Beta
×

Welcome to the Slashdot Beta site -- learn more here. Use the link in the footer or click here to return to the Classic version of Slashdot.

Thank you!

Before you choose to head back to the Classic look of the site, we'd appreciate it if you share your thoughts on the Beta; your feedback is what drives our ongoing development.

Beta is different and we value you taking the time to try it out. Please take a look at the changes we've made in Beta and  learn more about it. Thanks for reading, and for making the site better!

Da Vinci Code Message Revealed

Zonk posted more than 8 years ago | from the funny-judge dept.

96

Ironsides writes "The message embedded in the Da Vinci Code ruling earlier this week has been cracked. The message reads 'Smithy Code Jackie Fisher who are you Dreadnought' and is a reference to an event from about 100 years ago. The encryption scheme itself was based on the Fibonacci number Sequence which is the same one used in the novel."

cancel ×

96 comments

Sorry! There are no comments related to the filter you selected.

Cool (0)

pHOENIXonline (927200) | more than 8 years ago | (#15231203)

Cool.

First Post :) (-1, Offtopic)

Anonymous Coward | more than 8 years ago | (#15231204)

First Post :))

Re:First Post :) (1)

Shortgeek (971350) | more than 8 years ago | (#15232086)

  1. No, second post.
  2. I don't see why he put a secret code there in the first place. Maybe I'm missing something, but it seems quite pointless.
  3. Why in a court verdict?

hmm (-1)

Anonymous Coward | more than 8 years ago | (#15231214)

Well I guess thats interesting.

it's good to see (-1, Troll)

celardore (844933) | more than 8 years ago | (#15231217)

It's good to see that the judge is spending his valuable time wisely...

I don't see how him doing this was relevant to anything.

Re:it's good to see (5, Insightful)

ComaVN (325750) | more than 8 years ago | (#15231224)

You might need to lighten up. Not everything anyone ever does needs to be 100% productive to society, you know. Posting on slashdot comes to mind.

Re:it's good to see (1)

mapkinase (958129) | more than 8 years ago | (#15231339)

Another benefit: no site was /.ed today. Yet.

Re:it's good to see (1)

hackstraw (262471) | more than 8 years ago | (#15231782)

You might need to lighten up. Not everything anyone ever does needs to be 100% productive to society, you know. Posting on slashdot comes to mind.

I consider posting to slashdot more productive to society than say sending spam, writing and installing rootkits, worms, viruses, ssh dictionary attacks, DDOS attacks, not to mention what people do outside of computers.

Its at least harmless.

Re:it's good to see (1)

heinousjay (683506) | more than 8 years ago | (#15231821)

Posting to /. isn't always harmless. There's a high percentage of bullshit on here that gets modded up, for instance, causing people to have wrong information. /. also serves as a left-wing feedback loop, which harms society's level of useful discourse.

Spam, on the other hand, eats a little bandwidth. I'd say spam causes much less harm than /.

Re:it's good to see (1)

Sique (173459) | more than 8 years ago | (#15235828)

From the viewpoint of an European centrist, Slashdot looks quite right wing ;)
Just because you describe yourself as rightwing, not everyone not agreeing with you is a left wing nut. Some might just be wrong. ;)

Re:it's good to see (1)

_merlin (160982) | more than 8 years ago | (#15259609)

Posting to Slashdot might be less counter-productive than spamming, but I don't see it as being useful.

again, again! (1, Insightful)

joe 155 (937621) | more than 8 years ago | (#15231218)

I think that this has been a nice bit of fun... I'm wondering if maybe we could start to get interesting little bits like this in all of our judgements and maybe even legislation... we could make that the full time job of the chancellor of the dutcy of lancaster. Also it at least made people aware of a very important man who is all too often forgot, but did some mighty fine work.

Re:again, again! (4, Funny)

VanillaBabies (829417) | more than 8 years ago | (#15231293)

Not sure about you, but i already need a crack team of lawyers and interpreters to know what most legislation and court rulings mean. Lets keep the codes to a minimum.

Re:again, again! (1)

LordLucless (582312) | more than 8 years ago | (#15231424)

Yeah, but it'd suck if the judge had to bump your sentance to 57 years just to get his code to work out right.

Re:again, again! (4, Interesting)

NoTheory (580275) | more than 8 years ago | (#15231677)

Actually, judges in the US insert all sorts of stuff into their rulings depending on how bored/pissed off they are at a particular case, lawyer, etc.

Exhibit 1 [wsj.com] .

Other examples include rulings written entirely in rhyming couplets, and more. Apparently Law Schools test their n00b students' ability to research cases by asking they dig up such arcane trivia.

IANAL but I know a number of law students.

Re:again, again! (2, Interesting)

rah1420 (234198) | more than 8 years ago | (#15233518)

Barnes and Noble has a book all about the humor in decisions handed down by courts. It's called Corpus Juris Humorous. [barnesandnoble.com] Pretty funny.

What is it with the Da Vinci Code? (1)

Overly Critical Guy (663429) | more than 8 years ago | (#15232792)

Why are we hearing so much about this freaking novel? Is it the greatest novel written in the past 20 years or something? It feels like every week, I'm hearing something about "the Da Vinci Code," whether it's about the movie, or the book, or someone studying the history behind it, or saying it's real, or it's fake, or blah blah blah.

I'm just tired of seeing the phrase "Da Vinci Code." It's like the media is obsessed with advertising this book for the author--perhaps because of the premise involving Jesus having a wife and kid, which pisses Christians off, and anything pissing off a group of people who belief a certain faith is a-okay in this country as long as it's Christianity.

Re:What is it with the Da Vinci Code? (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 8 years ago | (#15233166)

Yeah, Christians got it real rough these days. Maybe if they were running the country we'd all be better off. Oh wait, they are and we're not.

Re:What is it with the Da Vinci Code? (1)

Overly Critical Guy (663429) | more than 8 years ago | (#15239661)

And the media hates it. They HATE that the majority of people in this country have chosen to believe in Christianity. They can't stand that people believe in something they don't. All these tolerant liberals aren't tolerant at all, so they do what they can to piss Christians off. Just look at the reaction the liberal media gave to some guy daring to, *gasp*, make a movie about Jesus. A bunch of vitriol spewed his way, he's making money off Jesus! He's "obsessed with violence!" But all the other sex and violence from Hollywood is a-okay.

If a successful book that was majorly sacrilegious to Islam came out, the media would ignore it or, worse, bury it. Because it would surely be the work of "intolerant bigots" or "conservatives."

Re:What is it with the Da Vinci Code? (1)

Eristone (146133) | more than 8 years ago | (#15250437)

Hmm. Salmon Rushdie might disagree with you about the whole "bury it" bit. And I'm certain there are a few embassy staffers in a few countries around the world that also might have a comment or three based on some published cartoon drawings?

Well, the Movie is about to hit the screens... (1)

PaulBu (473180) | more than 8 years ago | (#15233302)

... and this is the best "astroturf" campaign I've seen so far -- maybe because it (the book, supposedly the moive) is really not that bad!

On the other hand, I moved on to read "Digital Fortress" and on the first couple dozen pages I realized "Hey, I can understand why a historian or a theologist might be all pissed at Da Vinci Code"! For starters, by definition you can not "brute force" all key length cyphers in almost constant time ("6 minutes to 3 hours"). I'd be much less distracted from the plot if the premise were that NSA knew about weaknesses in all modern stream cyphers which does NOT require brute force.

Of course there is a gem too obscure for general public but very funny for some people in my very small field of superconducting electronics -- the "top secret Cray/Josephsnon II computer". A group of would-be builders of just such a beast in late 90s (google for HTMT), which included myself, were appaled that it was already considered obsolete by the same organization which funded us! ;-)

Paul B.

Re:Well, the Movie is about to hit the screens... (1)

hazem (472289) | more than 8 years ago | (#15233739)

** spoilers **

The Da Vinci Code was a nice read. But after reading Angels & Demons, and Digital Fortress, I determined he uses this basic formula:

A good-looking, but slightly dorky middle-aged professor meets a good-looking, slightly aloof, smart woman (crypto-analyst, scientist) struggling in a man's world, because of a murder committed by a secret society (Vatican, NSA, Knight's Templar) in order to hide a secret that could unravel the fabric of society as we know it. The professor and the woman save the day, but only after being double-crossed by someone they trust, and go on to have crazy monkey sex in an exotic location.

It kind of makes the other books a bit predictable.

Some people have too much time on their hands (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 8 years ago | (#15234523)

smithycodeiaoyrhwjiniukkyhyrgyzbbmslcqdwcz

And then... (5, Funny)

gowen (141411) | more than 8 years ago | (#15231219)

The encryption scheme itself was based on the Fibonacci number Sequence which is the same one used in the novel
At which point Dan Brown announced his intention to sue the judge for copyright infringement.

"I'm the only one allowed to endlessly recycle the plot of 'The DaVinci Code' into other works", said Brown.

Re:And then... (1)

DaveAtFraud (460127) | more than 8 years ago | (#15231843)

Warning: not really plot spoilers but discussion of plots to various Dan Brown books.

Have to agree with you on that one. I read "Angles and Demons" prior to reading "The Da Vinci Code". Good reads but the overall plot between the two of aging professor and beautiful young woman solve thousand year old plot/mystery/conspiracy/code while never sleeping and performing at levels of Olympic athletes to be way to similar. Then I read "Digital Fortress" which I thought would be different only to find that the overall plot was again the basicaly the same with the only difference being the mystery/conspiracy wasn't a thousand years old. I can think of several other authors who do the same thing (same plot structure but just flesh-out the characters and locales a little differently).

Oh well. I guess when you can make that much money selling the same thing over and over, why change. Look what the same strategy has done for Microsoft.

Cheers,
Dave

Re:And then... (1)

LoverOfJoy (820058) | more than 8 years ago | (#15232267)

It worked for Indiana Jones, too.

Re:And then... (1)

morie (227571) | more than 8 years ago | (#15237724)

Try deception point. Entirely different.

It is actually about a woman, and.... he rest is the same, really.

Re:And then... Liberache numbers? (1)

davidsyes (765062) | more than 8 years ago | (#15235208)

Oh, must've been thinking RHINESTONES instead of runes and stones...

Now... imagine Liberache with a time machine...

"An event"? (4, Informative)

stjobe (78285) | more than 8 years ago | (#15231220)

From TFA:
The judge admires Admiral Jackie Fisher, who developed battleship HMS Dreadnought, which launched in February 1906, 100 years before the case began.

In a statement, Mr Justice Smith said: "The message reveals a significant, but now overlooked event that occurred virtually 100 years to the day of the start of the trial."

An event indeed. (4, Informative)

Gorath99 (746654) | more than 8 years ago | (#15231327)

"John Arbuthnot Fisher, 1st Baron Fisher, RN (January 25, 1841 - July 10, 1920), commonly known as "Jackie" Fisher, was a British admiral known for his efforts at naval reform. He had a huge influence on the Royal Navy in a career spanning more than 60 years, starting in a navy of wooden sailing ships armed with muzzle-loading cannon and ending in one of battlecruisers, submarines and the first aircraft carriers. The argumentative, energetic, reform-minded Fisher is often considered the second most important figure of British naval history, after Lord Nelson."

"The sixth HMS Dreadnought of the British Royal Navy was the first battleship to have a uniform main battery, rather than having a secondary battery of smaller guns. She was also the first large warship to be powered by steam turbines, making her the fastest warship of her size. So advanced was Dreadnought that her name became a generic term for modern battleships, whilst the ships she made obsolete were known as "pre-dreadnoughts". Her introduction helped spark off a major naval arms race as navies around the world rushed to match her, particularly the Germans in the build up to the First World War."

Taken from wikipedia.

Re:An event indeed. (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 8 years ago | (#15231519)

So advanced was Dreadnought that her name became a generic term for modern battleships, whilst the ships she made obsolete were known as "pre-dreadnoughts". Her introduction helped spark off a major naval arms race as navies around the world rushed to match her, particularly the Germans in the build up to the First World War.

Yes. The important thing about Dreadnought is that her introduction made all other capital ships obsolete, and indeed almost irrelevant. So the building of this ship vastly increased the longstanding British naval supremacy, but at the same time it suddenly brought supremacy within reach of rival nations.

The saying is that, in 1905, the British navy led the naval race by many dozens of ships. Whereas in 1906, the British were in the lead by one Dreadnought.

Re:An event indeed. (2, Insightful)

Duhavid (677874) | more than 8 years ago | (#15232730)

Quite true, but realize that American was building the South Carolina class ( laid down in 12/06,
planning had to have begun before Dreadnought's launch ).

And what is with the downmods? Dreadnought was brought up in the topic,
but we cant talk about it?

Re:An event indeed. (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 8 years ago | (#15233815)

Yes but the American designs had only one thing in common with Dreadnought, and that was the uniform main armament. Dreadnought combined many advances in capital ship design, construction, armament and propulsion.
Had the South Carolinas been built as soon as their design was finished they would still be called pre-dreadnoughts.

Re:An event indeed. (2, Informative)

Duhavid (677874) | more than 8 years ago | (#15237399)

You have a good point, but, the biggest idea was the uniformity
of weaponry. For America, there was little point in moving to
turbines just yet as the fleet speed would still have been low,
and only two ships of this class would be built.

Warships1.com rates South Carolina and on as Dreadnought battleships,
and as does Hazegray.org, specifically not lumping them in with
the pre-dreadnoughts. Hazegray had this to say: ( about the South Carolina class )

"The first US dreadnoughts, and by design the first all-big-gun ships in the world. However, they were directly developed from the predreadnought designs, and were quite conservative in many areas; as a result, they were not as effective or satisfactory as other nations' first-generation dreadnoughts. During WWI they served with the predreadnoughts in secondary roles."

Warships1's rating may well be based on the commission date being after
Dreadnought's, so I dont know what kind of weighting to give that.

So, classification wise I have yet to see anything that
rates them as pre-dreadnought, but your point is a very good one.

Uh? (2, Informative)

CCFreak2K (930973) | more than 8 years ago | (#15231225)

Maybe I'm just ignorant, but the article is about someone's own Da Vinci-like code, not THE DaVinci code, as the title/summary suggests.

Another fine Slashdot entry?

Re:Uh? (-1, Redundant)

Anonymous Coward | more than 8 years ago | (#15231273)

The Judge left the code in his rulings on the Dan Brown copyright infringement case.

Re:Uh? (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 8 years ago | (#15234220)

(I am not the same AC, but) How is that "redundant"? The parent is providing a correct answer to the question posed by the woefully uninformed "informative" gp.

Re:Uh? (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 8 years ago | (#15231366)

I think that what you need is to change the slashdot CSS to swap the title with the summary. No more misleading titles! (almost)

Re:Uh? (1)

Anonymous Coward | more than 8 years ago | (#15231568)

Maybe I'm just ignorant, but the article is about someone's own Da Vinci-like code, not THE DaVinci code, as the title/summary suggests.

No, the summary is right. This judge is said to have connections to the Priory of Sion. The code message which he passed on was handed down through the generations from Leonardo da Vinci.

Leonardo foresaw many military advancements, including the tank [wikipedia.org] and the helicopter, [rotaryaction.com] so it is not really surprising that he foresaw the Dreadnought as well. But the Knights Templar urged him to keep this last invention secret, lest it be used by Opus Dei in their plans of global conquest.

a little offtopic...but.... (-1, Offtopic)

LiquidMind (150126) | more than 8 years ago | (#15231226)

wanna see another hidden feature? check out this trailer [apple.com] and look for the monkey (about 2/3 of the way through) and scroll back a few frames...(use *click click* pause play pause) for a hidden treat :)

mod me OT if you wish...i thought it was funny.

if you still haven't gotten it.... (1, Funny)

LiquidMind (150126) | more than 8 years ago | (#15231240)

look here [themindshive.com] ....

Re:if you still haven't gotten it.... (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 8 years ago | (#15231291)

heh, how on earth did you find that?

Information... (0)

skribe (26534) | more than 8 years ago | (#15231229)

...about Jackie Fisher [wikipedia.org] and Dreadnought [wikipedia.org] .

Re:Information... (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 8 years ago | (#15231404)

You forgot a link: Karma Whores [wikipedia.org] .

The message read (2, Informative)

rollonet (882269) | more than 8 years ago | (#15231232)

All Your Base Are Belong To Us I kid I kid. There is a very interesting article on Wikipedia about the Smithy Code right here: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Smithy_code [wikipedia.org] The code was a little underwhelming though :(

Re:The message read (2, Informative)

rollonet (882269) | more than 8 years ago | (#15231244)

Righto. All the formatting went wack. What I meant to say was:/

All Your Base Are Belong To Us

I kid I kid.
There is a very interesting article on Wikipedia about the Smithy Code right here: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Smithy_code [wikipedia.org]
The code was a little underwhelming though imo:(

Re:The message read (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 8 years ago | (#15231289)

The code was a little underwhelming though imo:(

What were you expecting? The secrets of the universe?

Shit... I'm more amazed that one of our judges has a sense of humour. They aren't noted for it. Personally, I think he should have been a bastard and used random numbers... and let people spend months trying to crack it.

Re:The message read (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 8 years ago | (#15231439)

And laugh at all the people who DO find messages in it

For those C# programmer out there (1, Informative)

Anonymous Coward | more than 8 years ago | (#15233353)

Appologies about the messy code - I had to get around the spam filter's whitespace detection. Here's a bit of C# code to decode the string...
using System;
using System.Text;
 
namespace SmithyCode
{
class Program
{
    const string INPUT = "JAEIEXTOSTGPSACGREAMQWFKADPMQZVZ";
 
    static char[] _alphabet = { 'A', 'B', 'C', 'D', 'E', 'F', 'G', 'H', 'I', 'J', 'K', 'L', 'M', 'N', 'O', 'P', 'Q', 'R', 'S', 'T', 'U', 'V', 'W', 'X', 'Y', 'Z' };
    static int[] _fibonacci = {1,1,2,3,5,8,13,21};
 
    static void Main(string[] args)
    {
        for (int i = 0; i < INPUT.Length; i++)
        {
            Console.Write(Decrypt(i, INPUT[i]));
        }
 
        Console.ReadLine();
    }
 
    static char Decrypt(int i, char c)
    {
        char decoded = '?';
        int f = _fibonacci[i % _fibonacci.Length];
        int leterIndex = GetIndexInAlphabet(c);
 
        if (leterIndex != -1)
        {
/* turn 3rd index negative */
            if (i % 8 == 2)
            {
                f *= -1;
                f++;
            }
 
/* calculate index of alphabet */
            int x = (leterIndex + (f - 1));
 
/* if out of bounds (neg) wrap to end of alphabet */
            if (x < 0) x += _alphabet.Length;
 
/* modulo the alphabet position if out of bounds (pos) */
            if (x >= _alphabet.Length) x %= _alphabet.Length;
 
            decoded = ((f == 1) ? _alphabet[leterIndex] : _alphabet[x]);
        }
        return decoded;
    }
 
    static int GetIndexInAlphabet(char c)
    {
        for (int i = 0; i < _alphabet.Length; i++)
            if (_alphabet[i] == c) return i;
        return -1;
    }
}
}

Golden Ratio (1)

soyo (971878) | more than 8 years ago | (#15231237)

It's all about that Golden Ratio!

Sorry not into that (1)

Freaky Spook (811861) | more than 8 years ago | (#15231380)

Im sorry, im not into that kinky shit.

Yeah yeah, very clever... (5, Funny)

j.a.mcguire (551738) | more than 8 years ago | (#15231239)

das dratsab srehpargotpyrc og emoh!

Re:Yeah yeah, very clever... (1)

WillerZ (814133) | more than 8 years ago | (#15231317)

I ma ydaerla ta emoh.

Re:Yeah yeah, very clever... (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 8 years ago | (#15231669)

Cryptographicus ite domum !!

Re:Yeah yeah, very clever... (1)

anotherzeb (837807) | more than 8 years ago | (#15232723)

lmao - mod parent up already

Re:Yeah yeah, very clever... (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 8 years ago | (#15234335)

Centurion: How many cryptographers?

Unintentionally comic typo about the Royal Navy? (1)

AEton (654737) | more than 8 years ago | (#15231242)

The text as originally decrypted, with the judge's supposedly intentional typographical error, reads in part "Jackie Fister who are you".

I am not making this up.

Re:Unintentionally comic typo about the Royal Navy (1)

ozbird (127571) | more than 8 years ago | (#15231372)

There were four, deliberate typos according to this article [timesonline.co.uk] ; the actual decoded message read: "Smithy Code: Jadkie Fisthr- who are bou? Dreadqought".

No, wrong key... (2, Informative)

Junta (36770) | more than 8 years ago | (#15231796)

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Smithy_code [wikipedia.org]
There is a twist on the sequency not quite being the Fibonacci sequence. Evidently, a twist derived from the Holy Blood, Holy Grail work.

If you don't want to work through it, they even give python code so you can see the 'jackie fister who are you dreadnough' decode for yourself.

Time well spent (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 8 years ago | (#15231257)

It's good to see our public servants have enough time on their hands to do these things in between dealing out justice.

Re:Time well spent (1)

mustafap (452510) | more than 8 years ago | (#15231347)

They probably dont waste thei time on slashdot, like us ;o)

Re:Time well spent (3, Insightful)

SachiCALaw (856692) | more than 8 years ago | (#15231777)

EVERY workplace is improved by a bit of light-heartedness, including courts. I've appeared in court many times, and things definitely work much more smoothly (and faster!) in courtrooms where the judges and court officials are open to a bit of humor. Think of your own jobs - don't you get more done, overall, in jobs when you can have a bit of fun in contrast to those where you are tied to a grumpy ball and chain?

Slow news day (0, Offtopic)

bulldogzerofive (947922) | more than 8 years ago | (#15231263)

This story is something like 48 hours old... the one about the centrifuge is just, well, boring...

Must be a really slow news sunday.

Re:Slow news day (1)

MobileTatsu-NJG (946591) | more than 8 years ago | (#15231296)

"This story is something like 48 hours old... the one about the centrifuge is just, well, boring..."

Do what I do: Visit Engadget.com. Actually, I'm surprised we don't see more stuff from engadget around here. Right now there's a story going on about Apple's recent patent silliness. Apple and patents are typically hot topics around here...

Re:Slow news day (1)

bulldogzerofive (947922) | more than 8 years ago | (#15231425)

Yeah, but I prefer www.killsometime.com. Its juvenile, but funny nonetheless. I suppose I could turn of the computer go outside, but I am alergic to natural light.

Riiiight (1)

joe coffee (946418) | more than 8 years ago | (#15231303)

The only thing this code has to offer is the number to an endless account at an atm.

Wrong Call (1)

d'alz (959455) | more than 8 years ago | (#15231306)

The title sure got me interested but the story only made me yawn.... Was'nt it supposed to be about the da vinci code, why was it talkin about some judge with too much of time on his hands.

Re:Wrong Call (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 8 years ago | (#15242940)

He (the judge) says it took 40 minutes to prepare and another 40 to insert into the text.
Anyone want to guess at a judge's hourly wage?

Talk about wasting taxpayers money.

ummm... (1, Insightful)

circletimessquare (444983) | more than 8 years ago | (#15231325)

IANAL but doesn't a judge ruling on the da vinci code case, finding for the da vinci code author, and showing he is a closet fan of the book by putting his own da vinci code in his ruling give grounds for the plaintiff for a retrial?

Re:ummm... (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 8 years ago | (#15231426)

Do me a favour. That kind of ploy might work in the U.S. but in Britain, no chance. What next? Declaring a retrial because the judge was wearing the same underwear as the defendants mother (in itself, quite possible)?

Re:ummm... (2, Interesting)

danceswithtrees (968154) | more than 8 years ago | (#15231442)

give grounds for the plaintiff for a retrial?

I don't think so. Perhaps it just proves that he read at least one of the books involved- which is a good thing. The whole case was about the first book's ideas (a book which was not about fiction but new interpretations of the relationship between Jesus and Mary Magdalen, ie NON-FICTION) being used as the basis for a FICTIONAL story. The whole basis for the case was a bit fishy.

In any case, sales of the first book have skyrocketed and the author of the first book must be happy (if this was his plan, kudos). Dan Brown (author of the DaVinci Code) won the case, the movie is just coming out, and the whole ordeal has created even more publicity (any publicity is good publicity). In other words, both parties came out ahead! No need for a retrial because both parties are happy.

Re:ummm... (1)

pjt33 (739471) | more than 8 years ago | (#15232653)

In other words, both parties came out ahead! No need for a retrial because both parties are happy.
While the publicity was good news for sales of HBHG, the boost is nowhere near enough to cover the legal costs which Baigent and Leigh have to pay.

Re:ummm... (4, Informative)

SachiCALaw (856692) | more than 8 years ago | (#15231740)

I am a lawyer, and to put it succinctly, no, being a fan of the book would not be grounds for reversal. Judges cannot have financial interests in cases, and should not have personal entanglements with parties, but reading a party's book is not such a personal entanglement that would be ground for reversal.

Re:ummm... (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 8 years ago | (#15234074)

I'm assuming you're an American Lawyer though. This case was in Europe where they have different rules.

Re:ummm... (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 8 years ago | (#15232525)

I agree, especially considering the prosecution's very large (in the millions)fee that is sending the client to the poorhouse.

Article Devoid of Facts (5, Informative)

zaguar (881743) | more than 8 years ago | (#15231345)

The article failed to mention how he solved it. It was a Polyalphabetic Cipher [wikipedia.org] with the key being the Fibonnaci sequence. For those who want to crack it, the sequence of numbers for the key is 1,1,2,3,5,8,13,21,34 etc, in recursive form: T(n+1)=T(n)+T(n-1)

Re:Article Devoid of Facts (1)

ozbird (127571) | more than 8 years ago | (#15231370)

Only the first eight numbers [timesonline.co.uk] of the Fibonacci sequence were used (1,1,2,3,5,8,13,21) and repeated to generate the key for the length of the message.

That'll teach the Judge... (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 8 years ago | (#15231437)

... to use Windows built-in encryption!

Cool... (1)

TeleoMan (529859) | more than 8 years ago | (#15231458)

It says: "Drink Your Ovaltine"

Reverse engineer the code... (0)

3seas (184403) | more than 8 years ago | (#15231542)

anyone have a program that allows you to input a phrase and then have it generate the code to decript it from teh bible?

Re:Reverse engineer the code... (1)

Starcub (527362) | more than 8 years ago | (#15231635)

This proves that with enough time and effort you can construct a cypher from which 'the meaning of life' tm. can be determined from last night's plate of spaghetti that your mom made you eat.

How Ben Hoyle cracked the code (3, Interesting)

frank249 (100528) | more than 8 years ago | (#15231819)

One of the facts that the linked article failed to mention is that it was Ben Hoyle, a reporter for the Times, that cracked the code. His personal account of how he did it is here [timesonline.co.uk] . He admits that he had a couple broad hints from the judge and the help of Ray Keene, The Times Chess Correspondent.

As for Jackie Fisher, I like Al Stewart's song Old Admirals [martylloyd.com] that is based on his life. While he did some great things, he should not have been recalled as First Lord of the Admiralty. He opposed Churchill's plan for Gallipoli. Although the operation went forward, it was Fisher's refusal to fully support the operation with enough ships and shells that lead to its failure and the death of thousands of Anzacs.

Re:How Ben Hoyle cracked the code (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 8 years ago | (#15235701)

broad hints! The judge pretty much told him how to solve it. From the article:

Yesterday I dropped in on the Royal Courts of Justice in The Strand and submitted a note to the judge, asking for a clue.

He e-mailed back during the lunchtime break suggesting: "Try letter substitution letter by letter applying the Fibonacci Sequence (in correct form)."

If this clue hadn't been given does anyone here think that it wouldn't have been cracked? The plaintext is obscure enough not to give too many clues and short enough to make frequency analysis fairly difficult. Unless someone randomly thought to apply a Fibonacci sequence as the key (and I'm not sure how likely this would be) I can't see how else it could have been cracked.

News Story of the YEAR! (1)

DulcetTone (601692) | more than 8 years ago | (#15232642)

Anything that draws attention to Jackie Fisher and HMS Dreadnought is a good thing!

Not Slashdotty enough for you?!

Have you any idea how closely fire control [dreadnoughtproject.org] (even in 1914) resembled our current world of networked computers?

Y2000 (1)

Piroca (900659) | more than 8 years ago | (#15233631)


This contest was so year 2000... Reminds me of companies with lack of substance, lots of money and overrated employees, and a 1,2,3 business plan. Time will tell if history is repeating itself.

Re:Y2000 (1)

2sheds (78194) | more than 8 years ago | (#15233779)

Or even, a 1,1,2,3 business plan...

Code within the Davinci Code? (1)

the_odin (842602) | more than 8 years ago | (#15233716)

I wonder if there is something written in code.... ...within the novel The Davinci Code?

The Holy Blood and the Holy Grail (1)

NitsujTPU (19263) | more than 8 years ago | (#15233796)

If I understand correctly, the authors of "The Holy Blood and the Holy Grail," actually intended that book to be a historical perspective presenting the concept that the holy grail is the bloodline of Jesus. IE, they intended the work to present what they believe to be an actual historical event.

If that's the case, then I'm copyrighting the American Revolution, in my new book, "McGraw Hill: Reflections on American History."

Re:The Holy Blood and the Holy Grail (1)

servognome (738846) | more than 8 years ago | (#15234092)

If that's the case, then I'm copyrighting the American Revolution, in my new book, "McGraw Hill: Reflections on American History."

*YAWN* You're making the mistake "The Holy Blood and Holy Grail" did. If you're going to sell any books and make millions on movie rights you gotta jazz it up a little.
Call it "The Minuteman Memorandum." A secret document from George Washington to Benjamin Franklin detailing the plans for the Freemasons to establish a country which they could completely control. This document sparked Franklin's trips to Europe to gather support from masons there for the new country, and set the groundwork for the American Revolution.
The main plot of the book would be a thriller, about a man who discovers a copy of the document in the possessions of his great great grandfather (also a mason), when they sell off the family's colonial home. But THEY know about the document and would stop at nothing to keep the secrets, secrets which would undermine the very foundations of western government from being revealed. As the plot develops things about the secret conspiracy are revealed: the integration of masonic ideals into the Constitution, masonic symbols used throughout government (the cover of the book can be the unfinished pyramid), how foreign policy is geared towards increasing the global influence of the Freemasons.

Hmmm... wait maybe I will write the book, and you can't sue me ;)

Re:The Holy Blood and the Holy Grail (1)

NitsujTPU (19263) | more than 8 years ago | (#15234159)

Oh yeah? Well, I'll write a book about law suits, and I'll sue the secretaries who transcribe court records.

Re:The Holy Blood and the Holy Grail (1)

Tetsujin28 (156148) | more than 8 years ago | (#15239456)

For a pretty good Disneyfied version, see National Treasure [imdb.com] .

I'd rather he didn't (1)

mbius (890083) | more than 8 years ago | (#15233938)

Reminds me of Idaho's Napoleon Dynamite bill...be cute on your own time, Curly. I'm offended, as a citizen, in needing to remind you government is not a joke.

From a guy you have to address as "your honor" and to whom mouthing off is against the law, this caprice is extremely unprofessional.

A charming lawyer is called a politician. I like a hard line between my politicians and my judges, thanks.

I wish (1)

Pike (52876) | more than 8 years ago | (#15234718)

someone would take a crack at this [jdueck.net] .

it's been more than two years and no one has solved it yet.

Re:I wish (1)

p00ya (579445) | more than 8 years ago | (#15237084)

The horrible character set doesn't help: those characters are visually offensive. Why would you use them when there are only 41 distinct base symbols? The possibility that the cipher could have anything to do with their UCS positions is a turn-off.

I expect experimenting with all the extra semantics (super/subscripting, and whatever sequences are used to signal alphabet changes) would be tedious. However, I also suspect that a serious cryptographer would have solved it by now: it looks like spaces are un-substituted (English-like word length distribution), hence many of the shorter-length words would be guessable.

There are other ciphertexts that are more fun/profitable to decipher (like Kryptos-4 and the RSA ones).

Re:I wish (1)

Pike (52876) | more than 8 years ago | (#15241918)

"However, I also suspect that a serious cryptographer would have solved it by now:

Darn right they would have. Dude, it's a code, and you're upset that it doesn't look pretty??

Kryptos-4 is not much "fun" imo, as in, something you could crack in a week of spare time. And RSA?!? There's no 'solving' going on there, just a sifting through millions of possible keys... What's fun about that.

Check for New Comments
Slashdot Login

Need an Account?

Forgot your password?

Submission Text Formatting Tips

We support a small subset of HTML, namely these tags:

  • b
  • i
  • p
  • br
  • a
  • ol
  • ul
  • li
  • dl
  • dt
  • dd
  • em
  • strong
  • tt
  • blockquote
  • div
  • quote
  • ecode

"ecode" can be used for code snippets, for example:

<ecode>    while(1) { do_something(); } </ecode>