On Mon, 8 Oct 2007 20:04:15 +0200, ropers wrote: >On 08/10/2007, Tom Van Looy <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: >> I think it should have been 1000001 instead of 100001. > >Gord wrote: >> Someone is giving it a go: >> http://slashdot.org/~TheRaven64/journal/184027 > >That's real interesting, guys. >TheRaven64 writes that (0)100001 1010101 is (caesar-)ciphertext for Au. >But going with Tom's suggestion of a missing 0, 1000001 1010101 is >plaintext for AU. > >So is Gold the answer or is it "not you"? >I dunno, but me likey! :) > >--ropers >
Well back on last Sunday I put my guess on undeadl at: http://undeadly.org/cgi?action=article&sid=20071007002942&mode=expanded&; count=26 and it was Gold as you can easily see. I didn't explain my reasoning because it might have been a spoiler but now there are two others getting gold, both differing from mine in the method. Listen to the song. The two strings are broken and come out as: 100 001 that gives 41 which is A in hex 101 0101 that gives 55 which is U in hex. Gosh, three ways to make gold. OpenBSD is Alchemy! I'd award it gold in the marathon for sure. >From the land "down under": Australia. Do we look <umop apisdn> from up over?
