66100+ entries in 0.032s
mircea_popescu: "have you thought about what'll you do about lingerie ? TRIBAL GIRLS CANT WEAR ANY!"
mircea_popescu: alf : "probvlem is mod is not distributive" me : "it can be made, cheaply" alf : "no, it can not" me : "here" alf : "oh, i did that back in july". then wtf are you griping about.
mircea_popescu: good for you ; but your problem isn't what you presented it as being.
mircea_popescu: the procedure is both obvious and insistently discussed above.
mircea_popescu: the EXTRA COST of making mod actually distributive is SMALL.
mircea_popescu: this approach of "i have a girlfriend and i am blind to all else" doesn't work with girlfriends, or anything else.
mircea_popescu: that i can believe. though i expect the above is actually cheaper than adding teh numbers first and modding after.
mircea_popescu: so you won't have many passes of it. just as many as elements in list at the most.
mircea_popescu: yes, but this is very cheap here. because the elements in list are < mod
mircea_popescu: this will always take the same ops no matter what elements are in the original list.
mircea_popescu: repeat 2 until you have populated a list of equal length, and return the correct element from it.
mircea_popescu: for simplicity, input list limited to 2 elements, but expansion obvious.
mircea_popescu: and this is potentially recursive, in that if you have a 500 bit number with 300 ones in it, you do the mod for 500 terms which are all a power of 2, throw 200 away, keep the other 300 and add them.
☟︎ mircea_popescu: that is not my concern! if there IS a mod, then yo ucan apply it to the terms rather than add them first and apply to result, is all i'm saying.
mircea_popescu: you understand, a mod x + b mod x + c mod x may be > x, but never by more than op count * x.
mircea_popescu: you write by hand a function which takes a list with a promise none of the items on it exceed a mod, and returns the mod of the sum of the sum of the elements, in constant time.
mircea_popescu: just write it all out by hand, the constanttime mod distributivetor.
mircea_popescu: that small cost can be slightly higher and constant time.
mircea_popescu: i am talking about how mod is distributive to addition "at a small cost".
mircea_popescu: asciilifeform you understand you need AT MOST a single pass of knuth ? because it may exceed the mod but never by more than 3x ?
mircea_popescu: it is distributive in this sense at a minimum cost (tm).
mircea_popescu: (in a sense, key update with deedbot is like bitcoin spending!)
mircea_popescu: ie, all the trivial polynomials of the mod, see ? x, x^2 + x, x ^ 3 + x etc etc
mircea_popescu: asciilifeform if you maintain a list of the mod and it squares
mircea_popescu: asciilifeform how about something like squares interpolation ?
mircea_popescu: the exact same will happen again. "oh, you had a consensus ? lol."
mircea_popescu: rothbart you're perhaps too new to know this, but the PREVIOUS time there was "miner consensus" it turned out the miners that "voted" and "supermajority" didn't give the slightest shit about the whole thing, and did NOT actually implement what they were misrepresented as having supported.
mircea_popescu: but whatever, i don't mind making money out of mit's "blockchain of the future", like i didn't mind fleecing "ripple" or cashing btc crash. free bitcoin will continue for as long as usg can draw breath, i'm not against. let them lose what they can't invest.
mircea_popescu: (always and everywhere, the stupid poor. to them it makes sense, they've nothingh to lose anyway)
mircea_popescu: (to be, of coruse, rehashed again and again forever, like mike gavin's asshole.)
mircea_popescu: the t1 wreckers may yell all they want this "is not right". but in bitcoin longest chain prevails, and so the story ends
mircea_popescu: now then. at time t2, any of those involved, or any third party, simply SPENDS that bitcoin.
mircea_popescu: oin chain. on the basis of these mystery strings, OTHER PARTIES, which ARE IN NO WAY BOUND TO THIS, alloocate wholly imaginary bitcoins to the sort of imbeciles who buy into this scheme (always and everywhere, the stupid poor. to them it makes sense, they've nothingh to lose anyway)
mircea_popescu: let's drop the math for a moment and delve. at time t0, bitcoin works. at time t1, some wreckers under "public pressure" as discussed well in
http://trilema.com/2013/digging-through-archives-yields-gold/ attempt to attack this bitcoin that works, by producing an alt-bitcoin, that does not work. the specific way in which the alt-bitcoin thatr does not work "works" is by deeding (exactly like deedbot) some strings into the bitc
mircea_popescu: whole fucking point of segwit is to try and take pow away.
mircea_popescu: but otherwise, prb much like any other windows app does not natively produce data in portable format.
mircea_popescu: rothbart if you have it in a portable data format, can just feed it into trb
mircea_popescu: "what do you mean this problem is hard, i have a half baked item in my head i pompously call abstraction in which it is EASY!!!"
mircea_popescu: i tried the haskell approach to "Solving" problems, whadda ya want from me.
mircea_popescu: 1. multiply x and y ; 2. count bits of result ; 3. count bits of modulus ; 4. multiply modulus with count2 - count3 and test if larger than result. if not, substract. if yes, multiply with count2-count3-1 and do the same. repeat until result smaller than modulus.
mircea_popescu: ok, how slow is the following heuristicized approach :
mircea_popescu: srsly, 240 seconds since the microsecond previous n lines ? pshaw.
mircea_popescu: Sep 12 14:43:18 * Disconnected (Remote host closed socket).