Vecr

24 ms·

391.
by Vecr 2y ago
> The map is not the territory. Yes, that's why I spoke of GR + objective collapse. GR + objective collapse is not the territory, most people including Penrose will tell you that. What some of his readers apparently don't get i
392.
by Vecr 2y ago
You can't use it outside of physics, because the combination of digital computers and human brains this hypothetical stuff runs on is in physics. GR (general relativity) + objective collapse (re. quantum physics) does not give you enou
393.
by Vecr 2y ago
That was always the case, to argue otherwise required new physics. I.e. hypothetical physics that probably didn't exist.
394.
by Vecr 2y ago
It's the No-Doom.
395.
by Vecr 2y ago
Tell the author of the videos that I want to debate her on AI. (ha ha only serious)
396.
by Vecr 2y ago
Are you calculating under LNT (Linear No Threshold)? Otherwise unless the rate is spiky it might be fine.
397.
by Vecr 2y ago
You know, and all the dead people. Or the people who die in the evacuation.
398.
by Vecr 2y ago
Shorts are never an obvious trade, the downside risk is too high, even if you're eventually directionaly right.
399.
by Vecr 2y ago
Non-fossil oil probably does exist, but I've never seen a credible claim that there's very much of it. Other than the fact it's not literally made from fossils, but from general carbon-based life.
400.
by Vecr 2y ago
About six times faster compared to sha1. Depends on the hardware/cache environment.
401.
by Vecr 2y ago
Not really, it's slower than truncated blake3 for no gain and much loss.
402.
by Vecr 2y ago
I suggest not using any of the MAC based versions. In theory that could be anything other than v4 and v7, but v1 is the worst. As well as v3, MD5 is horribly broken.
403.
by Vecr 2y ago
Have you done the risk calculations? Are you assuming LNT? Really, at the construction costs now you could probably pay someone to do it and have that be profitable.
404.
by Vecr 2y ago
It's been a while, I thought it was something to do with the blocks but it probably depends on what the exact state of the art is for cracking at this point. Don't put it any higher than 4, that's for sure. In theory a parall
405.
by Vecr 2y ago
No. The parallelism is an upper bound, higher reduces security. If you're running a server for multiple clients each client should only get one thread for argon2 anyway, more won't help your overall throughput.
406.
by Vecr 2y ago
I think tptacek is talking about a ground-up design, in that case I think you should use Argon2id. Using something weaker is not really needed, turn the parallelism down to 1 and then start reducing the rounds and memory until it works for
407.
by Vecr 2y ago
There's no point intentionally making your implementation weaker than it has to be.
408.
by Vecr 2y ago
That does not follow, a robot following the rules of correct reasoning can conclude (to a reasonable probability) that a statement is false. You may have very strong requirements in your definition of "understanding", but the robo
409.
by Vecr 2y ago
Because of the error checking problem shell has. I'll put it on my list to check the script, so I won't only be complaining.
410.
by Vecr 2y ago
I tried it out, it works. Personally I'd write something like this in Rust not shell. It's not hard at all, you basically can just ignore the borrow checker because all the program is doing is spawning processes and a bit of text
411.
by Vecr 2y ago
The kind of person who would have purchased a hydrogen Hummer if the filling infrastructure was in place? It's been a thing for a while.
412.
by Vecr 2y ago
By more or less holding its angle constant by moving. The intercept trajectory is nowhere near optimal.
413.
by Vecr 2y ago
I don't know what you're saying. A derandomized Las Vegas algorithm is deterministic for a given seed, so far so good. From there I'm lost.
414.
by Vecr 2y ago
I already got all that. Yes, I think it's interesting, but I wanted to see a final (non-interim) analysis of the payload going byte-by-byte.
415.
by Vecr 2y ago
I'd also like to see the timeline of XZ's landlock implementation, I haven't seen that discussed much.
416.
by Vecr 2y ago
Yeah, what's posted by you and other users so far is stuff I know, build scripts, injection, obfuscation. I'm more looking for a careful reverse engineering of the actual payload.
417.
by Vecr 2y ago
Yes they are, look at the derandomization program in computational complexity, or if you're slightly more forgiving with your definition of logic, then look at mixed strategies and Monte-Carlo algorithms.
418.
by Vecr 2y ago
Was there ever a writeup of exactly how the XZ exploit worked? I mean exactly , I get the general overview and even quite a few of the specifics, but last time I checked no one had credibly figured out exactly how all the obfuscated compon
419.
by Vecr 2y ago
> Where there is a notion of free will. > Perhaps the notion of computational reducibility is a stab in this direction [Wolfram] - Probably all you need is emergence for this and not a quantum brain [Penrose] Well, yes, but I'm
420.
by Vecr 2y ago
Why? A robot should be able to disprove free will by following the rules of correct reasoning, if such a thing is relatively easy, i.e. you would expect humans to ever solve it.

More ›