gjm comments on December 2014 Bragging Thread - Less Wrong

3 Post author: Morendil 30 November 2014 11:54PM

You are viewing a comment permalink. View the original post to see all comments and the full post content.

Comments (47)

You are viewing a single comment's thread. Show more comments above.

Comment author: gjm 03 December 2014 05:28:53PM 1 point [-]

Note that the memorability of the last few digits is a direct consequence of the way you constructed the number (yes, it's 12345^5). The last 4 digits of n^5 when n ends in 5 are always among {0625,1875,3125,4375,6875,8125,9375}. If the digit before the 5 is even you always get one of {0625,3125,5625,8125}. At the very least, the final 3 digits are always a multiple of 125 and you probably recognize all of those.

Still, even a completely random number typically has lots of little patterns in it to help this kind of memorizing. For instance, I just generated a random 20-digit number: 66474746605022249923. The first things that occur to me, looking through it in order:

  • 66 4747 -- two pairs of repetitions
  • 466 -- overlapping 46 (one less than the 47 we just had) and 66 (same as first two digits, and a pair)
  • 050 -- symmetrical, all multiples of 5 (of which there aren't many among the digits :-))
  • 222 --- threefold repetition
  • 499 -- one less than 500
  • 23 -- not a particularly interesting number but e.g. the number of chromosome pairs you have.

(I also noticed in passing that 60502 is reminiscent of 6502, the processor in the first few computers I used. Lovely instruction set. Having some overlap between the features one notices is useful because it makes it easier to remember what order things come in.)

I tried the obvious experiment: after writing the above, could I look away from it and reproduce my 20-digit number? Why yes, I could; and still could a couple of minutes later. I think I'd find things like reversing the digits quite painful, though.

Comment author: Gunnar_Zarncke 03 December 2014 06:03:35PM 0 points [-]

Yes. Using x^y as a random number is bound to show patterns of this kind. I know enough number theory to recognize this. But it does alter the result only very slightly.

And yes. Your 'story' has the same basic structure as mine. I would have told it somewhat different but I think you got my approach. Note that it doesn't scale though. The major system beats it in that. But for small sequences of passwords it works nicely.