The "Intermediate Report" [1] lists the authors as "Robert V. and Claude (Anthropic)". Is there any reason to believe this is not AI hallucinations? [1] https://stateofutopia.com/papers/2/intermediate-report.pdf
We broke 92% of SHA-256 – you should start to migrate from it
71–80 of 86 posts
Re: We broke 92% of SHA-256 – you should start to migrate from it
#72Re: We broke 92% of SHA-256 – you should start to migrate from it
#73Re: We broke 92% of SHA-256 – you should start to migrate from it
#74Long time reader first time poster here... What is the verdict (humans)? AI slop research or modern cryptography (and society) flushed down the toilet overnight? I can't immediately tell from the thread so far... :)
Re: We broke 92% of SHA-256 – you should start to migrate from it
#75The neat thing about bitcoin is that the incentive to break it is so high that it would almost certainly be the first place you would learn that SHA2 had been broken. Not on a website like this. I can verify its integrity by opening robinhood on my phone.
Re: We broke 92% of SHA-256 – you should start to migrate from it
#76The "Intermediate Report" [1] lists the authors as "Robert V. and Claude (Anthropic)". Is there any reason to believe this is not AI hallucinations? [1] https://stateofutopia.com/papers/2/intermediate-report.pdf
Almost certainly. Someone no-one has ever heard of before driving a hallucinating AI claims to have done what the world's best cryptographers have been unable to do. Just wait a day or two for the first crypto person who notices to pick the claim to pieces.
we went to cryptographic experts first and published second, after they said it is a very good result and worth publishing. We've given a lot of help for reproducibility, the c and python programs encode the claims very precisely and anyone can verify the claims in ten minutes. The bottom line is that you wouldn't have seen this article if cryptographers hadn't seen these results first and liked them.
Re: We broke 92% of SHA-256 – you should start to migrate from it
#77Earlier quoted context omitted.
Almost certainly. Someone no-one has ever heard of before driving a hallucinating AI claims to have done what the world's best cryptographers have been unable to do. Just wait a day or two for the first crypto person who notices to pick the claim to pieces.
>Just wait a day or two for the first crypto person who notices to pick the claim to pieces. we went to cryptographic experts first and published second, after they said it is a very good result and worth publishing. We've given a lot of help for reproducibility, the c and python programs encode the claims very precisely and anyone can verify the claims in ten minutes. The bottom line is that you wouldn't have seen t…
Re: We broke 92% of SHA-256 – you should start to migrate from it
#78The neat thing about bitcoin is that the incentive to break it is so high that it would almost certainly be the first place you would learn that SHA2 had been broken. Not on a website like this. I can verify its integrity by opening robinhood on my phone.
Well does it? If I would be able to break SHA2 and make myself rich with it, I would need to be sure that nobody would find out, that Bitcoin can be manipulated. The second anyone is aware, I wouldn't be rich anymore.
Re: We broke 92% of SHA-256 – you should start to migrate from it
#79Earlier quoted context omitted.
Well does it? If I would be able to break SHA2 and make myself rich with it, I would need to be sure that nobody would find out, that Bitcoin can be manipulated. The second anyone is aware, I wouldn't be rich anymore.
Wouldn't that be the play, though? Get a buttload of bitcoin, turn it into real money, then destroy bitcoin. If you found a break in bitcoin you wouldn't rely on keeping your wealth in bitcoin and then hoping nobody else discovers it.
Re: We broke 92% of SHA-256 – you should start to migrate from it
#80I looked into citation [5] since it sounded interesting but the DOI link has been hallucinated and goes to some other article. I assume many of the others are similarly bogus.