first order zero knowledge proof system (zk-stark), it works on android, macos, linux, webassembly, vulkan/cuda backend (metal coming), but the composition polynomial evaluation is suboptimal so i am working on that now
zero-knowledge proof framework to prove for example that a bank has the necessary funds, or for a loan application that I make enough without revealing how much
in theory some publications are available as torrents, in theory they are in batches zipped together and in theory one could, by requesting certain parts of the zip file using a crafted torrent client, download only the publication they are looking for, in theory
talking as someone who is building such a system, why would an avarage participant of the network give their own money, i dont think they would for the same reason i'm not running a bounty program with my dollars,
the only use of having it on the blockchain is rewards without using your own money (so it's economics depends on the eventual value of the coin), for that it has to be bound to the minting process, but a purely algorithmic system for determining who gets how much based on their proofs seems elusive (think of the infinite possible proofs 1+2=3, 1+3=4...), we are going for having a central authority doing the minting for proofs (as voting based on money would hardly reflect mathematical experties)
I am in a such a "meaningless" pickle myself, I have never imagined that hard tasks with strict deadlines are a breeze compared to this, it slowly but surely chips away my will to live, even though on the outside it sounds wonderful
well for their definition of tech "approaching zero cost", the only tech companies are pure software ones, the cost of manifacturing a rocket can hardly approach zero
I'm trying to find the takeaway, should kids not go to college? or that nobody reads the comments, since one of them raises the question, "is there proof?" and claims that not according to their linkedin
although zero knowledge proofs can compress the "proof of gradient" so it takes much less time to verify than recompute, it take orders of more work to generate the proof, moreover can we merge multiple "improvements"? if not then upon the selection of the "winner" all those are lost?
yes, coworkers thanking me for a bugfix or a feature bothers the hell out of me. man I am not doing it for you, I am doing it for money that is thanks enough
they stated that they print regularly, then without knowning anything of their use case and needs, came the "ackchyually" like they know it better or the original commenter is an idiot, why is it so unfathomable that they have done their research
the maximum is given by the carnot cycle, which has COP=T_high/(T_high-T_cold) so from room temp 25°C to 250°C it is 2.3, but this is the theoretical limit
"If you work quickly, the cost of doing something new will seem lower in your mind. So you’ll be inclined to do more." well if it is work that I know I can do quickly I'm just gonna procrastinate the hell out of it, if it is something I enjoy doing I am already inclined to do it
the article linked on the WHO's site is titled "WHO advises not to use non-sugar sweeteners for weight control in newly released guideline", I mean why drop the "for weight control" part
I mean, depending on the work using it as a thin client would make the most sense imo, compiling still takes a toll on the battery life even with m2 magic
not everything is on you, the observation may be valid, but there is always a way to word it such that it is more akin to "brainstorming", realize that some people are just socially inept, even more so in the tech sector, play the game of "this is a stupid response, what is the gist of it, and how could i have worded it were it my observation" (and also fix the mistake if valid)
what I noticed is that rubber ducking works kind of like doing a DFS instead of a BFS, even when I can barely think, but I know that a few more lines at just the right places solves the problem and I simply can't let it go, (going for a walk rarely does it for me) so speaking out loud what and why is happening makes all the difference
did 3D printing help them iterate on some component design maybe? also they need to differentiate themselves, so they aren't just another spacex, so being the "3D printed rocket company" sounds better for getting investment I guess
I was so psyched about this movie, but the idea that an AI that can design new quantum processors in seconds, is even remotely challenged by a few humans is just so stupid
interesting prize, I wonder why they fix that it has to be radix-2 NTT, using higher radix speeds things up an order of magnitude on GPU (granted I am using a 256 bit field, so it might be more memory bound)