<?xml version="1.0" encoding="UTF-8"?><rss version="2.0"
	xmlns:content="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/content/"
	xmlns:dc="http://purl.org/dc/elements/1.1/"
	xmlns:atom="http://www.w3.org/2005/Atom"
	>
<channel>
	<title>Comments on: Hutter Prize Update</title>
	<atom:link href="http://www.c10n.info/archives/532/feed" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml" />
	<link>http://www.c10n.info/archives/532</link>
	<description>All about the most recent compression techniques, algorithms, patents, products, tools and events.</description>
	<pubDate>Tue, 07 Oct 2008 04:58:43 +0000</pubDate>
	<generator>http://wordpress.org/?v=2.6</generator>
		<item>
		<title>By: Sachin Garg</title>
		<link>http://www.c10n.info/archives/532#comment-251395</link>
		<dc:creator>Sachin Garg</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Thu, 03 Jul 2008 21:05:11 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.c10n.info/archives/532#comment-251395</guid>
		<description>I share your concern about some compression benchmarks ignoring time, but Hutter Prize is an exception where this is OK. 

Its not as much about compression as its about AI. Check out its rationale, it touches the speed issue.

  http://cs.fit.edu/~mmahoney/compression/rationale.html</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>I share your concern about some compression benchmarks ignoring time, but Hutter Prize is an exception where this is OK. </p>
<p>Its not as much about compression as its about AI. Check out its rationale, it touches the speed issue.</p>
<p>  <a href="http://cs.fit.edu/~mmahoney/compression/rationale.html" rel="nofollow">http://cs.fit.edu/~mmahoney/compression/rationale.html</a></p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: Andrew Polar</title>
		<link>http://www.c10n.info/archives/532#comment-251374</link>
		<dc:creator>Andrew Polar</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Thu, 03 Jul 2008 16:52:30 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.c10n.info/archives/532#comment-251374</guid>
		<description>The contest is interesting but the time looks absurd. 9 hours for 100 MB file is not practical. Also each new record require longer time. Shouldn't that be more logical to consider size multiplied by compression time as a criteria.</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>The contest is interesting but the time looks absurd. 9 hours for 100 MB file is not practical. Also each new record require longer time. Shouldn&#8217;t that be more logical to consider size multiplied by compression time as a criteria.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
</channel>
</rss>
