Return to Unfiction unforum
 a.r.g.b.b 
FAQ FAQ   Search Search 
 
Welcome!
New users, PLEASE read these forum guidelines. New posters, SEARCH before posting and read these rules before posting your killer new campaign. New players may also wish to peruse the ARG Player Tutorial.

All users must abide by the Terms of Service.
Website Restoration Project
This archiving project is a collaboration between Unfiction and Sean Stacey (SpaceBass), Brian Enigma (BrianEnigma), and Laura E. Hall (lehall) with
the Center for Immersive Arts.
Announcements
This is a static snapshot of the
Unfiction forums, as of
July 23, 2017.
This site is intended as an archive to chronicle the history of Alternate Reality Games.
 
The time now is Mon Nov 18, 2024 7:31 pm
All times are UTC - 4 (DST in action)
View posts in this forum since last visit
View unanswered posts in this forum
Calendar
 Forum index » Diversions » Perplex City Puzzle Cards » PXC: Silver Puzzle Cards
[PUZZLE] #251 - Silver - The Thirteenth Labour - READ POST#1
Moderators: AnthraX101, bagsbee, BrianEnigma, cassandra, Giskard, lhall, Mikeyj, myf, poozle, RobMagus, xnbomb
View previous topicView next topic
Page 27 of 73 [1087 Posts]   Goto page: Previous 1, 2, 3, ..., 25, 26, 27, 28, 29, ..., 71, 72, 73  Next
Author Message
arnezami
Veteran


Joined: 14 Apr 2006
Posts: 136

chimera245 wrote:
I don't see any reason to add to the alphabet at this stage - we can use the extra speed to get through the existing alphabet much faster.

Yeah I guess it would be nice for everyone to see it moving very fast. Just worried that if we wouldn't find the solution if most people will understand they will "have to do it all over again".

chimera245 wrote:
Hi,

The alphabet is for the 8 character key not the solution.

For a solution, we are including all values <= '~' I.e. from 0 to 126 - I am excluding DEL (127) and all higher - but this includes all the early crap too.

If the 8 character key happens to be

!@#$%^&*

instead of

8ugg3rM3

we will miss it - but we can cross that bridge at the end if necessary. It is not hard to come up with the work units/processing to go through the remaining combos. I just (and others in this and previous threads) have not thought that this would be necessary.


Of course if the password is "Answers!" we won't find it either. A strong password should contain one or more strange characters. I just thought this moment is maybe a good opportunity: while increasing the number of input characters it would still get faster. So everybody is/stays happy. But I guess finishing (quickly) what has been started can be appealing too Smile.

But it maybe a good idea to already implement it into the new client. That way people won't have to reinstall but the server could be able to automatically switch the clients to do more characters (if we happened to not find the solution in the first run). While some won't care I think many people usually do not like installing something several times. If we didn't find it and the new program had to be developed and installed this may be a trigger to stop running it for some.

Something else: would it be a good idea to create 62 times bigger workunits? That is: make it 1 character longer to prevent the server from being overloaded?

arnezami

PostPosted: Thu May 04, 2006 3:21 am
 View user's profile
 Back to top 
chimera245
Decorated

Joined: 09 Mar 2006
Posts: 209

In actual fact I am planning on flexible length data grabs (i.e. range) - for throttling at the server end purposes.

I should probably elucidate further.

2.0 of the Labour13 client will (if all goes well) feature a -f option to use the Fast Client code from Sk1zz. This however will only operate on certain platforms, while the rest of the code remains for the others. This alone necessitates a flexibility in work unit assignment. I also want to (from a server standpoint) be able to vary the number of work units assigned to the clients based upon server load and other factors.

The idea therefore is that the client will request work unit(s), and will get an appropriate amount - for a non -f client this will be a limited number (it may be more than one though if server congestion is an issue), for the -f client it will be a larger number.

Once the client can cater for more than one work unit - it can essentially cater for any number (within reason) if I do it right.

PostPosted: Thu May 04, 2006 3:50 am
 View user's profile Visit poster's website
 Back to top 
Guin
Unfettered


Joined: 11 Jan 2006
Posts: 400
Location: Antartica

The prize pool continues to grow. I have acquired a spare (and original) card wallet to place all the shiny new and unscratched cards into - nice for a starter or even old hand - an almost (we have every wave 1 and 2 card excluding one purple (#175 Binary) some blacks (#206, #215, #217, #219) and most silvers (although we have polar #247 and 13th #251) complete set of cards). I have been offered all wave 3 purples and am just awaiting the MC contribution before I post a new picture for all to drool over.

So PLEASE keep them clients running. even if you can only contribute an hour a day however small your contribution it will make the task seem easier and reduce the workload helping us solve this card once and for all.

If you need the client a new version is available at 13th labour and the Live Journal is also available to check progress, news, and our little running puzzles and competitions set to while away the hours while we process these work units and offer a little R&R from any of those pesky silvers.
_________________
So long and thanks for all the fish! Trout

PostPosted: Thu May 04, 2006 5:01 am
 View user's profile Visit poster's website AIM Address Yahoo Messenger MSN Messenger
 Back to top 
jazzychad
Veteran

Joined: 03 May 2006
Posts: 74

8 byte key

As for the key (and restricting it to text)...

What indication do we have that it is a "readable" key? All we know is that it' s 8 bytes long (i.e. 64 bits) and not necessarily 8 typable characters. I say we run the whole keyspace. If we're being this ambitious about a distributed project, might as well go for broke. Plus, testing only the "readable" keys would be an underwhelming minority of the 2^64 combinations. But, if you think that we should keep it to that subset of keys, please explain why... cause I don't see it.

P.S. I'm sorry if that came off as condescending... the scientist/engineer in me wants proof for big optimizations like this Very Happy

PostPosted: Thu May 04, 2006 5:49 am
 View user's profile
 Back to top 
arnezami
Veteran


Joined: 14 Apr 2006
Posts: 136

chimera245 wrote:
In actual fact I am planning on flexible length data grabs (i.e. range) - for throttling at the server end purposes.

I should probably elucidate further.

2.0 of the Labour13 client will (if all goes well) feature a -f option to use the Fast Client code from Sk1zz. This however will only operate on certain platforms, while the rest of the code remains for the others. This alone necessitates a flexibility in work unit assignment. I also want to (from a server standpoint) be able to vary the number of work units assigned to the clients based upon server load and other factors.

The idea therefore is that the client will request work unit(s), and will get an appropriate amount - for a non -f client this will be a limited number (it may be more than one though if server congestion is an issue), for the -f client it will be a larger number.

Once the client can cater for more than one work unit - it can essentially cater for any number (within reason) if I do it right.

Sounds like you're on top of it. Smile

I was wondering (I guess this is a question to Skizz): would it be possible to create an in-between version where no SSE is used so other/older CPU's would speed up aswell?

arnezami

PostPosted: Thu May 04, 2006 6:00 am
 View user's profile
 Back to top 
hexDa3m0n
Boot

Joined: 15 Dec 2005
Posts: 60
Location: Lancaster, England

Re: 8 byte key

jazzychad wrote:
As for the key (and restricting it to text)...

What indication do we have that it is a "readable" key? All we know is that it' s 8 bytes long (i.e. 64 bits) and not necessarily 8 typable characters. I say we run the whole keyspace. If we're being this ambitious about a distributed project, might as well go for broke. Plus, testing only the "readable" keys would be an underwhelming minority of the 2^64 combinations. But, if you think that we should keep it to that subset of keys, please explain why... cause I don't see it.

P.S. I'm sorry if that came off as condescending... the scientist/engineer in me wants proof for big optimizations like this Very Happy


As there are so many keys, I don't think it makes much difference which order we do them. If we get towards the last few work units of "readable" keys, I'm sure chimera can just expand and include more and more characters in each??

Hex

p.s. I am sure there is some law out there that means it will be one of the last keys we try anyway.....think how disappointing it would have been if we had "cracked" this during the testing phase!! Very Happy
_________________
746F6F206D616E792073656372657473

PostPosted: Thu May 04, 2006 6:10 am
 View user's profile AIM Address MSN Messenger
 ICQ Number 
 Back to top 
Guin
Unfettered


Joined: 11 Jan 2006
Posts: 400
Location: Antartica

Re: 8 byte key

hexDa3m0n wrote:
p.s. I am sure there is some law out there that means it will be one of the last keys we try anyway


Yes its called S~Ds law
_________________
So long and thanks for all the fish! Trout

PostPosted: Thu May 04, 2006 6:19 am
 View user's profile Visit poster's website AIM Address Yahoo Messenger MSN Messenger
 Back to top 
Fuseunderground
Decorated

Joined: 17 Dec 2005
Posts: 151

Re: 8 byte key

jazzychad wrote:
As for the key (and restricting it to text)...
If we're being this ambitious about a distributed project, might as well go for broke. Plus, testing only the "readable" keys would be an underwhelming minority of the 2^64 combinations.


I'm sure 'we' (read 'they') could quite easily add the rest of the keyspace at the end,
after we have processed all the readable keys.

There is nothing to say that the key would be readable - correct,
but if it is, we get it earlier than we would have testing all the keyspace.

If it isn't, we get it at pretty much the same time as we would have got it testing all the keyspace (on average) due to the massive search area.

MC suggests it will take 11 months, I'd love to see us do it quicker.
But obviously we don't 'know' where the key is, it would be a lot easier if we did! Wink

For the record - We do not waste any time by starting with readable keys
_________________
Like your hero TJ Hooker you tackle challenges head-on with determination and vigour paying scant attention to the law. This devil-may-care attitude may work for fictional crimefighters but it can be counterproductive in real life.

PostPosted: Thu May 04, 2006 6:21 am
 View user's profile
 Back to top 
Skizz
Boot

Joined: 11 Jan 2006
Posts: 37

arnezami:
Now there's a thought - it shouldn't be too difficult to remove the SSE stuff, and I can do it automatically too - there's a bit in the CPUID result that is set if SSE2 is present.
I'm currently working with chimera245 on V2 of the client so I'll definitely look into that.

Oh, and about the whole key thing - the client at the moment will only do keys "xxxxyyyy" where the X's are provided by the server and Y's are iterated by the client. At the moment the client (and server) only iterates 0-9,A-Z,A-Z (the fast client also does ':'). Expanding the key space search will require modifying the client and the server - doing a full 4 character key search (ascii 0 to ascii 255 for each y) using the fast client on a fast CPU will take an hour, so it will be a major undertaking. If this first go doesn't produce a result, I'd be tempted to do a search in the range ascii 32 to ascii 127 as the next step.

Skizz

PostPosted: Thu May 04, 2006 6:29 am
 View user's profile
 Back to top 
chimera245
Decorated

Joined: 09 Mar 2006
Posts: 209

Just an update, I'm working with Sk1zz on getting the processor specific optimizations in, but there is a version of the general use client (1_1_0) in beta now which bring the processing time down by a factor of 4 -5 - I have it doing work units in 2 mins now Smile.

This should be available early next week.

PostPosted: Thu May 04, 2006 11:03 am
 View user's profile Visit poster's website
 Back to top 
kniteli
Boot

Joined: 01 May 2006
Posts: 14

any hope of a multi threaded one for dual cores? i know im running at 50% because of it, could be running alot faster than i am atm.

PostPosted: Thu May 04, 2006 11:39 am
 View user's profile
 Back to top 
Fuseunderground
Decorated

Joined: 17 Dec 2005
Posts: 151

kniteli wrote:
any hope of a multi threaded one for dual cores? i know im running at 50% because of it, could be running alot faster than i am atm.


Run two copies as mentioned earlier in the thread
There is a full methodology earlier on - up there Jetpack
_________________
Like your hero TJ Hooker you tackle challenges head-on with determination and vigour paying scant attention to the law. This devil-may-care attitude may work for fictional crimefighters but it can be counterproductive in real life.

PostPosted: Thu May 04, 2006 11:51 am
 View user's profile
 Back to top 
kniteli
Boot

Joined: 01 May 2006
Posts: 14

oo thank you, im dumb (or just tired lol), actually see my proc peaked at 100 for the first time since i got it.

PostPosted: Thu May 04, 2006 11:59 am
 View user's profile
 Back to top 
Flynn
Decorated


Joined: 11 Nov 2003
Posts: 240
Location: UK

Fuseunderground wrote:
kniteli wrote:
any hope of a multi threaded one for dual cores? i know im running at 50% because of it, could be running alot faster than i am atm.


Run two copies as mentioned earlier in the thread
There is a full methodology earlier on - up there Jetpack


Or take a look at the FAQ on the website Wink

PostPosted: Thu May 04, 2006 12:00 pm
 View user's profile AIM Address MSN Messenger
 Back to top 
Fuseunderground
Decorated

Joined: 17 Dec 2005
Posts: 151

Flynn wrote:
Or take a look at the FAQ on the website Wink


Yeah! that too, sorry Rolling Eyes Embarassed
_________________
Like your hero TJ Hooker you tackle challenges head-on with determination and vigour paying scant attention to the law. This devil-may-care attitude may work for fictional crimefighters but it can be counterproductive in real life.

PostPosted: Thu May 04, 2006 12:17 pm
 View user's profile
 Back to top 
Display posts from previous:   Sort by:   
Page 27 of 73 [1087 Posts]   Goto page: Previous 1, 2, 3, ..., 25, 26, 27, 28, 29, ..., 71, 72, 73  Next
View previous topicView next topic
 Forum index » Diversions » Perplex City Puzzle Cards » PXC: Silver Puzzle Cards
Jump to:  

You cannot post new topics in this forum
You cannot reply to topics in this forum
You cannot edit your posts in this forum
You cannot delete your posts in this forum
You cannot vote in polls in this forum
You cannot attach files in this forum
You can download files in this forum
You cannot post calendar events in this forum



Powered by phpBB © 2001, 2005 phpBB Group