IN THREE AND THREE EIGHTHS RADIANS TEN is the personally confirmed solution to the Z32 cipher, aka the Mount Diablo Code.

Code:  https://github.com/dstampher/zodiac-z32-cipher

Paper:  https://zenodo.org/records/18645227

Discovered in December 2025 by great guy David Stampher and his cat, who helped him solve this cipher after 55 years.

Keanu in an infinite woah loop.  That is like me since I found the triangle.

Eventually I will bypass the mental firewalls, just as I bypassed the unicity distance problem on this specific cipher.

It was only possible given the context.

IN THREE AND THREE EIGHTHS RADIANS TEN is the personally confirmed solution to the Z32 cipher.

Solved in December 2025 by David Stampher using the Python programming language.

Code:  https://github.com/dstampher/zodiac-z32-cipher

Paper:  https://zenodo.org/records/18645227

At this point I am mostly just trying to get to 1,000 posts as I am so close.  Have a nice day.

Wait a minute.

I just realized the landmark that appears in 68′ is natural in origin.  It seems I have been wrong for the past four months.

Any rocket scientists viewing this thread?  Would love to hear from you.

All I’ve really got is cow theorist @shaqmeister

Someone else said natural origin, so I’m wrong.

Anyone else?

The enemy has invaded my thread.

They are trying to spam my spam.

Do not let them distract you from the truth.

IN THREE AND THREE EIGHTHS RADIANS TEN is the personally confirmed solution to the Z32 cipher.

Solved in December 2025 by David Stampher using the Python programming language.

Code:   https://github.com/dstampher/zodiac-z32-cipher

Paper:   https://zenodo.org/records/18645227

At this point I am mostly just trying to get to 1,000 posts as I am so close.  Have a nice day.

IN THREE AND THREE EIGHTHS RADIANS TEN is the personally confirmed solution to the Z32 cipher.

Solved in December 2025 by David Stampher using the Python programming language.

Code:    https://github.com/dstampher/zodiac-z32-cipher

Paper:    https://zenodo.org/records/18645227

I cracked the Mt. Diablo code.

I solved Z32 back in December just been waiting around ever since.

Code:   https://github.com/dstampher/zodiac-z32-cipher

Paper:   https://zenodo.org/records/18645227

Posted by: @coder1987

↑

Any rocket scientists viewing this thread?  Would love to hear from you.

All I’ve really got is cow theorist @shaqmeister

Someone else said natural origin, so I’m wrong.

Anyone else?

Since you have chosen to ping me again with a mention only to denigrate me, I shall respond one last time with a deduction.

You have written so much in the time that you have been with us, that it is possible at this point to be confident in taking a step back and reviewing just exactly what has been going on here. It might have been better for all of us, however, if you had just been honest from the start.

Your proposal has been given considerably more attention over the last month than it has merited based on your manner here. It is clear that you are passionate about your symbol in the grass, and it is clear that challenges to its possible origin and meaning are the ones that disturb you the most. And thus, fairly, you are keen to stick with what you have found.

With that said, however, it is also abundantly clear that, not David Stampher, but rather your AI Copilot is in fact the primary originator of both your code – as you have noted – and certainly your paper and the list of criteria you would have your reviewers stick to.

The manner of your presentation here and the form and wording of your paper betray nought that I can see that indicates commonality of origin. Nothing that we have seen, in your responses (or lack thereof) to a comprehensive slew of objective criticisms to the details of your offering, has given us the slightest indication that you actually have, not just the willingness to face objective review, but more importantly any real understanding of what you present as your own work to be able to do so.

I have come to realise that the frustrations of having tried to engage with you in honest discussion, such as they have been, have arisen not from anything that can at all be regarded as meaningful but difficult-to-address counterargument, but simply because the discussion has been had with you and not the Copilot that put all this together. Not one single point of valid objection has been taken up by you and offered a counter.

And, of course, there’s nothing at all wrong in working in this way and sharing the products of your efforts. It would just have been preferable, before coming into the lion’s den like this, if you had chosen to be upfront about it.

All the best to you.

Posted by: @shaqmeister

↑

Posted by: @coder1987

↑

Any rocket scientists viewing this thread?  Would love to hear from you.

All I’ve really got is cow theorist @shaqmeister

Someone else said natural origin, so I’m wrong.

Anyone else?

Since you have chosen to ping me again with a mention only to denigrate me, I shall respond one last time with a deduction.

You have written so much in the time that you have been with us, that it is possible at this point to be confident in taking a step back and reviewing just exactly what has been going on here. It might have been better for all of us, however, if you had just been honest from the start.

Your proposal has been given considerably more attention over the last month than it has merited based on your manner here. It is clear that you are passionate about your symbol in the grass, and it is clear that challenges to its possible origin and meaning are the ones that disturb you the most. And thus, fairly, you are keen to stick with what you have found.

With that said, however, it is also abundantly clear that, not David Stampher, but rather your AI Copilot is in fact the primary originator of both your code – as you have noted – and certainly your paper and the list of criteria you would have your reviewers stick to.

The manner of your presentation here and the form and wording of your paper betray nought that I can see that indicates commonality of origin. Nothing that we have seen, in your responses (or lack thereof) to a comprehensive slew of objective criticisms to the details of your offering, has given us the slightest indication that you actually have, not just the willingness to face objective review, but more importantly any real understanding of what you present as your own work to be able to do so.

I have come to realise that the frustrations of having tried to engage with you in honest discussion, such as they have been, have arisen not from anything that can at all be regarded as meaningful but difficult-to-address counterargument, but simply because the discussion has been had with you and not the Copilot that put all this together. Not one single point of valid objection has been taken up by you and offered a counter.

And, of course, there’s nothing at all wrong in working in this way and sharing the products of your efforts. It would just have been preferable, before coming into the lion’s den like this, if you had chosen to be upfront about it.

All the best to you.

 

Lol, are you saying I didn’t find the triangle?

Get out of here.

You are the natural origin guy.

I have been completely up front.  I shared my research.  I put a ton of time into this.