Data compression. Something about "making less data out of ... The same data" is really mind blowing, & the math is sick
It is not that complicated, to make a simple example with strings:
AAAABBBABABAB takes up 13 spaces, but write (compress) it like 4A3B3AB take up 6 spaces compressing it more than 50%.
Now double it like AAAABBBABABABAAAABBBABABAB with 26 spaces and write it as 2(4A3B3AB) with 9 spaces it takes only 30% of the space.
Compression algorithms just look for those repetitive spaces.
Takes those letters and imagine them being colored pixels of a picture to compress a picture
Once you get into audio, images and video it revolves a lot around converting temporal and/or positional data into the frequency domain rather than simple token replacement.
Wait, isn't your first example goes from 13 spaces binary to a 6 spaces of base 12 (base 10 + the two values A or B).
That would make the "compressed" result be 110111010111011101110011 which is larger than the original message when both are in binary...
Don't overthink my example, it was just a representation
Fair enough. The general idea is correct, I just found that example rather jarring... It is generally more difficult to compress an already small amount of data anyway.
Data compression. Something about "making less data out of ... The same data" is really mind blowing, & the math is sick
It is not that complicated, to make a simple example with strings: AAAABBBABABAB takes up 13 spaces, but write (compress) it like 4A3B3AB take up 6 spaces compressing it more than 50%.
Now double it like AAAABBBABABABAAAABBBABABAB with 26 spaces and write it as 2(4A3B3AB) with 9 spaces it takes only 30% of the space.
Compression algorithms just look for those repetitive spaces.
Takes those letters and imagine them being colored pixels of a picture to compress a picture
Once you get into audio, images and video it revolves a lot around converting temporal and/or positional data into the frequency domain rather than simple token replacement.
Wait, isn't your first example goes from 13 spaces binary to a 6 spaces of base 12 (base 10 + the two values A or B).
That would make the "compressed" result be 110111010111011101110011 which is larger than the original message when both are in binary...
Don't overthink my example, it was just a representation
Fair enough. The general idea is correct, I just found that example rather jarring... It is generally more difficult to compress an already small amount of data anyway.