6 ms·

The company has issued a "statement regarding recent allegations made at Black Hat 2019 [0]. For anyone interested, the statement links to the guy's paper [1] "

The company has issued a "statement regarding recent allegations made at Black Hat 2019 [0]. For anyone interested, the statement links to the guy's paper [1] "where he identified the first Infinite Prime Number prediction pattern". > Utilizing multi-dimensional encryption technology, including time, music’s infinite variability, artificial intelligence, and most notably mathematical constancies to generate entangled key pairs, ... I'm not even remotely qualified to speak about any of it but it certainly gives the feeling that they're selling "silicon snake oil". My bullshit detector hit 11 after reading the above. Supposedly, Grant's discovery enables "the accurate prediction of prime numbers". I'm unable to find out just how many previously unknown prime numbers he has successfully predicted thus far, however. Anyone know? [0]: https://www.crownsterling.io/2019/08/crown-sterling-issues-statement-regarding-recent-allegations-made-at-black-hat-2019/ https://www.crownsterling.io/2019/08/crown-sterling-issues-s... [1]: https://arxiv.org/abs/1903.08570 https://arxiv.org/abs/1903.08570

RL_Quine 7y ago
> Well, I did allude to a draft preprint of some arguments that point out the major issues with Grant's paper he is presenting at @BlackHatEvents. Here is that draft: Reviewing Recent Prime Generation Methods for Breaking Cryptographic Keys https://twitter.com/LargeCardinal/status/1159204973282025472 https://twitter.com/LargeCardinal/status/1159204973282025472 https://unprovable.github.io/drafts/Prime_Generation_For_Breaking_Crypto-5e.pdf https://unprovable.github.io/drafts/Prime_Generation_For_Bre...
- dmix 7y ago
  So it sounds like the people in attendance who challenged it live were aware of it beforehand and showed up to call him out? The linked Twitter post saying "Sad to see such charlatans given a stage at Black Hat" was on August 2nd. Edit: and a paper critiquing the math was published July 2019: https://unprovable.github.io/drafts/Prime_Generation_For_Breaking_Crypto-5e.pdf https://unprovable.github.io/drafts/Prime_Generation_For_Bre...
  - chmod775 7y ago
    I didn't watch the talk, but if it is anything like the paper many people would be able to call bullshit on the spot, especially those who would attend such a talk in the first place.
  - pbhjpbhj 7y ago
    Surely the best thing to do with charlatans is put them in the spotlight and expose them. If you refuse to "give them the limelight" then you're just letting them hide their deception long enough to rip [more] people off.
gus_massa 7y ago
The paper is quite straightforward and use only math from the first or second year of the university. If you understand the word "module" and have 15 minutes to loose, give it a try. Ignoring the reference to unrelated results about prime numbers, the main idea is that to check if a number is prime: 1) First check the remainder modulo 10, modulo 9 and modulo 24. This part is correct, but it's suspicious that they waste a few pages to prove it. Anyone with a minimal background will agree with this part explained in a line. 2) They make a multiplication table "Q-grid" of the number that are not multiple of 2 nor 3. The idea is that after discarding the numbers with the bad remainder module 24, the rest of the numbers are not multiple of 2 nor 3. Again, it's suspicious that they give a long explanation and the use of invented names like "Quasi-primes" 3) To test if N is prime, they try to find in this table build looking first at the numbers nearby the x~=sqrt(N) and y~=sqrt(N) so x * y ~= N. It's not clear how they lookup in the table. Being very optimistic, this is essentially like searching for a divisor of N up to sqrt(N). [I'm not sure that their implementation is not worse.] This search up to sqrt(N) is one of the first trick you learn to test primality. The advantage of their method is that they reduce the search space modulo 24 and they get the result in sqrt(N)/3 steps. [I'm not sure that their implementation is not worse.] This is slightly better than using only the odd numbers to get the result in sqrt(N)/2 steps. For big enough numbers to be used in cryptography, this sqrt(N) or sqrt(N)/2 or sqrt(N)/3 is complete rubbish compared to any modern serious method, it's not even funny, I understand the uproar. Some quotes: > And because when we search for the prime factors of some semiprime number we need to remove the non-prime numbers from both axes of the Q-grid, like 25, 35, 49 etc., the problem will automatically reduce to simply locating the number in the Q-grid, with its horizontal and vertical projections on both axes being its prime factors. I hope they are not trying to build the whole Q-grid. It uses more memory than a simple search. Also if they are keeping only the prime numbers, why all the discussion of using the remainder module 24. All big prime numbers have the correct remainder module 24. > In fact, these two numbers, 2 and 3, contradict many of the primes properties such that some mathematicians consider them as sub-prime integers. I never hear that. Bad math joke: Did you notice that 2 is an odd prime number?
- mkl 7y ago
  It looks like all instances of "module" here should be "modulo", having been auto-incorrected or something.
angarg12 7y ago
How much does your bullshit detector hit with their promo video? https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=yd_2HwAmge8 https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=yd_2HwAmge8
- chvid 7y ago
  That video is amazing. The conference is really playing into Time AIs game by censoring it. Underlying the story that this new technology is just too big and too groundbreaking for the industry to accept :-D
  - sschueller 7y ago
    It's like some Hollywood movie intro, really well made.
  - BubRoss 7y ago
    A conference not accepting a talk is not censorship.
    - misnome 7y ago
      The conference accepted the talk. They gave the talk. The conference is now removing their videos after-the-fact. It's not hard to see how one could spin that as censorship.
      - moloch 7y ago
        The conference did _not_ accept the talk, they paid the conference so that they could give the talk.
        StavrosK 7y ago
        Which they accepted, no?
        jjeaff 7y ago
A2017U1 7y ago
There's thousands of dollars on offer for each large one and a somewhat related millennium prize. Guess scaling is down the track for this "business"
olalonde 7y ago
My bullshit detector was already super high at "Time AI". Might as well have gone all in and call it "Time Blockchain AI".
baby 7y ago
Any pitch that wastes 30min to talk about primes, or that focuses on primes, is trying to scam you. You’re welcome.
youdontknowtho 7y ago
"Entagled key pairs" sounds like Deepak Chopra style woowoo. "Brains are soul localizing devices." <--- The Deepster Chopra.
zucker42 7y ago
This guy is a known crank. His paper popped up on /r/math a few months ago https://www.reddit.com/r/math/comments/bargli/can_a_mathematician_confirm_whether_this_paper_is/ https://www.reddit.com/r/math/comments/bargli/can_a_mathemat... See also: http://primes.utm.edu/notes/crackpot.html http://primes.utm.edu/notes/crackpot.html Don't him too much credit. He deserves none.
- bspammer 7y ago
  He even shows up in the comments of that thread. I'd love to know if he really believes the nonsense he's spewing: https://www.reddit.com/r/math/comments/bargli/can_a_mathematician_confirm_whether_this_paper_is/eue6p3a/ https://www.reddit.com/r/math/comments/bargli/can_a_mathemat...
- baobrien 7y ago
  It looks like he found that reddit thread.
mcguire 7y ago
I am waiting for the Time Cube to make an appearance.

RL_Quine 7y ago

> Well, I did allude to a draft preprint of some arguments that point out the major issues with Grant's paper he is presenting at @BlackHatEvents. Here is that draft: Reviewing Recent Prime Generation Methods for Breaking Cryptographic Keys https://twitter.com/LargeCardinal/status/1159204973282025472 https://twitter.com/LargeCardinal/status/1159204973282025472 https://unprovable.github.io/drafts/Prime_Generation_For_Breaking_Crypto-5e.pdf https://unprovable.github.io/drafts/Prime_Generation_For_Bre...

dmix 7y ago
So it sounds like the people in attendance who challenged it live were aware of it beforehand and showed up to call him out? The linked Twitter post saying "Sad to see such charlatans given a stage at Black Hat" was on August 2nd. Edit: and a paper critiquing the math was published July 2019: https://unprovable.github.io/drafts/Prime_Generation_For_Breaking_Crypto-5e.pdf https://unprovable.github.io/drafts/Prime_Generation_For_Bre...
- chmod775 7y ago
  I didn't watch the talk, but if it is anything like the paper many people would be able to call bullshit on the spot, especially those who would attend such a talk in the first place.
- pbhjpbhj 7y ago
  Surely the best thing to do with charlatans is put them in the spotlight and expose them. If you refuse to "give them the limelight" then you're just letting them hide their deception long enough to rip [more] people off.

gus_massa 7y ago

The paper is quite straightforward and use only math from the first or second year of the university. If you understand the word "module" and have 15 minutes to loose, give it a try. Ignoring the reference to unrelated results about prime numbers, the main idea is that to check if a number is prime: 1) First check the remainder modulo 10, modulo 9 and modulo 24. This part is correct, but it's suspicious that they waste a few pages to prove it. Anyone with a minimal background will agree with this part explained in a line. 2) They make a multiplication table "Q-grid" of the number that are not multiple of 2 nor 3. The idea is that after discarding the numbers with the bad remainder module 24, the rest of the numbers are not multiple of 2 nor 3. Again, it's suspicious that they give a long explanation and the use of invented names like "Quasi-primes" 3) To test if N is prime, they try to find in this table build looking first at the numbers nearby the x~=sqrt(N) and y~=sqrt(N) so x * y ~= N. It's not clear how they lookup in the table. Being very optimistic, this is essentially like searching for a divisor of N up to sqrt(N). [I'm not sure that their implementation is not worse.] This search up to sqrt(N) is one of the first trick you learn to test primality. The advantage of their method is that they reduce the search space modulo 24 and they get the result in sqrt(N)/3 steps. [I'm not sure that their implementation is not worse.] This is slightly better than using only the odd numbers to get the result in sqrt(N)/2 steps. For big enough numbers to be used in cryptography, this sqrt(N) or sqrt(N)/2 or sqrt(N)/3 is complete rubbish compared to any modern serious method, it's not even funny, I understand the uproar. Some quotes: > And because when we search for the prime factors of some semiprime number we need to remove the non-prime numbers from both axes of the Q-grid, like 25, 35, 49 etc., the problem will automatically reduce to simply locating the number in the Q-grid, with its horizontal and vertical projections on both axes being its prime factors. I hope they are not trying to build the whole Q-grid. It uses more memory than a simple search. Also if they are keeping only the prime numbers, why all the discussion of using the remainder module 24. All big prime numbers have the correct remainder module 24. > In fact, these two numbers, 2 and 3, contradict many of the primes properties such that some mathematicians consider them as sub-prime integers. I never hear that. Bad math joke: Did you notice that 2 is an odd prime number?

mkl 7y ago
It looks like all instances of "module" here should be "modulo", having been auto-incorrected or something.

angarg12 7y ago

How much does your bullshit detector hit with their promo video? https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=yd_2HwAmge8 https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=yd_2HwAmge8

chvid 7y ago
That video is amazing. The conference is really playing into Time AIs game by censoring it. Underlying the story that this new technology is just too big and too groundbreaking for the industry to accept :-D
- sschueller 7y ago
  It's like some Hollywood movie intro, really well made.
- BubRoss 7y ago
  A conference not accepting a talk is not censorship.
  - misnome 7y ago
    The conference accepted the talk. They gave the talk. The conference is now removing their videos after-the-fact. It's not hard to see how one could spin that as censorship.
    - moloch 7y ago
      The conference did _not_ accept the talk, they paid the conference so that they could give the talk.
      - StavrosK 7y ago
        Which they accepted, no?
        jjeaff 7y ago

A2017U1 7y ago

There's thousands of dollars on offer for each large one and a somewhat related millennium prize. Guess scaling is down the track for this "business"

olalonde 7y ago

My bullshit detector was already super high at "Time AI". Might as well have gone all in and call it "Time Blockchain AI".

baby 7y ago

Any pitch that wastes 30min to talk about primes, or that focuses on primes, is trying to scam you. You’re welcome.

youdontknowtho 7y ago

"Entagled key pairs" sounds like Deepak Chopra style woowoo. "Brains are soul localizing devices." <--- The Deepster Chopra.

zucker42 7y ago

This guy is a known crank. His paper popped up on /r/math a few months ago https://www.reddit.com/r/math/comments/bargli/can_a_mathematician_confirm_whether_this_paper_is/ https://www.reddit.com/r/math/comments/bargli/can_a_mathemat... See also: http://primes.utm.edu/notes/crackpot.html http://primes.utm.edu/notes/crackpot.html Don't him too much credit. He deserves none.

bspammer 7y ago
He even shows up in the comments of that thread. I'd love to know if he really believes the nonsense he's spewing: https://www.reddit.com/r/math/comments/bargli/can_a_mathematician_confirm_whether_this_paper_is/eue6p3a/ https://www.reddit.com/r/math/comments/bargli/can_a_mathemat...
baobrien 7y ago
It looks like he found that reddit thread.

mcguire 7y ago

I am waiting for the Time Cube to make an appearance.