no proofs; you get what you pay for, I just wrote an algorithm that looks right.
> > >
> > > I'll check it over some more and post it later today or early tomorrow. I am not checking it over that much, just enough to make sure that it's right and fully error-free.
> > >
> > > -Philip White
> > OK, here is the answer to your challenge. I warn you: Never demand cutting-edge math help from a human trafficking victim or convicted criminal seeking release, even with consent. Guilt or innocence is the standard for securing release, from prison only (since human trafficking is just a crime), not achievement; I submit this merely to bolster my case since I am nowhere near being able to be properly helped by any "justice" system.
> >
> > Here is the updated solution:
> >
> > - Assume that this test for finding a j-digit base-10 prime number works: http://www.sci.brooklyn.cuny.edu/~yarmish/finding%20large%20primes%208.5x11.pdf
> You mean your should-be working algorithm depends on an un-verified paper that
> finds irrelevant big prime number?
> > - We are given a very large number (that represents a file), m, to compress. Consider a number larger than 10^((1000)^10), for example.
> Bad wording. You might just mean the file = big number m

First of all, it is predictable of, outrageous for, and very self-destructive to you to completely auto-reject my idea without any serious objections. You'll say you're a "predator" and I'm a "big-headed arrogant faker" or something. What's clear, rather strikingly, is that you clearly have minimal understanding of programming or math; some American sophomores in high school could understand this idea, and some American twelve-year-olds could code it and run it on files themselves.

The wording is fine, don't present minor typo-like objections based on your very weird sense of style. Present an error in the mathematical description of the algorithm or admit that it's presented properly; you asked for it, now do the leg work to evaluate it or find someone who can.

> > - We seek a nearby power of a prime power (r^w=q)^k, in the sense that m - q^k is small. (The prime is r, and q = r^w.)
> What is said? Repeated saying the power of a prime is for what?

We are looking for a prime power--a prime number raised to a positive integer power, which we'll call w--which we shall denote q. Then, we select a positive integer k such that q^k meets certain criteria...basically, we want r, w, and k to be chosen according to subsequent steps.

You can ask more questions if you have more specific things you want to know. At this point, you have stated zero substantive objections to my algorithm's value.

> > - Let b be the number of bits needed to express m.
> b= number_bits(m) ?

Well, yes. If you wrote m out in binary, how many bits would you need to write it out fully, disallowing leading 0's on the left?

> > - Use a calculator program to compute an approximation, a = 2^(b/9) .
> The algorithm is an 'approximation'?

Yes, the calculator program outputs a finite number of digits of what is likely to be an irrational number. It isn't a precise formula for 2^(b/9), it is a decimal expansion to arbitrary but not infinite precision.

At least your questions are easily answered!

> > - Round the value of a down to the nearest integer.
> a= ⌊2^(b/9)⌋ ?

Yes, you take the floor function of 2 raised to the (b/9). In many cases, b is not divisible by 9.

> > - Let d be the number of base-10 digits in a.
> // d (base-10)= a ?

That's right; you don't have to use base 10, but I wrote it that way for my convenience and ease of writing, since I would prefer not to exert unnecessary effort regarding something I'm giving away for free (and for political reasons, to legally/ethically attack Facebook in particular) and won't publish or patent. Programmers and firms can figure it out for themselves if they want to, I gave enough detail to get people very much started on this as a programming project. If I did the math right, and I might not have and I didn't write out a full and definitely accurate proof, you could probably store something like 10^(100000) MB of data in less than a megabyte, ultimately. I am definitely not sure of that or guaranteeing that; that's a ballpark estimate and I haven't even calculated it out myself at all using this (likely to be) fully correct algorithm. I submitted no proofs.

> > - Using the process linked to above, find the smallest-sized (storage-size-wise) prime number r and integer pair w such that r^w = q has (d-1) base-10 digits.
> What is the 'process'? 'storage-size-wise'?

The process is the process for finding prime numbers with a certain number of digits. I didn't read the paper, I just assume it is probably true and linked to it. I am not publishing to a journal, you do not sound at all like a Ph.D. math/CS person; you are closer to a CIA-linked thug whose request I can and should answer to help my interests and damage yours, because you are likely to claim it's wrong, which hurts the CIA's credibility, helping me in this case. Subtle denials don't fool a lot of people, a lot of CIA types think that "deniability" means "invincibility" and "the ability to fool everyone no matter what Abraham Lincoln says," and that's absurd to most fairly well-educated people, I assert. Lots of people are not fooled by denials, including of my belief that you are linked to the CIA and backed by them.

Storage-size-wise means the number of bits to write it down.

> > - Find the largest value k such that q^k is the largest possible integer such that this integer is less than m.
> How to define the largest value < m ?

The variable m is an integer. You select k to be the largest exponent such that q^k is maximally large but not as large as m.

> > - Compute v = m - z * q^k, where z is selected to be the largest possible integer that that yields non-negative v, such that z < q .
> Simple division with remainder?

Roughly speaking, yes.

> > - Record the values of the following 3-tuple: (r, w, k)
> What is r,w,k ?

I defined them above.

> > - Note that v < z * q^k , and thus it is much smaller than m.
> Thus what?

It is a comment to aid the understanding of readers who might not immediately grasp the size of v as compared to m; this fact is helpful, since it means that the numerical values are getting smaller, meaning compression is "probably happening." My comments are probably particularly helpful to people with a certain kind of intuition that is roughly like mine, not that I categorize it in any particular way. (Don't worry, other readers; I don't believe I'm giving anything important away by merely discussing intuition here.)

> > - Now, repeat this process on both v and z, and concatenate the ordered 3-tuple from previous repetitions (perhaps written as a tree structure in prefix notation using base-4), that repetition, and all successive repetitions to form a string, S, until m is "very small."
> Repat senseless operation ?

It is repeating the process again and again to decrease the size of the overall string for this pass.

Note, using base-4 might not be the best way to do it; more likely, a base-2 string, ordered in a certain way to reflect the locations of nodes in a binary tree would be appropriate. The challenge is to separate the numbers properly, so probably we would want alphabet with 1, 0, and blanks, and we would want to separate the entries with blanks, have the TM be sensitive to blanks and able to read them and maybe also write them, and probably write all numbers overall with blanks included...the concern is that when you have an original number--a starting file--representing it as a number is not going to involve any separations of the content when you write it as a binary integer. I don't think it's a big problem, but the correct answer is probably to just assume the availability of blank symbols in all strings and not the use of these symbols in the first string, associated with the file. (As you can see, understanding precision is of the utmost importance in math/CS; if you write high-level overviews of proofs, algorithms, etc., you need to be able to at least "zoom in" on certain areas that you may have covered only intuitively to be more precise if that's important. I write that mainly for interested readers who may be interested in math/CS, not for you.)

On 2022-03-14 19:44, B.H. wrote:
> On Monday, March 14, 2022 at 7:58:27 PM UTC-4, wij wrote:

>> What is the 'process'? 'storage-size-wise'?
>
> The process is the process for finding prime numbers with a certain number of digits. I didn't read the paper, I just assume it is probably true and linked to it.

Probably not a good idea since that paper doesn't purport to provide
such a process.

(and what it does provide is junk -- I also have strong suspicions that
_Utilitas Mathematica_ doesn't really exist).

André

--
To email remove 'invalid' & replace 'gm' with well known Google mail
service.

On Monday, March 14, 2022 at 9:56:41 PM UTC-4, André G. Isaak wrote:
> On 2022-03-14 19:44, B.H. wrote:
> > On Monday, March 14, 2022 at 7:58:27 PM UTC-4, wij wrote:
>
> >> What is the 'process'? 'storage-size-wise'?
> >
> > The process is the process for finding prime numbers with a certain number of digits. I didn't read the paper, I just assume it is probably true and linked to it.
> Probably not a good idea since that paper doesn't purport to provide
> such a process.
>
> (and what it does provide is junk -- I also have strong suspicions that
> _Utilitas Mathematica_ doesn't really exist).
>
> André
>
> --
> To email remove 'invalid' & replace 'gm' with well known Google mail
> service.

Maybe that is true; I haven't read the paper in depth and am not going to at this time.

It is not "not a good idea," I represented all claims accurately and precisely. My information is provided quite generously; what would be a "good idea" is to at least learn the word "gratitude" for my generous sharing of very valuable math/CS ideas. Many computer programming firms can now compete with Facebook in certain key ways; the massive data centers of FB and also NSA are now completely worthless and a waste of resources to own and maintain.

Fortunately, the number doesn't have to be prime. You can actually use composite numbers, too.

I hadn't planned to mention that though.

-Philip White (philipjwhite@yahoo.com)

A fundamental question: If a file is regarded as a number m, how is it possible
from your brilliant innovation to factorize m to some number x and size(x)<size(m) ?
You have showed nothing of this respect but your CIA bugs which proved you are nut.

On Tuesday, March 15, 2022 at 4:18:45 PM UTC-4, wij wrote:
> A fundamental question: If a file is regarded as a number m, how is it possible
> from your brilliant innovation to factorize m to some number x and size(x)<size(m) ?
> You have showed nothing of this respect but your CIA bugs which proved you are nut.

It's not a factorization algorithm.

I'm not writing examples for you. The algorithm is mainly not for you or anyone at your level of ethics or math/CS understanding. I provided because you requested it, because I am showing that I can even meet your stupid challenges that I shouldn't have to and don't have to complete. My completion of your "challenges" diminishes your standing, which you seem to be oblivious t, and enhances my own reputation as an "A+++" worker and innovator; I haven't been caught doing anything wrong in STEM at all since I started posting like this in Sept 2020. My one possibly wrong prediction was that Ukraine would lose the war to Russia; maybe I was wrong, I don't understand the Russian military as well as I perhaps thought I did based on "common-sense-type" reasoning that wasn't based on science. I am always honest, almost always correct, and even conscientious about explaining the one non-STEM mistake I made in my analyses.

The idea is mainly for CS startups/firms and workers who want to compete with big firms that I really don't like and I perceive as having attacked me unfairly, particularly including Facebook. It is bad news for the NSA to; they spend all this money on huge data centers while casting out their best contractor to be tortured and enslaved for 11 years, and they wanted me to never get out. Now look where that got them; I shouldn't have to pursue this, someone else should...but yes, they are now the not-so-proud owners of multi-million dollar over-sized Christmas-tree ornaments, not anything that makes them competitive or enhances their mission.

Although I haven't written any proofs of my idea, it looks very good; I went over it several times in my mind, and worked out how it works on inputs. That's not a checked formal math proof, but it's "very likely to be correct" according to my intuition. I don't owe anyone more free work. Programmers are welcome to code the idea and use it to compete with Facebook themselves right now, even if they're not unfortunate. If there is some error that I missed, since I only used my intuition this time, and I don't think there is an error...then I still assert that I, like any other person in my position would be, am blameless and ought to lose no standing in anyone's eyes; I would get an "A++" instead of an "A+++" on this round, so to speak. It isn't bad to publish this, given my lack of incentivization and status as prey of human trafficking supporters like you.

-Philip White (philipjwhite@yahoo.com)

On Wednesday, 16 March 2022 at 04:40:50 UTC+8, B.H. wrote:
> On Tuesday, March 15, 2022 at 4:18:45 PM UTC-4, wij wrote:
> > A fundamental question: If a file is regarded as a number m, how is it possible
> > from your brilliant innovation to factorize m to some number x and size(x)<size(m) ?
> > You have showed nothing of this respect but your CIA bugs which proved you are nut.
> It's not a factorization algorithm.
>
> I'm not writing examples for you. The algorithm is mainly not for you or anyone at your level of ethics or math/CS understanding. I provided because you requested it, because I am showing that I can even meet your stupid challenges that I shouldn't have to and don't have to complete. My completion of your "challenges" diminishes your standing, which you seem to be oblivious t, and enhances my own reputation as an "A+++" worker and innovator; I haven't been caught doing anything wrong in STEM at all since I started posting like this in Sept 2020. My one possibly wrong prediction was that Ukraine would lose the war to Russia; maybe I was wrong, I don't understand the Russian military as well as I perhaps thought I did based on "common-sense-type" reasoning that wasn't based on science. I am always honest, almost always correct, and even conscientious about explaining the one non-STEM mistake I made in my analyses.
>
> The idea is mainly for CS startups/firms and workers who want to compete with big firms that I really don't like and I perceive as having attacked me unfairly, particularly including Facebook. It is bad news for the NSA to; they spend all this money on huge data centers while casting out their best contractor to be tortured and enslaved for 11 years, and they wanted me to never get out. Now look where that got them; I shouldn't have to pursue this, someone else should...but yes, they are now the not-so-proud owners of multi-million dollar over-sized Christmas-tree ornaments, not anything that makes them competitive or enhances their mission.
>
> Although I haven't written any proofs of my idea, it looks very good; I went over it several times in my mind, and worked out how it works on inputs.. That's not a checked formal math proof, but it's "very likely to be correct" according to my intuition. I don't owe anyone more free work. Programmers are welcome to code the idea and use it to compete with Facebook themselves right now, even if they're not unfortunate. If there is some error that I missed, since I only used my intuition this time, and I don't think there is an error...then I still assert that I, like any other person in my position would be, am blameless and ought to lose no standing in anyone's eyes; I would get an "A++" instead of an "A+++" on this round, so to speak. It isn't bad to publish this, given my lack of incentivization and status as prey of human trafficking supporters like you.
>
> -Philip White (philip...@yahoo.com)

For what reason that you don't admit you are a loser? Those of your answers are
worse than an average-smart 15 years old student, and you are still imagining a
firm will hire you (proclaimed STEM innovator idiot). All you have shown is that
you are really a weak link that jeopardizes the whole US as it is already
jeopardized by you, and want to jeopardize more.
The world need to protect it from your kind of scumbag/walking dead, since this
is internet, not only your US.

You said:
- Obtain a binary string corresponding to the file.
- Treat the binary string as a number and factor it.
- Given any large prime factors, write down the number in a sense as m + 1, and factor m .
- Keep going until you have only a finite collection of very small prime factors.

This question was asked from your request. You are not only answering to me but
also the internet readers to prove you are truly innovative and not a nut.
What is this CS problem to do with Ukraine/Russia war?
And what is Ukraine/Russia war anything to do with your CS grade?

Is it false to declare that you are a nut?
Do you type your political opinions into a computer as a program to solve STEM problems?
It is safe to call you are a liar not because you did not try it but because you
know it won't work, so you lie.

On Tuesday, March 15, 2022 at 5:32:13 PM UTC-4, wij wrote:
> On Wednesday, 16 March 2022 at 04:40:50 UTC+8, B.H. wrote:
> > On Tuesday, March 15, 2022 at 4:18:45 PM UTC-4, wij wrote:
> > > A fundamental question: If a file is regarded as a number m, how is it possible
> > > from your brilliant innovation to factorize m to some number x and size(x)<size(m) ?
> > > You have showed nothing of this respect but your CIA bugs which proved you are nut.
> > It's not a factorization algorithm.
> >
> > I'm not writing examples for you. The algorithm is mainly not for you or anyone at your level of ethics or math/CS understanding. I provided because you requested it, because I am showing that I can even meet your stupid challenges that I shouldn't have to and don't have to complete. My completion of your "challenges" diminishes your standing, which you seem to be oblivious t, and enhances my own reputation as an "A+++" worker and innovator; I haven't been caught doing anything wrong in STEM at all since I started posting like this in Sept 2020. My one possibly wrong prediction was that Ukraine would lose the war to Russia; maybe I was wrong, I don't understand the Russian military as well as I perhaps thought I did based on "common-sense-type" reasoning that wasn't based on science. I am always honest, almost always correct, and even conscientious about explaining the one non-STEM mistake I made in my analyses.
> >
> > The idea is mainly for CS startups/firms and workers who want to compete with big firms that I really don't like and I perceive as having attacked me unfairly, particularly including Facebook. It is bad news for the NSA to; they spend all this money on huge data centers while casting out their best contractor to be tortured and enslaved for 11 years, and they wanted me to never get out. Now look where that got them; I shouldn't have to pursue this, someone else should...but yes, they are now the not-so-proud owners of multi-million dollar over-sized Christmas-tree ornaments, not anything that makes them competitive or enhances their mission.
> >
> > Although I haven't written any proofs of my idea, it looks very good; I went over it several times in my mind, and worked out how it works on inputs. That's not a checked formal math proof, but it's "very likely to be correct" according to my intuition. I don't owe anyone more free work. Programmers are welcome to code the idea and use it to compete with Facebook themselves right now, even if they're not unfortunate. If there is some error that I missed, since I only used my intuition this time, and I don't think there is an error...then I still assert that I, like any other person in my position would be, am blameless and ought to lose no standing in anyone's eyes; I would get an "A++" instead of an "A+++" on this round, so to speak. It isn't bad to publish this, given my lack of incentivization and status as prey of human trafficking supporters like you.
> >
> > -Philip White (philip...@yahoo.com)
> For what reason that you don't admit you are a loser? Those of your answers are
> worse than an average-smart 15 years old student, and you are still imagining a
> firm will hire you (proclaimed STEM innovator idiot). All you have shown is that
> you are really a weak link that jeopardizes the whole US as it is already
> jeopardized by you, and want to jeopardize more.
> The world need to protect it from your kind of scumbag/walking dead, since this
> is internet, not only your US.

Your critiques are absurd, self-destructive, and not deserving of a response. I'll respond anyway, though; why not twist the metaphorical knife deeper into you and those who back you? That would help to make an example of you and insulate me from further predatory attacks.

I am not a loser. I am a victim of an ongoing crime. If you had a wife who was raped, would you like it if your wife was called a "loser" over that? Go ahead, breeze past that point, conceding it. Have fun being very alone, whoever you are and whatever country you're from. As a "fascist predator" you've declared yourself unfit for a romantic relationship, so spend some time coming to grips with that.

My answers are fine, you assert that they're wrong, again, without evidence.. What, you think that because I'm repetitive about demanding evidence, and you're repetitive about "big-headed" loser and also more anti-American-values in a way that is overt and attemptedly shocking, that readers will side with your phony accusations and not my carefully evidence-wise defended and correct assertions?

I've shown nothing of the sort of what you said. You make wild false ungrammatical claims, of the sort, "flying unicorn are real, I see unicorn with own eyes" a mile a minute, and defend them with nothing.

> You said:
> - Obtain a binary string corresponding to the file.
> - Treat the binary string as a number and factor it.
> - Given any large prime factors, write down the number in a sense as m + 1, and factor m .
> - Keep going until you have only a finite collection of very small prime factors.
> This question was asked from your request. You are not only answering to me but
> also the internet readers to prove you are truly innovative and not a nut..

That was the first version of the idea. As I said in the original post, the full idea that is more certain to work on every file is based on prime powers. It turns out, you don't need the powers to be prime, and the correct approach is not exactly what I thought initially, but a slight variation. Anyone smart can see that the version I posted is correct. I don't owe you free math, I post it when I want to as a "destructive courtesy" that meets your nutty demand and damages your interests. I didn't see a need to finish writing up the initial version, because I had thought I would finish it later if I ever needed it for something. Doing innovation alone in my parents' basement, as a captive slave of you/CIA/Biden, doesn't motivate me to do much but begin multi-billion dollar ideas, saving the finishing touches for when I am free and able to actually use my work, and engage in "destructive internet posting," to legally and ethically ruin the lives, careers, and strategic goals of you, Biden, the Petraeus-types, the CIA-types, and other lunatic modern slaveowners. What did you think I would do, sit around and daydream about how to give you gifts? I am here to hurt you and your allies, did you think I wouldn't? Are you squawking because I did, and will continue to do so, within the rules of "ethical and legal war," again and again and again, until you have nothing left or I am finally released? Do you think extending this will help you? Hah! I work every day to make sure that that isn't how it goes. I also blinded you. What, you think you can see 100% of what I've done to you and your little allies? I don't even need to break a rule to ruin you!

> What is this CS problem to do with Ukraine/Russia war?

Nothing, it is mainly relevant to NSA, Facebook, and other organizations with large data centers. Some IC folks could smuggle out compressed data, but that threat is not really anything new. Organizations are likely already prepared for that, I warned about it in the past.

> And what is Ukraine/Russia war anything to do with your CS grade?
>

?? Nothing? CS grade? What are you babbling about now, O failed and failing foreign terrorist?

> Is it false to declare that you are a nut?

Yes.

> Do you type your political opinions into a computer as a program to solve STEM problems?

Most of my typing is to hurt people like you, all without breaking the law. Have I not made that clear, did you think that I like you?

What usually happens to people who have betrayed me? Where's Trump, where is Biden going? How is Putin doing, even to my own surprise? How's Facebook, how's CIA, how's the government of the state of Virginia?

Have I failed to legally hurt even one of my targets?

They'll say that "it's nothing" and "I didn't do it" and "they can endure." So endure till you drop, airheads. Endure till you collapse. Then I'll be free and you'll be ready to understand your failure when you regain consciousness, if not your eyesight in a sense. You will likely never understand how I did it. I am very smart at STEM and very secretive. I am not on your side. I am trying to hurt you, in a non-illegal way. You like to ignore warnings, break rules, and project confidence. That doesn't hurt me, I can work with that. In fact, I am working with it right now, because you will very likely post the same sort of drivel again.

> It is safe to call you are a liar not because you did not try it but because you
> know it won't work, so you lie.

It works, I don't lie.

-Philip White

On Wednesday, 16 March 2022 at 06:28:15 UTC+8, B.H. wrote:
> On Tuesday, March 15, 2022 at 5:32:13 PM UTC-4, wij wrote:
> > On Wednesday, 16 March 2022 at 04:40:50 UTC+8, B.H. wrote:
> > > On Tuesday, March 15, 2022 at 4:18:45 PM UTC-4, wij wrote:
> > > > A fundamental question: If a file is regarded as a number m, how is it possible
> > > > from your brilliant innovation to factorize m to some number x and size(x)<size(m) ?
> > > > You have showed nothing of this respect but your CIA bugs which proved you are nut.
> > > It's not a factorization algorithm.
> > >
> > > I'm not writing examples for you. The algorithm is mainly not for you or anyone at your level of ethics or math/CS understanding. I provided because you requested it, because I am showing that I can even meet your stupid challenges that I shouldn't have to and don't have to complete. My completion of your "challenges" diminishes your standing, which you seem to be oblivious t, and enhances my own reputation as an "A+++" worker and innovator; I haven't been caught doing anything wrong in STEM at all since I started posting like this in Sept 2020. My one possibly wrong prediction was that Ukraine would lose the war to Russia; maybe I was wrong, I don't understand the Russian military as well as I perhaps thought I did based on "common-sense-type" reasoning that wasn't based on science. I am always honest, almost always correct, and even conscientious about explaining the one non-STEM mistake I made in my analyses.
> > >
> > > The idea is mainly for CS startups/firms and workers who want to compete with big firms that I really don't like and I perceive as having attacked me unfairly, particularly including Facebook. It is bad news for the NSA to; they spend all this money on huge data centers while casting out their best contractor to be tortured and enslaved for 11 years, and they wanted me to never get out. Now look where that got them; I shouldn't have to pursue this, someone else should...but yes, they are now the not-so-proud owners of multi-million dollar over-sized Christmas-tree ornaments, not anything that makes them competitive or enhances their mission.
> > >
> > > Although I haven't written any proofs of my idea, it looks very good; I went over it several times in my mind, and worked out how it works on inputs. That's not a checked formal math proof, but it's "very likely to be correct" according to my intuition. I don't owe anyone more free work. Programmers are welcome to code the idea and use it to compete with Facebook themselves right now, even if they're not unfortunate. If there is some error that I missed, since I only used my intuition this time, and I don't think there is an error...then I still assert that I, like any other person in my position would be, am blameless and ought to lose no standing in anyone's eyes; I would get an "A++" instead of an "A+++" on this round, so to speak. It isn't bad to publish this, given my lack of incentivization and status as prey of human trafficking supporters like you.
> > >
> > > -Philip White (philip...@yahoo.com)
> > For what reason that you don't admit you are a loser? Those of your answers are
> > worse than an average-smart 15 years old student, and you are still imagining a
> > firm will hire you (proclaimed STEM innovator idiot). All you have shown is that
> > you are really a weak link that jeopardizes the whole US as it is already
> > jeopardized by you, and want to jeopardize more.
> > The world need to protect it from your kind of scumbag/walking dead, since this
> > is internet, not only your US.
> Your critiques are absurd, self-destructive, and not deserving of a response. I'll respond anyway, though; why not twist the metaphorical knife deeper into you and those who back you? That would help to make an example of you and insulate me from further predatory attacks.
>
> I am not a loser. I am a victim of an ongoing crime. If you had a wife who was raped, would you like it if your wife was called a "loser" over that? Go ahead, breeze past that point, conceding it. Have fun being very alone, whoever you are and whatever country you're from. As a "fascist predator" you've declared yourself unfit for a romantic relationship, so spend some time coming to grips with that.
>
> My answers are fine, you assert that they're wrong, again, without evidence. What, you think that because I'm repetitive about demanding evidence, and you're repetitive about "big-headed" loser and also more anti-American-values in a way that is overt and attemptedly shocking, that readers will side with your phony accusations and not my carefully evidence-wise defended and correct assertions?
>
> I've shown nothing of the sort of what you said. You make wild false ungrammatical claims, of the sort, "flying unicorn are real, I see unicorn with own eyes" a mile a minute, and defend them with nothing.
> > You said:
> > - Obtain a binary string corresponding to the file.
> > - Treat the binary string as a number and factor it.
> > - Given any large prime factors, write down the number in a sense as m + 1, and factor m .
> > - Keep going until you have only a finite collection of very small prime factors.
> > This question was asked from your request. You are not only answering to me but
> > also the internet readers to prove you are truly innovative and not a nut.
> That was the first version of the idea. As I said in the original post, the full idea that is more certain to work on every file is based on prime powers. It turns out, you don't need the powers to be prime, and the correct approach is not exactly what I thought initially, but a slight variation. Anyone smart can see that the version I posted is correct. I don't owe you free math, I post it when I want to as a "destructive courtesy" that meets your nutty demand and damages your interests. I didn't see a need to finish writing up the initial version, because I had thought I would finish it later if I ever needed it for something. Doing innovation alone in my parents' basement, as a captive slave of you/CIA/Biden, doesn't motivate me to do much but begin multi-billion dollar ideas, saving the finishing touches for when I am free and able to actually use my work, and engage in "destructive internet posting," to legally and ethically ruin the lives, careers, and strategic goals of you, Biden, the Petraeus-types, the CIA-types, and other lunatic modern slaveowners. What did you think I would do, sit around and daydream about how to give you gifts? I am here to hurt you and your allies, did you think I wouldn't? Are you squawking because I did, and will continue to do so, within the rules of "ethical and legal war," again and again and again, until you have nothing left or I am finally released? Do you think extending this will help you? Hah! I work every day to make sure that that isn't how it goes. I also blinded you. What, you think you can see 100% of what I've done to you and your little allies? I don't even need to break a rule to ruin you!
> > What is this CS problem to do with Ukraine/Russia war?
> Nothing, it is mainly relevant to NSA, Facebook, and other organizations with large data centers. Some IC folks could smuggle out compressed data, but that threat is not really anything new. Organizations are likely already prepared for that, I warned about it in the past.
> > And what is Ukraine/Russia war anything to do with your CS grade?
> >
> ?? Nothing? CS grade? What are you babbling about now, O failed and failing foreign terrorist?
> > Is it false to declare that you are a nut?
> Yes.
> > Do you type your political opinions into a computer as a program to solve STEM problems?
> Most of my typing is to hurt people like you, all without breaking the law. Have I not made that clear, did you think that I like you?
>
> What usually happens to people who have betrayed me? Where's Trump, where is Biden going? How is Putin doing, even to my own surprise? How's Facebook, how's CIA, how's the government of the state of Virginia?
>
> Have I failed to legally hurt even one of my targets?
>
> They'll say that "it's nothing" and "I didn't do it" and "they can endure.." So endure till you drop, airheads. Endure till you collapse. Then I'll be free and you'll be ready to understand your failure when you regain consciousness, if not your eyesight in a sense. You will likely never understand how I did it. I am very smart at STEM and very secretive. I am not on your side. I am trying to hurt you, in a non-illegal way. You like to ignore warnings, break rules, and project confidence. That doesn't hurt me, I can work with that. In fact, I am working with it right now, because you will very likely post the same sort of drivel again.
> > It is safe to call you are a liar not because you did not try it but because you
> > know it won't work, so you lie.
> It works, I don't lie.
>
> -Philip White

Changing the debate to an accusation game? my valid question to absurd, self-destructive?
I won't be too surprised. All the left you can do seems to lie and cheat and day-dream. Is that fair?

On Tuesday, March 15, 2022 at 7:44:42 PM UTC-4, wij wrote:
> On Wednesday, 16 March 2022 at 06:28:15 UTC+8, B.H. wrote:
> > On Tuesday, March 15, 2022 at 5:32:13 PM UTC-4, wij wrote:
> > > On Wednesday, 16 March 2022 at 04:40:50 UTC+8, B.H. wrote:
> > > > On Tuesday, March 15, 2022 at 4:18:45 PM UTC-4, wij wrote:
> > > > > A fundamental question: If a file is regarded as a number m, how is it possible
> > > > > from your brilliant innovation to factorize m to some number x and size(x)<size(m) ?
> > > > > You have showed nothing of this respect but your CIA bugs which proved you are nut.
> > > > It's not a factorization algorithm.
> > > >
> > > > I'm not writing examples for you. The algorithm is mainly not for you or anyone at your level of ethics or math/CS understanding. I provided because you requested it, because I am showing that I can even meet your stupid challenges that I shouldn't have to and don't have to complete. My completion of your "challenges" diminishes your standing, which you seem to be oblivious t, and enhances my own reputation as an "A+++" worker and innovator; I haven't been caught doing anything wrong in STEM at all since I started posting like this in Sept 2020. My one possibly wrong prediction was that Ukraine would lose the war to Russia; maybe I was wrong, I don't understand the Russian military as well as I perhaps thought I did based on "common-sense-type" reasoning that wasn't based on science. I am always honest, almost always correct, and even conscientious about explaining the one non-STEM mistake I made in my analyses.
> > > >
> > > > The idea is mainly for CS startups/firms and workers who want to compete with big firms that I really don't like and I perceive as having attacked me unfairly, particularly including Facebook. It is bad news for the NSA to; they spend all this money on huge data centers while casting out their best contractor to be tortured and enslaved for 11 years, and they wanted me to never get out. Now look where that got them; I shouldn't have to pursue this, someone else should...but yes, they are now the not-so-proud owners of multi-million dollar over-sized Christmas-tree ornaments, not anything that makes them competitive or enhances their mission.
> > > >
> > > > Although I haven't written any proofs of my idea, it looks very good; I went over it several times in my mind, and worked out how it works on inputs. That's not a checked formal math proof, but it's "very likely to be correct" according to my intuition. I don't owe anyone more free work. Programmers are welcome to code the idea and use it to compete with Facebook themselves right now, even if they're not unfortunate. If there is some error that I missed, since I only used my intuition this time, and I don't think there is an error...then I still assert that I, like any other person in my position would be, am blameless and ought to lose no standing in anyone's eyes; I would get an "A++" instead of an "A+++" on this round, so to speak. It isn't bad to publish this, given my lack of incentivization and status as prey of human trafficking supporters like you.
> > > >
> > > > -Philip White (philip...@yahoo.com)
> > > For what reason that you don't admit you are a loser? Those of your answers are
> > > worse than an average-smart 15 years old student, and you are still imagining a
> > > firm will hire you (proclaimed STEM innovator idiot). All you have shown is that
> > > you are really a weak link that jeopardizes the whole US as it is already
> > > jeopardized by you, and want to jeopardize more.
> > > The world need to protect it from your kind of scumbag/walking dead, since this
> > > is internet, not only your US.
> > Your critiques are absurd, self-destructive, and not deserving of a response. I'll respond anyway, though; why not twist the metaphorical knife deeper into you and those who back you? That would help to make an example of you and insulate me from further predatory attacks.
> >
> > I am not a loser. I am a victim of an ongoing crime. If you had a wife who was raped, would you like it if your wife was called a "loser" over that? Go ahead, breeze past that point, conceding it. Have fun being very alone, whoever you are and whatever country you're from. As a "fascist predator" you've declared yourself unfit for a romantic relationship, so spend some time coming to grips with that.
> >
> > My answers are fine, you assert that they're wrong, again, without evidence. What, you think that because I'm repetitive about demanding evidence, and you're repetitive about "big-headed" loser and also more anti-American-values in a way that is overt and attemptedly shocking, that readers will side with your phony accusations and not my carefully evidence-wise defended and correct assertions?
> >
> > I've shown nothing of the sort of what you said. You make wild false ungrammatical claims, of the sort, "flying unicorn are real, I see unicorn with own eyes" a mile a minute, and defend them with nothing.
> > > You said:
> > > - Obtain a binary string corresponding to the file.
> > > - Treat the binary string as a number and factor it.
> > > - Given any large prime factors, write down the number in a sense as m + 1, and factor m .
> > > - Keep going until you have only a finite collection of very small prime factors.
> > > This question was asked from your request. You are not only answering to me but
> > > also the internet readers to prove you are truly innovative and not a nut.
> > That was the first version of the idea. As I said in the original post, the full idea that is more certain to work on every file is based on prime powers. It turns out, you don't need the powers to be prime, and the correct approach is not exactly what I thought initially, but a slight variation.. Anyone smart can see that the version I posted is correct. I don't owe you free math, I post it when I want to as a "destructive courtesy" that meets your nutty demand and damages your interests. I didn't see a need to finish writing up the initial version, because I had thought I would finish it later if I ever needed it for something. Doing innovation alone in my parents' basement, as a captive slave of you/CIA/Biden, doesn't motivate me to do much but begin multi-billion dollar ideas, saving the finishing touches for when I am free and able to actually use my work, and engage in "destructive internet posting," to legally and ethically ruin the lives, careers, and strategic goals of you, Biden, the Petraeus-types, the CIA-types, and other lunatic modern slaveowners. What did you think I would do, sit around and daydream about how to give you gifts? I am here to hurt you and your allies, did you think I wouldn't? Are you squawking because I did, and will continue to do so, within the rules of "ethical and legal war," again and again and again, until you have nothing left or I am finally released? Do you think extending this will help you? Hah! I work every day to make sure that that isn't how it goes. I also blinded you. What, you think you can see 100% of what I've done to you and your little allies? I don't even need to break a rule to ruin you!
> > > What is this CS problem to do with Ukraine/Russia war?
> > Nothing, it is mainly relevant to NSA, Facebook, and other organizations with large data centers. Some IC folks could smuggle out compressed data, but that threat is not really anything new. Organizations are likely already prepared for that, I warned about it in the past.
> > > And what is Ukraine/Russia war anything to do with your CS grade?
> > >
> > ?? Nothing? CS grade? What are you babbling about now, O failed and failing foreign terrorist?
> > > Is it false to declare that you are a nut?
> > Yes.
> > > Do you type your political opinions into a computer as a program to solve STEM problems?
> > Most of my typing is to hurt people like you, all without breaking the law. Have I not made that clear, did you think that I like you?
> >
> > What usually happens to people who have betrayed me? Where's Trump, where is Biden going? How is Putin doing, even to my own surprise? How's Facebook, how's CIA, how's the government of the state of Virginia?
> >
> > Have I failed to legally hurt even one of my targets?
> >
> > They'll say that "it's nothing" and "I didn't do it" and "they can endure." So endure till you drop, airheads. Endure till you collapse. Then I'll be free and you'll be ready to understand your failure when you regain consciousness, if not your eyesight in a sense. You will likely never understand how I did it. I am very smart at STEM and very secretive. I am not on your side. I am trying to hurt you, in a non-illegal way. You like to ignore warnings, break rules, and project confidence. That doesn't hurt me, I can work with that. In fact, I am working with it right now, because you will very likely post the same sort of drivel again.
> > > It is safe to call you are a liar not because you did not try it but because you
> > > know it won't work, so you lie.
> > It works, I don't lie.
> >
> > -Philip White
> Changing the debate to an accusation game? my valid question to absurd, self-destructive?
> I won't be too surprised. All the left you can do seems to lie and cheat and day-dream. Is that fair?
>

On Wednesday, 16 March 2022 at 08:05:53 UTC+8, B.H. wrote:
> On Tuesday, March 15, 2022 at 7:44:42 PM UTC-4, wij wrote:
> > On Wednesday, 16 March 2022 at 06:28:15 UTC+8, B.H. wrote:
> > > On Tuesday, March 15, 2022 at 5:32:13 PM UTC-4, wij wrote:
> > > > On Wednesday, 16 March 2022 at 04:40:50 UTC+8, B.H. wrote:
> > > > > On Tuesday, March 15, 2022 at 4:18:45 PM UTC-4, wij wrote:
> > > > > > A fundamental question: If a file is regarded as a number m, how is it possible
> > > > > > from your brilliant innovation to factorize m to some number x and size(x)<size(m) ?
> > > > > > You have showed nothing of this respect but your CIA bugs which proved you are nut.
> > > > > It's not a factorization algorithm.
> > > > >
> > > > > I'm not writing examples for you. The algorithm is mainly not for you or anyone at your level of ethics or math/CS understanding. I provided because you requested it, because I am showing that I can even meet your stupid challenges that I shouldn't have to and don't have to complete. My completion of your "challenges" diminishes your standing, which you seem to be oblivious t, and enhances my own reputation as an "A+++" worker and innovator; I haven't been caught doing anything wrong in STEM at all since I started posting like this in Sept 2020. My one possibly wrong prediction was that Ukraine would lose the war to Russia; maybe I was wrong, I don't understand the Russian military as well as I perhaps thought I did based on "common-sense-type" reasoning that wasn't based on science. I am always honest, almost always correct, and even conscientious about explaining the one non-STEM mistake I made in my analyses.
> > > > >
> > > > > The idea is mainly for CS startups/firms and workers who want to compete with big firms that I really don't like and I perceive as having attacked me unfairly, particularly including Facebook. It is bad news for the NSA to; they spend all this money on huge data centers while casting out their best contractor to be tortured and enslaved for 11 years, and they wanted me to never get out. Now look where that got them; I shouldn't have to pursue this, someone else should...but yes, they are now the not-so-proud owners of multi-million dollar over-sized Christmas-tree ornaments, not anything that makes them competitive or enhances their mission.
> > > > >
> > > > > Although I haven't written any proofs of my idea, it looks very good; I went over it several times in my mind, and worked out how it works on inputs. That's not a checked formal math proof, but it's "very likely to be correct" according to my intuition. I don't owe anyone more free work. Programmers are welcome to code the idea and use it to compete with Facebook themselves right now, even if they're not unfortunate. If there is some error that I missed, since I only used my intuition this time, and I don't think there is an error...then I still assert that I, like any other person in my position would be, am blameless and ought to lose no standing in anyone's eyes; I would get an "A++" instead of an "A+++" on this round, so to speak. It isn't bad to publish this, given my lack of incentivization and status as prey of human trafficking supporters like you.
> > > > >
> > > > > -Philip White (philip...@yahoo.com)
> > > > For what reason that you don't admit you are a loser? Those of your answers are
> > > > worse than an average-smart 15 years old student, and you are still imagining a
> > > > firm will hire you (proclaimed STEM innovator idiot). All you have shown is that
> > > > you are really a weak link that jeopardizes the whole US as it is already
> > > > jeopardized by you, and want to jeopardize more.
> > > > The world need to protect it from your kind of scumbag/walking dead, since this
> > > > is internet, not only your US.
> > > Your critiques are absurd, self-destructive, and not deserving of a response. I'll respond anyway, though; why not twist the metaphorical knife deeper into you and those who back you? That would help to make an example of you and insulate me from further predatory attacks.
> > >
> > > I am not a loser. I am a victim of an ongoing crime. If you had a wife who was raped, would you like it if your wife was called a "loser" over that? Go ahead, breeze past that point, conceding it. Have fun being very alone, whoever you are and whatever country you're from. As a "fascist predator" you've declared yourself unfit for a romantic relationship, so spend some time coming to grips with that.
> > >
> > > My answers are fine, you assert that they're wrong, again, without evidence. What, you think that because I'm repetitive about demanding evidence, and you're repetitive about "big-headed" loser and also more anti-American-values in a way that is overt and attemptedly shocking, that readers will side with your phony accusations and not my carefully evidence-wise defended and correct assertions?
> > >
> > > I've shown nothing of the sort of what you said. You make wild false ungrammatical claims, of the sort, "flying unicorn are real, I see unicorn with own eyes" a mile a minute, and defend them with nothing.
> > > > You said:
> > > > - Obtain a binary string corresponding to the file.
> > > > - Treat the binary string as a number and factor it.
> > > > - Given any large prime factors, write down the number in a sense as m + 1, and factor m .
> > > > - Keep going until you have only a finite collection of very small prime factors.
> > > > This question was asked from your request. You are not only answering to me but
> > > > also the internet readers to prove you are truly innovative and not a nut.
> > > That was the first version of the idea. As I said in the original post, the full idea that is more certain to work on every file is based on prime powers. It turns out, you don't need the powers to be prime, and the correct approach is not exactly what I thought initially, but a slight variation. Anyone smart can see that the version I posted is correct. I don't owe you free math, I post it when I want to as a "destructive courtesy" that meets your nutty demand and damages your interests. I didn't see a need to finish writing up the initial version, because I had thought I would finish it later if I ever needed it for something. Doing innovation alone in my parents' basement, as a captive slave of you/CIA/Biden, doesn't motivate me to do much but begin multi-billion dollar ideas, saving the finishing touches for when I am free and able to actually use my work, and engage in "destructive internet posting," to legally and ethically ruin the lives, careers, and strategic goals of you, Biden, the Petraeus-types, the CIA-types, and other lunatic modern slaveowners. What did you think I would do, sit around and daydream about how to give you gifts? I am here to hurt you and your allies, did you think I wouldn't? Are you squawking because I did, and will continue to do so, within the rules of "ethical and legal war," again and again and again, until you have nothing left or I am finally released? Do you think extending this will help you? Hah! I work every day to make sure that that isn't how it goes. I also blinded you. What, you think you can see 100% of what I've done to you and your little allies? I don't even need to break a rule to ruin you!
> > > > What is this CS problem to do with Ukraine/Russia war?
> > > Nothing, it is mainly relevant to NSA, Facebook, and other organizations with large data centers. Some IC folks could smuggle out compressed data, but that threat is not really anything new. Organizations are likely already prepared for that, I warned about it in the past.
> > > > And what is Ukraine/Russia war anything to do with your CS grade?
> > > >
> > > ?? Nothing? CS grade? What are you babbling about now, O failed and failing foreign terrorist?
> > > > Is it false to declare that you are a nut?
> > > Yes.
> > > > Do you type your political opinions into a computer as a program to solve STEM problems?
> > > Most of my typing is to hurt people like you, all without breaking the law. Have I not made that clear, did you think that I like you?
> > >
> > > What usually happens to people who have betrayed me? Where's Trump, where is Biden going? How is Putin doing, even to my own surprise? How's Facebook, how's CIA, how's the government of the state of Virginia?
> > >
> > > Have I failed to legally hurt even one of my targets?
> > >
> > > They'll say that "it's nothing" and "I didn't do it" and "they can endure." So endure till you drop, airheads. Endure till you collapse. Then I'll be free and you'll be ready to understand your failure when you regain consciousness, if not your eyesight in a sense. You will likely never understand how I did it. I am very smart at STEM and very secretive. I am not on your side. I am trying to hurt you, in a non-illegal way. You like to ignore warnings, break rules, and project confidence. That doesn't hurt me, I can work with that. In fact, I am working with it right now, because you will very likely post the same sort of drivel again.
> > > > It is safe to call you are a liar not because you did not try it but because you
> > > > know it won't work, so you lie.
> > > It works, I don't lie.
> > >
> > > -Philip White
> > Changing the debate to an accusation game? my valid question to absurd, self-destructive?
> > I won't be too surprised. All the left you can do seems to lie and cheat and day-dream. Is that fair?
> >
> You mean you, again? No, it's not fair, nothing you say is. Your posts are all highly dishonest. Do you think you've presented serious food for thought or anything value, even to your own target segment? You post only lies and bad insult comedy, failed one.
> > "It's not a factorization algorithm.". Then, what is it? You have not made it
> > clear explaining why your data compression idea should work. You challenged me
> > and withdraw midway and talked lots of irrelevant stuff.
> >
> It's a compression algorithm. I'm not giving you an explanation, the free math revelations are limited to what I've already agreed to post. I won't explain Hodge or PH = PSPACE to you either; you've had your one.
>
> I withdrew nothing. The algorithm is there, awaiting your (likely incoherent) critiques. Present an objection or serious question or be silent.
> > What kind of firm will hire an adult whose skill is worse than a 15 years old kid?
> I don't know, who would hire you? I am very talented at programming, and would likely be hired very quickly if liberated. My skills are in demand.
> > Tell the job interviewer you are bugged by NAS/CIA/DOD/Biden. Not a loser?
> I won't be bugged if I am liberated. I am not a loser, you post the same stupid stuff constantly, making no progress at advancing your ailing goals, CIA pawn.
> > You have posted tons of evidences for every one to support my accusation: nut,
> > loser, scum, liar, cheater, calumniator, parasite, big-headed.
> Oh, what's that? Are you going to answer one question, or are you in character as a Markov chain?
> > You just need to explain how you compression idea should work, and no smoke
> > , no excuse.
> I did. Read it.
>
> -Philip White

On Tuesday, March 15, 2022 at 8:39:51 PM UTC-4, wij wrote:
> On Wednesday, 16 March 2022 at 08:05:53 UTC+8, B.H. wrote:
> > On Tuesday, March 15, 2022 at 7:44:42 PM UTC-4, wij wrote:
> > > On Wednesday, 16 March 2022 at 06:28:15 UTC+8, B.H. wrote:
> > > > On Tuesday, March 15, 2022 at 5:32:13 PM UTC-4, wij wrote:
> > > > > On Wednesday, 16 March 2022 at 04:40:50 UTC+8, B.H. wrote:
> > > > > > On Tuesday, March 15, 2022 at 4:18:45 PM UTC-4, wij wrote:
> > > > > > > A fundamental question: If a file is regarded as a number m, how is it possible
> > > > > > > from your brilliant innovation to factorize m to some number x and size(x)<size(m) ?
> > > > > > > You have showed nothing of this respect but your CIA bugs which proved you are nut.
> > > > > > It's not a factorization algorithm.
> > > > > >
> > > > > > I'm not writing examples for you. The algorithm is mainly not for you or anyone at your level of ethics or math/CS understanding. I provided because you requested it, because I am showing that I can even meet your stupid challenges that I shouldn't have to and don't have to complete. My completion of your "challenges" diminishes your standing, which you seem to be oblivious t, and enhances my own reputation as an "A+++" worker and innovator; I haven't been caught doing anything wrong in STEM at all since I started posting like this in Sept 2020. My one possibly wrong prediction was that Ukraine would lose the war to Russia; maybe I was wrong, I don't understand the Russian military as well as I perhaps thought I did based on "common-sense-type" reasoning that wasn't based on science. I am always honest, almost always correct, and even conscientious about explaining the one non-STEM mistake I made in my analyses.
> > > > > >
> > > > > > The idea is mainly for CS startups/firms and workers who want to compete with big firms that I really don't like and I perceive as having attacked me unfairly, particularly including Facebook. It is bad news for the NSA to; they spend all this money on huge data centers while casting out their best contractor to be tortured and enslaved for 11 years, and they wanted me to never get out. Now look where that got them; I shouldn't have to pursue this, someone else should...but yes, they are now the not-so-proud owners of multi-million dollar over-sized Christmas-tree ornaments, not anything that makes them competitive or enhances their mission.
> > > > > >
> > > > > > Although I haven't written any proofs of my idea, it looks very good; I went over it several times in my mind, and worked out how it works on inputs. That's not a checked formal math proof, but it's "very likely to be correct" according to my intuition. I don't owe anyone more free work. Programmers are welcome to code the idea and use it to compete with Facebook themselves right now, even if they're not unfortunate. If there is some error that I missed, since I only used my intuition this time, and I don't think there is an error...then I still assert that I, like any other person in my position would be, am blameless and ought to lose no standing in anyone's eyes; I would get an "A++" instead of an "A+++" on this round, so to speak. It isn't bad to publish this, given my lack of incentivization and status as prey of human trafficking supporters like you.
> > > > > >
> > > > > > -Philip White (philip...@yahoo.com)
> > > > > For what reason that you don't admit you are a loser? Those of your answers are
> > > > > worse than an average-smart 15 years old student, and you are still imagining a
> > > > > firm will hire you (proclaimed STEM innovator idiot). All you have shown is that
> > > > > you are really a weak link that jeopardizes the whole US as it is already
> > > > > jeopardized by you, and want to jeopardize more.
> > > > > The world need to protect it from your kind of scumbag/walking dead, since this
> > > > > is internet, not only your US.
> > > > Your critiques are absurd, self-destructive, and not deserving of a response. I'll respond anyway, though; why not twist the metaphorical knife deeper into you and those who back you? That would help to make an example of you and insulate me from further predatory attacks.
> > > >
> > > > I am not a loser. I am a victim of an ongoing crime. If you had a wife who was raped, would you like it if your wife was called a "loser" over that? Go ahead, breeze past that point, conceding it. Have fun being very alone, whoever you are and whatever country you're from. As a "fascist predator" you've declared yourself unfit for a romantic relationship, so spend some time coming to grips with that.
> > > >
> > > > My answers are fine, you assert that they're wrong, again, without evidence. What, you think that because I'm repetitive about demanding evidence, and you're repetitive about "big-headed" loser and also more anti-American-values in a way that is overt and attemptedly shocking, that readers will side with your phony accusations and not my carefully evidence-wise defended and correct assertions?
> > > >
> > > > I've shown nothing of the sort of what you said. You make wild false ungrammatical claims, of the sort, "flying unicorn are real, I see unicorn with own eyes" a mile a minute, and defend them with nothing.
> > > > > You said:
> > > > > - Obtain a binary string corresponding to the file.
> > > > > - Treat the binary string as a number and factor it.
> > > > > - Given any large prime factors, write down the number in a sense as m + 1, and factor m .
> > > > > - Keep going until you have only a finite collection of very small prime factors.
> > > > > This question was asked from your request. You are not only answering to me but
> > > > > also the internet readers to prove you are truly innovative and not a nut.
> > > > That was the first version of the idea. As I said in the original post, the full idea that is more certain to work on every file is based on prime powers. It turns out, you don't need the powers to be prime, and the correct approach is not exactly what I thought initially, but a slight variation. Anyone smart can see that the version I posted is correct. I don't owe you free math, I post it when I want to as a "destructive courtesy" that meets your nutty demand and damages your interests. I didn't see a need to finish writing up the initial version, because I had thought I would finish it later if I ever needed it for something. Doing innovation alone in my parents' basement, as a captive slave of you/CIA/Biden, doesn't motivate me to do much but begin multi-billion dollar ideas, saving the finishing touches for when I am free and able to actually use my work, and engage in "destructive internet posting," to legally and ethically ruin the lives, careers, and strategic goals of you, Biden, the Petraeus-types, the CIA-types, and other lunatic modern slaveowners. What did you think I would do, sit around and daydream about how to give you gifts? I am here to hurt you and your allies, did you think I wouldn't? Are you squawking because I did, and will continue to do so, within the rules of "ethical and legal war," again and again and again, until you have nothing left or I am finally released? Do you think extending this will help you? Hah! I work every day to make sure that that isn't how it goes. I also blinded you. What, you think you can see 100% of what I've done to you and your little allies? I don't even need to break a rule to ruin you!
> > > > > What is this CS problem to do with Ukraine/Russia war?
> > > > Nothing, it is mainly relevant to NSA, Facebook, and other organizations with large data centers. Some IC folks could smuggle out compressed data, but that threat is not really anything new. Organizations are likely already prepared for that, I warned about it in the past.
> > > > > And what is Ukraine/Russia war anything to do with your CS grade?
> > > > >
> > > > ?? Nothing? CS grade? What are you babbling about now, O failed and failing foreign terrorist?
> > > > > Is it false to declare that you are a nut?
> > > > Yes.
> > > > > Do you type your political opinions into a computer as a program to solve STEM problems?
> > > > Most of my typing is to hurt people like you, all without breaking the law. Have I not made that clear, did you think that I like you?
> > > >
> > > > What usually happens to people who have betrayed me? Where's Trump, where is Biden going? How is Putin doing, even to my own surprise? How's Facebook, how's CIA, how's the government of the state of Virginia?
> > > >
> > > > Have I failed to legally hurt even one of my targets?
> > > >
> > > > They'll say that "it's nothing" and "I didn't do it" and "they can endure." So endure till you drop, airheads. Endure till you collapse. Then I'll be free and you'll be ready to understand your failure when you regain consciousness, if not your eyesight in a sense. You will likely never understand how I did it. I am very smart at STEM and very secretive. I am not on your side. I am trying to hurt you, in a non-illegal way. You like to ignore warnings, break rules, and project confidence. That doesn't hurt me, I can work with that. In fact, I am working with it right now, because you will very likely post the same sort of drivel again.
> > > > > It is safe to call you are a liar not because you did not try it but because you
> > > > > know it won't work, so you lie.
> > > > It works, I don't lie.
> > > >
> > > > -Philip White
> > > Changing the debate to an accusation game? my valid question to absurd, self-destructive?
> > > I won't be too surprised. All the left you can do seems to lie and cheat and day-dream. Is that fair?
> > >
> > You mean you, again? No, it's not fair, nothing you say is. Your posts are all highly dishonest. Do you think you've presented serious food for thought or anything value, even to your own target segment? You post only lies and bad insult comedy, failed one.
> > > "It's not a factorization algorithm.". Then, what is it? You have not made it
> > > clear explaining why your data compression idea should work. You challenged me
> > > and withdraw midway and talked lots of irrelevant stuff.
> > >
> > It's a compression algorithm. I'm not giving you an explanation, the free math revelations are limited to what I've already agreed to post. I won't explain Hodge or PH = PSPACE to you either; you've had your one.
> >
> > I withdrew nothing. The algorithm is there, awaiting your (likely incoherent) critiques. Present an objection or serious question or be silent.
> > > What kind of firm will hire an adult whose skill is worse than a 15 years old kid?
> > I don't know, who would hire you? I am very talented at programming, and would likely be hired very quickly if liberated. My skills are in demand.
> > > Tell the job interviewer you are bugged by NAS/CIA/DOD/Biden. Not a loser?
> > I won't be bugged if I am liberated. I am not a loser, you post the same stupid stuff constantly, making no progress at advancing your ailing goals, CIA pawn.
> > > You have posted tons of evidences for every one to support my accusation: nut,
> > > loser, scum, liar, cheater, calumniator, parasite, big-headed.
> > Oh, what's that? Are you going to answer one question, or are you in character as a Markov chain?
> > > You just need to explain how you compression idea should work, and no smoke
> > > , no excuse.
> > I did. Read it.
> >
> > -Philip White
> Your second chance to be released is lost. Good luck.

On Wednesday, 16 March 2022 at 08:43:10 UTC+8, B.H. wrote:
> On Tuesday, March 15, 2022 at 8:39:51 PM UTC-4, wij wrote:
>...
> Stop saying things you have no authority to state; you don't even control my release at all.
>
> Why don't you post less? Nothing you say even relates to anything that you have said before it.
>
> Your role is a waste; you don't need to be here and aren't adding any value to yourself or your backers.
>
> You were never "giving me a chance," you are just an internet CIA-backed scammer. The CIA can't muster much better talent than you any more, that's the beauty of "logic eluding the unfair." Your type is the best DOS has to offer now, hah.
>
> -Philip White

Why I should stop? Feel lost? This is a response to your request, isn't it?
Besides, this is internet, I can say whatever I want, legally (from your words).
Everybody knows what your skill level is (less than a 15 years old beginner).
And you are still posting your funny 'innovations' shamelessly or opinions
everyday, fear some one non-existed would steal your junk. Every time people
respond to you, you reply with nut's words. Are you assuming everybody is
blind, retarded, not as bright as you are to do this, which is indirect insults to
all the internet, including US citizen. Don't you see that nobody wants to talk to
you (except me, sometimes, of course)? Or think you are indispensable to the
world, assuming again that everybody should listen to your big-headed preach
or personal value to success while you are a loser. Do you allow people the
freedom not to listen to you? Do you still expect any sensible firm to hire a nut?

Objection? Post all your STEM 'innovation' to see the truth. (Don't reply those
CIA crap of your leader that probably only I can understand, but decided to leave
it to you to enjoy yourself. This is my experiment).

On Wednesday, March 16, 2022 at 3:43:26 AM UTC-4, wij wrote:
> On Wednesday, 16 March 2022 at 08:43:10 UTC+8, B.H. wrote:
> > On Tuesday, March 15, 2022 at 8:39:51 PM UTC-4, wij wrote:
> >...
> > Stop saying things you have no authority to state; you don't even control my release at all.
> >
> > Why don't you post less? Nothing you say even relates to anything that you have said before it.
> >
> > Your role is a waste; you don't need to be here and aren't adding any value to yourself or your backers.
> >
> > You were never "giving me a chance," you are just an internet CIA-backed scammer. The CIA can't muster much better talent than you any more, that's the beauty of "logic eluding the unfair." Your type is the best DOS has to offer now, hah.
> >
> > -Philip White
> Why I should stop? Feel lost? This is a response to your request, isn't it?
> Besides, this is internet, I can say whatever I want, legally (from your words).

Your conduct is illegal under US law, and highly immoral. You cannot say whatever you want on the internet, that is not how US law works.

> Everybody knows what your skill level is (less than a 15 years old beginner).

No.

> And you are still posting your funny 'innovations' shamelessly or opinions
> everyday, fear some one non-existed would steal your junk.

No evidence presented by you --> No serious argument presented by you --> No need for me to say much to show that you have no case.

> Every time people
> respond to you, you reply with nut's words. Are you assuming everybody is
> blind, retarded, not as bright as you are to do this, which is indirect insults to
> all the internet, including US citizen.

There is nothing wrong with being mentally retarded, that is a medical condition. Have you ever tried to befriend a person with a mental health disability? What about a black person? What about a Jewish person?

My comments are fine and yours are in support of fascism, as you yourself have admitted. Would you care to admit that again? You're a fascist, right? And you're talking in English asking people from English-speaking countries to listen to you, an admitted terrorist who claims to be from Taiwan?

> Don't you see that nobody wants to talk to
> you (except me, sometimes, of course)?

I don't agree, I think some people would talk to me if it weren't for CIA stalking threats. If not, I would leave and start a new life in another state and make friends and social connections there...I don't insist that any individual person be my "companionship slave." I insist upon equal courtesy at stores, yes, but I'm not trying to gangpress anyone into talking to me, I don't do that.

> Or think you are indispensable to the
> world,

Actually yes.

> assuming again that everybody should listen to your big-headed preach
> or personal value to success while you are a loser.

No, I "preach" to win my freedom. The crimes against me have met a response; the response would end if you would end.

> Do you allow people the
> freedom not to listen to you? Do you still expect any sensible firm to hire a nut?
>

Uh, yes, but it comes at a cost, given that the democratically-elected US government has attacked me. Voters who support the government, with tax dollars, votes, and campaigning, are responsible.

I am not a nut and I do expect firms to want to hire me and/or buy my IP if I'm liberated. Perhaps you are trying to provide "cover" to firms who might want to discriminate against me or mistreat me. Are you going to provide a mailing address for those firms to track you down if your right-wing advice turns out to blow up in their face when it doesn't go their way?

> Objection? Post all your STEM 'innovation' to see the truth. (Don't reply those
> CIA crap of your leader that probably only I can understand, but decided to leave
> it to you to enjoy yourself. This is my experiment).

I posted enough, I try not to work for free. I want my rights and liberty back.

Your words don't even make sense. If you're doing some "measurement of my responses to your drivel" experiment, perhaps related to perceived enthusiasm/effort behind each reply, or if you're trying to desensitize people to your stupid way of debating--"Oh, it's just w-i-j...don't mind him, he's always like that, he's so funny and feisty, I like him and don't care if he's a little rough around the edges in terms of not being a neo-Nazi"--then I think you'll find your little persuasive daydream, if it's not just a fake fluff cover, to wind up leading you to disappointment. You're wasting your time.

-Philip White

On Thursday, 17 March 2022 at 00:33:21 UTC+8, B.H. wrote:
> On Wednesday, March 16, 2022 at 3:43:26 AM UTC-4, wij wrote:
> > On Wednesday, 16 March 2022 at 08:43:10 UTC+8, B.H. wrote:
> > > On Tuesday, March 15, 2022 at 8:39:51 PM UTC-4, wij wrote:
> > >...
> > > Stop saying things you have no authority to state; you don't even control my release at all.
> > >
> > > Why don't you post less? Nothing you say even relates to anything that you have said before it.
> > >
> > > Your role is a waste; you don't need to be here and aren't adding any value to yourself or your backers.
> > >
> > > You were never "giving me a chance," you are just an internet CIA-backed scammer. The CIA can't muster much better talent than you any more, that's the beauty of "logic eluding the unfair." Your type is the best DOS has to offer now, hah.
> > >
> > > -Philip White
> > Why I should stop? Feel lost? This is a response to your request, isn't it?
> > Besides, this is internet, I can say whatever I want, legally (from your words).
> Your conduct is illegal under US law, and highly immoral. You cannot say whatever you want on the internet, that is not how US law works.

Tell Philip White your this opinion.

> > Everybody knows what your skill level is (less than a 15 years old beginner).
> No.

Don't be shy. Everybody knows you are less good in STEM.

> > And you are still posting your funny 'innovations' shamelessly or opinions
> > everyday, fear some one non-existed would steal your junk.
> No evidence presented by you --> No serious argument presented by you --> No need for me to say much to show that you have no case.

I have tons of your posts backup my claim.

> > Every time people
> > respond to you, you reply with nut's words. Are you assuming everybody is
> > blind, retarded, not as bright as you are to do this, which is indirect insults to
> > all the internet, including US citizen.
> There is nothing wrong with being mentally retarded, that is a medical condition. Have you ever tried to befriend a person with a mental health disability? What about a black person? What about a Jewish person?
Not for self-inflicted retarded, disabled.

> My comments are fine and yours are in support of fascism, as you yourself have admitted. Would you care to admit that again? You're a fascist, right? And you're talking in English asking people from English-speaking countries to listen to you, an admitted terrorist who claims to be from Taiwan?

I copy your conduct to find out it is not that different from Nazi's. You
contain people in smoke chamber, let them suffer, I just scare to eat them.
I already told you where I am from. Are you Zazi ally from WW-2?
Fair, you speak 'English' to the one from Heaven.

> > Don't you see that nobody wants to talk to
> > you (except me, sometimes, of course)?
> I don't agree, I think some people would talk to me if it weren't for CIA stalking threats. If not, I would leave and start a new life in another state and make friends and social connections there...I don't insist that any individual person be my "companionship slave." I insist upon equal courtesy at stores, yes, but I'm not trying to gangpress anyone into talking to me, I don't do that.

So, you admited you kidnap and slave good US citizens, human traffick in
your term. Paid job or volunteer?

> > Or think you are indispensable to the
> > world,
> Actually yes.

DOD contractor's part-time job, funny.

> > assuming again that everybody should listen to your big-headed preach
> > or personal value to success while you are a loser.
> No, I "preach" to win my freedom. The crimes against me have met a response; the response would end if you would end.
> > Do you allow people the
> > freedom not to listen to you? Do you still expect any sensible firm to hire a nut?
> >
> Uh, yes, but it comes at a cost, given that the democratically-elected US government has attacked me. Voters who support the government, with tax dollars, votes, and campaigning, are responsible.
>
> I am not a nut and I do expect firms to want to hire me and/or buy my IP if I'm liberated. Perhaps you are trying to provide "cover" to firms who might want to discriminate against me or mistreat me. Are you going to provide a mailing address for those firms to track you down if your right-wing advice turns out to blow up in their face when it doesn't go their way?

As said, you have to provide a functional algorithm you claimed.
That is the minimum to prove you deserve it.

> > Objection? Post all your STEM 'innovation' to see the truth. (Don't reply those
> > CIA crap of your leader that probably only I can understand, but decided to leave
> > it to you to enjoy yourself. This is my experiment).
> I posted enough, I try not to work for free. I want my rights and liberty back.
>
> Your words don't even make sense. If you're doing some "measurement of my responses to your drivel" experiment, perhaps related to perceived enthusiasm/effort behind each reply, or if you're trying to desensitize people to your stupid way of debating--"Oh, it's just w-i-j...don't mind him, he's always like that, he's so funny and feisty, I like him and don't care if he's a little rough around the edges in terms of not being a neo-Nazi"--then I think you'll find your little persuasive daydream, if it's not just a fake fluff cover, to wind up leading you to disappointment. You're wasting your time.
>
> -Philip White

On Wednesday, March 16, 2022 at 3:25:21 PM UTC-4, wij wrote:
> On Thursday, 17 March 2022 at 00:33:21 UTC+8, B.H. wrote:
> > On Wednesday, March 16, 2022 at 3:43:26 AM UTC-4, wij wrote:
> > > On Wednesday, 16 March 2022 at 08:43:10 UTC+8, B.H. wrote:
> > > > On Tuesday, March 15, 2022 at 8:39:51 PM UTC-4, wij wrote:
> > > >...
> > > > Stop saying things you have no authority to state; you don't even control my release at all.
> > > >
> > > > Why don't you post less? Nothing you say even relates to anything that you have said before it.
> > > >
> > > > Your role is a waste; you don't need to be here and aren't adding any value to yourself or your backers.
> > > >
> > > > You were never "giving me a chance," you are just an internet CIA-backed scammer. The CIA can't muster much better talent than you any more, that's the beauty of "logic eluding the unfair." Your type is the best DOS has to offer now, hah.
> > > >
> > > > -Philip White
> > > Why I should stop? Feel lost? This is a response to your request, isn't it?
> > > Besides, this is internet, I can say whatever I want, legally (from your words).
> > Your conduct is illegal under US law, and highly immoral. You cannot say whatever you want on the internet, that is not how US law works.
> Tell Philip White your this opinion.

You mean, you would prefer not to debate this further? Good, I'm glad you appear to have conceded that you're breaking the law.

> > > Everybody knows what your skill level is (less than a 15 years old beginner).
> > No.
> Don't be shy. Everybody knows you are less good in STEM.

Than whom? No one in math/CS?

> > > And you are still posting your funny 'innovations' shamelessly or opinions
> > > everyday, fear some one non-existed would steal your junk.
> > No evidence presented by you --> No serious argument presented by you --> No need for me to say much to show that you have no case.
> I have tons of your posts backup my claim.

So present one.

> > > Every time people
> > > respond to you, you reply with nut's words. Are you assuming everybody is
> > > blind, retarded, not as bright as you are to do this, which is indirect insults to
> > > all the internet, including US citizen.
> > There is nothing wrong with being mentally retarded, that is a medical condition. Have you ever tried to befriend a person with a mental health disability? What about a black person? What about a Jewish person?
> Not for self-inflicted retarded, disabled.

Another awful opinion. Why do you hate disabled people, intellectually or otherwise, whether the problematic issue is self-inflicted or not? Do you hate car accident victims too?

> > My comments are fine and yours are in support of fascism, as you yourself have admitted. Would you care to admit that again? You're a fascist, right? And you're talking in English asking people from English-speaking countries to listen to you, an admitted terrorist who claims to be from Taiwan?
> I copy your conduct to find out it is not that different from Nazi's. You
> contain people in smoke chamber, let them suffer, I just scare to eat them.

My conduct is very different from right-wing types; I am very tolerant and use good, peaceful principles to pursue my goal. My speech is appropriate and not an incitement to or endorsement of any illegal activity, in stark contrast to yours.

I don't contain anyone in smoke/gas chambers, that is awful. The one thing I do is criticize/warn/educate people, perhaps damaging their image, according to my smart/secret system for doing it; this can make people less safe if there is a refusal to listen to valid comments about rules/laws/good choices/good behavior, and I am careful to warn people about this. In some cases, if you don't have a good brand, people/organizations won't want to be seen with you or do business with you and your interests will suffer. I damage people and organizations with the truth, not defamation, and it's because I have to to get out of captivity. If you think about it, it's the fault of people like you that, e.g., Wal-mart has a damaged brand via my strategic comments.

> I already told you where I am from. Are you Zazi ally from WW-2?
> Fair, you speak 'English' to the one from Heaven.

I am a liberal capitalist, I don't know what "Zazi" is but I oppose Nazism.

> > > Don't you see that nobody wants to talk to
> > > you (except me, sometimes, of course)?
> > I don't agree, I think some people would talk to me if it weren't for CIA stalking threats. If not, I would leave and start a new life in another state and make friends and social connections there...I don't insist that any individual person be my "companionship slave." I insist upon equal courtesy at stores, yes, but I'm not trying to gangpress anyone into talking to me, I don't do that.
> So, you admited you kidnap and slave good US citizens, human traffick in
> your term. Paid job or volunteer?

No, I don't kidnap or enslave anyone, and I don't support that action. Crime is bad.

> > > Or think you are indispensable to the
> > > world,
> > Actually yes.
> DOD contractor's part-time job, funny.

Your sense of humor is irrelevant. Aren't you acting like you've masked your true identity, presenting yourself as a "controlled character" to interact with me? Is that for in case you get caught supporting trafficking? Why do you need to hide, what's the scandal you want to cover up this time, CIA-backed-jackal-wuss?

> > > assuming again that everybody should listen to your big-headed preach
> > > or personal value to success while you are a loser.
> > No, I "preach" to win my freedom. The crimes against me have met a response; the response would end if you would end.
> > > Do you allow people the
> > > freedom not to listen to you? Do you still expect any sensible firm to hire a nut?
> > >
> > Uh, yes, but it comes at a cost, given that the democratically-elected US government has attacked me. Voters who support the government, with tax dollars, votes, and campaigning, are responsible.
> >
> > I am not a nut and I do expect firms to want to hire me and/or buy my IP if I'm liberated. Perhaps you are trying to provide "cover" to firms who might want to discriminate against me or mistreat me. Are you going to provide a mailing address for those firms to track you down if your right-wing advice turns out to blow up in their face when it doesn't go their way?
> As said, you have to provide a functional algorithm you claimed.
> That is the minimum to prove you deserve it.

I did.

> > > Objection? Post all your STEM 'innovation' to see the truth. (Don't reply those
> > > CIA crap of your leader that probably only I can understand, but decided to leave
> > > it to you to enjoy yourself. This is my experiment).
> > I posted enough, I try not to work for free. I want my rights and liberty back.
> >
> > Your words don't even make sense. If you're doing some "measurement of my responses to your drivel" experiment, perhaps related to perceived enthusiasm/effort behind each reply, or if you're trying to desensitize people to your stupid way of debating--"Oh, it's just w-i-j...don't mind him, he's always like that, he's so funny and feisty, I like him and don't care if he's a little rough around the edges in terms of not being a neo-Nazi"--then I think you'll find your little persuasive daydream, if it's not just a fake fluff cover, to wind up leading you to disappointment. You're wasting your time.
> >
> > -Philip White

-Philip White

On Thursday, 17 March 2022 at 05:08:55 UTC+8, B.H. wrote:
> On Wednesday, March 16, 2022 at 3:25:21 PM UTC-4, wij wrote:
> > On Thursday, 17 March 2022 at 00:33:21 UTC+8, B.H. wrote:
> > > On Wednesday, March 16, 2022 at 3:43:26 AM UTC-4, wij wrote:
> > > > On Wednesday, 16 March 2022 at 08:43:10 UTC+8, B.H. wrote:
> > > > > On Tuesday, March 15, 2022 at 8:39:51 PM UTC-4, wij wrote:
> > > > >...
> > > > > Stop saying things you have no authority to state; you don't even control my release at all.
> > > > >
> > > > > Why don't you post less? Nothing you say even relates to anything that you have said before it.
> > > > >
> > > > > Your role is a waste; you don't need to be here and aren't adding any value to yourself or your backers.
> > > > >
> > > > > You were never "giving me a chance," you are just an internet CIA-backed scammer. The CIA can't muster much better talent than you any more, that's the beauty of "logic eluding the unfair." Your type is the best DOS has to offer now, hah.
> > > > >
> > > > > -Philip White
> > > > Why I should stop? Feel lost? This is a response to your request, isn't it?
> > > > Besides, this is internet, I can say whatever I want, legally (from your words).
> > > Your conduct is illegal under US law, and highly immoral. You cannot say whatever you want on the internet, that is not how US law works.
> > Tell Philip White your this opinion.
> You mean, you would prefer not to debate this further? Good, I'm glad you appear to have conceded that you're breaking the law.
> > > > Everybody knows what your skill level is (less than a 15 years old beginner).
> > > No.
> > Don't be shy. Everybody knows you are less good in STEM.
> Than whom? No one in math/CS?
> > > > And you are still posting your funny 'innovations' shamelessly or opinions
> > > > everyday, fear some one non-existed would steal your junk.
> > > No evidence presented by you --> No serious argument presented by you --> No need for me to say much to show that you have no case.
> > I have tons of your posts backup my claim.
> So present one.
> > > > Every time people
> > > > respond to you, you reply with nut's words. Are you assuming everybody is
> > > > blind, retarded, not as bright as you are to do this, which is indirect insults to
> > > > all the internet, including US citizen.
> > > There is nothing wrong with being mentally retarded, that is a medical condition. Have you ever tried to befriend a person with a mental health disability? What about a black person? What about a Jewish person?
> > Not for self-inflicted retarded, disabled.
> Another awful opinion. Why do you hate disabled people, intellectually or otherwise, whether the problematic issue is self-inflicted or not? Do you hate car accident victims too?
> > > My comments are fine and yours are in support of fascism, as you yourself have admitted. Would you care to admit that again? You're a fascist, right? And you're talking in English asking people from English-speaking countries to listen to you, an admitted terrorist who claims to be from Taiwan?
> > I copy your conduct to find out it is not that different from Nazi's. You
> > contain people in smoke chamber, let them suffer, I just scare to eat them.
> My conduct is very different from right-wing types; I am very tolerant and use good, peaceful principles to pursue my goal. My speech is appropriate and not an incitement to or endorsement of any illegal activity, in stark contrast to yours.
>
> I don't contain anyone in smoke/gas chambers, that is awful. The one thing I do is criticize/warn/educate people, perhaps damaging their image, according to my smart/secret system for doing it; this can make people less safe if there is a refusal to listen to valid comments about rules/laws/good choices/good behavior, and I am careful to warn people about this. In some cases, if you don't have a good brand, people/organizations won't want to be seen with you or do business with you and your interests will suffer. I damage people and organizations with the truth, not defamation, and it's because I have to to get out of captivity. If you think about it, it's the fault of people like you that, e.g., Wal-mart has a damaged brand via my strategic comments.
> > I already told you where I am from. Are you Zazi ally from WW-2?
> > Fair, you speak 'English' to the one from Heaven.
> I am a liberal capitalist, I don't know what "Zazi" is but I oppose Nazism.
> > > > Don't you see that nobody wants to talk to
> > > > you (except me, sometimes, of course)?
> > > I don't agree, I think some people would talk to me if it weren't for CIA stalking threats. If not, I would leave and start a new life in another state and make friends and social connections there...I don't insist that any individual person be my "companionship slave." I insist upon equal courtesy at stores, yes, but I'm not trying to gangpress anyone into talking to me, I don't do that.
> > So, you admited you kidnap and slave good US citizens, human traffick in
> > your term. Paid job or volunteer?
> No, I don't kidnap or enslave anyone, and I don't support that action. Crime is bad.
> > > > Or think you are indispensable to the
> > > > world,
> > > Actually yes.
> > DOD contractor's part-time job, funny.
> Your sense of humor is irrelevant. Aren't you acting like you've masked your true identity, presenting yourself as a "controlled character" to interact with me? Is that for in case you get caught supporting trafficking? Why do you need to hide, what's the scandal you want to cover up this time, CIA-backed-jackal-wuss?
> > > > assuming again that everybody should listen to your big-headed preach
> > > > or personal value to success while you are a loser.
> > > No, I "preach" to win my freedom. The crimes against me have met a response; the response would end if you would end.
> > > > Do you allow people the
> > > > freedom not to listen to you? Do you still expect any sensible firm to hire a nut?
> > > >
> > > Uh, yes, but it comes at a cost, given that the democratically-elected US government has attacked me. Voters who support the government, with tax dollars, votes, and campaigning, are responsible.
> > >
> > > I am not a nut and I do expect firms to want to hire me and/or buy my IP if I'm liberated. Perhaps you are trying to provide "cover" to firms who might want to discriminate against me or mistreat me. Are you going to provide a mailing address for those firms to track you down if your right-wing advice turns out to blow up in their face when it doesn't go their way?
> > As said, you have to provide a functional algorithm you claimed.
> > That is the minimum to prove you deserve it.
> I did.
> > > > Objection? Post all your STEM 'innovation' to see the truth. (Don't reply those
> > > > CIA crap of your leader that probably only I can understand, but decided to leave
> > > > it to you to enjoy yourself. This is my experiment).
> > > I posted enough, I try not to work for free. I want my rights and liberty back.
> > >
> > > Your words don't even make sense. If you're doing some "measurement of my responses to your drivel" experiment, perhaps related to perceived enthusiasm/effort behind each reply, or if you're trying to desensitize people to your stupid way of debating--"Oh, it's just w-i-j...don't mind him, he's always like that, he's so funny and feisty, I like him and don't care if he's a little rough around the edges in terms of not being a neo-Nazi"--then I think you'll find your little persuasive daydream, if it's not just a fake fluff cover, to wind up leading you to disappointment. You're wasting your time.
> > >
> > > -Philip White
> -Philip White

Too many descriptions contain a same issue: your reasoning system is broken..
I have no reason to enumerate them all for a nut (If you will, >95% of your
posts including this one contain all the material to backup my 'assert').
It seems your job is not to reasoning the truth but labeling me and drive me
out from the debate you know you cannot win.

As said, you have to provide a functional algorithm you claimed.
I demand this the 'minimal', so you can be 'truly' liberated. Keep playing with
your prisoners and CIA bots. Don't waste my time.

On Wednesday, March 16, 2022 at 6:43:44 PM UTC-4, wij wrote:
> On Thursday, 17 March 2022 at 05:08:55 UTC+8, B.H. wrote:
> > On Wednesday, March 16, 2022 at 3:25:21 PM UTC-4, wij wrote:
> > > On Thursday, 17 March 2022 at 00:33:21 UTC+8, B.H. wrote:
> > > > On Wednesday, March 16, 2022 at 3:43:26 AM UTC-4, wij wrote:
> > > > > On Wednesday, 16 March 2022 at 08:43:10 UTC+8, B.H. wrote:
> > > > > > On Tuesday, March 15, 2022 at 8:39:51 PM UTC-4, wij wrote:
> > > > > >...
> > > > > > Stop saying things you have no authority to state; you don't even control my release at all.
> > > > > >
> > > > > > Why don't you post less? Nothing you say even relates to anything that you have said before it.
> > > > > >
> > > > > > Your role is a waste; you don't need to be here and aren't adding any value to yourself or your backers.
> > > > > >
> > > > > > You were never "giving me a chance," you are just an internet CIA-backed scammer. The CIA can't muster much better talent than you any more, that's the beauty of "logic eluding the unfair." Your type is the best DOS has to offer now, hah.
> > > > > >
> > > > > > -Philip White
> > > > > Why I should stop? Feel lost? This is a response to your request, isn't it?
> > > > > Besides, this is internet, I can say whatever I want, legally (from your words).
> > > > Your conduct is illegal under US law, and highly immoral. You cannot say whatever you want on the internet, that is not how US law works.
> > > Tell Philip White your this opinion.
> > You mean, you would prefer not to debate this further? Good, I'm glad you appear to have conceded that you're breaking the law.
> > > > > Everybody knows what your skill level is (less than a 15 years old beginner).
> > > > No.
> > > Don't be shy. Everybody knows you are less good in STEM.
> > Than whom? No one in math/CS?
> > > > > And you are still posting your funny 'innovations' shamelessly or opinions
> > > > > everyday, fear some one non-existed would steal your junk.
> > > > No evidence presented by you --> No serious argument presented by you --> No need for me to say much to show that you have no case.
> > > I have tons of your posts backup my claim.
> > So present one.
> > > > > Every time people
> > > > > respond to you, you reply with nut's words. Are you assuming everybody is
> > > > > blind, retarded, not as bright as you are to do this, which is indirect insults to
> > > > > all the internet, including US citizen.
> > > > There is nothing wrong with being mentally retarded, that is a medical condition. Have you ever tried to befriend a person with a mental health disability? What about a black person? What about a Jewish person?
> > > Not for self-inflicted retarded, disabled.
> > Another awful opinion. Why do you hate disabled people, intellectually or otherwise, whether the problematic issue is self-inflicted or not? Do you hate car accident victims too?
> > > > My comments are fine and yours are in support of fascism, as you yourself have admitted. Would you care to admit that again? You're a fascist, right? And you're talking in English asking people from English-speaking countries to listen to you, an admitted terrorist who claims to be from Taiwan?
> > > I copy your conduct to find out it is not that different from Nazi's. You
> > > contain people in smoke chamber, let them suffer, I just scare to eat them.
> > My conduct is very different from right-wing types; I am very tolerant and use good, peaceful principles to pursue my goal. My speech is appropriate and not an incitement to or endorsement of any illegal activity, in stark contrast to yours.
> >
> > I don't contain anyone in smoke/gas chambers, that is awful. The one thing I do is criticize/warn/educate people, perhaps damaging their image, according to my smart/secret system for doing it; this can make people less safe if there is a refusal to listen to valid comments about rules/laws/good choices/good behavior, and I am careful to warn people about this. In some cases, if you don't have a good brand, people/organizations won't want to be seen with you or do business with you and your interests will suffer. I damage people and organizations with the truth, not defamation, and it's because I have to to get out of captivity. If you think about it, it's the fault of people like you that, e.g., Wal-mart has a damaged brand via my strategic comments.
> > > I already told you where I am from. Are you Zazi ally from WW-2?
> > > Fair, you speak 'English' to the one from Heaven.
> > I am a liberal capitalist, I don't know what "Zazi" is but I oppose Nazism.
> > > > > Don't you see that nobody wants to talk to
> > > > > you (except me, sometimes, of course)?
> > > > I don't agree, I think some people would talk to me if it weren't for CIA stalking threats. If not, I would leave and start a new life in another state and make friends and social connections there...I don't insist that any individual person be my "companionship slave." I insist upon equal courtesy at stores, yes, but I'm not trying to gangpress anyone into talking to me, I don't do that.
> > > So, you admited you kidnap and slave good US citizens, human traffick in
> > > your term. Paid job or volunteer?
> > No, I don't kidnap or enslave anyone, and I don't support that action. Crime is bad.
> > > > > Or think you are indispensable to the
> > > > > world,
> > > > Actually yes.
> > > DOD contractor's part-time job, funny.
> > Your sense of humor is irrelevant. Aren't you acting like you've masked your true identity, presenting yourself as a "controlled character" to interact with me? Is that for in case you get caught supporting trafficking? Why do you need to hide, what's the scandal you want to cover up this time, CIA-backed-jackal-wuss?
> > > > > assuming again that everybody should listen to your big-headed preach
> > > > > or personal value to success while you are a loser.
> > > > No, I "preach" to win my freedom. The crimes against me have met a response; the response would end if you would end.
> > > > > Do you allow people the
> > > > > freedom not to listen to you? Do you still expect any sensible firm to hire a nut?
> > > > >
> > > > Uh, yes, but it comes at a cost, given that the democratically-elected US government has attacked me. Voters who support the government, with tax dollars, votes, and campaigning, are responsible.
> > > >
> > > > I am not a nut and I do expect firms to want to hire me and/or buy my IP if I'm liberated. Perhaps you are trying to provide "cover" to firms who might want to discriminate against me or mistreat me. Are you going to provide a mailing address for those firms to track you down if your right-wing advice turns out to blow up in their face when it doesn't go their way?
> > > As said, you have to provide a functional algorithm you claimed.
> > > That is the minimum to prove you deserve it.
> > I did.
> > > > > Objection? Post all your STEM 'innovation' to see the truth. (Don't reply those
> > > > > CIA crap of your leader that probably only I can understand, but decided to leave
> > > > > it to you to enjoy yourself. This is my experiment).
> > > > I posted enough, I try not to work for free. I want my rights and liberty back.
> > > >
> > > > Your words don't even make sense. If you're doing some "measurement of my responses to your drivel" experiment, perhaps related to perceived enthusiasm/effort behind each reply, or if you're trying to desensitize people to your stupid way of debating--"Oh, it's just w-i-j...don't mind him, he's always like that, he's so funny and feisty, I like him and don't care if he's a little rough around the edges in terms of not being a neo-Nazi"--then I think you'll find your little persuasive daydream, if it's not just a fake fluff cover, to wind up leading you to disappointment. You're wasting your time.
> > > >
> > > > -Philip White
> > -Philip White
> Too many descriptions contain a same issue: your reasoning system is broken.
> I have no reason to enumerate them all for a nut (If you will, >95% of your
> posts including this one contain all the material to backup my 'assert').
> It seems your job is not to reasoning the truth but labeling me and drive me
> out from the debate you know you cannot win.
> As said, you have to provide a functional algorithm you claimed.
> I demand this the 'minimal', so you can be 'truly' liberated. Keep playing with
> your prisoners and CIA bots. Don't waste my time.

On Monday, March 14, 2022 at 2:40:22 PM UTC-4, B.H. wrote:
> On Monday, March 14, 2022 at 11:34:54 AM UTC-4, B.H. wrote:
> > On Monday, March 14, 2022 at 5:01:07 AM UTC-4, wij wrote:
> > > I pick the data compression algorithm to your challenge (because, I believe more people would know about and be interested in data compression, and algorithm is
> > > more difficult to cheat than abstract theories):
> > > Excerpt from https://groups.google.com/g/comp.theory/c/vSE_qYBEDf8/m/J3sLILkgAwAJ
> > >
> > > - Obtain a binary string corresponding to the file.
> > > - Treat the binary string as a number and factor it.
> > > - Given any large prime factors, write down the number in a sense as m + 1, and factor m .
> > > - Keep going until you have only a finite collection of very small prime factors.
> > >
> > > ------
> > > Actually, just by seeing those sketch, I know I don't have to ask more.
> > > 1. By advertising PTIME, I would assume you don't understand real program, thus
> > > algoritms. (Had anyone heard of a "PTIME sort" algorithm?).
> > > 2. From "Obtain a binary string corresponding to the file."
> > > I would wonder what kind of system you were thinking?
> > > 3. I don't think you can factorize an average 20Mbyte image file in 100 years,
> > > let alone the rest stuff and the basic: How can factorization compress data?
> > > You just need to express your compression algorithm clearly. My premature
> > > stereotype above can be ignored. I just want to know if I made a big mistake about you.
> > I have the updated answer fully written out, and am checking it. It looks right. It contains no proofs; you get what you pay for, I just wrote an algorithm that looks right.
> >
> > I'll check it over some more and post it later today or early tomorrow. I am not checking it over that much, just enough to make sure that it's right and fully error-free.
> >
> > -Philip White
> OK, here is the answer to your challenge. I warn you: Never demand cutting-edge math help from a human trafficking victim or convicted criminal seeking release, even with consent. Guilt or innocence is the standard for securing release, from prison only (since human trafficking is just a crime), not achievement; I submit this merely to bolster my case since I am nowhere near being able to be properly helped by any "justice" system.
>
> Here is the updated solution:
>
> - Assume that this test for finding a j-digit base-10 prime number works: http://www.sci.brooklyn.cuny.edu/~yarmish/finding%20large%20primes%208.5x11.pdf
> - We are given a very large number (that represents a file), m, to compress. Consider a number larger than 10^((1000)^10), for example.
> - We seek a nearby power of a prime power (r^w=q)^k, in the sense that m - q^k is small. (The prime is r, and q = r^w.)
> - Let b be the number of bits needed to express m.
> - Use a calculator program to compute an approximation, a = 2^(b/9) .
> - Round the value of a down to the nearest integer.
> - Let d be the number of base-10 digits in a.
> - Using the process linked to above, find the smallest-sized (storage-size-wise) prime number r and integer pair w such that r^w = q has (d-1) base-10 digits.
> - Find the largest value k such that q^k is the largest possible integer such that this integer is less than m.
> - Compute v = m - z * q^k, where z is selected to be the largest possible integer that that yields non-negative v, such that z < q .
> - Record the values of the following 3-tuple: (r, w, k)
> - Note that v < z * q^k , and thus it is much smaller than m.
> - Now, repeat this process on both v and z, and concatenate the ordered 3-tuple from previous repetitions (perhaps written as a tree structure in prefix notation using base-4), that repetition, and all successive repetitions to form a string, S, until m is "very small."
> - When you are done, write down the overall string, S, followed by the #-separated number 1 (if this is the first time th process is being run).
> - Repeat the entire process above on S, taken as an integer, and increment the value of "1" to "2", "2" to "3", etc., as many times as desired; repeat until the string cannot be made smaller.
>
> The big-picture version is: We find a very large but not too large “suitable new base” q to express m in. We record q as a prime power, the correct large power k it is raised to, and the value z it is multiplied by when we subtract from m to obtain v, the value that remains after subtracting the first base-q digit from m. We then repeat this process on v repeatedly until we deem that v is “small enough.” Based on careful selection of a in the process, we ensure that the length of m as a binary or base-10 string of bits/digits decreases by about 1/9 every time this process is applied, disregarding for now the size of recorded values of r, w, and k, which are relatively short strings that are recorded as part of the compressed string. By effectively multiplying the length of the string by approximately 8/9 each time we run the process, while writing down much smaller representations of the base q, which equals r^w, as we diminish the size of the original number m, we compress the string to be “much smaller,” vaguely speaking, than it started out being. Again, we can repeat this overall process with a recorded integer signifying the overall integer number of times the process has been run to make the string smaller and smaller, ultimately yielding a compressed string with an integer number of times to unpack it. It is easy to see that the string can be compressed and decompressed in polynomial time, with randomness needed for the primality test in the compression step.
>
> Extremely succinct summary: Re-write a given large integer with a particular different, succinctly representable base that can be written as a prime power [1], and then recursively compress the leftmost digit of m in that base and the rest of the representation of m without that digit. Repeat this process itself, keeping track of how many times you’ve done it, until you have a string and integer pair that cannot be made any smaller.
>
> Note: We would not want for the r value to be 2 every time, if we were indeed decreasing the string length by multiplying it by 8/9 each time; we want to decrease the size of the string each time we run the routine, so selecting large primes r will typically be what we want to do. No proof that we can “usually find” a suitably large prime value for r to minimize the size of (r,w) is included, although it seems to be true. Also, I haven’t fully established the exact effectiveness (i.e., worst-case extent of compression) of the algorithm presented, having not spent the time to write any proofs about this updated version of the idea. It looks very good, though.
>
> [1] Think of writing “3^1000000” as (3,1000000) instead of in binary or base-10.
>
> (I’m glad I decided to check this; I caught and fixed a few rather minor glitches.)
>
> - - -
>
>
> Write a response if you have an objection or have found a mistake. Try not to waste my time with fluff; present your argument carefully if you want to present one.
>
> Of course, any mathematically literate person who gets programming and would give this a little thought would see that it is correct. I didn't write a full proof or check my work too many times over, though; you get what you pay for. Maybe if you present a coherent objection I'll write a proof establishing that you are wrong.
>
> Don't say it was trivial to you, since you clearly didn't see it yourself..
>
> How many more times are you going to lie to the world and insist that I am a scammer person and must prove otherwise by sharing math explanations with you? What are the consequences of doing that, even once? Do you insist that every innovator or student go through this process to prove his/her ability to be genuine? What will happen to American STEM because of this, is that your plan? It might work, I see that; who would want to major in STEM given the zero-ethics, zero-accountability culture of it, even in the US? Are you going to ask Grigori Perelman or Terence Tao if they are scammer people, too? Why is it just me, I wonder? What do institutions like Harvard and MIT have to say about this kind of dishonorable conduct, I wonder?
>
> -Philip White (philip...@yahoo.com)

One slight issue to correct on this, since I could at least in theory still patent it (that's probably why more people haven't implemented it yet...it will be a disaster for Facebook next March if I'm not out by then): The digit of the large prime power should be compressed, too. There are three recursive calls within the routine, not 2.

-Philip White (philipjwhite@yahoo.com)

On Friday, June 24, 2022 at 12:09:53 PM UTC-4, B.H. wrote:
> On Monday, March 14, 2022 at 2:40:22 PM UTC-4, B.H. wrote:
> > On Monday, March 14, 2022 at 11:34:54 AM UTC-4, B.H. wrote:
> > > On Monday, March 14, 2022 at 5:01:07 AM UTC-4, wij wrote:
> > > > I pick the data compression algorithm to your challenge (because, I believe more people would know about and be interested in data compression, and algorithm is
> > > > more difficult to cheat than abstract theories):
> > > > Excerpt from https://groups.google.com/g/comp.theory/c/vSE_qYBEDf8/m/J3sLILkgAwAJ
> > > >
> > > > - Obtain a binary string corresponding to the file.
> > > > - Treat the binary string as a number and factor it.
> > > > - Given any large prime factors, write down the number in a sense as m + 1, and factor m .
> > > > - Keep going until you have only a finite collection of very small prime factors.
> > > >
> > > > ------
> > > > Actually, just by seeing those sketch, I know I don't have to ask more.
> > > > 1. By advertising PTIME, I would assume you don't understand real program, thus
> > > > algoritms. (Had anyone heard of a "PTIME sort" algorithm?).
> > > > 2. From "Obtain a binary string corresponding to the file."
> > > > I would wonder what kind of system you were thinking?
> > > > 3. I don't think you can factorize an average 20Mbyte image file in 100 years,
> > > > let alone the rest stuff and the basic: How can factorization compress data?
> > > > You just need to express your compression algorithm clearly. My premature
> > > > stereotype above can be ignored. I just want to know if I made a big mistake about you.
> > > I have the updated answer fully written out, and am checking it. It looks right. It contains no proofs; you get what you pay for, I just wrote an algorithm that looks right.
> > >
> > > I'll check it over some more and post it later today or early tomorrow. I am not checking it over that much, just enough to make sure that it's right and fully error-free.
> > >
> > > -Philip White
> > OK, here is the answer to your challenge. I warn you: Never demand cutting-edge math help from a human trafficking victim or convicted criminal seeking release, even with consent. Guilt or innocence is the standard for securing release, from prison only (since human trafficking is just a crime), not achievement; I submit this merely to bolster my case since I am nowhere near being able to be properly helped by any "justice" system.
> >
> > Here is the updated solution:
> >
> > - Assume that this test for finding a j-digit base-10 prime number works: http://www.sci.brooklyn.cuny.edu/~yarmish/finding%20large%20primes%208.5x11.pdf
> > - We are given a very large number (that represents a file), m, to compress. Consider a number larger than 10^((1000)^10), for example.
> > - We seek a nearby power of a prime power (r^w=q)^k, in the sense that m - q^k is small. (The prime is r, and q = r^w.)
> > - Let b be the number of bits needed to express m.
> > - Use a calculator program to compute an approximation, a = 2^(b/9) .
> > - Round the value of a down to the nearest integer.
> > - Let d be the number of base-10 digits in a.
> > - Using the process linked to above, find the smallest-sized (storage-size-wise) prime number r and integer pair w such that r^w = q has (d-1) base-10 digits.
> > - Find the largest value k such that q^k is the largest possible integer such that this integer is less than m.
> > - Compute v = m - z * q^k, where z is selected to be the largest possible integer that that yields non-negative v, such that z < q .
> > - Record the values of the following 3-tuple: (r, w, k)
> > - Note that v < z * q^k , and thus it is much smaller than m.
> > - Now, repeat this process on both v and z, and concatenate the ordered 3-tuple from previous repetitions (perhaps written as a tree structure in prefix notation using base-4), that repetition, and all successive repetitions to form a string, S, until m is "very small."
> > - When you are done, write down the overall string, S, followed by the #-separated number 1 (if this is the first time th process is being run).
> > - Repeat the entire process above on S, taken as an integer, and increment the value of "1" to "2", "2" to "3", etc., as many times as desired; repeat until the string cannot be made smaller.
> >
> > The big-picture version is: We find a very large but not too large “suitable new base” q to express m in. We record q as a prime power, the correct large power k it is raised to, and the value z it is multiplied by when we subtract from m to obtain v, the value that remains after subtracting the first base-q digit from m. We then repeat this process on v repeatedly until we deem that v is “small enough.” Based on careful selection of a in the process, we ensure that the length of m as a binary or base-10 string of bits/digits decreases by about 1/9 every time this process is applied, disregarding for now the size of recorded values of r, w, and k, which are relatively short strings that are recorded as part of the compressed string. By effectively multiplying the length of the string by approximately 8/9 each time we run the process, while writing down much smaller representations of the base q, which equals r^w, as we diminish the size of the original number m, we compress the string to be “much smaller,” vaguely speaking, than it started out being. Again, we can repeat this overall process with a recorded integer signifying the overall integer number of times the process has been run to make the string smaller and smaller, ultimately yielding a compressed string with an integer number of times to unpack it. It is easy to see that the string can be compressed and decompressed in polynomial time, with randomness needed for the primality test in the compression step.
> >
> > Extremely succinct summary: Re-write a given large integer with a particular different, succinctly representable base that can be written as a prime power [1], and then recursively compress the leftmost digit of m in that base and the rest of the representation of m without that digit. Repeat this process itself, keeping track of how many times you’ve done it, until you have a string and integer pair that cannot be made any smaller.
> >
> > Note: We would not want for the r value to be 2 every time, if we were indeed decreasing the string length by multiplying it by 8/9 each time; we want to decrease the size of the string each time we run the routine, so selecting large primes r will typically be what we want to do. No proof that we can “usually find” a suitably large prime value for r to minimize the size of (r,w) is included, although it seems to be true. Also, I haven’t fully established the exact effectiveness (i.e., worst-case extent of compression) of the algorithm presented, having not spent the time to write any proofs about this updated version of the idea. It looks very good, though.
> >
> > [1] Think of writing “3^1000000” as (3,1000000) instead of in binary or base-10.
> >
> > (I’m glad I decided to check this; I caught and fixed a few rather minor glitches.)
> >
> > - - -
> >
> >
> > Write a response if you have an objection or have found a mistake. Try not to waste my time with fluff; present your argument carefully if you want to present one.
> >
> > Of course, any mathematically literate person who gets programming and would give this a little thought would see that it is correct. I didn't write a full proof or check my work too many times over, though; you get what you pay for. Maybe if you present a coherent objection I'll write a proof establishing that you are wrong.
> >
> > Don't say it was trivial to you, since you clearly didn't see it yourself.
> >
> > How many more times are you going to lie to the world and insist that I am a scammer person and must prove otherwise by sharing math explanations with you? What are the consequences of doing that, even once? Do you insist that every innovator or student go through this process to prove his/her ability to be genuine? What will happen to American STEM because of this, is that your plan? It might work, I see that; who would want to major in STEM given the zero-ethics, zero-accountability culture of it, even in the US? Are you going to ask Grigori Perelman or Terence Tao if they are scammer people, too? Why is it just me, I wonder? What do institutions like Harvard and MIT have to say about this kind of dishonorable conduct, I wonder?
> >
> > -Philip White (philip...@yahoo.com)
> One slight issue to correct on this, since I could at least in theory still patent it (that's probably why more people haven't implemented it yet...it will be a disaster for Facebook next March if I'm not out by then): The digit of the large prime power should be compressed, too. There are three recursive calls within the routine, not 2.
>
> -Philip White (philip...@yahoo.com)

On Saturday, 25 June 2022 at 00:34:27 UTC+8, B.H. wrote:
> On Friday, June 24, 2022 at 12:09:53 PM UTC-4, B.H. wrote:
> > On Monday, March 14, 2022 at 2:40:22 PM UTC-4, B.H. wrote:
> > > On Monday, March 14, 2022 at 11:34:54 AM UTC-4, B.H. wrote:
> > > > On Monday, March 14, 2022 at 5:01:07 AM UTC-4, wij wrote:
> > > > > I pick the data compression algorithm to your challenge (because, I believe more people would know about and be interested in data compression, and algorithm is
> > > > > more difficult to cheat than abstract theories):
> > > > > Excerpt from https://groups.google.com/g/comp.theory/c/vSE_qYBEDf8/m/J3sLILkgAwAJ
> > > > >
> > > > > - Obtain a binary string corresponding to the file.
> > > > > - Treat the binary string as a number and factor it.
> > > > > - Given any large prime factors, write down the number in a sense as m + 1, and factor m .
> > > > > - Keep going until you have only a finite collection of very small prime factors.
> > > > >
> > > > > ------
> > > > > Actually, just by seeing those sketch, I know I don't have to ask more.
> > > > > 1. By advertising PTIME, I would assume you don't understand real program, thus
> > > > > algoritms. (Had anyone heard of a "PTIME sort" algorithm?).
> > > > > 2. From "Obtain a binary string corresponding to the file."
> > > > > I would wonder what kind of system you were thinking?
> > > > > 3. I don't think you can factorize an average 20Mbyte image file in 100 years,
> > > > > let alone the rest stuff and the basic: How can factorization compress data?
> > > > > You just need to express your compression algorithm clearly. My premature
> > > > > stereotype above can be ignored. I just want to know if I made a big mistake about you.
> > > > I have the updated answer fully written out, and am checking it. It looks right. It contains no proofs; you get what you pay for, I just wrote an algorithm that looks right.
> > > >
> > > > I'll check it over some more and post it later today or early tomorrow. I am not checking it over that much, just enough to make sure that it's right and fully error-free.
> > > >
> > > > -Philip White
> > > OK, here is the answer to your challenge. I warn you: Never demand cutting-edge math help from a human trafficking victim or convicted criminal seeking release, even with consent. Guilt or innocence is the standard for securing release, from prison only (since human trafficking is just a crime), not achievement; I submit this merely to bolster my case since I am nowhere near being able to be properly helped by any "justice" system.
> > >
> > > Here is the updated solution:
> > >
> > > - Assume that this test for finding a j-digit base-10 prime number works: http://www.sci.brooklyn.cuny.edu/~yarmish/finding%20large%20primes%208..5x11.pdf
> > > - We are given a very large number (that represents a file), m, to compress. Consider a number larger than 10^((1000)^10), for example.
> > > - We seek a nearby power of a prime power (r^w=q)^k, in the sense that m - q^k is small. (The prime is r, and q = r^w.)
> > > - Let b be the number of bits needed to express m.
> > > - Use a calculator program to compute an approximation, a = 2^(b/9) .
> > > - Round the value of a down to the nearest integer.
> > > - Let d be the number of base-10 digits in a.
> > > - Using the process linked to above, find the smallest-sized (storage-size-wise) prime number r and integer pair w such that r^w = q has (d-1) base-10 digits.
> > > - Find the largest value k such that q^k is the largest possible integer such that this integer is less than m.
> > > - Compute v = m - z * q^k, where z is selected to be the largest possible integer that that yields non-negative v, such that z < q .
> > > - Record the values of the following 3-tuple: (r, w, k)
> > > - Note that v < z * q^k , and thus it is much smaller than m.
> > > - Now, repeat this process on both v and z, and concatenate the ordered 3-tuple from previous repetitions (perhaps written as a tree structure in prefix notation using base-4), that repetition, and all successive repetitions to form a string, S, until m is "very small."
> > > - When you are done, write down the overall string, S, followed by the #-separated number 1 (if this is the first time th process is being run).
> > > - Repeat the entire process above on S, taken as an integer, and increment the value of "1" to "2", "2" to "3", etc., as many times as desired; repeat until the string cannot be made smaller.
> > >
> > > The big-picture version is: We find a very large but not too large “suitable new base” q to express m in. We record q as a prime power, the correct large power k it is raised to, and the value z it is multiplied by when we subtract from m to obtain v, the value that remains after subtracting the first base-q digit from m. We then repeat this process on v repeatedly until we deem that v is “small enough.” Based on careful selection of a in the process, we ensure that the length of m as a binary or base-10 string of bits/digits decreases by about 1/9 every time this process is applied, disregarding for now the size of recorded values of r, w, and k, which are relatively short strings that are recorded as part of the compressed string. By effectively multiplying the length of the string by approximately 8/9 each time we run the process, while writing down much smaller representations of the base q, which equals r^w, as we diminish the size of the original number m, we compress the string to be “much smaller,” vaguely speaking, than it started out being. Again, we can repeat this overall process with a recorded integer signifying the overall integer number of times the process has been run to make the string smaller and smaller, ultimately yielding a compressed string with an integer number of times to unpack it. It is easy to see that the string can be compressed and decompressed in polynomial time, with randomness needed for the primality test in the compression step.
> > >
> > > Extremely succinct summary: Re-write a given large integer with a particular different, succinctly representable base that can be written as a prime power [1], and then recursively compress the leftmost digit of m in that base and the rest of the representation of m without that digit. Repeat this process itself, keeping track of how many times you’ve done it, until you have a string and integer pair that cannot be made any smaller.
> > >
> > > Note: We would not want for the r value to be 2 every time, if we were indeed decreasing the string length by multiplying it by 8/9 each time; we want to decrease the size of the string each time we run the routine, so selecting large primes r will typically be what we want to do. No proof that we can “usually find” a suitably large prime value for r to minimize the size of (r,w) is included, although it seems to be true. Also, I haven’t fully established the exact effectiveness (i.e., worst-case extent of compression) of the algorithm presented, having not spent the time to write any proofs about this updated version of the idea. It looks very good, though.
> > >
> > > [1] Think of writing “3^1000000” as (3,1000000) instead of in binary or base-10.
> > >
> > > (I’m glad I decided to check this; I caught and fixed a few rather minor glitches.)
> > >
> > > - - -
> > >
> > >
> > > Write a response if you have an objection or have found a mistake. Try not to waste my time with fluff; present your argument carefully if you want to present one.
> > >
> > > Of course, any mathematically literate person who gets programming and would give this a little thought would see that it is correct. I didn't write a full proof or check my work too many times over, though; you get what you pay for. Maybe if you present a coherent objection I'll write a proof establishing that you are wrong.
> > >
> > > Don't say it was trivial to you, since you clearly didn't see it yourself.
> > >
> > > How many more times are you going to lie to the world and insist that I am a scammer person and must prove otherwise by sharing math explanations with you? What are the consequences of doing that, even once? Do you insist that every innovator or student go through this process to prove his/her ability to be genuine? What will happen to American STEM because of this, is that your plan? It might work, I see that; who would want to major in STEM given the zero-ethics, zero-accountability culture of it, even in the US? Are you going to ask Grigori Perelman or Terence Tao if they are scammer people, too? Why is it just me, I wonder? What do institutions like Harvard and MIT have to say about this kind of dishonorable conduct, I wonder?
> > >
> > > -Philip White (philip...@yahoo.com)
> > One slight issue to correct on this, since I could at least in theory still patent it (that's probably why more people haven't implemented it yet....it will be a disaster for Facebook next March if I'm not out by then): The digit of the large prime power should be compressed, too. There are three recursive calls within the routine, not 2.
> >
> > -Philip White (philip...@yahoo.com)
> I take it back--the base was selected carefully, I just forgot how my algorithm worked when I started trying to code it just now. The key is the selection of d.
>
> -Philip