sgy

REF10 | Full-Time Android & iOS Engineers | Europe | https://ref10.com/26 & https://ref10.com/27

We work with companies to help them acquire the best talent by talking to all candidates that get referred to us and reward whoever referred them.

73% of our current users are on mobile devices; we think it's a good time to have a good mobile client. We're looking for native mobile apps hackers (React Native could also be considered), with good sense for design and fluent English.

You can get in touch via one[at]ref10[dot]com

REF10 | Full-Time Frontend Engineer | REMOTE/Freiburg, DE | https://ref10.com/1

We work with companies to help them acquire the best talent by talking to all job candidates that get referred to us and reward whoever referred them.

To advance our product UI, we're looking a resourceful JS hacker with some experience in Angular/React and CSS, good sense for design and fluent English.

You can get in touch via one[at]ref10[dot]com

what happens when you hand such task to 'growth hackers' :). would have appreciated if this was communicated directly via email so we stop it right away.

thank you for your question. we ask the hiring companies to sign a legal agreement; it is somehow similar to the one recruiting agencies do, only less boring :)

Why would you stop someone passionate and determined? Their wellbeing is a personal matter in that regard.

thank you for your questions!

referrers get paid by REF10. we ask hiring companies to sign a legal agreement that is somehow similar to the one recruiting agencies do.

I've met several people who work even more than that

It should be higher?

Updated to $12,000 now

That explains the $12k referral bonus here https://www.ref10.com/

A lot of people voluntarily work for long hours, especially in tech/research and especially if they like what they're working on

Also, there seems to be a ~7600 USD referral bonus on for the position here: https://ref10.com/

if you know someone who might be a good fit, you can refer them to the job here https://ref10.com

you'll earn a referral bonus once they're successfully hired

for now, we get in touch with successful referrers and process their payments manually.

PayPal or bank transfer

via PayPal or bank transfer

you can agree with senders to disclose their items beforehand. otherwise, you don't have to!

You can just get in touch with the enlisted person! If there were no contact information or some info was wrong, please indicate so in the "flag" column.

thanks. looking into them ..

right.

it is only a simple example. here's a working demo: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=h1kABn5dfXc.

i agree. now this is something to get busy with.

thanks a lot for taking the time to discuss it.

right. but, again, the whole system doesn't even rely on entropy. i was referring to existing literature as an analogy to, perhaps, better clarify the idea. it seems i was mistaken doing so.

you're correct.

my claim is a bit different though; it's a new take on encrypting text that has no properties of existing crypto systems. used OTP as an analogy. i think it's a fallacy to do so.

i don't think it's related to Viginere. here's an example of repeated text that is not repeated when encrypted: http://i.imgur.com/i4XLLEm.png

Dan, thanks for the feedback.

- my bad, the font size in the editor is originally small. will try to fix that.

- problem is that the algorithm itself is what makes the system strong. once revealed in a white paper, the whole thing is useless. what do you recommend to write in a text description for this case?

- it's an imitation of OTP mechanism but has nothing to do with how OTP is conventionally implemented.

- the first time, i intentionally modified the key [to show that it doesn't work just on any number input]

- the system can be updated to take a key as input.

- right, it expands by nearly a half; that's used to make it just as secure as the one-time pad, but more practical. [and this is what i want to verify, then optimize].

if you have the time, i'd love to hear more feedback. thank you very much.

why is that the case? would you please guide me to some good read on that?

i'm not using any traditional math that current encryption relies on; no entropy, discrete logarithms nor prime factorials, etc.

Take it easy dude. It doesn't have to be worse or better; some might find it interesting and some might not.

I wasn't introduced to the topic before and it looked nice to me. It's just a <simple proof> as the title inside the articles implies.

pretty much inspired by PG? https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=R9ITLdmfdLI#t=450

neither firefox.. requires flash player I think?