General Questions (Forum Closed)

[Webmaster]

[uwequbit]

Hello Webmaster,

Please enter the text newly translated into the English language. I have posted the second set again.

Thank you (and Google Translator)

regards

uwequbit

[Siegmund]

@SDSC
You're welcome.
@Webmaster
Thanks for translating.

Siegmund

[SDSC]

[Karel Jan]

Interesting Topic.

This is one of the few Topics I''ll folllow. Thanks for sharing (WP).

Karel Jan

[David Hofman]

Hmm, after reading your whitepaper, I must admit I'm a bit disappointed. Essentially, you seem to be storing chunks from the input files in the reference table (well, not literally, but that's what it boils down to fundamentally).

This means it only works for storing ('encoding') multiple files if they share common patterns.

If you encode 1000 .zip or .rar files of 1-2MB each, using DNA, you will NOT be able to reduce them all to 256 bytes and keep your reference table at or below 740 MB.

Furthermore, I'm pretty sure that if you compress a bunch of files using Rar or 7-Zip with solid archiving, the resulting archive will always be smaller than encoding it with DNA and taking the resulting reference file size into account. This means there is essentially NO advantage in required disk size to store certain data, or the effective compression ratio achieved by this method.

Maybe I miss the point, but I don't see any revolutionary benefits here?

[Eberhard]

[Eberhard]

[David Hofman]

[SDSC]