so_good_so_far
so_good_so_far t1_jbc1mp0 wrote
Reply to comment by Mr_Locke in A group of researchers has achieved a breakthrough in secure communications by developing an algorithm that conceals sensitive information so effectively that it is impossible to detect that anything has been hidden by thebelsnickle1991
A lot of stego doesn't increase size at all. You might change the least significant bits of each pixel to your encoded value. The visual difference of the image is nearly undetectable, size is the same, but encoded data has replaced the least important parts of the image data.
Still would fail hash checks, and their claim is still patently false (haven't read it, but if that's actually their claim it's about on par with a perpetual motion machine so don't really need to).
so_good_so_far t1_itianwv wrote
Reply to comment by ChucktheUnicorn in Formation of Namibia’s fairy circles isn’t due to termites. Plants are "ecosystem engineers" that survive by forming optimal geometric patterns. by marketrent
Sure that's true, it just quickly renders the word meaningless if we have no cut-off on complexity (arbitrary though it may be), so what's the point? A rock is intelligent if we have no limit. My point is we can have a word that means literally nothing, sure, or we can say it requires levels of complexity that I don't think this grass comes remotely near.
so_good_so_far t1_itglq1a wrote
Reply to comment by marketrent in Formation of Namibia’s fairy circles isn’t due to termites. Plants are "ecosystem engineers" that survive by forming optimal geometric patterns. by marketrent
This really seems like he's trying to broaden the meaning of intelligence to the point that it encompasses any emergent behavior. If this is the bar, then fractals are intelligent, crystals are intelligent, rivers are intelligent.
I think it would be better to just say that this grass demonstrates complex behavior stimulated by simple inputs. To be "intelligent" by any meaningful definition of the term, it would need to exhibit many different such complex behaviors that themselves interact in additionally complex ways.
so_good_so_far t1_jbdd5pu wrote
Reply to comment by nybble41 in A group of researchers has achieved a breakthrough in secure communications by developing an algorithm that conceals sensitive information so effectively that it is impossible to detect that anything has been hidden by thebelsnickle1991
For one, steganography systems do not universally assume that. There are plenty of use cases for hiding data in plain sight, commonly used images, etc. Hiding data in a common image might be plenty to slip it past a censor or authority even if a later cryptanalysis might detect it.
But please link me the mathematical proof that backs up their claim that this is "perfectly secure" (whatever that actually means). "Random seeming" is not random. Even tiny biases can tip off attackers that there may be encrypted data, no matter how many times you XOR it. Random is random, everything else has patterns. No matter how cleverly they intermingle it with other structured data, it is not random and I'm not buying it unless they have a peer reviewed proof that backs their claim up.