HN user
Correct me if I'm wrong but The article doesn't describe how 'classical' cryptography will survive quantum computers. It merely describes how it will break RSA and then lightly covers a potential alternative quantum proof public private key cryptography scheme.
Misleading title?
The event will take place on 22 February
Gonna have to wait for while....
shameless plug: https://github.com/r-a-w/TorProxy
This will ensure all outgoing traffic is headed for the Tor network. This would prevent this vuln from being effective as it would drop the outbound packets.
This is awesome, nice work!
This analogy is comparable to an extent. The odds of making money off bitcoin compared to a lottery ticket are several orders of magnitude higher. When making investments if you want to make large gains some of your money has to be in riskier assets.
Obviously don't put your life savings in bitcoin, anyone who does is not making an intelligent choice. But if you have money to spare that your willing to lose, I wouldn't consider it a horrible investment.
This also happens with fiat currency in the form of lost or destroyed cash. The final supply of bitcoins is limited but bitcoins can still be created using fractional reserve banking no different then our current banking system.
Watched this the other day, good layman's introduction to what computers actually do. Feynman has a serious skill at explaining complex topics in simple terms that anyone can understand.
love to watch Feynman's lectures even if I have a fairly good understanding of the topic, such an entertaining lecturer.
Self referential loops in the brain may indeed be the mechanism for our sense of self awareness but to go on and say this makes consciousness any less mysterious is a non-sequitur.
How would any combination of neurons and interconnections between the neurons (feedback loops or not) explain the emergence of a subjective first person experience i.e. consciousness
This might be a confusion of words and not reality. If you define consciousness as self awareness then we are talking about two different things.
Bitcoin is a neutral technology, think of it like cash. Buying illegal things is always done with cash but it doesn't mean we should get rid of cash altogether.
Regardless even if we came to the collective decision that we wanted to get rid of bitcoin, its not feasible due to its decentralized nature.
I think soon that this sentiment will start to apply to Universities. It seems inevitable at some point in the near future there will be an online 'university' (for lack of a better word) who's graduates will be considered equal or even better than a standard university education, particularly for tech related degrees.
Universities have been a centralized source of accreditation for a long time. All it takes is for someone to figure out how to restrict graduation and filter good candidates using testing or some other means to gain accreditation and acceptance of its graduates by industry.
Frustrating that so many great minds are swooped into the finance industry.
The lure of money is too strong.
Arguable whether or not HFT increases liquidity in the market.
Guessing they were sent the data by the attacker
I think the author is a masochist
This is also the main thing making me question the purchase
Not a lawyer, but i couldn't see why it wouldn't be thrown out.
Hotz just reversed and found an exploit on his local machine. Seems to be exactly what these provisions are covering.