ivancho

7 ms·

1.
by ivancho 2y ago
Yeah, you can look in the contributors' dashboard, they stopped around 2019. As any documentation, its fate is to wither and fall into decay. But hey, he got a book out of it.
2.
by ivancho 2y ago
So we'll have expensive artisanal software for rich people? Self-assembly takes a whole new meaning for the rest of us.
3.
by ivancho 2y ago
That's a pretty narrow view of software too. The nature of building software systems is not always towards being able to mass-produce them. What would be the point of copying and distributing 10K copies of my script that runs migration
4.
by ivancho 2y ago
It's complete nonsense. "The total number of moves in the game is equal to the number of stones initially in the pile, which is 5000." Similarly on the Martian question "If we transform 1 red and 1 green Martian, we get
5.
by ivancho 2y ago
So, "it is really mostly a matter of luck", and just do so much work that they decide to fire someone else... sigh . If only there was some way for the workers to negotiate collectively for working terms that avoid mass layoffs w
6.
by ivancho 2y ago
I think the anecdote highlights that there's no incremental way to approach gRPC, it's not a low risk small footprint prototype project that can be introduced slowly and integrated with existing systems and environments. Which, we
7.
by ivancho 2y ago
My model was not to demonstrate that utility doesn't go down ever, it was to show that it can do that extremely slowly, which makes the utility argument about why we discourage it societally a bit weak - we're clearly not very goo
8.
by ivancho 2y ago
This is a bit of a stretch from what I said - 1% drop after the entire population has gambled through 10x their net worth is not meaningful. I also pointed out other speculative activities which we encourage, presumably because they compens
9.
by ivancho 2y ago
Ok, take 100 people, with $100 each, and have one round of $1 coin flips between each 2. A significant number of bets overall, 4950. Each person has wagered 1% of their net worth 99 times, something that we all agree sounds quite scary. And
10.
by ivancho 2y ago
You haven't demonstrated most of these assertions. For example, if everyone gambled against everyone else every second, then that system has a pretty good chance of staying close to equilibrium for a long time, whereas your model indic
11.
by ivancho 2y ago
Ah, a brilliant idea, design all languages so people who only know C can make small changes to existing Ruby code without getting confused. Definitely don't want to enable different abstractions or models of computation. Are these core
12.
by ivancho 3y ago
Even more so then. Simplify, simplify, simplify!
13.
by ivancho 3y ago
What is your certainty that that statement is true? What if it was a calculation which takes decades on a supercomputer?
14.
by ivancho 3y ago
I'm not gatekeeping proofs here, and I'm glad you got math pizza :) If proofwiki had exhaustively printed all possible arrangements, or the decision tree of constructing them, or if they had even included the code that would do th
15.
by ivancho 3y ago
Their "proof" that there are only 12 solutions to 8 Mutually Non-Attacking Queens on Chessboard is just "That there are only these 12 can be proved by brute force." :/
16.
by ivancho 3y ago
There is extensive research on key finding attacks. Often they only need 30% of the bits. Things can be sped up by exploiting entropy - keys are really random, unlike most of the rest of your memory, so that filters things down, and as yo
17.
by ivancho 3y ago
I think the dunk is funny, and at the same time recognize that glibc is invaluable. At least here the attackers had to do some memory tricks - in other (apparently safer) languages they just get arbitrary code execution directly implemented
18.
by ivancho 3y ago
You can't simultaneously have that key strength is maintained as long as they don't know how many bits are flipped, or where in memory the key was, but also that leaking any number of bits is catastrophic. If your memory dump crea
19.
by ivancho 3y ago
The original comment said "One bit flip and it's game over". Which is clear nonsense, I don't have to specify that there's exactly one bit flip, I just need to know that the key is in that general neighborhood and i
20.
by ivancho 3y ago
I think this needs its own cognitive term, it's not a survivorship or selection bias, it's just skipping the selection entirely and just focusing on the sample. So here people go "This plane is an outlier, there must be somet
21.
by ivancho 3y ago
What the hell are we doing as an industry? We have 20 cores per CPU and enough RAM to fit the entire human civilization's knowledge in text form in everyone's pocket, but we can't scroll a webpage with animations without stut
22.
by ivancho 3y ago
I have not conceded anything. Many crimes would be perfectly unsolvable if everyone did everything perfectly, and yet.. You are again using "logically impossible" while insisting on a very specific condition, "not knowing all
23.
by ivancho 3y ago
But we don't have to search for those keys in all of the deposits that CM ever made - only in the ones that stopped churning and mixing. Maybe they try to control the dynamics of their lots to be statistically indistinguishable from th
24.
by ivancho 3y ago
I disagree with pretty much every point here, wow. ChipMixer provided a little bit of disconnect, but there was a research paper a while back that ran something like 5 transfers through it and managed to identify their mixing transactions w
25.
by ivancho 3y ago
Except with packet switching networks I can immediately point to the problem they are solving and can also make a guess how things will change when we create 000s of bigger and better ones. And the timeline is definitely not what you are ma
26.
by ivancho 3y ago
I meet some people in crypto occasionally, and it's hilarious that most of them no longer talk about technologies, projects, applications - all they discuss is sentiment. "Oh, there's a wave of positive outlook", or &quo
27.
by ivancho 3y ago
MtGox thieves evaded prosecution because no one was doing tracing back then. Chainalysis got started specifically to link all their activity and is now a giant graph connecting all the "pseudonymous" addresses. And the thieves lau
28.
by ivancho 3y ago
> a zip bomb will only serve to hinder teenage/kid 'hackers' And that is literally what the blog post says - it will mess with script kiddies who don't change their user agent. Author acknowledges that it is not an ac
29.
by ivancho 3y ago
You are very insistent that people are doing "defending" wrong, and I can see how someone could read victim blaming into it, the industry does have a bad habit of loud hindsight bias. But it's also entirely beside the point,
30.
by ivancho 3y ago
No one is really worried, and no time is wasted when the outcome is occasional fun. There's no security holes to fix, there's just a bunch gnats poking at your server and you shoo them away, that's all.

More ›