HN user

thepace

71 karma
Posts4
Comments11
View on HN

Claude gave me this unobfuscated C code for `long z,x,G;main(){for(puts("P1\n80 80"),scanf("%10lx",&G);3-z/2160;x=++z%81/8-5)putchar(5>x?!(16>>(x^-(x<1))+1&G<<5>>z/6485)^49:10);}`:

#include <stdio.h>

/ * PPM Pattern Generator * * This program generates a 80x80 black and white PPM image based on a * hexadecimal input pattern. The pattern is rendered as ASCII art using * bit manipulation to determine which pixels are on or off. /

int main() { long pixel_index = 0; // Current pixel being processed (0-6399 for 80x80) long horizontal_offset; // Horizontal position relative to center long hex_pattern; // Input hexadecimal pattern

    // Output PPM header for 80x80 black and white image
    // P1 = ASCII black and white format
    // 80 80 = width and height
    puts("P1\n80 80");
    
    // Read hexadecimal pattern from user (up to 10 hex digits)
    scanf("%10lx", &hex_pattern);
    
    // Process each pixel in the 80x80 image
    // Continue until we've processed all pixels
    // The condition (3 - pixel_index/2160) continues while pixel_index < 6480
    // This accounts for 80x80 = 6400 pixels plus some margin
    for (; 3 - pixel_index/2160; ) {
        
        // Move to next pixel and calculate horizontal offset from center
        pixel_index++;
        horizontal_offset = (pixel_index % 81) / 8 - 5;
        
        // Determine what to output for this pixel
        if (horizontal_offset < 5) {
            // We're in the main pattern area (central region)
            
            // Complex bit manipulation to determine pixel state:
            // 1. Calculate bit position based on horizontal offset
            int bit_pos = (horizontal_offset ^ -(horizontal_offset < 1)) + 1;
            
            // 2. Extract relevant bits from the pattern
            // hex_pattern << 5 shifts the pattern
            // >> (pixel_index/648*5) selects which part of pattern to use based on vertical position
            long pattern_bits = (hex_pattern << 5) >> (pixel_index/648 * 5);
            
            // 3. Check if the specific bit is set
            int bit_is_set = (16 >> bit_pos) & pattern_bits;
            
            // 4. Invert the bit and XOR with '1' (ASCII 49) to get '0' or '1'
            char pixel_char = (!bit_is_set) ^ 49;
            
            putchar(pixel_char);
            
        } else {
            // We're outside the pattern area - output newline
            putchar(10);  // ASCII 10 = newline character
        }
    }
    
    return 0;
}

/ * USAGE: * Compile: gcc -o pattern_gen pattern_gen.c * Run: ./pattern_gen * Input: Enter a hexadecimal number (e.g., 1234ABCD) * Output: PPM format image data that can be saved to a .pbm file * * EXAMPLE: * ./pattern_gen > output.pbm * Then input: DEADBEEF * * The resulting .pbm file can be viewed with image viewers that support PPM format * or converted to other formats using tools like ImageMagick. */

It is not the just queue that is the bottleneck. If the new power plants designed specifically for powering these new AI data centers are connected to the existing electric grid, the energy prices for regular customers will also get affected - most likely in an upwardly fashion. That means, the cost of the transmission upgrades required by these new datacenters will be socialized which is a big problem. There does not seem to be a solution in sight for this challenge.

The original report (Link: https://drive.google.com/file/d/1XT1-vygq8TNwP3I-ljMkP9_MqYh...) contains wealth of references. I am still going through it, but the following stood out for me:

Defending against AI-capable adversaries without employing AI is an invitation to disaster. AI will compress decision time frames from minutes to seconds, expand the scale of attacks, and demand responses that will tax the limits of human cognition. Human operators will not be able to defend against AI-enabled cyber or disinformation attacks, drone swarms, or missile attacks without the assistance of AI-enabled machines. The best human operator cannot defend against multiple machines making thousands of maneuvers per second potentially moving at hypersonic speeds and orchestrated by AI across domains. Humans cannot be everywhere at once, but software can.

Every time I see these kinds of video, whether that is of protein translation, kinesin walking on microtubule, or birth and death of a galaxy, I get this feeling that Panpsychism is closer to truth that it gets credit for. Any constraints we put in the defining consciousness and life seems to be just some arbitrary constraint put there for our own convenience.

Cloud platforms like AWS, Azure and GCP, are now the de-facto operating systems for web apps and services. Section 230 also provides them immunity from the content that gets hosted in those platforms. I find it unfortunate that we are in this situation where the platform providers are also playing the police. They should stick to being a platform and policing side of this should be left to the law enforcement.

What will we feel if Microsoft and Apple start deciding what kind of contents can be generated and saved in their operating systems? It feels like time is ripe for a cloud provider that simply provides a platform.

I have been wondering about whether there is a limit to how much Amazon can grow in terms of number of industries they can expand into and also how big can they grow in each of those industries. At some point, there will obviously be attempts to create legislations to stop them from growing. Such legislative maneuvers will probably be rendered ineffective by intense lobbying.

I think there has be change in consumer behavior and expectation to stop Amazon at this point. But will there be significant enough change in consumer behavior so that it is longer feasible for Amazon to grow so much?