Random Data Compressed 100:1 (Guffaw)

[Michael Motyka]

Ken Brown <k.brown at ccs.bbk.ac.uk> wrote :
>
>Michael Motyka wrote:
>> Here we go :
>> 
>> "As Eric correctly points out, true random input simply cannot be
>> compressed, it doesn't matter how clever you are or how much time and
>> computing power you have access to."
>> 
>> This is a statement of belief isn't it? Odd.
>
>No, it's a logical consequence of his definition of "random" & no more a
>statement of belief than "1+1=2" is. If you use the word to mean
>something else then it might or might not be true in your universe.
>
>Ken
>
Perhaps my universe is off in all six degrees but answer this - which is
it : 

random data cannot be compressed 

or

random data may include recognizable and even repeating patterns 

A string of random data may include anything. Compressibility will vary
with the particular data and the algorithm used. Lucky with one input
set, unlucky with another. I wouldn't try to base a business on getting
lucky with the customer's input data but the absolute statement of
incompressibility is wrong unless you preselect your data sets. Then
they're no longer random and the definition of random becomes circular.

Mike