Posted by Hollywood Jerry on April 22, 2002, at 3:02:13
In reply to A convoluted message for everyone :-), posted by Hollywood Jerry on April 7, 2002, at 15:55:17
> Hi Friends,
>
> You know messages are a very important part of society.
> It is very important that information not be lost in messages.
>
> It the telecommunications world, it is especially important that information
> not be lost in messages.
>
> Certainly we don't want our information that we send over the internet
> or our cellular telephones to be lost or mangled. That would be bad.
>
> So to protect from the loss of information, clever people have come up
> with ways to protect messages from losing their value.
>
> One of the most popular techniques is a method called "convolutional encoding."
>
> The message is "convoluted" to a new format that contains extra information to
> protect it from noise that may be introduced over wires, the air waves, etc.
>
> A really good example of this is how we communicate with satellites. Look, we use
> convolution to communicate with extraterrestrial entities (The Mars Rover!).
>
> Here is an example of how message convolution works.
>
> I'll use the scheme that uses a "veterbi decoder", the most popular method
> very nicely described on this web site:
>
> http://pw1.netcom.com/~chip.f/viterbi/algrthms.html
> http://pw1.netcom.com/~chip.f/viterbi/tutorial.html
>
> I'll start with a message:
>
> “LOVE”
>
> This translates to ascii (bits 1’s and 0’s) on a Windows based PC:
>
> 0100 1100 0100 1111 0101 0110 0100 0101 (Love in 1’s and 0’s)
>
> Using “convolution” (I will use the exact encoding mechanism described on that web page;
> refer to the state diagrams provided) the convoluted message becomes:
>
> 00 11 10 11 11 01 01 11 00 11 10 11 11 01 10 10
> 01 00 10 00 10 00 01 01 11 11 10 11 00 11 10 00
>
> The message balloons by a factor of 2 (from 32 bits to 64 bits), but this makes the message safer
> to transmit. The receiver of the message just needs to decode the convoluted
> message (Like the Mars Rover does on Mars!).
>
> So, for fun I would like to leave you with an important “convoluted” message.
> Maybe this message can/should be sent to Mars!
> You can decode it if you are clever and read through that web page.
> PS, the ascii code dump is for a Windows based system.
>
> START MESSAGE
> 00 00 11 10 11 00 11 10 11 11 10 00 10 00 10 11
> 00 11 01 01 00 10 11 00 00 11 01 01 11 11 10 00
> 10 11 11 10 11 00 00 00 00 00 11 01 01 00 01 10
> 01 11 11 10 11 00 00 00 00 11 10 11 00 11 01 10
> 01 00 01 01 11 00 00 11 10 00 01 10 01 00 10 11
> 00 11 01 01 11 11 10 00 10 00 01 10 01 11 11 01
> 01 11 11 10 11 00 00 00 00 11 01 01 00 01 10 10
> 01 00 01 01 00 01 10 01 11 00 11 10 11 00 00 00
> 00 11 01 10 01 00 10 11 00 11 01 01 00 10 11 00
> 00 11 01 01 11 11 10 00 10 11 11 10 11 00 00 00
> 00 11 10 00 10 11 11 10 11 11 01 01 00 01 10 10
> 01 00 01 01 11 00 00 11 10 00 01 01 11 11 10 11
> 00 00 11 10 11 00 00 00 00 11 01 10 01 00 10 11
> 00 11 01 01 00 01 10 10 01 11 11 10 11 00 00 00
> 00 11 01 10 01 00 10 11 00 11 01 01 00 10 11 00
> 00 11 01 01 11 11 10 00 10 11 11 10 11 00 00 00
> 00 11 10 11 00 00 11 01 01 00 01 10 01 11 11 10
> 11 11 01 01 00 01 10 10 01 00 01 10 01 00 01 10
> 01 00 01 01 00 01 10 01 11 00 11 10 11 00 00 00
> 00 11 01 01 00 01 10 10 01 00 01 01 11 11 01 01
> 11 00 11 10 11 00 00 00 00 11 10 11 11 01 01 11
> 00 11 01 01 00 10 11 11 10 00 01 01 11 11 01 01
> 11 11 01 01 11 11 10 00 10 11 11 10 11 00 11 10
> 11 00 11 10 11 00 00 00 00 00 11 10 11 00 00 00
> 00 11 10 11 00 11 10 00 10 00 10 11 11 01 10 10
> 01 00 10 11 11 01 01 00 10 11 11 10 11 00 00 00
> 00 00 11 10 00 01 01 00 10 11 11 10 11 00 00 00
> 00 11 10 11 11 10 11 00 00 11 10 11 11 10 00 10
> 11 00 11 10 11 00 00 00 00 00 11 01 10 01 00 01
> 01 11 11 10 00 01 01 00 10 11 11 10 00 10 11 11
> END MESSAGE
>
>
> HollywoodThis is the really alias JohnX2
(Hollwood Jerry is a can-of-worms pseudonym).
I can't get in on my JohnX2 passoword, so I'm going back
to Jerry (who was supposed to be retired) for this post.No, I really thing this post should be discarded, as it is junk.
And here is why, I have been learning/coping, etc about passive aggressive personality
disorder and I'm starting to think that this is a core issue with anger
issues that I need to deal with (yes they flare up worse when agitated/manic), but
I think I would be kidding myself to say that I don't use this gross tool otherwise.
It probably a learned behaviour from my father, but that's no excused for the cruelty that could be inferred from
this post (in my view) and the timing of the post (just after SAR's death).This may get redirected to admin...sorry
Look, there was a spat about an interview by Jannelle (sorry , SP) regarding status
of people taking LOA from work (I believe). And a few things lead to
some bickering regarding the appopriateness of such a post. At the time I
was angry, mainly because I had specifically spent a substantial amount
of my time helping Jannelle with her problem. There are *MANY* problems
with this above post of mine (with a line of thinking):A) I should not had gotton angry at Lou (and I was attacking 2 things, I'll describe
below), because of past bias working with Jannelle.B) I was expressing my thoughts in a passive aggressive manner (the pseudonism, etc).
This is wrong. A personality defect on my behalf? that I must work on (deeling with/finding new
coping skills for anger). Passive aggressive behavior leads to uncertainty amongt the group on where people
stand. And is coverty chaotic and deceptive.C) On Lou's behalf, Jannelles survey frankly was a bit insulting to
people who may not have the "priveledges" of others. I did not feel uncomfortable answering
the survey for my own reasons. But I could definately see where this would
be an affront to people with other situations/histories/means. This is my opinion.
No passive aggression bullshit. This is my thought. (I think if the survey was
set up right and volunteery, I dunno, maybe there would have been a good system,
tough call don't get me into that debate.D) Here is the big can of worms. The message that was sent was a
quote from Lou's previous post, "The 7 Gates on the Road on the Crown of Life."
Well, to but it lightly, THIS WAS WRONG. I was trying to do something to be
offensive to Lou, but instead of choosing something like "SHUT UP LOU!" (still wrong).
I just grabbed his last post title. Now I realize, being confused about my
own spiritual feelings, that this indirectly was a major attack on an entire
group. This may practicly be construed as "your belief system is
wrong". Whoa, uncivil and disguisting! Personally I don't quite grasp my own
spiritual feelings, much less others...need to work on this area.E) In order to understand the message you may need
means not available to everyone (like an engineering
type background). NOW I see that this relates to issue C.
This may really piss people off understandably.F) Instead of thinking carefully through my thoughts and expressing
them or not expressing them, I was so worried about being within the
bounds of what is socially acceptable that I resorted to passive aggressive
behavior. Sorry this was to be a slam on Bob, I should just make my opinions
on Bob's civilty rules clearly, AND as a seperate issue.G) The timing with SAR's death. This problem I realized after coming
off my anger bit and understanding the issues at hand (which lead to the
follow up post asking to delete the post). It wasn't deleted. In the follow
up I mentioned that the post was "silly" but it light of A-G I would say
it was not "silly".So basically I owe an apology to the newsboard. To Lou and
the people offended/hurt, and to Dr. Bob.Maybe I should be banned for my actions in proportion to the others who
were banned, Lou, Zoe..whoever else. I dunno rememeber the fallout was
bad (sorry to drudge this up, but I want to get closure).Anyways, this was just one of a few situation were I behaved very
inappropriately as of late. I have set my priority to better learn to deal
with feelings of anger (where they come from), also will need to work hard to
come to terms with my spiritual thoughts/confusion.Thanks for your time (if you could stand reading this).
Why I went into posting under a pseudonym is another big ugly
discussion, which I intend to clear the water on.JohnX2
poster:Hollywood Jerry
thread:21619
URL: http://www.dr-bob.org/babble/social/20020411/msgs/22392.html