The Ur-Quan Masters Discussion Forum

Break this code:

2s0z5v-1g8m-2m10p-4u13s-6x15d-7b19j-9c21o-11v23o-11f9r4y11r2o14y0a17r-1f21f-3n23y-4l27t-5n31j-8p35o-9s25y8b

It's not so hard.

eiv'a ylaws nfuod ecdob kraei anrgt bhreo grni, spreo lnlay.

No way.
How did you get that?!

o_O

Hey, isn't that an activation code for MS-Office?

LOL^ ... More Like for Windows Vista: Linux Edition ;D

Allright, this is how I did it: (Copy text below in Notepad for solution)

THE ORIGINAL TEXT:
THE TEACHER IS AN IDIOT

FIRST STEP:
On a standard QWERTY keyboard layout, add 1 to each letter (so q->w, e->r, p->a, l->z).

SECOND STEP:
Arrange the letters in a table Number columns and rows starting from the centre:
 _6_4_2_1_3_5_7_
4_Y_J_R_ _ _ _ _
2_Y_R_S_V_J_R_T_
1_O_D_ _S_M_ _ _
3_O_F_O_P_Y_ _ _

THIRD STEP:
Each letter has two corresponding coordinates. Write down this thingies for each letter:
<Coord._Product><Letter><Coord._Sum> - so for the top right Y you have: 24Y10

FOURTH STEP:
Arrange the symbols above (like the 24Y10) in increasing order of the number got by aligning the sum and the product - for 24Y10 this number is 2410, for 16J8 the number is 168 etc..
If two symbols have the same number, put the [one with the letter more at the beginning of the English alphabet] first.
You get:
1S2_2V3_3M4 etc.

FIFTH STEP:
Replace the underlines with random letters (they have no significance, their only use is to fool the one trying to decipher the text.).

SIXTH STEP:
Add +1 to the first number in the series. -2 second, +3 third and so on. The 18th number gets -18, at the 19th number restart from +1.
Right - the dashes were minuses:
2s0_5v-1_8m-2_10p-4_ and so on. The underlines are the random letters with no significance.

this is "not so hard"? o-O

Because:
in fact you could ignore the numbers - just take the 1st, 3rd, 5th etc. letters, subtract 1 on the QWERTY layout and rearrange until you get something.

("Not so hard" because my pocket Colossus (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Colossus_computer) computer can solve it in 0.0024 seconds)

"pocket Colossus computer"... I guess my impression that arbitrary pieces of what you say are total nonsense is right... :-\

My code is one step!

If you can ignore the numbers and do it as you describe, then why even HAVE the complicated encryption process?

paosp doest dooce egner naitg a,gIt .hre

That's the funny part. The numbers are there to make the code seem very... hardcoded.

Under the same circumstances, in a different dimensional timeline parallel to ours, but going back into our Universe, your assumption's truth value corresponds to the first natural number different from zero. Nevertheless, the assumption can determine the buffer of the waterflow in more than one case in many *times*.
Not the "pocket Colossus computer", anyway. There are some guys that could fit an entire room into their pockets, but we can't remember their true name. We call them "Shaggy Ones". You call them Precursors.

I suppose so, although I invented that code a while ago and just decided to use it here...

Is that a Markov chain?!

No, it's not - it's just a simple sentence whose words have been replaced with more intricate phrases meaning the same thing.

You see: "Under the same circumstances" - this one can be cut completely, there's no need to express this - it goes without saying.

"in a different dimensional timeline parallel to ours" - technobabble, though its meaning is irrelevant since the next phrase, "but going back into our Universe" means that in fact we still talk about our Universe. Again, you can cut this part (from "In a different..." to "...into our Universe").

"Nevertheless, the assumption can determine the buffer of the waterflow in more than one case in many *times*." - here the relevant phrase is "in many *times*" - it means that we are talking about different Star Control-like dimensions. Since there are other laws there, this sentence may make sense somewhere. (and yes, in our dimension, it can be considered a Markov chain) Of course, you can cut this one too, it does not relate to your quoted question.

<<Not the "pocket Colossus computer", anyway.>> - this is the real answer to your question: I'm saying that "pocket Colossus computer" is not nonsense, because the "guys that could fit an entire room into their pockets, but we can't remember their true name." (the Precursors) can fit a Colossus computer into their pockets.

Thing is, I never asked a _question_, and it was not at all clearer what the "Not the..." referred to.

If you make abstraction of the first paragraph, it makes sense.

So what you're saying is, what you say makes sense if you completely interpret it around to mean something almost tangental to the original text? Okay...

Almost. I'm saying that my sayings make sense if you completely interpret it around to mean something almost TANGENTIAL to the original text, not tangental.  :)

1) Pedant.

2) My dictionary lists "tangental" as an acceptable spelling.

Sorry. I couldn't resist saying this.