I mean its status as a piece of world class cryptography is overblown. Anyone can jumble a message together and say it’s something special. I have a coding reputation and can attest there’s strength in having applicability be in the balance. Not only that, but the amount of times the sculptor had to correct himself, and the fact that the decoded messages are jibberish even when decoded, just makes it sound like he wanted to kill time.
You have been consistently and provably wrong throughout this entire exchange. Forgive me, but your opinion on its status holds exactly zero weight. Especially when you said that you heard the Cicada 3301 thing (something you got the name wrong of) from a TopTenz video.
I’m going to stick with the people who have worked with the NSA for years and who have broken the first three codes into something that was not jibberish. While I abhor what the NSA does, they are good at what they do. Which is cryptography. And if they’re saying that it actually is something, as well as every other expert in the field, then I’m going to believe that over someone who has a coding reputation.
Is Wikipedia a good enough source for you, because I linked to that too, as long as you wish to posit I am “provably wrong”. Aside from solving it, the NSA, who like anyone in existence can only go by the knowledge given to them in preparation (hence why it took an AI to solve the Zodiac Killer messages, as if one killer is more capable than a whole agency), did not in particular have anything to actually say about the code, which comes off as randomly assembled utterances if you go down to the “solutions” section of the page, the code explicitly having connotations with the CIA, who admitted in the very same section…
On April 19, 2006, Sanborn contacted an online community dedicated to the Kryptos puzzle to inform them that what was once the accepted solution to passage 2 was incorrect. Sanborn said that he made an error in the sculpture by omitting an S in the ciphertext (an X in the plaintext), and he confirmed that the last passage of the plaintext was WESTXLAYERTWO, and not WESTIDBYROWS.
The only reason I haven’t given more sources is due to the temporary rule on Lemmy right now to only use sources from known sites in order to make it easier to spot spam. Had this not been an issue, I’m sure you’d be asked right about now about your, erm, sources.
I mean its status as a piece of world class cryptography is overblown. Anyone can jumble a message together and say it’s something special. I have a coding reputation and can attest there’s strength in having applicability be in the balance. Not only that, but the amount of times the sculptor had to correct himself, and the fact that the decoded messages are jibberish even when decoded, just makes it sound like he wanted to kill time.
You have been consistently and provably wrong throughout this entire exchange. Forgive me, but your opinion on its status holds exactly zero weight. Especially when you said that you heard the Cicada 3301 thing (something you got the name wrong of) from a TopTenz video.
I’m going to stick with the people who have worked with the NSA for years and who have broken the first three codes into something that was not jibberish. While I abhor what the NSA does, they are good at what they do. Which is cryptography. And if they’re saying that it actually is something, as well as every other expert in the field, then I’m going to believe that over someone who has a coding reputation.
This is a waste of my time lol
Is Wikipedia a good enough source for you, because I linked to that too, as long as you wish to posit I am “provably wrong”. Aside from solving it, the NSA, who like anyone in existence can only go by the knowledge given to them in preparation (hence why it took an AI to solve the Zodiac Killer messages, as if one killer is more capable than a whole agency), did not in particular have anything to actually say about the code, which comes off as randomly assembled utterances if you go down to the “solutions” section of the page, the code explicitly having connotations with the CIA, who admitted in the very same section…
The only reason I haven’t given more sources is due to the temporary rule on Lemmy right now to only use sources from known sites in order to make it easier to spot spam. Had this not been an issue, I’m sure you’d be asked right about now about your, erm, sources.