-----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE----- - -> Back when jpinson@fcdarwin.org.ec said.... [Stuff deleted, no value judgment implied] The researchers analyzed the frequency distribution of words found in the works of Shakespeare, and compared them to the other writers of the day. I don't recall the results of the project, but that kind of research would have implications for anonymous postings. It is not too difficult to see how certain spelling errors, word frequency (how often do you say 'I':-) choice of wording, and the working vocabulary of an individual could allow you to identify an anonymous poster. This would be particularly easy if the individual also posted under their real name. [Stuff deleted, no value judgment implied] This brings up the subject of how one can post without leaving an "ASCII fingerprint". I suspect the use of a spelling checker and grammatical checker would help. Perhaps running your text through a language converter, (say English to French) then back would remove many identifying characteristics. Jim Pinson Galapagos Islands PGP key available by finger jpinson@fcdarwin.org.ec - -> to which I reply: It seems to me that the software to "filter" a message through and remove anomalies, standardize punctuations and replace words over 5 letters with more standard words.. etc.. has a kind of utility. I particularly like the two sweep translation program idea. If enough people used this software it would become meaningless to attempt this kind of analysis, which looks to be straightforward enough to give even the persistent investigator a "gut feel" for the identity of an otherwise anonymous poster. It seems that the most solid basis for this kind of message analysis is non-standard use of grammar, spelling, and punctuation. I, for example, use too many commas. Anyone have any information on what factors identify posters? Is it just word frequency analysis or...? It would be easy enough to correct that. - -uni- (Dark) -----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE----- Version: 2.3 iQCVAgUBLNGcxxibHbaiMfO5AQFVIwP+JsuNvRmE1WlFZ7wxvIybg1bTa0FO5/N7 4XrHQ0On1avtoFDjPAmA7dqgrHHscz8LiwYEx1eXx/exOPmZkA2sCg5/AVo61zv6 iBjsqd3o5IgV9L+uXmzl2+OBJ0zpdTyNxiV7VzrKjJqKVlzZgCqbYCB8tN5cOpFj M3FnGQZfSsg= =a1Hf -----END PGP SIGNATURE-----
On Fri, 29 Oct 1993, Dark wrote:
It seems to me that the software to "filter" a message through and remove anomalies, standardize punctuations and replace words over 5 letters with more standard words.. etc.. has a kind of utility.
I remember a sf suggestion a while ago that went like this: a. A mail reader that intelligently filters incoming messages to extract only the factual content. b. A mail sender that intelligntly "stylizes" a factual message with appropriate "fluff". That way I can send you a one line message "watch out for the MDS!", but our computers will communicate with as much polite waffling as possible. The suggestion was a joke but maybe it has applicability :-) PJT - A new poster but a longtime reader.
I remember a sf suggestion a while ago that went like this: a. A mail reader that intelligently filters incoming messages to extract only the factual content. b. A mail sender that intelligntly "stylizes" a factual message with appropriate "fluff". That way I can send you a one line message "watch out for the MDS!", but our computers will communicate with as much polite waffling as possible.
The suggestion was a joke but maybe it has applicability :-)
Yes, however, this isn't too feasable. There's a great quote somewhere in Don Lancaster's Secret Money Machine II that goes along the lines of a bit of text being translated to Russian and back which illustrates just how (in)effective these things can be: IN: The spirit is willing, but the flesh is weak. OUT:The vodka was great, but the mean is rotten.
participants (3)
-
A1 ray arachelian -
Dark -
Phil Taylor