Return Styles: Pseud0ch, Terminal, Valhalla, NES, Geocities, Blue Moon. Entire thread

Encryption is useless

Name: Anonymous 2013-07-07 15:53

"Yes, the NSA has the capability to crack anything weaker than SHA-2048 with O(1) complexity."

- Edward Snowden

We need quantum-proof crypto... NOW.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Post-quantum_cryptography

Name: Anonymous 2013-07-07 22:47

>people who need citations

Name: Anonymous 2013-07-07 23:09

that feel when you ain't Jewish and never wrote an awesome virus

Name: Anonymous 2013-07-08 1:53

>>29
My anus is the single largest employer of dicks in the world.

Name: Anonymous 2013-07-08 2:14

>>43
My dubs are the single largest employer of checkers in the world.

Name: Anonymous 2013-07-08 2:55

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Skipjack_%28cipher%29
A truncated differential attack was also published against 28 rounds of Skipjack cipher.[6] This was later complemented by a slide attack on all 32 rounds.[7] Biham, Shamir and Biryukov's attack continues to be the best cryptanalysis of Skipjack known to the public.
If the NSA is so smart, how are three kikes able to break all 32 rounds?

Name: Anonymous 2013-07-08 3:18

>>1
O(1) complexity
so they have the backdoor? Wut

Name: Anonymous 2013-07-08 4:39

>>28
If Murrikan intelligence agencies let themselves become lazy and dumb by over-relying on technology,
If?

Name: Anonymous 2013-07-08 6:40

>>9
>d-wave
>quantum
>wired.com
you sure do have reliable sources of information
that shit cannot into schor algo
.
the sad truth is that nsa probably have backdoor for the only schor-resistant perfect forward-secret encryption scheme
https://www.schneier.com/blog/archives/2007/11/the_strange_sto.html

Name: Anonymous 2013-07-08 7:50

>>48
elliptic crypto isn't schor-resistant you dumb fuck

Name: Anonymous 2013-07-08 14:33

>>39
Citation?

Name: Anonymous 2013-07-08 15:41

>>3
>only neckbeards know how to use computers.
no.

Name: Anonymous 2013-07-08 15:53

>>51
yes. female neckbeards are also neckbeards, they just don't have facial hair (but they're fat, smelly, ugly and socially incompetent just like their male counterparts).

Name: Anonymous 2013-07-08 15:57

>>51
I've never met a fat female programmer. Ugly, maybe, but never fat or smelly

Name: Anonymous 2013-07-08 16:02

I've never met a female programmer.
FTFY

Name: Anonymous 2013-07-08 16:05

>>54
I've never met a female
FTFY

Name: Anonymous 2013-07-08 16:09

>>53
fine, if you're going to split hairs, then:
every person who knows how to use computers is a neckbeard.
a neckbeard is defined as a person that possesses at least two of the following attributes: fat, smelly, ugly, socially incompetent. it is remarked that male neckbeards often have neck beards (hence the name).

Name: Anonymous 2013-07-08 16:09

>>53
also, you're unlikely to see fat neckbeards because they don't like going out (partly out of laziness and partly out of being ashamed of their sorry physical state)

Name: Anonymous 2013-07-08 19:10

>>57
(partly out of laziness and partly out of being ashamed of their sorry physical state)
Sounds like lived experience.

Name: Anonymous 2013-07-08 23:04

>>58
yes :( i hate myself

Name: Anonymous 2013-07-08 23:09

>>59

Do not hate yourself, brother.  You are not like others, and you will not find peace until you understand that.  But I prefer your company to theirs.  If it's worth anything to you, I am fairly good looking; I have a family and a good job.  But I am unable to force myself to join in with the normal people.  I feel as if I am a member of a different species.  Here I feel as if I am understood.

Name: Anonymous 2013-07-09 9:27

>>60
A family? If you decided to have kids, why did you do so?

Name: 60 2013-07-09 9:46

>>61
Lolies!?

Name: Anonymous 2013-07-09 10:41

>>62
Right. Thing is, I fucking hate children and I can't see any reason anyone could possibly want anything to do with them.

Name: Anonymous 2013-07-09 13:02

>>61
In fact, the first pregnancy was not intentional; I was not living a lifestyle that was likely to lead to reproduction.  However, I like kids, and I can't help but think that abortion is murder.  Saying abortion isn't murder is like saying that if a baby is inside a bag, it doesn't exist.  It doesn't really matter that the bag is made out of a human being.  The rights of the parent shouldn't enter into it any more than they should after the baby is born.

Also, the structure of the human mind is such that once you have children, you prefer to have (more) children, and you will not abandon them.  There are exceptions of course, but I have no regrets.  That is the product of biology I am sure, but so is the fact that it doesn't bother me.  The most desperate person on earth is the woman in her late 30s with no children (I'm a man, but I think the men likely just hide it better).

An interesting side effect of parenthood is that I am fearful and squeamish about many things, whereas before I was rarely afraid of anything.  I did not expect it to affect me that way, but the instinct to feed one's offspring is overpowering, and has in my case led to a stronger instinct for self-preservation.

Name: Anonymous 2013-07-09 14:17

>>64
Saying abortion isn't murder is like saying that if a baby is inside a bag, it doesn't exist.  It doesn't really matter that the bag is made out of a human being.
Natality is also murder, it just takes a lot longer. But eventually and inevitably the child dies, possibly after leading an unhappy life in the overpopulated world you helped create. Also, a 2 month foetus has neither sapience nor sentience, so I don't see why it should get any more rights than the average parasitic organism. Also, shitting more babies in our overpopulated world is irresponsible and harmful.

That is the product of biology I am sure, but so is the fact that it doesn't bother me.
So is having sexual intercourse (which, by the way, does not imply penetrative sex) for pleasure.

The most desperate person on earth is the woman in her late 30s with no children (I'm a man, but I think the men likely just hide it better).
Not really; if most (over 95%) of people have, to varying degrees, a biologically-induced psychological need for having children (which is terrible news for mother Earth, by the way), then an even larger amount of desperation befalls the one who does not want children, for they will have a very hard time finding a partner with the same preference.

Name: Anonymous 2013-07-09 16:09

>>65
biologically-induced psychological need for having children (which is terrible news for mother Earth, by the way),
Hitler tried to save the Earth with eugenics, but you ignored him. Enjoy your democracy, liberalism and overpopulation, suffocating in its own waste.

Name: Anonymous 2013-07-09 17:33

>>66
Eugenics means selecting based on some idiot's biased criteria. What I'm suggesting is that people (uniformly) randomly stop breeding.

Name: Anonymous 2013-07-09 17:42

>>67
What is wrong with selecting for good personality? It solves both overpopulation and evolution.

Name: Anonymous 2013-07-09 17:45

>>68
What does eugenics has to do with personality?

Name: Anonymous 2013-07-09 18:03

>>19
however first these systems need to be running at 0K (yes absolute ZERO kelvin), as even slight temp changes causes the sub-atomic particles to gain energy hence change state, hence incorrect results when reading the qubit.
Mental midget.

Name: Anonymous 2013-07-09 18:03

>>64
This is a bunch of pseudo-scientific evo psych bullshit.

Where's all the hard evidence to support all your assumptions and so-called ``facts''? The popscience books on evolution? Your dawkins? the lesswrong.com fanatics?

Remember, I'm not denying evolution but just denying this kind of misuse of it. Also your personal experience doesn't mean anything.

Name: Anonymous 2013-07-09 18:04

>>68
It is not possess to select for any personality even at the genetic level with advance technology in the future.
nor is it desirable to do such a thing

Name: Anonymous 2013-07-09 18:10

i want a cyber anus

Name: Anonymous 2013-07-09 18:34

>>71
When did I represent any of that as fact?  Someone asked for my opinion and I gave it.  The only general statement of fact I made was that most parents like children; I will leave supporting that with scientific evidence to you.

I suppose you go around demanding proof for the obvious whenever you feel like yanking someone's chain.  Maybe /r/atheism is more suited to your way of thinking.

Name: Anonymous 2013-07-09 18:55

>>68
Aside from obvious chemical imbalances, personality isn't genetic. If a kid is born from biological parents with a certain personality trait but is raised in a family that has the opposite trait, they are very likely to inherit the trait of the latter. In other words, idiots should refrain from raising children, and non-idiots should adopt (if they really want to have children). Which makes sense.

However, thanks to the Dunning-Kruger, what we would end up with in practice is that people who would have been good parents underestimate themselves, while idiots think they're really great and decide to adopt/procreate.

Fuck I hate humans.

evolution
Making our shitty fragile bodies imperceptibly less shitty and fragile (in the very best case scenario)? That's evolution? I'd rather place my bets on transhumanism and mind uploading.

Name: Anonymous 2013-07-09 21:10

``The obvious mathematical breakthrough would be development of an easy way to factor large prime numbers.'' -Bill Gates, The Road Ahead

Name: sage field 2013-07-10 0:22

encrypt my name

Name: Anonymous 2013-07-10 1:00

>>77
Damn it! I was saving those dubs for a special occasion!

Name: Anonymous 2013-07-10 6:35

transhumanism and mind uploading are faggot things thought up by faggot people
we can't let such things happen

Name: Anonymous 2013-07-10 6:36

>>74
Opinions aren't the obvious.

Newer Posts
Don't change these.
Name: Email:
Entire Thread Thread List