nialo
Joined 16 years ago
Joined 16 years ago
(I'm getting this from reading between lines on Twitter, so it's not exactly a high confidence guess)
Edited to add: I'm not particularly up in arms about needing ID, and I feel like buying Sudafed got easier somehow recently, but this seemed like a place where I could help explain what sorts of things can be uncomfortable/difficult for some people.
* Windows and Mac filesystems are generally case-insensitive, so some users will have the file names in the playlist file in one case and the actual file names on disk in another format * Sometimes file paths cross between two different filesystems, because one is mounted in the other with a USB drive or over CIFS or similar. Sometimes these two different filesystems have different case sensitivities * There's no way to know how the playlist file was encoded * HFS+ normalizes file paths to Unicode NFD, but there's no guarantee that the paths in a playlist file will be normalized. Also, sometimes users generate an m3u file on a Windows system and expect it to just work on a Mac. Also, the filesystem nesting problem with network or USB mounts can happen this way too.
alias rg='rg -S'
to my .bashrc so that rg had the same default case sensitivity as ag.
In particular, problem number 17 from set 3 is an attack against CBC mode AES used with Mac-the-Encrypt. Maybe a fun exercise would be to first implement that attack against CBC mode, and then try to see if you can make it work against your CFB-HMAC protocol.
For reference, I used to see ~4 hour cycle times for growing graphene on copper sheets. I think most of that was in the heat up and cool down, maybe order of 30min actual growth time. These numbers might be off by a factor of 2-5, it's been a few years since that job, and I was a equipment design engineer not a process guy as such.
Truncating from 512 bits to 256 bits hides 256 bits of the state from the attacker, so in order to use a length extension attack they would need to "guess" those bits.
HFT firms are make money by taking a spread, which is effectively the cost of making a single trade. As they compete and get better and better at there jobs, this spread well be reduced, the amount of money available to pay for the best and brightest programmers will come down, and they'll suck fewer of them away from other parts of the economy.
The point being, the further they go past this 'point of diminishing returns', the less money they can possibly make. To the extent that HFT is a zero sum game, there will always be a limit on how much money they can spend.
(I believe but cannot prove that this limiting effect has already started, HFT firms are consolidating and making thinner margins than they used to)
Formerly a mechanical/vacuum system engineer, now a software engineer at https://roonlabs.com/
Some code I wrote: https://github.com/bcoburn3/forex