41–50 of 51 posts
Earlier quoted context omitted.
what would be a better license to use to encourage people to use it? also good point about CPP I will change that.
MIT and BSD licenses are very embeddable, but I am not familiar enough with Apache licensing when it comes to embedding. This is why I ask.
I see that you ran out of particle names for your projects. May I introduce you to super-symmetry, then? What's the issue with picking names that do not exist already? It has got the upside that millions of webpages will not appear in the results when people are searching for your project's name.
I sort of get the feeling you're using voice, but you're the one speaking.
I don't get the italics section.
Also are you suggesting I pick another name? It sort of seems like you're replying to a comment, but this comment appears at top level.
If you can explain more I'll appreciate it. Thanks
Also, please suggest a name if that's your thing. I'm thinking 'metahadron' goes with the voice section.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
Because they are known in advance and you could design to exploit their structure.
this was not meant to create some mystery around the included s-box, though I get that it does do that. the funny thing is the very fears that are being promoted about this are in a way, sort of exactly the weaknesses that this parameterisible family of hash function was designed to secure against. I mean people are afraid that there's somehow malevolent design floor but that could be true in any hash function with t…
https://www.schneier.com/crypto-gram/archives/1998/1015.html...
Read and internalize this.
I see that you ran out of particle names for your projects. May I introduce you to super-symmetry, then? What's the issue with picking names that do not exist already? It has got the upside that millions of webpages will not appear in the results when people are searching for your project's name.
Is this a reference to something? I sort of get the feeling you're using voice, but you're the one speaking. I don't get the italics section. Also are you suggesting I pick another name? It sort of seems like you're replying to a comment, but this comment appears at top level. If you can explain more I'll appreciate it. Thanks Also, please suggest a name if that's your thing. I'm thinking 'metahadron' goes with the v…
The italis section is just a thing I add to comments sometimes: a few sentences that loosely relate to the thing I am talking about. It can be a quote, an imagined dialog, a flippant comment, ... other examples are at [0][1].
I was annoyed.
I'm physicist and computer projects have the annoying custom of picking names from physics, engineering or what else. Other people also come up with their own names, why should not computer tech people also do this?
Atom editor, Electron framework, Neutrino.js, Crankshaft, ...
Earlier quoted context omitted.
That's the wrong attitude. Universities are a place where you should be much of the learning yourself. There is not enough time in a class for a lecturer to recite every word or idea that is present in a large textbook but there is definitely enough time outside of class to read it.
That’s dumb. I’m not asking for a professor to read to me. I’m asking for the school to provide a curriculum that introduces me to these subjects since I PAID them to educate me. Cryptography was not introduced/required for my CS degree.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
That's the wrong attitude. Universities are a place where you should be much of the learning yourself. There is not enough time in a class for a lecturer to recite every word or idea that is present in a large textbook but there is definitely enough time outside of class to read it.
> Universities are a place where you should be much of the learning yourself. The professors in the first three years of my schooling definitely did everything wrong, then. Passing and failing classes had next to nothing to do with independent learning.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
Is this a reference to something? I sort of get the feeling you're using voice, but you're the one speaking. I don't get the italics section. Also are you suggesting I pick another name? It sort of seems like you're replying to a comment, but this comment appears at top level. If you can explain more I'll appreciate it. Thanks Also, please suggest a name if that's your thing. I'm thinking 'metahadron' goes with the v…
No, there are no references in there. The italis section is just a thing I add to comments sometimes: a few sentences that loosely relate to the thing I am talking about. It can be a quote, an imagined dialog, a flippant comment, ... other examples are at [0][1]. I was annoyed. I'm physicist and computer projects have the annoying custom of picking names from physics, engineering or what else. Other people also come…
hmmm, really interesting how you feel about the names. It sounds like that is super annoying.
I never thought about how naming would affect people invested in the names like this.
I don't think I need to defend it, so I'm not trying to here, just sharing that for me, beamsplitter sounds like such a cool word, as if a beam were a physical thing like a rock that could be split. Also something solid in itself, and connotes advanced, possibly war, tech. lasers. I'll going for that connotation. hash functions are usually very pathetically named.
also there's more to this name in this project because my initial design imagined the "beam" of the input, ricocheting around a network of s-boxes getting mixed. It seemed to me like the perfect hash, aesthetically and efficiently, and universal. but to my disappointment, I couldn't get a pure, s-box only design to work. I had to include some "traditional mixing function hacks" like multiplication, rotation and xor. But I wanted to keep the name because it was aspirational.
I can imagine that it must feel like all these annoying computer software people taking all these names that are not from their area, but from your area, and not leaving anything good for the rest. And when they have such high profile already! Like nobody will listen to the poor physicists, especially once all their names are taken, and then it will be more lonely. A nameless space, with nothing left. Sounds pretty sad.
Funny is for me, it seems physics stands above software, so using such names is a way to increase perceived value. But from your view, software has the higher profile.
Thanks for sharing.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
That’s dumb. I’m not asking for a professor to read to me. I’m asking for the school to provide a curriculum that introduces me to these subjects since I PAID them to educate me. Cryptography was not introduced/required for my CS degree.
My point was that you need to do reading and research on your own in order to get the most out of a an education there is not enough time for a professor to go over everything. I'm not sure why you are surprised you didn't get much out of it if you only did the minimum. You have the opportunity in university to do and learn almost anything you want./
Earlier quoted context omitted.
No, there are no references in there. The italis section is just a thing I add to comments sometimes: a few sentences that loosely relate to the thing I am talking about. It can be a quote, an imagined dialog, a flippant comment, ... other examples are at [0][1]. I was annoyed. I'm physicist and computer projects have the annoying custom of picking names from physics, engineering or what else. Other people also come…
Thanks for the explanation. I think the italis is cool and fresh. hmmm, really interesting how you feel about the names. It sounds like that is super annoying. I never thought about how naming would affect people invested in the names like this. I don't think I need to defend it, so I'm not trying to here, just sharing that for me, beamsplitter sounds like such a cool word, as if a beam were a physical thing like a r…
I've also have to admit that physics needs relatively few new names in general which would make picking one a lot easier. There are also naming patterns as well, e.g. for superpartners (new articles in supersymmetry are either prefixed with S- or suffixed with -ion [0] in a predictable way).
I'm confused. Supercop is a benchmark for cryptographic hash functions, but SMHasher is a test for non-cryptographic hash functions. The use cases list cryptography, but also universal hash functions which are generally not crypto-grade. It compares itself to the SHA hashes, but only has 64 bit output. Is Beamsplitter supposed to be cryptography grade or not?