6 ms·
My intuition says it's not possible to get 1 without destroying the ability to get 2, or vice versa. But I'm no expert. The solution that leaps to my mind is
by jwp 19y ago
My intuition says it's not possible to get 1 without destroying the ability to get 2, or vice versa. But I'm no expert. The solution that leaps to my mind is to use a locality-sensitive hash function. It would make search stochastic, which means reversing the encoding would be easier. Seems like any hash-based solution will involve a tradeoff between 1 and 2.
What did you have in mind?
- cmars232 19y agoI still haven't worked out the protocols for matching encoded locations -- hopefully it is possible. I fear you're right, I may not be able to get beyond a simple challenge-response type of comparison without disclosing some information. Cool thing is, since I got interested in solving this problem, I've learned how R-Trees work! :) http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Hilbert_R-tree http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Hilbert_R-tree