230900+ entries in 0.154s

a111: Logged on 2016-12-24 01:15 asciilifeform:
the useful envelope of operation comes when you have at least ~16x
the bottom limit.
mircea_popescu: specifically 256kb does not even remotely promise for 64kb
to be walked. you get a
third untouched more
than half
the
time.
mircea_popescu: moreover,
to be 99% sure 100% of 64kb were walked, you need millions of steps.
mircea_popescu: this resolves
the part where "all have been walked"
though not
the part where
there's structure intrinsic in
the method.
mircea_popescu: yes. a point n distance from origin has more chances of being walked over
than a point 2n distance from origin by a factor of about 1.4
a111: Logged on 2016-12-24 14:17 mircea_popescu: asciilifeform
thinking about it,
the walker scheme doesn't seem
too great.
the
theoretical objection is
that it ~does~ introduce structure,
through
the convention
that
the walker moves from where it last moved. in practice
though, run a few simulations over a 16bit message which you can
then print as a 256x256 bitmap. your walker makes anthills basically.
mircea_popescu: "we have always been at war with fake news such as any item
that is politically inconvenient
today."
mircea_popescu: ben_vulpes lol
that leclerc dude is visiting your blog on a weekly basis ? 2, 9,
then nobody gave a shit so he skipped 16 and i guess 23, we see him on
the 30th ?
shinohai would love
to see Ver successfully do Unlimited fork, lose all BTC on phorked side
mircea_popescu: good
thing
there's reddit. now
that yahoo "finance" closed
the public boards, where'd all
the scum go.
mircea_popescu: asciilifeform
thinking about it,
the walker scheme doesn't seem
too great.
the
theoretical objection is
that it ~does~ introduce structure,
through
the convention
that
the walker moves from where it last moved. in practice
though, run a few simulations over a 16bit message which you can
then print as a 256x256 bitmap. your walker makes anthills basically.
☟︎ BingoBoingo: Well,
they don't know radical honesty is best served nekkid
mircea_popescu: another problem is
the observation
that 1011011011 is neutral.
mircea_popescu: you prolly want circular
tape
the size of message
tbh.
mircea_popescu: if you make
the waltzer start from ~the end~ of
the message, even sqrt(n) steps improves rsa enough.
mircea_popescu: i now have
to a) generate 4kb of entropy (roughly enough for 8 4096bit rsa keys) ; b) complete 16k operations
to pad ; c) execute a 5kb rsa exponentiation. so i'm looking at what, about an hour ?
mircea_popescu: let's consider
the case where i want
to exchange a 1kb letter. i won't actually use 1mb
to feed
the
tape, but i will use 4kb.
mircea_popescu: the
thing here however is,
that incremental improvement may actually be useful. ie, a ~better~ encryption scheme, even if not ~provably
the best~.
mircea_popescu: no, we're clear on
the part where it's pretty expensive.
mircea_popescu: suppose you actually use
the payload itself sqrt(payloadsize)
times.
mircea_popescu: ok, let's go at it another insane way. suppose you pad
the message by using...
the message as
the
tape.
mircea_popescu: this is also
true. problem with it is
that it's so damned long.
mircea_popescu: well, because
this way
T.p is slightly but not much longer
than
T.
mircea_popescu: i will now proceed
to create a string S += hash(S+1011101011)
three
times. << i mean.
mircea_popescu: i will now use S as a
tape for
the automaton
to be applied
to
T.