> > Others weigh in:
> > 
> > http://www.techworld.com/news/index.cfm?NewsID=7432
> 
> Is this just plain stupid, or am I missing something?
> 
> "13. The alphabet problem Hexadecimal numbering works because 
> the reading device "understands" hexadecimal. Suppose you 
> could use coloured and shape-grouped bits to store more 
> information, you would then need to "understand" it. If every 
> pixel represented a 32-bit colour then its value is 2 to the 
> power 32. A contributor to Daily Tech calculated that you 
> could have a 4096x4096 grid using pixels of 1-32 colours and 
> so arrive at 6MB of data. Two such "super bits" could 
> represent 16GB (16 trillion) pieces of information but ... 
> you have invent an alphabet with 16 trillion letters and map 
> that to a binary alphabet. This is not a trivial 
> computational problem."
> 
> Where's that not trivial? The "letters" of this "alphabet" 
> are each just a number of bits, and two such "super bits" 
> together are just two such sequences of bits.


Could be a bit tricky reading a couple of tiny dots that are one colour
shade apart.

On the other hand, women don't seem to have much trouble doing it, judging
from the paint colour books with about 34235 versions of 'white'.  Vanilla
be damned, it's still white.  Even if it's called frozen vanilla.

Tony

-- 
http://www.piclist.com PIC/SX FAQ & list archive
View/change your membership options at
http://mailman.mit.edu/mailman/listinfo/piclist