PeeMcGee

Using RSA as an example, the prime factors are supposed to have the same bit length (plus or minus 1 for carryover) for a similar reason. If the smaller factor has 1 fewer bit than the larger factor, it will be discovered twice as quickly by brute force, and 4x faster if it has 2 fewer bits, 8x faster if it has 3 fewer bits, etc. You could technically create a 4096 bit RSA key where one of the factors is 3 and the other is some other giant prime, but it would be immediately discovered by a naive brute force attack. The algorithm itself isn't concerned with the bit-length difference and operates on the inputs opaquely. The key generator is responsible for selecting prime factors that cannot be easily derived from the algorithm's output.

The LMGTFY link is an outstanding analogy.

It happens as soon as the fourth sentence (maybe even the third):

> There was a silence at the table—not confusion, but recognition.

Then keeps happening again and again and again to the point where it would be obnoxious even if a human wrote it.

It's unbelievable to me that there's a kind of person who would publish an article about learning that is so obviously AI generated, and from a professor nonetheless. Maybe this is some sort of experiment or an ironic joke that went over my head.

These sorts of tests are invaluable for things like ensuring adherence to specifications such as OAuth2 flows. A high-level test that literally describes each step of a flow will swiftly catch odd changes in behavior such as a request firing twice in a row or a well-defined payload becoming malformed. Say a token validator starts misbehaving and causes a refresh to occur with each request (thus introducing latency and making the IdP angry). That change in behavior would be invisible to users, but a test that verified each step in an expected order would catch it right away, and should require little maintenance unless the spec itself changes.

Georgia Tech has a great online MSc CS program (OMSCS) that's very affordable for what it is, though the amount of direct interaction with the professor varies from class to class.

> That does not mean there isn't an AI system that can do X.

You are holding the burden of proof here...

The post title is misleading and the content reads more like a guerilla advertisement for claude. TL;DR: author works for Anthropic, and used claude to implement an optimization for LLVM.

And the top 1000 replies for any stupid thing he says are nothing but positive reinforcement from boosted blue check bot accounts that bury any actual criticism.

Wow, if I needed any more proof Google is a ghost ship then this is it. The $5K bounty is an insult, and the fact that they low-balled it in the first place makes them look like absolute clowns. Good on you for calling out how little of a shit Google gives about actually protecting user data.

It's very common to see from devs that don't really grasp reactive programming. You often see similar things in Angular projects because of RxJS.

I like how the app shows reference calls/songs for detected birds so I can verify using my own judgement, or to figure out which birds are which when there's a lot of chirping going on.

> No passwords, private keys, or funds were exposed and Coinbase Prime accounts are untouched.

I'm curious why no Coinbase Prime accounts were part of the leak (assuming that's what they mean). Is there some sort of additional layer of data protection behind the Coinbase Prime paywall? Or perhaps those accounts were intentionally avoided as they would presumably belong to more savvy users.

The mere concept of a "business book" seems like hamfisted satire. It blows my mind how so many white collar workers genuinely entertain the concept in the first place.

The singularity but stupid

Thank you for that.