dsacco

167 ms·

931.
by dsacco 9y ago
I'm willing to accept that your postulate is true (if I understand it correctly, the thesis is that the market will "mature" and solve these problems). But even if that is true, it doesn't diminish the fact that right
932.
by dsacco 9y ago
It's surreal. If a legal hammer doesn't come down on ICOs and smart contracts soon, it's simply going to be rational to either hack other parties' smart contracts or start ICOs just to get "hacked." I don'
933.
by dsacco 9y ago
That ship sailed a long time ago. The commonly accepted definition is now the one you're contesting.
934.
by dsacco 9y ago
I'm not a bicyclist; what is this strategy and why is it used? You can't aggressively impact another player's performance in bicycling as you can in Mario Kart, right? So what is the benefit? Is it as simple as conserving eff
935.
by dsacco 9y ago
That's interesting, do you have a source re: position versus distance from 1st for item distribution? That invalidates a swath of my blue shell analysis downthread.
936.
by dsacco 9y ago
I agree with your analysis but disagree with your conclusion. In my opinion (very casual/occasional gamer, have played multiple iterations of Mario Kart), the blue shell is designed to be an agent of chaos. More generally, the game its
937.
by dsacco 9y ago
1. The bet was placed because Buffett's thesis is fundamentally true - you have much better odds of receiving a good return through passive index fund investing than you do through active management. However, this bet is often used (un
938.
by dsacco 9y ago
13 days (let's call it two weeks, assuming full person/weeks of time) is not atypical for an assessment. If you have multiple people working simultaneously on a two week assessment, you can "comfortably" assess fairly co
939.
by dsacco 9y ago
That's a good note - more succinctly, the key exchange can provide confidentiality, but not authentication.
940.
by dsacco 9y ago
1. That doesn't meaningfully respond to my point about cross pollinating skillsets, because we aren't distinguishing between amateurs, novices who become professionaks after expertise in other fields, and core professionals in fin
941.
by dsacco 9y ago
No it isn't, because each firm doesn't have a 50% chance of beating the market each year. Unless you're postulating that that is the case , it's not at all the same. I can quibble about the odds of each individual trade
942.
by dsacco 9y ago
That's if you have one trade per year. How would you model this if you have 25 monkeys throwing, say, 300 darts at the board per day, for every day that the market is open (252 days), for five years? If you're going to quantify su
943.
by dsacco 9y ago
Not if you group all trading events into single data points by year it doesn't, but that's a silly way of analyzing them if you have extraordinary performance consistency on a day by day (or trade by trade!) basis.
944.
by dsacco 9y ago
> If you have enough different attempts, one of them will beat the market by sheer game of chance. How do you define an "attempt", and how many "attempts" do you need to beat the market (consistently) by chance?
945.
by dsacco 9y ago
If the winning techniques continue to generate greater risk-adjusted returns than the market for a significant amount of time, you haven't really bypassed the whole, "finding alpha" bit. Unless of course you've spun up a
946.
by dsacco 9y ago
I don't think the cognitive bias you're describing matches this scenario very well, because that bias appears to result when people don't acknowledge specialization versus overall intelligence. Your first example seems like i
947.
by dsacco 9y ago
Yeah, that all makes sense, thanks. I figured you were using that 3 year figure with an implicit acknowledgement that it would provide greater or lesser rigor depending on the number of trades and the holding time. Thanks for the resources
948.
by dsacco 9y ago
GPG is FIPS 140-2 compliant (though pass itself might not be, depending on the specific way it's used). Most likely pass would have to use GPG in a specific FIPS-compliant mode to pursue validation.
949.
by dsacco 9y ago
> A 3 year track record is plenty long enough to prove out a system and provide a track record. It's a troubling sign that there is only $20 million in his fund if. I'm curious as to why you say a 3 year track record is long
950.
by dsacco 9y ago
Yeah that's a comparison I drew down-thread as well (w/r/t a stream cipher). "Seed" was a poor choice of terminology on my part there - the point I was trying to convey is that you'll need a non-deterministic s
951.
by dsacco 9y ago
Yes, this is essentially half the basis for cryptography, of which the one-time pad is one particularly rigid form. If Alice and Bob wish to communicate, they can do so by first verifying each other in person, or with a trusted courier, and
952.
by dsacco 9y ago
> Those are not sufficient conditions for a one-time pad. The entire pad, not just some "seed" has to be random. Well that seems a bit pedantic, but yes, you're right. The difficulty I was focusing on however is the rand
953.
by dsacco 9y ago
Note that pass was developed (and is maintained) by Jason Donenfeld (zx2c4), the same person who developed Wireguard, the new VPN protocol. Not that my opinion is worth a whole lot, but this is the password manager I would choose to use if
954.
by dsacco 9y ago
> so you know and trust every piece of software that is running on your machine? Ostensibly, yes. Because (as 'StavrosK said), if I don't then we can't even begin to talk about security on that machine yet. We have to st
955.
by dsacco 9y ago
> Not coincidentally, 2^n is also the number of possible one-time pads there are, so your adversary gains no information from this fact. Yes! And this is what's critical to the success of the one-time pad: you've not just enc
956.
by dsacco 9y ago
> Formally, the condition isn't "never use a one-time pad with the same key numbers" it's "make sure the key numbers of each pad are statistically independent of each other". And to expand on this - this i
957.
by dsacco 9y ago
You can't. Or, well, you can , but it's redundant. One-time pads make sense in the Cold War, Vernam Square era of cryptography. But now that we have the internet and public key cryptography, a one-time pad implemented in Ethereum
958.
by dsacco 9y ago
> Isn't "unbreakable" a bit of a dirty word in the security community "Dirty" is one way to put it, yes. I'd personally use something like "false god" or "blasphemy" :). "Unbreakab
959.
by dsacco 9y ago
The only thing I want out of that is redundancy. Why do I want those other things? (Bear in mind I know what they are - I want you to sell me on them).
960.
by dsacco 9y ago
> If you're winning a race by milliseconds, you are trying to interpose yourself into a trade that was already going to happen that day. This is an inaccurate framing of how high frequency trading propagates liquidity in an otherw

More ›