[HN Gopher] The Stick of Jan Sloot (2004)
       ___________________________________________________________________
        
       The Stick of Jan Sloot (2004)
        
       Author : schnitzelstoat
       Score  : 32 points
       Date   : 2021-12-20 11:13 UTC (11 hours ago)
        
 (HTM) web link (www.spronck.net)
 (TXT) w3m dump (www.spronck.net)
        
       | tluyben2 wrote:
       | I worked and lived in Nieuwegein at that time (the quite small
       | Dutch city he lived and died) and I heard many things before and
       | after his death. The book is a nice story but it was and is clear
       | to any computer scientist that this was just nonsense. Funnily
       | enough Sloot managed to the then Philips ceo on board who was not
       | a dumb guy (although his investments around the bubble actually
       | would make you think he was and this did not help).
       | 
       | My though was (and still is), is that this was a clever fraud
       | that went too far and that the stress about this fraud actually
       | killed him. He was a nervous wreck at the end which supports that
       | theory (although his family says this was because he was feeling
       | paranoid and threatened).
       | 
       | Two years after his death I was contacted by a man who said he
       | was a friend of Sloot and in private conversation Sloot told him
       | the secret. As I was co-owner of an IT company in Nieuwegein and
       | had studied math, he ended up on our doorstep. Our ceo told him
       | to go somewhere else, but I was curious so had a few meetings
       | with him. He showed pics of him with Sloot and explained how the
       | system worked. He said the analog story was to throw clever
       | guessers off (he indeed was at least paranoid enough for that
       | this man said) and the system was, in fact, digital. It was
       | revolutionary lossless digital compression. Of course I do not
       | know if this guy knew anything or if Sloot ever told him
       | anything; I will never really know. But it seems to fit the
       | scenario I thought what had happened.
       | 
       | He drew this all out and wanted to pay me to implement this
       | algorithm. I said it was basically worthless but to humor him I
       | implemented it anyway (for free; he said when he would be rich
       | soon, he would fix that crime). The way it worked, and I suspect
       | so did Sloot's version indeed, is that the 'compressed' version,
       | which indeed had 10 movies (or more) compressed in 64kb, was kind
       | of an index for the decompression data.
       | 
       | So, you have 10 movies of 500mb (rather normal back then), you
       | would end up with a memory stick with 64kb file on it which are
       | those 10 'compressed' movies and you would have a roughly 5gb
       | decompress.exe to uncompress them.
       | 
       | To the spectator it looks like you stick different sticks into
       | your computer which have 64kb files with 10s of movies or 1000s
       | of images, all without quality loss from their original. Which
       | was, in my opinion, the reason no one could inspect 'his device';
       | it was an easy sell for the secret could be stolen that way. Of
       | course there are very easy tricks in fat32 to show a different
       | file size for decompress.exe which could further help the ruse.
       | 
       | Anyway: what he suggested is not possible and cannot be
       | possible(kolmorogov complexity?); lossless compression of
       | countless movies in 64kb, ergo it was nonsense. But intriguing so
       | many people fell for it.
        
         | jacquesm wrote:
         | Sloot's 'prototype' demo apparently worked but it didn't do
         | what he said it did. He was strongly convinced that he needed
         | just a little bit more time to make it work for real and in the
         | meantime he probably justified his fake demo by telling himself
         | that once it worked all would be forgiven. It's a sad story and
         | a good reminder that the most dangerous start-up founders for
         | investors are the ones that believe their own bullshit.
        
           | tluyben2 wrote:
           | Yeah, maybe it was not an intentional scam and maybe he
           | believed it. The guy I spoke with who claimed to know him
           | said that his prototype did actually work to what he said.
           | But I was not there and it still seems an interesting story.
        
             | jacquesm wrote:
             | The prototype _looked_ like it worked, but it didn 't. It
             | was pretty clever though and even though I don't know 100%
             | sure how they did it I had figure out enough to make them
             | very uncomfortable.
             | 
             | The setup was a small device plugged into a TV, and then
             | you could pick any one of iirc 8 movies that they would
             | then show a sizeable chunk of. As far as it being a scam:
             | they believed they could make it work, but there is no way
             | that they did not know that they were presenting a rigged
             | demo.
        
       | schnitzelstoat wrote:
       | This story reminds me a bit of the modern cryptocurrency stuff -
       | I wonder how many of those involved are like Pieper and likely
       | know it is bullshit but continue with the charade nonetheless as
       | a vehicle to enrich themselves at the expense of the less savvy.
        
         | anotheraccount9 wrote:
         | Define bullshit.
        
           | InfiniteRand wrote:
           | Well, if you're a bit too bullish about your shit, your shit
           | is probably bullshit
        
         | jacquesm wrote:
         | Other investors back in the day passed on this and told him
         | they believed it to be a scam, but that did not stop Pieper
         | from taking the CEO role in the company that was to
         | commercialize Jan Sloot's 'invention'. Pieper did a lot of
         | stuff that was questionable (Ring!Rosa for instance), but the
         | list is much longer.
         | 
         | The biggest thing he messed up was probably killing Philips as
         | a viable brand (but to be honest that giant was already on the
         | way down for a while).
        
         | gpvos wrote:
         | The difference with crypto is that Sloot's scheme is
         | information-theoretically impossible. For crypto the math
         | actually is correct; whether it is viable is a societal/human
         | matter.
        
       | afandian wrote:
       | I didn't see it explcitly mentioned: arithmetic coding was one of
       | the more mind bending things to learn about.
       | https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Arithmetic_coding
        
       | Maursault wrote:
       | Article contains a good number of sloppy inaccuracies. Here is
       | one.
       | 
       | > What truly amazes me is that a man as Roel Pieper, who is a
       | professor of Computer Science no less...
       | 
       | > On 1 September 1999 Pieper was appointed as a _professor of
       | Electronic Commerce,_ a newly created chair at the faculty of
       | informatics and technology management of the University of
       | Twente. Pieper ended as a professor of business administration
       | and corporate governance at the university of Twente in 2013. [1]
       | 
       | Information Science != Computer Science
       | 
       | See also [2]
       | 
       | [1]
       | https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Roel_Pieper#Career_in_the_Neth...
       | 
       | [2] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Sloot_Digital_Coding_System
        
         | jacquesm wrote:
         | Roel Pieper is a man with a long and interesting history, some
         | successes but also a large number of spectacular failures, and
         | not a few borderline (or even outright) scams.
         | 
         | Falling for this particular scam was pretty dumb, especially
         | for someone with his connections. Note that Jan Sloot worked at
         | Philips before Roel Pieper and him joined forces.
        
         | bondarchuk wrote:
         | Dutch "informatica" = English "computer science", although it
         | was translated as "informatics" here.
        
           | Maursault wrote:
           | That is interesting, and seems perfectly reasonable at first,
           | but then please explain what "Technology Management" could
           | possibly have to do with Computer Science. Informatics
           | (domestic meaning) fits with Technology Management, they're
           | complementary. Computer Science, which is a subset of
           | Mathematics, has nothing to do with _management_ of
           | technology (or computers). Techs, administrators and SysOps
           | are not computer scientists, and even if they happen to be
           | (which is becoming more common), they 're not doing any
           | computer science when they're managing technology. What is
           | the translation of (western) informatics? Is it possible the
           | translation is correct? [1], [2], [3], [4] Or is it more
           | likely Dutch universities don't know what Computer Science
           | is? Is there also a Dutch department of Veterinary Science
           | and Pet Management somewhere? Or a department of Astronomy
           | and Optometry? Mechanical Engineering and Machining?
           | 
           | [1] https://da.wikipedia.org/wiki/Roel_Pieper ??
           | 
           | [2] https://translate.google.com/?sl=auto&tl=nl&text=informat
           | ics...
           | 
           | [3] https://translate.google.com/?sl=auto&tl=nl&text=computer
           | %20...
           | 
           | [4] I suspect, not that OP is necessarily incorrect, but that
           | this is more interesting than I thought
        
             | bondarchuk wrote:
             | It's become a bit of a joke at this point, the way Dutch
             | universities give their programs and departments English
             | titles to appear hip and international.. It seems there are
             | (or were) 2 faculties, "Informatica", and "Technologie &
             | Management", and the chair "Electronic Commerce" was part
             | of both.
        
       | wernsey wrote:
       | Fun read.
       | 
       | This Jan Sloot reminds me of a conversation I once had with my
       | dad, an electrical engineer, where he told me how many lay people
       | he encountered throughout his career that proposed perpetual
       | motion machines to him.
       | 
       | My dad would see it as his duty to educate them on the
       | conservation of energy, but it wasn't a pleasant experience for
       | him to burst their bubble like that.
       | 
       | I don't think he ever encountered anyone who refused to be
       | educated, though.
        
       | e2021 wrote:
       | This is like the idea of using Pi for compression - if Pi
       | contains all strings of digits, then we find whatever data we
       | want to encode in Pi and store the index where it starts. But
       | turns out the number of digits in the index is going to be (on
       | average) greater than the number of digits pointed to in Pi
       | anyway
        
       | DonaldFisk wrote:
       | I'm reasonably familiar with this case, and there's a book about
       | it called De Broncode by Eric Smit. I haven't read it as my Dutch
       | is extremely limited. It's been my understanding that his
       | invention involved analogue processing (think along the lines of
       | an electromagnetic frequency being used to transmit a data point,
       | rather than a single bit). The article suggests it was supposed
       | to be able to generate all possible movies but that looks like a
       | straw man to me. There are a finite number of movies and you
       | could restrict this further to the top (for example) 1000 movies.
       | 
       | There's a patent here:
       | https://patents.google.com/patent/NL1009908C2/en It's in English
       | but as it's new to me I haven't read it yet either.
       | 
       | Jan Sloot died the day before he was due to release details of
       | his invention to investors. The timing seems suspicious. The
       | obvious conclusions might be either suicide in anticipation of
       | being exposed as a charlatan, or (if you're prone to conspiracy
       | theories) murder by someone acting on behalf of companies who had
       | invested in digital compression, but he died of a heart attack,
       | i.e. natural causes, though no autopsy was performed, despite
       | relatives requesting one. I don't know the known state of his
       | health was at the time he died.
        
         | gpvos wrote:
         | A friend once gave me the book De Broncode, as they thought it
         | might be inspirational for me. I must have hurt their feelings
         | a bit as I immediately explained why it was an impossible idea.
        
           | jacquesm wrote:
           | Anybody with a cursory understanding of how technology works
           | would have punctured that particular balloon. But in the
           | present this guy would likely be sitting right next to one E.
           | Holmes, M. Perry or anyone of a number of other CEOs that
           | were 'faking it until they could make it'.
        
       | jacquesm wrote:
       | I've had the demo in the offices of one Hugo Krop (of Textlite
       | fame, later jailed for fraud).
       | 
       | It was a complete fake and I told them that - and how I thought
       | it worked, and for a counter demo disrupted theirs with $5 worth
       | of electronics (VHF sweep generator). They left and never came
       | back. I jokingly call it the first tech DD I ever did.
        
       ___________________________________________________________________
       (page generated 2021-12-20 23:02 UTC)