Which four words are we supposed to remember?
"I love this company" or "Developers, developers, developers, developers". https://www.youtube.com/watch?...
I want to eat human flesh, particularly humans whose names start with "dev" and end with "slash0". Do you have a problem with that? Because ain't nobody going to tell me what I should and should not eat.
In other words, I'm sick and tired of people who think their choice of food is only about their personal rights. The food always comes from somewhere. Most people don't go around robbing grocery stores just because they think they have a divine right to eat what they want.
And then technology just froze. No sensor components got cheaper. Computer vision stopped, as a field. Multimodal AI didnâ(TM)t get invented. Robotic hand technology development stopped. Robotic planning and error recovery did not progress. Time just froze, after McDonalds ended its robotic program.
Democracy is for retards.
Government did this. All of this. Government regulated so much that only a rare few can afford to compete.
This is late stage statism. Retard voters are to blame.
Like you.
My take was: "Buddy movie in space."
It was fine.
The principle problem with humans is that they're completely unreliable, due to basic design.
They seem particularly unreliable when asked to tell the difference between a headmaster and a fundamental rule.
QCs are completely unsuitable for reversing hashes and that is what cracking passwords needs.
Translation: we don't currently have a quantum algorithm for reversing hashes. But there was a time, not that long ago, when we didn't have a quantum algo for factorization either. However, I don't expect to see a quantum algo for hash reversion any time soon, because the whole problem of reversing hashes is pretty complex.
Factorization as a classical problem is essentially trivial, in that there are very simple classical algorithms for it. They just take a lot of time to run. But coming up with an efficient quantum algorithm was not trivial, and the algorithm itself isn't so simple. So you can estimate that a quantum version of any algorithm is a lot more complex than the classical counterpart.
"quantum resistant forever" is too strong.
I've only taken fairly general master's level courses in quantum information and regular cryptography, but I agree with this overall sentiment. My math professors used to say that no asymmetric encryption scheme has been proved unbreakable; we only know if they haven't been broken so far. Assuming something is unbreakable is like saying Fermat's last theorem is unprovable — until one day it's proved. So to me "post quantum cryptography" is essentially a buzzword.
Grok was constantly say it was doing something that it had ZERO ability to, and I kept calling it out and it kept apologizing and then immediately doing it again.
As a guy who spend 5 figures a year on Ai, the last thing I want is that. I know Claude and ChatGPT also do it, but Grok was doing it CONSTANTLY.
Planes are powered by kerosene.
Balloons are powered by hot air. What better way to generate it than a room full of AI-enhanced suits?
In every hierarchy the cream rises until it sours. -- Dr. Laurence J. Peter