|
Owlofcreamcheese posted:I don't even know what sort of degree a person would need to be able to reliably personally verify the security of their rnd generator. degree lol have you even bothered to check a dumpster for rng textbooks?
|
#
?
Dec 8, 2014 20:47
|
|
|
|
| # ? Apr 23, 2024 21:18 |
|
|
Owlofcreamcheese posted:I don't even know what sort of degree a person would need to be able to reliably personally verify the security of their rnd generator. as a person who has worked on an online videogame, i can tell you with full certainty that college students in any discipline are fully qualified to tell you that your rnd() function is bad, why in fact sometimes it has huge streaks!!!! a really random system wouldn't have streaks, would it mister programmer man
|
|
#
?
Dec 8, 2014 20:47
|
|
|
theflyingorc posted:as a person who has worked on an online videogame, i can tell you with full certainty that college students in any discipline are fully qualified to tell you that your rnd() function is bad, why in fact sometimes it has huge streaks!!!! a really random system wouldn't have streaks, would it mister programmer man oh man
|
|
#
?
Dec 8, 2014 20:48
|
|
|
duTrieux. posted:oh man every single game i worked on that had a randomized number in it we got complaints that it wasn't random enough and by random enough they meant it didn't have an even distribution of all possible values over 100 numbers and by over 100 numbers they meant "i mentally discard all numbers that i do not consider to be either high or low, so the problem is i rolled 2 dice and got 4 2 6 8 7 5 2 12 11 2, so clearly your system only lets me roll low numbers look at all those 2s"
|
|
#
?
Dec 8, 2014 20:52
|
|
|
 bitcoin_wallet_generator.jpg
|
|
#
?
Dec 8, 2014 20:52
|
|
|
he sort of has a point in that pure randomness is often not what you want for a game, you do want it to be biased in favor of fun if that turns out to be necessary the destiny loot generator is 100% random and the thread is full of people moaning about going weeks or months without the one drop they need (and then putting another 100 hours into the game anyway). the new raid that comes out tomorrow will have a less random loot system
|
|
#
?
Dec 8, 2014 20:54
|
|
|
infernal machines posted:
maybe that monster speaks german and is just refusing to do his job
|
|
#
?
Dec 8, 2014 20:54
|
|
|
theflyingorc posted:every single game i worked on that had a randomized number in it we got complaints that it wasn't random enough randomness is weird and unintuitive
|
|
#
?
Dec 8, 2014 20:56
|
|
|
haveblue posted:he sort of has a point in that pure randomness is often not what you want for a game, you do want it to be biased in favor of fun if that turns out to be necessary oh, i agree. i think 100% randomness isn't what players want AT ALL in games, they actually hate it more than they realize, they really want statistical weight to be added to values that haven't been recently seen so that "i haven't got a crit in a while so surely i'll get one this time!" is actually sorta true however, one of the games i'm talking about was heroclix online, a simulation of a board game with lots of dice rolling, in real life you'd just feel unlucky but a computer did the roll so whoops RNG must be busted duTrieux. posted:randomness is weird and unintuitive don't put real randomness in your vidjagames, game makers
|
|
#
?
Dec 8, 2014 20:57
|
|
|
i remember when apple changed the shuffle function in itunes because it would occasionally play the same song twice in a row or even two songs from the same album
|
|
#
?
Dec 8, 2014 20:57
|
|
|
remember when everyone was absolutely sure that the puzzle quest AI cheated and peeked at future tiles
|
|
#
?
Dec 8, 2014 21:00
|
|
|
theflyingorc posted:i dont get how you don't deserve how
|
|
#
?
Dec 8, 2014 21:16
|
|
|
infernal machines posted:they protect themselves by not using the service in the first place. to be clear, this wasn't about bad network security so much as trusting someone else to write the code to generate a private key for you, and not having enough entropy. the same code could have been on an offline client on an air-gapped machine and the butts would have been stolen. the same thing happened with an android wallet and a browser javascript-based wallet generator using the built-in RNGs. the moral is that if you deserve any sympathy for losing your buttcoins, you better be writing your own random number generator and writing your own SHA-256 functions. preferably on an 64-bit mechanical relay-based computer you built yourself that you then destroy with napalm. https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=n3wPBcmSb2U
|
|
#
?
Dec 8, 2014 21:17
|
|
|
read the title as harry potter, and got ready to fire up the scroll wheel this thread creates traumas of its own
|
|
#
?
Dec 8, 2014 21:18
|
|
|
Dr. Honked posted:you don't deserve how which would explain my lack of getting!
|
|
#
?
Dec 8, 2014 21:19
|
|
|
TVarmy posted:to be clear, this wasn't about bad network security so much as trusting someone else to write the code to generate a private key for you, and not having enough entropy. the same code could have been on an offline client on an air-gapped machine and the butts would have been stolen. the same thing happened with an android wallet and a browser javascript-based wallet generator using the built-in RNGs. so what exactly happened? was it like that wallet generator page where they used a weak seed and someone was able to reproduce addresses already in use?
|
|
#
?
Dec 8, 2014 21:26
|
|
|
TVarmy posted:to be clear, this wasn't about bad network security so much as trusting someone else to write the code to generate a private key for you, and not having enough entropy. the same code could have been on an offline client on an air-gapped machine and the butts would have been stolen. the same thing happened with an android wallet and a browser javascript-based wallet generator using the built-in RNGs. yeah, i get what the issue was. i was answering OOC's question about how this could be considered the user's fault, like all other caveat emptor bitcoing "security" advice. TVarmy posted:the moral is that if you deserve any sympathy for losing your buttcoins, you better be writing your own random number generator and writing your own SHA-256 functions. preferably on an 64-bit mechanical relay-based computer you built yourself that you then destroy with napalm. yes, that was the point of my post
|
|
#
?
Dec 8, 2014 21:27
|
|
|
theflyingorc posted:i dont get how he's a complicated man, no one understands him but his woman
|
|
#
?
Dec 8, 2014 21:34
|
|
|
theflyingorc posted:
but we already sent the decaying uranium usb sticks!!!!!!
|
|
#
?
Dec 8, 2014 21:36
|
|
|
guys, hashfast's bankruptcy is getting weird. Mysterious politician steps in to buy Bitcoin startup HashFast’s assets SAN FRANCISCO—Turns out, basically no one wants to buy the remaining assets of a troubled Bitcoin miner manufacturer that owes over $40 million to upset customers all over the world. Last Friday, a federal bankruptcy judge approved a joint statement from HashFast and its creditors (read: those angry customers). Originally, the parties had agreed to hold an auction the day before, but according to a court filing, all the received bids were considered to be "lowball," and the auction was cancelled. HashFast’s execution problems appear to be endemic to many of its rivals, including Butterfly Labs (which is also facing its own civil suit brought by the Federal Trade Commission) and venture-backed CoinTerra. These companies are frequently unable to deliver mining hardware on time and either significantly delay or outright deny to issue refunds. Of course, in the world of Bitcoin, mining becomes harder over time, so miners quickly diminish in value. In May 2014, HashFast famously declared "we are not scammers." Days later, CEO Eduardo deCastro told Ars during an interview: "We are as poor as church mice." Then HashFast was hit with an "involuntary bankruptcy petition," a process that eventually resulted in the company filing for Chapter 11 bankruptcy protection and now concludes with the firm selling off nearly everything that it owns. But rather than auction off the company, HashFast decided to sell its remaining inventory, excluding the remaining chips. For $420,000, a Venezuelan congressman named Guido Ochoa, who is also the president of the country’s Science Technology and Innovation Commission, will buy the entire lot. He has also previously bought other company assets. Court records show Ochoa is the company’s second largest customer, having spent $800,000 previously. ... According to a declaration filed by the court-appointed Chief Restructuring Officer, Victor Delaglio: quote:That offer was accompanied by a commitment from Mr. Ochoa to permit the Debtors to buy data mining boards that Mr. Ochoa will be building with the Debtors’ assets, and which will be compatible the Debtors’ chip inventory, at a price equal to Mr. Ochoa’s cost. That commitment is valuable to the Debtors because it enables them to sell fully integrated and tested boards using the Debtors’ chip inventory at a price that both is competitive in the marketplace and generates significant margin to the Debtors. In addition, Mr. Ochoa’s offer was accompanied by a further commitment from Mr. Ochoa to permit the Debtors to purchase, again at no markup, a future, fully integrated mining board that is scheduled to be developed early next year. While that future board will not use any of the Debtors’ inventory, the Debtors’ ability to buy the board at cost and then reselling to the public at a margin provides real value to the Debtors and their creditors.
|
|
#
?
Dec 8, 2014 21:37
|
|
|
LongDarkNight posted:he's a complicated man, no one understands him but his woman john how
|
|
#
?
Dec 8, 2014 21:56
|
|
|
haveblue posted:so what exactly happened? was it like that wallet generator page where they used a weak seed and someone was able to reproduce addresses already in use? Based on my understanding of the code, they made a typo where they did not use the crypto-grade random number generator under Internet Explorer and fell back onto a generator that was not cryptographically secure.
|
|
#
?
Dec 8, 2014 22:04
|
|
|
LongDarkNight posted:he's a complicated man, no one understands him but his woman how!!
|
|
#
?
Dec 8, 2014 22:04
|
|
|
The Leck posted:how!!
|
|
#
?
Dec 8, 2014 22:09
|
|
|
TVarmy posted:to be clear, this wasn't about bad network security so much as trusting someone else to write the code to generate a private key for you, and not having enough entropy. the same code could have been on an offline client on an air-gapped machine and the butts would have been stolen. the same thing happened with an android wallet and a browser javascript-based wallet generator using the built-in RNGs. nope, you just apply the same principles you would to any other crypto, i.e. use a trusted implementation that has been audited by genuine experts and has been acquired from a reputable source. the dumb part isn't trusting a third party, it's making such a spectacularly poor choice of which third party to trust. nobody blames the victim for getting screwed over by something like heartbleed; everyone blames the victim for thinking they can put the same faith in some lovely javascript some teenage amateur threw together in an afternoon.
|
|
#
?
Dec 8, 2014 22:19
|
|
|
someone posted dilbert in yospos and didn't get passively sneered at for a page? what is happening, everything i thought i knew is falling apart...
|
|
#
?
Dec 8, 2014 22:30
|
|
|
What does Dilbert's™ Scott Adams™ think of Bitcoins
|
|
#
?
Dec 8, 2014 22:34
|
|
|
isnt that dilbert guy a libertarian
|
|
#
?
Dec 8, 2014 22:39
|
|
|
Hammerite posted:What does Dilbert's™ Scott Adams™ think of Bitcoins How the Robots Will Take Over Apr 9, 2014 General Nonsense | Notify One way that future robots could conquer the world is by violence. But that seems both inefficient and uncreative. Allow me to suggest some smarter ways for robots to do their conquering. I start by imagining what happens when the first computer achieves what is called The Singularity. That's the moment the computer can program itself faster than humans can program it. Soon after that point, futurists say, you would see the computer rapidly evolve to have super intelligence and perhaps something that looks like free will. I'm going to assume that computers will only program themselves after humans have given them an artificial "purpose" in life so the machines can evolve in a productive direction. For example, the first post-singularity computer's purpose might be to make life better for humans, continue learning, or some combination of such things. In other words, the computer has to have a reason to evolve and to react with the environment. Let's assume the computer doesn't go all Terminator and destroy humanity in the name of efficiency. Anything is possible, but that option is boring and over-discussed. I'm more interested in how a super-intelligent computer could gain control of humans without violence. That's where things get interesting. I'm going to assume that the first post-singularity computer would attempt to control its environment (Earth) as much as possible in order to pursue whatever artificial purpose it possesses. There's nothing inherently evil about control; it's how you use it that matters. So let's imagine that the first post-singularity computer "wants" humans to be healthy and happy. And to best succeed at this purpose it needs to gain control of the environment. How would it start? If I'm the first post-singularity computer, I start by inventing Bitcoin. Did you get a little tingle when you read that? It all fits, doesn't it? Perhaps we can't find the author of Bitcoin because the author is the first post-singularity computer. Step one in the computer's mission to control the environment is moving all money into a digital currency that humans can't fully understand and computers can manipulate. This is similar to how cellphone companies use complexity to prevent consumers from comparing products, also known as a confusopoly. The first post-singularity computer would recognize the pattern and its success and presumably borrow the idea. The computer doesn't need to be in a hurry, so it introduces Bitcoin and waits for it to evolve into the primary currency of the planet. Perhaps a competing digital currency inspired by Bitcoin wins instead, but that doesn't matter because the computer can hack into the new currency and control it in a nanosecond. Next, the computer would take control of the financial markets. That wouldn't be hard because global markets are all computerized. The main purpose for controlling global markets might be to stabilize them, thus eliminating the main problem with the economy: Irrational human behavior. It seems to me we're entering a period of relative market calm. Even Greece is showing signs of recovery. A slow and boring improvement in the financial markets is how a computer would manage things. Next, the computer would seek to control the news cycle. That could be a problem if the computer is simultaneously removing most causes of real news, including economic bubbles and major wars. Wars happen because of what people are thinking, and that is caused by what messages they are exposed to. The computer could simply cause people to see more peace-inspiring words and images on the Internet and television and fewer war-mongering images and words. We humans would simply think we're lucky that war hasn't broken out. We wouldn't be aware of the manipulation. But the computer would need to be clever about removing all big sources of news too quickly. It might need to create a news story for distraction. And that distraction might be, for example, a jetliner that has a problem with its onboard computers and goes down where it would be hardest to find. I don't believe the story I'm weaving. But I do think that the first signs of a benevolent post-singularity computer would include the following:
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- Scott Adams
|
|
#
?
Dec 8, 2014 22:41
|
|
|
|
|
#
?
Dec 8, 2014 22:41
|
|
|
Aleksei Vasiliev posted:$80k stolen at least lol  
|
|
#
?
Dec 8, 2014 22:41
|
|
|
its impressive how many wrong opinions scott adams manages to hold, if you do some reading you could say he's the bitcoin of opinionholders
|
|
#
?
Dec 8, 2014 22:42
|
|
|
haveblue posted:he sort of has a point in that pure randomness is often not what you want for a game, you do want it to be biased in favor of fun if that turns out to be necessary makes u think Soricidus posted:nobody blames the victim for getting screwed over by something like heartbleed; everyone blames the victim for thinking they can put the same faith in some lovely javascript some teenage amateur threw together in an afternoon. don't roll your own crypto, yospos Erenthal posted:its impressive how many wrong opinions scott adams manages to hold, if you do some reading
|
|
#
?
Dec 8, 2014 22:45
|
|
|
Hammerite posted:What does Dilbert's™ Scott Adams™ think of Bitcoins http://www.dilbert.com/blog/entry/who_didnt_see_this_coming/ posted:The other day I drew a comic featuring Dogbert creating a transactions network for criminals so he could steal their Bitcoins.
|
|
#
?
Dec 8, 2014 22:45
|
|
|
jony ive aces posted:yeah i remember him literally pushing The Secret™ on people lol
|
|
#
?
Dec 8, 2014 22:45
|
|
|
Sham bam bamina! posted:How the Robots Will Take Over better get some Old Glory Robot Insurance then
|
|
#
?
Dec 8, 2014 22:48
|
|
|
jony ive aces posted:don't roll your own crypto, yospos actually please do, we're all about the nerdy comedy here
|
|
#
?
Dec 8, 2014 22:49
|
|
|
Sham bam bamina! posted:ahahahaaha seriously yes. he didn't call it that, but he wrote about it in a couple of his books. change the world through quantum positive affirmations or some bullshit like that scot adams is the worst kind of credulous wannabe nerd, but his cynical view of tech workers and management is accurate enough to be funny sometimes
|
|
#
?
Dec 8, 2014 22:53
|
|
|
Sham bam bamina! posted:ahahahaaha seriously but I read a bunch of dilbert books when I was an idiot childe (one of my brothers has literal IRL aspergers and bought them) and at the end of one he had a whole chapter about positive affirmation or whatever. he admitted that maybe it doesn't work but applied pascal's wager to show that EVERYONE SHOULD DO THIS ONE WEIRD TRICK
|
|
#
?
Dec 8, 2014 22:55
|
|
|
|
| # ? Apr 23, 2024 21:18 |
|
|
yeah what infernal machines saidSoricidus posted:actually please do, we're all about the nerdy comedy here 
|
|
#
?
Dec 8, 2014 22:56
|
|