alecbenzer

9 ms·

31.
by alecbenzer 6y ago
It's bad, but it's such a minor flaw. If you won't use hey because of that, either you don't care at all about any of the actual features (in which case, sure, don't use it) or you're being dramatic.
32.
by alecbenzer 6y ago
> Not to burst your bubble, but you aren't. You are very good when you get it right. You aren't when you don't get it right. But then you are leaving out that part because nobody likes to focus on the negatives I'm so
33.
by alecbenzer 6y ago
Yeah but there's got to be some give in the name of getting signal. Resumes are incredibly noisy signal. I think references are pretty noisy too... a bad reference is very bad, a better than average reference is really good, but I thin
34.
by alecbenzer 6y ago
> It's a shame how our industry is the only highly-paid professional industry where this kind of sophomoric "intellectual hazing" is not only accepted, but also encouraged. I mean, hell, I have like three books on my books
35.
by alecbenzer 6y ago
Uh, I dunno? Is the implication that I'll have less patience for taking tests each time I change a job when it's the Nth time? Maybe? At 5-6 years out of school, I personally don't mind tests. Sometimes I actually really like
36.
by alecbenzer 6y ago
I think of interviewing like I think of other "tests" like the SATs. They're a thing you've got to study for. Just because they don't mirror what your day to day at a job will be like doesn't automatically mean
37.
by alecbenzer 6y ago
> I mean, firstly, no. What you're describing is what we call "Textbook RSA" and that's a classroom exercise rather than a technology you should use in practice - it's unsafe. ? I'm not talking about encrypt
38.
by alecbenzer 6y ago
Oh, I see, we're just doing Diffie-Hellman but with elliptic curves? Ok, that makes much more sense... it was confusing for the article to compare it with RSA instead of vanilla Diffie-Hellman.
39.
by alecbenzer 6y ago
Right, but while most people understand multiplication, it doesn't seem clear how to efficiently perform repeated application of the dot operation. I'm guessing the operation is associative, which lets you do it fast.
40.
by alecbenzer 6y ago
Ah ok, so the dot operation is associative I guess? --- I mean, once you have the keys, how do you actually use them to transform data?
41.
by alecbenzer 6y ago
Right, but the point is that doing the transformation in one direction needs to be fast in order of the scheme to be viable. So there must be some faster way of doing n iterations, which the post doesn't mention.
42.
by alecbenzer 6y ago
Sure, fine, but even in RSA signing there's some message you transform with one of the keys and then undo the transformation with the other key (the transformation is encryption when the first key is the public key, and signing when th
43.
by alecbenzer 6y ago
I'm assuming that given a starting point A and a number of operations n, there's a much faster way of computing the end point than just iterating n times? Otherwise, determining n given A and an end point would just be a matter of
44.
by alecbenzer 6y ago
A feature that's available for free on public repos isn't necessarily free for private repos, it seems. The wording on the pricing page isn't very clear about this, though. If they mean that they're now removing required
45.
by alecbenzer 6y ago
When has GOOG made something expensive once the competition died? I guess for that matter... also when has MSFT? I buy they have, but not aware of any examples of the top of my head.
46.
by alecbenzer 6y ago
Looks like it's one of these: .alt-mono-font { font-family: SFMono-Regular,Consolas,Liberation Mono,Menlo,Courier,monospace; } If you find yourself wondering this a lot, https://chrome.google.com/webstore
47.
by alecbenzer 6y ago
> A better way is to self-host... Even ignoring the higher cost to set up, are you sure your self-hosted solution will have better uptime? Are you sure you'll be able to get things up and running faster when it does go down than Git
48.
by alecbenzer 6y ago
> Do you not have those with Free private repos? Correct.
49.
by alecbenzer 7y ago
The whole world sometimes feels like it's held together with duck tape. I think people invest in things until they're just barely not falling apart.
50.
by alecbenzer 7y ago
My therapist recently told me that often it's working on something that sparks (or fuels) the passion for it, not the other way around. Sometimes you just need to decide to do something and make progress on it, not worrying about the f
51.
by alecbenzer 7y ago
> you basically just derived a logical consequence that touching the website yields a result? The suggestion was pretty implicit in the original comment but I think making it explicit makes the tone of the comment friendlier. It shifts t
52.
by alecbenzer 7y ago
Whether this is true or not, there's much better ways to phrase this. > Your online presence is dreadfully low for a web developer. Just dropping "Sorry to say" makes it sound less condescending. > Your online presence
53.
by alecbenzer 7y ago
Eh, it's sort of the same? You can imagine each pixel as its own message: the point is that repeatedly transforming things in a consistent but "random" way isn't actually random. The ciphertext of each pixel is "ran
54.
by alecbenzer 7y ago
I'm reaching the limits of my stats knowledge, but you may be able to figure out, even from just those two ciphertexts, something about the input plaintexts. It's obviously harder with shorter inputs. I guess one thing to note is
55.
by alecbenzer 7y ago
> The output is always random, regardless how often the key has been used. The output of any _one_ use of the pad is, yes, but the point is to consider all of the data that an attacker may have. If you re-use the key multiple times, then
56.
by alecbenzer 7y ago
Not sure what you're asking? If you use the same key over and over again, then you're using the same key much more than just twice. The idea of a one-time-pad is that you're basically just randomly flipping the bits of your i
57.
by alecbenzer 7y ago
> I would much rather buy $30k of preferred at fair market value. Sure, but VCs aren't getting shares at FMV either.
58.
by alecbenzer 7y ago
Yes but the context here is liquid investment, which is what preferred stock are meant to be a defense for (at least according to what I've heard). (The opportunity cost is also paid slowly over years; I think VCs get better terms in
59.
by alecbenzer 7y ago
> It absolutely is an inferior product. I don't think they were disputing that? But it's not dollar-for-dollar equivalent -- VCs are paying more (a lot more, I think usually) liquid cash per preferred share than employees are p
60.
by alecbenzer 7y ago
In common language when discussing comp, yeah definitely, I think so. "Legally" idk.

More ›