Galactic Empire vs Orions Arm Sephirotic Civilisations

[Darth Hoth]

-In addition, you have completely, utterly failed to comprehend what a game changing factor intelligence was to mankind. It turned us from simple animals into the masters of the fucking earth. The things we can do now (compared to what mere apes can do) is insane, and its all due to just a slight increase in intelligence. What do you think a large (no, a very, very large) increase could do?

Oh, are we still "super-intelligence"-wanking? How predictable.

Tell you what, since you like to use the animals example so much: If I put you alone on the Siberian tundra, no equipment but the clothes on your body (enough to keep you warm at night, generously enough), a hundred miles from any human settlement, and then expect you to fight off a pack of starving wolves, will you bet on you or the wolves winning? Should be no contest for the superior intelligence, I take it!

Intelligence is useful mostly because it has allowed us to build tools superior to the animals. Yes, such matters as superior planning or organisation (among other things) are obviously also important, but what let us succeed to the point where we are today was, basically, that we built better tools than any other species. Larger societies only became relevant later.

To put it another way, this time using your ape analogy, would you like to duel unarmed against a monkey with a gun, and trained to use it? After all, you are the more intelligent one. The monkey just has weaponry with vastly superior lethality and delivery systems compared to your fists. But your intelligence can surely negate that advantage! Perhaps you ask the monkey to wait while you spend a few decades (or centuries) building up the infrastructure necessary for reverse-engineering the pistol!

In this case, SW simply builds better tools than the OA avuncular sophists, despite being mostly humans (or unrealistic human-like aliens) rather than wankatrons. It is that simple.

Intelligence is not magic. It does not instantly spell away all objective physical factors. You lose against the wolves. You lose against the monkey. And compared to SW tech vs OA, those are generous analogies.

[Darth Hoth]

Well, screw all this vague wankery. I just thought of something. Star Wars has Grand Admiral Thrawn, A.K.A. The Biggest Mary Sue Ever. Does anyone know what he does? He looks at some random artwork from a species, and then he is (due to author's fiat super-intelligence) able to completely accurately predict anything they will ever do and effortlessly defeat them!

I guess SW has a magic instawin as well! I cannot believe that no one has thought of this before! Or maybe it as because this is fundamentally stupid reasoning . . .

Anyway, now we know that. Whenever OA-wankers (or AI-wankers in general, for that matter) bitch about how their wankatrons' "super-intelligence" are a magic panacea against any and all of the SW setting's (usually very numerous and considerable) advantages, just copy-paste their arguments and return them, substituting "Thrawn" for "avuncular sophist AI"!

[Vendetta]

Anyway, could you PLEASE tell me why the members of a soft science fiction group like star wars considers itself harder than orions arm? I mean, you clearly know some little secret that I don't. Help a brother out.

Has anyone actually made that argument? Or are you as easily confused by the nature of a vs scenario as you are by the standard BBCode quote tags that every single forum software on the internet uses?

People here are saying that Star Wars is "harder" than OA in the colloquial English meaning that it can kick the shit out of it. Not in the fat greasy nerd definition that it is closer to "real science".

HAHAHAHAHA, you aren't serious, are you?! Hardness is based on scientific accuracy and realism, nothing else!

ITT people can't read or understand colloquial speech.

I'll lay it out for you, because you're obviously thick. In merrie olde Englande, to say that someone is "hard" is to say that they are a good fighter, a strong person, a vicious shitkicker etc. A hard motherfucker. It means that they could break faces should they so choose. This has nothing to do with the greasy fat nerd "hard-SF" other than the fact that anyone who recognises "hard-SF" when they see it is almost certainly not "hard" by the prior definition.

I was conflating the two for the purposes of funny. I suspect most other people on the forum understood this, because they are clever. You did not understand it because you are thick.

[CaptainChewbacca]

You are the weaker party in regards to hardness, and that is all there is to say about that.

I want everyone to say that line out loud. If you can do it without finding the overwhelming urge to punch yourself in the neck, I salute you. OA seems OBSESSED with this nebulous 'hardness' even though everything they've got is based on bleeding-edge theoretical science that's so new even the people developing it don't understand it fully. What's more, that doesn't even guarantee a good story.

There's two places I require hardness in life; my dick and my booze. I can't put Orion's Arm in a glass and it's not gonna get me laid, so what the hell good is it? Its not entertaining, thought provoking, or even INTERESTING. Its a child's poster covered with glitter, which he assumes makes it beautiful, only its cheap, gaudy, and only admired by few out of some obligation to the creator.

[Bottlestein]

So has anybody asked why a series that does not believe in thermodynamics considers itself "harder"?

Oh right - they consider Ray Bradbury a "scientist"

SW wins - more people know of Lucas's series than Bradbury's delusional ravings

[Serafina]

So has anybody asked why a series that does not believe in thermodynamics considers itself "harder"?

Oh right - they consider Ray Bradbury a "scientist"

SW wins - more people know of Lucas's series than Bradbury's delusional ravings

Not that i doubt that OA shits all about thermodynamics (they certainly don't show any respect for actual science), but could you kindly name an example - just for fun?

Oh, and NICE post, Chewie.

[Bottlestein]

^ They go on about 100% energy-to-mass conversions; they have on the order of 20 to 30% efficiencies from solar harvesting - which demonstrates how little they know of QM (remember Dyson proposed his BS before we really understood solid state physics - so they're actually using out of date material )

You and STRAK hit the nail on the head - they are just pretty much writing down whatever the hell they feel like.

Like Bradbury

[Serafina]

Ah, i already pointed out the "100%-efficiency"-nonsense, but i readily admit that i had no idea how or why solar harvesting efficiencies are bullshit.
But hey, they have actual "unstoppable gray goo", so no amount of pseudoscience surprises me from OA.

[Serafina]

-AI researchers are under the assumption that its the software (not the hardware) which is lagging behind. For example, lets say you need to crack a 125 bit code. You have two options:
A 2007 era supercomputer, with 1977 software or,
A 1977 era computer, with 2007 software,
Which one cracks the code faster? Suprisingly, its the 1977 computer (the apple 2). It can do it twice as fast as the modern day supercomputer. Of course, breaking a code doesn't require sapience, but it gives you an idea. A couple of AI researchers are under the impression that neural connectivity has nothing to do with it, but I doubt that. Its the one thing we have in abundance that machines don't, after all, so would that not be a good place to start?

You fail. I know little about AI-programming, but if you want to demonstrate the benefits of INTELLIGENCE, presenting number-crunching power is just utter failure. By that logic, a calculator is more intelligent than you. Not that i would rule that out, mind you.

-Hey, I'm sorry man, but the qautes feature just doesn't do what I am asking of it. I just came on stardestroyer.net a couple days ago, and I've been in the heat of battle the whole time. Maybe I'm missing some key. Anyway, could you PLEASE tell me why the members of a soft science fiction group like star wars considers itself harder than orions arm? I mean, you clearly know some little secret that I don't. Help a brother out.

Seriously, it's easy enough that 13-year olds can figure it out.
But hey, i play nice every now and then, so here it goes (i still have your spelling to mock, not to mention your general stupidity):

Code: Select all

[quote]Just hit the "quote" button above and then put what you want to quote into it.[/quote]

Just hit the "quote" button above and then put what you want to quote into it.

Code: Select all

[quote][quote]If you want to quote a quote, put a complete "quote tag" into another complete "quote tag", put the quote you are quoting (the text that appears FIRST) into the MIDDLE "quote tag"[/quote]and the SECOND quote tag right between the first and second "/quote"[/quote]

If you want to quote a quote, put a complete "quote tag" into another complete "quote tag", put the quote you are quoting (the text that appears FIRST) into the MIDDLE "quote tag"

and the SECOND quote tag right between the first and second "/quote"

Code: Select all

[quote="RandomPoster"]If you want to tell us whom you quoted, just put his or her name behind the first in this form ="NAME" [/quote]

If you want to tell us whom you quoted, just put his or her name behind the first in this form ="NAME"

It's fucking EASY. Now you have no more excuse to fuck it up.

-Obviously it doesn't, silly. I already said way back there that strong super intelligence doesn't equal instant hyperdrive copying, just that it will help a lot. Provided that they can capture one, the toposophics will be able to dissect the engine, and build an architecture to support its production and mass deployment. Remember, they don't just have stronger and better thoughts, but faster ones too. Computations which take a human lifetime can be done in seconds by a toposophic. If it wasn't for that, I wouldn't even be discussing hyperdrive retro-engineering, because otherwise, any attempt to do so would be limited to human work speeds (which we circumvent with super AI). I don't believe you can entirely rule it out either.

No, they WON'T be able to build a hyperdrive.
Even if they capture one, they can't figure out how it works, since they can't measure it's effects. That's like trying to replicate a modern engine without being able to measure heat. At best, they can employ a copy&paste method - if they can replicate the materials, which is doubtful.
However, they can NOT replicate hypermatter - that's like looking at modern fossil fuels and instantly knowing how they are mined and refined. No, wait, it's like looking at fossil fuel engine and doing that.

Again, you are ignoring ALL the steps necessary to actually build something, and just go "find hyperdrive"->"intelligence"->"???"->"profit".

-In fact, if you give me a figure for how long it took the original warsies (the guys who lived way before zim the despot) to perfect the hypedrive, I can give you an estimate for how long it will take the artifints to retro-engineer it.

No, you WON'T. Technology or intelligence don't work like that.
Not to mention that, IIRC, the hyperdrive was developed based on the force (or with it), so your AIs would be utterly unable to do it AT ALL.

-LOL, yeah, well that just goes to show you how deep in the shithouse the AI researchers of today are. Their computers are not yet capable of any true sapient insight. But it is a bit of a hint at the significance software has to play in the issue.

It doesn't tell us anything how AIs work, since it's just number crunching without any sapience.

-Hmmm. Maybe I will earn such a decoder ring in the future. A boy can dream, can't he?

You can, but apparently you can't think. The latter is more useful than the former.

-Sorry if some of my comments seem sloppy and rushed (they are), but I'm just trying to score a few quick points in this bout. I've always wanted to learn about (and teach to people) the deadliness of strong AI, like the fictional computer defence network called skynet. The worrying thing is that there is nothing preventing the emergance of such machines in the distant future.

The only thing you are scoring quickly is idiocy-points. Besides, we have actual AI-researchers on this board, so you are telling us nothing new (in fact, you are telling us a lot of crap).

HAHAHAHAHA, you aren't serious, are you?! Hardness is based on scientific accuracy and realism, nothing else!

Evidently, you never used your penis. Otherwise, you would not have made that statement.

-LOL. This from the people who define scientific accuracy as the ability to destroy other sci fi franchises. Your an awesome bunch.

Stop your strawmans (if you actually know what that means). We never claimed that SW is scientifically accurate. We merely point out that OA is scientifically INACCURATE.

-Alright, I'll grant that you've floated out my theory on information gathering by the AI. They are (until the mass production of a retro-engineered hyperdrive) limited to the light speed barrier, after all. But you still went ahead pretending that luke (who has yet to have even a single precognitive vision) is the quivilant to an entire team of minoirty report pre-cogs! He is no such thing, he can't even have visions yet, so give it up. Unless the war takes place before vader and palpy died, you'll have to concede this point to me.

What point? The precognition? Sure, i have no problem to concede that Luke has no significant precognition for a long time. However, if we are talking about the GE at it's full strength, then Palpatine is alive.
My main point, which you failed to grasp, is that INTELLIGENCE IS USELESS WITHOUT INFORMATION. You can be the smartest thing in the universe, if you have no input about the real world, you can't predict anything about the real world (except by chance, which you can do just as well if you are human).

So yes, in summary, there is much that is limited by orions arm restriction to light speed. Information gathering, placement of mines, launching of attacks, etc. Its a shitty way to loose a fight (just because the other side is scientifically weaker), but there it is. Good time drilling it into me, much appreciated. Still...

Waah, waah, you are not playing fair because you are not obeying science in your fiction.
Sorry, but neither does OA. So stop this bullshit.


Actually, kudos on your apparently improved spelling. You are now on the level of a german child in seventh grade (3-5 years of english education). Well, actually, you are worse, since you are too dumb to use a spell checker (and yes, i do - it makes finding your spelling errors much easier).

Still, no actual argument except the usual wankstuff:
-AI-wank - appealing to great intelligence while ignoring reality
-Calling your opponent "soft sci-fi", as if that was a valid argument. While being a hypocrite, since OA is not hard science.

[Lord Insanity]

'No the sun puts out enough energy in 8,000 years to supply the death star for one shot. You would need approximately 3 million Dyson spheres, all powering the same source, to equal one Death Star reactor. A single Dyson sphere catches about the same amount of energy as a mere Star Destroyer's reactor generates.'

-Your obviously some kind of idiot. Orions arm is set 10,000 years in the future, and dysons spheres have existed for a long time. One of them could easily have stored up 7000 (yes, its 7000, not 8000) years of energy by now. You saying that 3 million dysons spheres would be required is just moronic. And yes, I know that the death star can put that out in one blast, and recharge in about 24 hours, so what? OA have much better WMDs, as my previous page indicates.

No, OA has WMDs that are all dependent on using stars. They have nothing that can generate its own power and can function as a weapon on the level of a Death Star. It would take 3 million Dyson spheres capturing stellar energy simultaneously to equal the power output at the same rate as one Death Star reactor.

'So does OA have any way of utilizing that power beyond a WMD that is dependent on using a nearby star. Really you don't see the difference between a Battle Station/Ship that generates its own power and can fire repeatedly, and a mere stellar bomb?'

-LOL. And can be destroyed by simply droping a fusion bomb down its thermal exhaust port. Good one, mate. You've got me. And you seem to forget, conversion bombs are not restricted to destroying just stars, they are more eversatile than that. Not to mention that the sephirotics have alot more than just one, and actually had the foresight not to focus all their resources into one rather easily destroyed ship, which is more than the empire can say.

Easily destroyed? It took the Rebels analyzing a complete set of technical specs to find a weakness and a wizard with magic precognition to exploit it. Where the hell would OA pull either of those from? Never mind that the Death Star is capable of appearing anywhere in OA territory and blasting a new target at least daily. They can also build a new one in secret inside 10 months. If they actually wanted to gear up for total war, they could field dozens of the things in less time than it takes for an OA ship to travel to another star system.

[Uncluttered]

I want everyone to say that line out loud. If you can do it without finding the overwhelming urge to punch yourself in the neck, I salute you. OA seems OBSESSED with this nebulous 'hardness' even though everything they've got is based on bleeding-edge theoretical science that's so new even the people developing it don't understand it fully. What's more, that doesn't even guarantee a good story.

There's two places I require hardness in life; my dick and my booze. I can't put Orion's Arm in a glass and it's not gonna get me laid, so what the hell good is it? Its not entertaining, thought provoking, or even INTERESTING. Its a child's poster covered with glitter, which he assumes makes it beautiful, only its cheap, gaudy, and only admired by few out of some obligation to the creator.

Don't let children like Asedra asedra ruin an experience for you. There is actually some good original fiction in OA.

This person....By Poe's law, I think he's trolling. He's not accurate with OA. It's like he read the "about" section and subsequently went looking for a bridge to live under.

[Uncluttered]

I'll lay it out for you, because you're obviously thick. In merrie olde Englande, to say that someone is "hard" is to say that they are a good fighter, a strong person, a vicious shitkicker etc. A hard motherfucker. It means that they could break faces should they so choose. This has nothing to do with the greasy fat nerd "hard-SF" other than the fact that anyone who recognises "hard-SF" when they see it is almost certainly not "hard" by the prior definition.

I was conflating the two for the purposes of funny. I suspect most other people on the forum understood this, because they are clever. You did not understand it because you are thick.

Well. In the very young and foolish childs defence..this IS a forum called: »Fiction»Science Fiction > Galactic Empire vs Orions Arm Sephirotic Civilisations.

The forum you are looking for is: Non-Fiction » History » Lets go to Nottingham and dress silly!

[Uncluttered]

Have the trans-sapients ever dealt with someone who can actually foresee the future?

I don't think either one of you knows how to read, you or your pal asedra.

OA had a massive transapient war called the Oracle War. One side developed extremely accurate simulations by building supercomputers in custom baby universes, called "Tipler Oracles". These weren't: Always-in-motion-is-the-future machines. These were: A-lesbian-your-mother-is-going-to-admit-next-friday and 5-months-to-double-is-the-price-of-wheat machines.

I'm not claiming this is hard Scifi. But then, neither is space monks in bathrobes absconding with small boys from the desert.....Never mind, that's somewhat realistic.

You are not even TRYING to address any of the other problems, such as logistics, differences in maneuverability, firepower, strategic speed and technology base. You are focusing ENTIRELY on a single issue, as if being smart allows you to overcome any challenge instantly.
That's why i am calling you an AI-wanker - because AI-wanking is your ENTIRE argument.

Having read your commentary, I feel this is a case of the pot calling the kettle stupid.
You both write like the Nigerian Spammers of the Apocalypse. Only less polite.

[Uncluttered]

-Sorry if some of my comments seem sloppy and rushed (they are), but I'm just trying to score a few quick points in this bout.

Ahem.

There are no points here. Stop Rushing.

[asedra]

So has anybody asked why a series that does not believe in thermodynamics considers itself "harder"?

Oh right - they consider Ray Bradbury a "scientist"

SW wins - more people know of Lucas's series than Bradbury's delusional ravings

-If popularity is how you win, then by god, star wars has done it!
-Also, although they pwn orions arm in a straight up fight, its only because they have superluminal capabilities. I would easily win this debate (against every pro-warsie who showed up) if that capability were nullified, or if orions arm were granted FTL. That's a guarantee, bro.
-But no. Instead, the warsies took the smart (if cowardly) way out - keep the debate at square one: Argue and bicker about the possibility's of the archailects implementing hyperdrive tech even though the op stated we would have it perfected after a sufficient amount of time. What did I get during this whole debate?: 'No, they can't do it.' 'Nope, not a chance in hell.' 'They don't have the infrastructure.' 'We have FTL! Instant win! You suck. Bye.' The only person who wasn't pulling that tired old song and dance was that Imperial guy. You stole away his (and my own) opportunity to have a real debate. Good job, you pricks.
-I guess you're all afraid to let one guy get his platform off the ground so he can take on another 6 or 7? Swarming tactics are so effective that way (and trivial complaints over spelling errors, haha, screw off). Pity, now I'll never get so see what would have happened without your FTL crutch. You won on a technicality.

[asedra]

-Grant me a rematch. Throw out star wars FTL advantage, I dare you.

[Bakustra]

So has anybody asked why a series that does not believe in thermodynamics considers itself "harder"?

Oh right - they consider Ray Bradbury a "scientist"

SW wins - more people know of Lucas's series than Bradbury's delusional ravings

-If popularity is how you win, then by god, star wars has done it!
-Also, although they pwn orions arm in a straight up fight, its only because they have superluminal capabilities. I would easily win this debate (against every pro-warsie who showed up) if that capability were nullified, or if orions arm were granted FTL. That's a guarantee, bro.
-But no. Instead, the warsies took the smart (if cowardly) way out - keep the debate at square one: Argue and bicker about the possibility's of the archailects implementing hyperdrive tech even though the op stated we would have it perfected after a sufficient amount of time. What did I get during this whole debate?: 'No, they can't do it.' 'Nope, not a chance in hell.' 'They don't have the infrastructure.' 'We have FTL! Instant win! You suck. Bye.' The only person who wasn't pulling that tired old song and dance was that Imperial guy. You stole away his (and my own) opportunity to have a real debate. Good job, you pricks.
-I guess you're all afraid to let one guy get his platform off the ground so he can take on another 6 or 7? Swarming tactics are so effective that way (and trivial complaints over spelling errors, haha, screw off). Pity, now I'll never get so see what would have happened without your FTL crutch. You won on a technicality.

a) FTL is not a crutch, but an integral part of the Star Wars universe, much like artificial intelligence is for Orion's Arm. Otherwise, it could be said that OA AIs would similarly be disallowed from existence, and then neither side wins, because they both cease to exist as recognizable civilizations. But I doubt that you'll understand, or admit why the two are equivalent.

b) Identifying yourself with a fictional setting to such an extent is psychologically unhealthy.

c) Well, given that the only other person arguing in favor of OA has said that you don't know what you're talking about, I doubt that you would have gotten very far even in a one-on-one debate with someone who knows what they're talking about.

d) If you want a real debate, then you should stop flinging comments like "warsies" around.

e) You do suck.

f) I'm still laughing over magic anti-matter transmutation beams being considered part of a hard sci-fi universe.

[Tornado Ninja Fan]

-Also, although they pwn orions arm in a straight up fight, its only because they have superluminal capabilities. I would easily win this debate (against every pro-warsie who showed up) if that capability were nullified, or if orions arm were granted FTL. That's a guarantee, bro.

To keep things fair you should give Star Wars the super-intelligent computers, then you will give OA the Force, then SW gets nanotech and so on. At the end you will have two sides with the exact same capabilities who will decide the winner with a coin toss.

[asedra]

-Also, although they pwn orions arm in a straight up fight, its only because they have superluminal capabilities. I would easily win this debate (against every pro-warsie who showed up) if that capability were nullified, or if orions arm were granted FTL. That's a guarantee, bro.

To keep things fair you should give Star Wars the super-intelligent computers, then you will give OA the Force, then SW gets nanotech and so on. At the end you will have two sides with the exact same capabilities who will decide the winner with a coin toss.

-So you basically admit SW would not win without FTL? That's basically what I'm saying. OA has enough of an advantage that they would win in its absence.

[Bakustra]

-Also, although they pwn orions arm in a straight up fight, its only because they have superluminal capabilities. I would easily win this debate (against every pro-warsie who showed up) if that capability were nullified, or if orions arm were granted FTL. That's a guarantee, bro.

To keep things fair you should give Star Wars the super-intelligent computers, then you will give OA the Force, then SW gets nanotech and so on. At the end you will have two sides with the exact same capabilities who will decide the winner with a coin toss.

-So you basically admit SW would not win without FTL? That's basically what I'm saying. OA has enough of an advantage that they would win in its absence.

Thank you for confirming my doubts. The point he is making that a) FTL is an integral part of the Star Wars universe, so removing it would be a major change and b) what's sauce for the goose is sauce for the gander. OA should also undergo surgical removal of any distinctive elements as well.

My point is slightly different, but you don't appear to be addressing that. I will repeat myself by saying that without FTL, Star Wars cannot interact with OA and will collapse into what is likely to be a lengthy dark age. Meanwhile, the same would happen for OA if its AIs were removed. So nobody wins in that scenario.

[asedra]

-A: Yes.
-B: Figure of speech: Pro OA vs pro SW. That is the 'us' I refer to, obviously.
-D: I can have that arranged.
-F: I'm still laughing over the magic hypermatter. LOL! Guess that makes two of us. By the way, since both are part of the established canon, what problem do you really have with it?

[asedra]

-If orions arm got hyperdrive engines, what one technology would you ask for in exchange? What would most be to your sides benefit?

[Vendetta]

-Grant me a rematch. Throw out star wars FTL advantage, I dare you.

So you admit that Orion's Arm can't win.

Good, can this failheap of a thread go die now?

[Bakustra]

-A: Yes.
-B: Figure of speech: Pro OA vs pro SW. That is the 'us' I refer to, obviously.
-D: I can have that arranged.
-F: I'm still laughing over the magic hypermatter. LOL! Guess that makes two of us. By the way, since both are part of the established canon, what problem do you really have with it?

The difference is that Star Wars, thanks to its popularity with the general public, does not have a horde of mouth-breathers declaring it to be so hard and so long and so salty. It never claims to be hard sci-fi. I have a problem with so-called hard sci-fi having magic antimatter transmutation beams because those are no more physically possible than FTL is. But one claims to be penile erect Viagral hard sci-fi, and the other does not.

-If orions arm got hyperdrive engines, what one technology would you ask for in exchange? What would most be to your sides benefit?

A time machine, that way I can go back in time and stop your parents from dropping you on the head as a baby. Then this conversation would not have happened, to the benefit of everybody. I realize that you might have been dropped more than once- but that's a chance I'm willing to take.

[Xon]

-AI researchers are under the assumption that its the software (not the hardware) which is lagging behind. For example, lets say you need to crack a 125 bit code. You have two options:
A 2007 era supercomputer, with 1977 software or,
A 1977 era computer, with 2007 software,
Which one cracks the code faster? Suprisingly, its the 1977 computer (the apple 2). It can do it twice as fast as the modern day supercomputer.

Um no. Modern (2010) CPUs are close to 2-4 times as faster than 2007 CPUs, and aproximately 4-5 of orders of magnitude faster than a 1977 Apply 2 for a single thread of execution. And for highly parralizable problems significantly faster, (as in dozens of orders of magnitude).

You are completely ignorant of P, NP, NP-Complete problems and what they mean for computing itself as given by trying to conflate static code cracking with fucking general intelligence, and thus your example is utterly and completely worthless. Hint, things called "rainbow tables"(which are really just a variant of dynamic programming) allow brute force solutions to be completed in a fraction of the time of naive brute force because they trade memory for time. And can easily require aproximately 7 orders of magnatude more memory for the tables than the Apple 2 had total memory.

Of course, breaking a code doesn't require sapience, but it gives you an idea.

The code in question isn't even sentient, never mind sapient. Nor do Turing machines, the fundemental princibles of how computing can posibly function, work that way.

A couple of AI researchers are under the impression that neural connectivity has nothing to do with it, but I doubt that. Its the one thing we have in abundance that machines don't, after all, so would that not be a good place to start?

What the fuck ar you trying to say? Because it is complete gibberish.