Dating two women

[IndiReloaded]

There it is, thanks!

I started at My Profile and it was completely non-intuitive. Here is the larger image for the curious:

[IndiReloaded]

You'd be surprised at [url=https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/RSA_(algorithm)#Proofs_of_correctness]how secure you can be[/url], with little effort. The way public-key encryption works is really awesome. If anyone solves integer factorization in polynomial time, though, we're all fu​cked.

So what do you think of this quantum computing apps for security? Be kind to me, I admit my ignorance in advance.

There's a company here in Van who is looking to hire smart ppl like yourself. I've heard the CEO speak at several events but confess I could never understand enough to decide if its worth investing in or not. The physics ppl I've asked (much smarter than I can ever hope to be) seem to think it has potential but that what this company is doing isn't actual quantum computing:

[url]http://www.dwavesys.com/en/dw_homepage.html[/url]

[KingZ]

So what do you think of this quantum computing apps for security? Be kind to me, I admit my ignorance in advance.

There's a company here in Van who is looking to hire smart ppl like yourself. I've heard the CEO speak at several events but confess I could never understand enough to decide if its worth investing in or not. The physics ppl I've asked (much smarter than I can ever hope to be) seem to think it has potential but that what this company is doing isn't actual quantum computing:

[url]http://www.dwavesys.com/en/dw_homepage.html[/url]

The idea behind quantum computing is pretty brilliant, but people mistakenly link the word "quantum" to "quantum physics", so it gets the wrong kind of attention.

The way a computer currently works is by using a LIFO stack to retain memory, and a processor that can only compute a single individual instruction at a time. Obviously, we've come a long way to be able to process large amounts of instructions in a given second, but the basic, oversimplified idea behind quantum computing is that it's non-deterministic and can be in multiple states at once. So while a lot of the theoretical problems like P vs. NP would still be relevant, it would drastically advance the world algorithms and computation.

In layman's terms, if this ever gets perfected, we're still fu​cked.

[IndiReloaded]

Interesting. So one can simply mess up a system by adding 'glue', so to speak, to that top stack and everything is fubar'd? In my naiveity I would have assumed things in queue worked like a hosepipe, or what you would call first in, first out.

I should probably read a scientific american article or something about this. More my speed.

[KingZ]

Interesting. So one can simply mess up a system by adding 'glue', so to speak, to that top stack and everything is fubar'd?

Ah! No, no, no. That's not what I meant when I say we're "fu​cked".

Here's an analogy. Let's say I give you a set of random numbers: {5, 6, 1, 2, 0, 2, 8}. I ask you: Can any of these numbers be summed to "14"? You would look at it quickly and say, Why, yes, 8 and 6 make 14. This solution is easy to verify because you're a human and you can just look at the list as a whole.

Now put yourself in the place of [url=https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Turing_machine]a computer that can only process one instruction at a time[/url]. It has to loop through the list many times to come up with a solution. In a list with several million elements, this can take forever. However, the computer can still verify a solution *given* to it by a human quickly: "Yes, 8 and 6 make 14". The computer verifies that 8 and 6 are indeed in the list, that 8 and 6 make 14, and there you go, the puzzle is solved.

In short, every security system in a computer rests on the assumption that the computer has to loop through that list many, many times, and the solution will take a long time to compute. If someone either wrote an algorithm that made it so they *didn't* have to loop through many times to know if there's a subset of the above list that can be summed to 14, or created a device that could solve this problem [url=https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Polynomial_time#Polynomial_time]efficiently[/url], we would be fu​cked. They could literally break in to every computer, regardless of the passwords, regardless of the encryption, and regardless of anything else. This would be an extremely profound discovery that would affect every field in science.

[IndiReloaded]

That's a really interesting problem, thanks for sharing it. I'm not a math whiz by any stretch, but I know a certain young man who would enjoy this puzzle.

So this is really a 'sequence space' problem, isn't it? You might be interested to know some very smart people (many with math or physics background) have published some interesting models on this in the nucleic acid field:

[url]http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Sequence_space[/url]

[url]http://scholar.google.ca/scholar?q=sequence+space+rna&hl=en&as_sdt=0&as_vis =1&oi=scholart&sa=X&ei=mxcLUOWiDcHYqgGE86jhBw&ved= 0CEwQgQMwAA[/url]

[KingZ]

That's a really interesting problem, thanks for sharing it. I'm not a math whiz by any stretch, but I know a certain young man who would enjoy this puzzle.

Ah, well if that young man happened to solve this problem, the Clay Mathematics Institute would give him a million dollars. It's the first of seven Millenium Prize Problems: [url]https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Millenium_Prize_Problems[/url]

So this is really a 'sequence space' problem, isn't it? You might be interested to know some very smart people (many with math or physics background) have published some interesting models on this in the nucleic acid field:

[url]http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Sequence_space[/url]

[url]http://scholar.google.ca/scholar?q=sequence+space+rna&hl=en&as_sdt=0&as_vis =1&oi=scholart&sa=X&ei=mxcLUOWiDcHYqgGE86jhBw&ved= 0CEwQgQMwAA[/url]

Yes, similar.

Sorry, but due to my boycott on Canada I don't click links that end in .ca.

[IndiReloaded]

LOL, well I'm sure you can google for yourself in a bored moment. Its a pretty small field.

See, now isn't this topic much more interesting than flaming Cam?

[vashti]

OMG, it's official. This thread totally sucks.

[IndiReloaded]

Yes, similar.

OMG, it's official. This thread totally sucks.

LOL, well you might be amused to know that KZ's 'yes, similar'
actually = 'not really the same but I'm not going to openly flame you Indi, since you admitted your ignorance openly at the beginning of this discussion'.

Its the equivalent of flaming in academia.

[iamaninnocentma]

Agreed, **** off king and indi. you pair of ****ing geeks.

[KingZ]

See, now isn't this topic much more interesting than flaming Cam?

No.

The only reason I'm even agreeing to publicly have a conversation with a Canadian resident is because I'm on 4 different types of amphetamines right now and pissing like a racehorse, so I don't feel like working.

Shame on you vashti for speaking without being spoken to.

[IndiReloaded]

Agreed, **** off king and indi. you pair of ****ing geeks.

Feeling left out teflon-brain? Here, have a cookie:

[vashti]

Agreed, **** off king and indi. you pair of ****ing geeks.

Common sense speaking, right there. ^^

lol

[iamaninnocentma]

Ah! No, no, no. That's not what I meant when I say we're "fu​cked".

Here's an analogy. Let's say I give you a set of random numbers: {5, 6, 1, 2, 0, 2, 8}. I ask you: Can any of these numbers be summed to "14"? You would look at it quickly and say, Why, yes, 8 and 6 make 14. This solution is easy to verify because you're a human and you can just look at the list as a whole.

Now put yourself in the place of [url=https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Turing_machine]a computer that can only process one instruction at a time[/url]. It has to loop through the list many times to come up with a solution. In a list with several million elements, this can take forever. However, the computer can still verify a solution *given* to it by a human quickly: "Yes, 8 and 6 make 14". The computer verifies that 8 and 6 are indeed in the list, that 8 and 6 make 14, and there you go, the puzzle is solved.

In short, every security system in a computer rests on the assumption that the computer has to loop through that list many, many times, and the solution will take a long time to compute. If someone either wrote an algorithm that made it so they *didn't* have to loop through many times to know if there's a subset of the above list that can be summed to 14, or created a device that could solve this problem [url=https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Polynomial_time#Polynomial_time]efficiently[/url], we would be fu​cked. They could literally break in to every computer, regardless of the passwords, regardless of the encryption, and regardless of anything else. This would be an extremely profound discovery that would affect every field in science.

Seriously man, youre losing it big time here. Wtf does any of this even mean? And why is Indi pretending to understand it. Its like watching that tit from the big bang theory trying to chat a bird up.

Im starting to see why you wanted Cam out the picture now, and im not impressed. Youre better than this kingz, and no amount of amphets can excuse this type of awkward geek flirting.

If i hadnt come along at a timely moment, im sure you would have clicked those canadian links. This isnt the king that i grew to respect.

Give yourself a good shake man, and try not get involved in conversations with indi. You know she wants you out the picture, and if she defeats you then ill soon follow.

If you show me how you got your forum powers , ill teach you how to get your hole, and not with a canadian, with a normal bird.