1,203 karma · joined May 11, 2012
meet.hn/city/ca-Old-Toronto
Interests:
Web Development, Technology
---
Bam, America. I'm not supporting anything, but looking at it from a business point of view this is pretty tempting.
Actually no, don't. Because that is not the point. The point is (like I said in other comments) my gut feeling suggests that we as a society are moving towards optimizing for edge cases and that's not a good thing. (Immediate examples that come to mind are parent fearing children going out and playing, security theatre, crime television, crazy safety labels etc.)
Btw this isn't a debate/argument but just a casual discussion. I was just observing that how quickly a person pulled an extreme card.
For instance, each iteration of the Rabin Miller test reduces the probability that a number is composite by 10^-4. So sure, you might argue "Well, you never know if the 16384-bit number is prime or not merely on running the rabin miller test 10 times because there's still a 1 in 10^-40 chance it's not prime so you method is invalid." I find this kinds of arguments infuriating.
He is sharing his experience which probably applies to the majority of the people but no, use edge cases to justify your stance and feel good about having the moral high ground.
Congratulations on your ability to focus on the edge cases and not the majority of the bell curve.
EDIT - Guys, no don't get me wrong. I'm not talking about THIS specific article or about being fat or anything. It's just that for the past year or so I've been in any online community (even the other one) I've noticed this. Sure, I get it - Innocent until proven guilty and all, but sometimes, things really are as simple as they appear to be.
[Oh, and dear parent poster, I'm a bit sorry for the "Congratulations on your ability to ..." but that was just me getting upset that people aren't looking at the bigger picture.]
Although, in some respects, I do get where they're coming from. New algorithms and computing paradigms develop that make the previous one broken. I'm just guessing here, but it maybe possible that probabilistic computers and awesome algorithms a few decades down the line are able to recover states of a CSPRNG by applying statistical techniques. Obviously, I'm way over my head here but this is a possibility.
If you say that the OP was talking about TRNGs then all bets are off. It could so happen that two consecutive 512-bits are exactly the same. The probability is extremely low (birthday low) but since it's a TRNG there's still a chance that it will happen.
If you gave them a rar, tar.gz, zip or anything, the Man can hold you for contempt if he really wants to.
You may consider this pedantism, but it's this pedantism and conservativeness that calls AES broken today.
Regarding link [2] I'm unable to even find a way to 'escape' the subscription process. Oh, no wait, it's again present as a "Checkout as Regular member" again in a hot pink on white scheme while the other giant CONTINUE TO CHECKOUT is in a more contrasty white on pink, and it's larger. Also, wait, if that's the regular member checkout link, then what's the giant checkout button do? Bam, chicanery yet again.
IT IS NOT SUBSIDIZED, PEOPLE.
You may say, well I'm paying the same per month whether I take a new phone or not from the carrier, so... it's subsidized right? Nope, they're just gouging you when you're on an old phone. Taking the new phone just slightly reduces your disadvantage. Let's put it this way, if MVNOs can offer you piggybacked network rates at $X while traditional operators rates are $3X aren't you a bit surprised? It's not that the operators are going to sell to MVNOs for a loss, and not that MVNOs are going to sell to you for a loss.
Okay, so that sucks.
>razor sharp shards of glass ricocheted
Welp, you literally dropped a glass glass of water. Good lord, that's scary on a naked computer. This is a pretty awesome hack.
>(Be sure to get your finger partially in front of the lens while documenting this.)
Why does he say this? I don't understand.
I have another question. What is the present status of taking something like this on-board an airplane? Is the extended battery likely to raise alarm at the carry-in security section?
The reason I'm asking is, because I don't know if there's ever a case where you'd want to assign right inside the if-condition. Is there?