

The responsibility doesn’t change.
I took an oath. In tech. I take it as fucking seriously as any doctor.


The responsibility doesn’t change.
I took an oath. In tech. I take it as fucking seriously as any doctor.


I’m not complaining about free Castlevania. XD


This is 100% the case. If an engineering firm fucks up and a bridge of building collapses or a CPU lacks working floating point arithmetic, they’re going to pay out the nose for it.
They’re running around pretending they can’t control any of this, but without giving a language model access to a shell or something, what the fuck can it do?
We have to deliberately grant these abilities. Otherwise, they don’t exist.


They are giving a stern look because they will fuck you.


I had to look it up. I didn’t realize they have been around for that long.


We can actually make stronger claims about factoring. We know for certain do that it is not in NP hard, so you are correct there
And I’m not exactly a security expert, but moving away from RSA at this point makes sense. Early assumptions about the difficulty of factoring large semi-primes certainly hasn’t panned out (in particular in light of the growing risk of quantum computers.)


Factoring is in a category. Everything computable exists somewhere. We know factoring to be in NP.
What I was disagreeing with was the “at least” and “at most” characterization of NP completeness. It is a set, not a boundary. The actual diagram of the complexity zoo is much more complicated than concentric circles.
And for verifiability, I was not referring to it as an existential sort of thing. I was simply saying that I agreed with you in that particular facet, but it isn’t sufficient to describe NP completeness. You also need NP-hardness.


Unfortunately, within the US, he effectively isn’t bound by any laws as far as we can tell.
It’s absolutely insane that he would expect the world to follow suit while we’re dealing with a rather special sort of derangement here.


Factoring is not NP-complete because it is not a member of NP-hard.
You are correct that verifiability is in there, but you have to also be able to do the reduction.
There are plenty of problems out there where we lack polynomial time solutions, while the problem also lacks the expressiveness required to reduce back and forth.


We actually don’t know if integer factorization is not in P, though.
Right now, I think most of us would guess that it is a prime candidate for NP Intermediate. Hence why I mentioned it earlier.
And you absolutely can solve it in polynomial time just not with classical architectures.


really NP complete
I don’t care who you want to get in the weeds with or what you wish to spar about, you’re just not correct.
There is no almost NP complete. There are strong and weak variants, sure, and those have particular implications.
But you’re drawing conclusions that don’t exist from definitions that you clearly don’t understand.
Signed: Somebody who has taught theory of computation for over a decade.


Dang. That’s hard.


it relies on P vs NP
That is incorrect. It relies on perceived difficulty of factoring large semi-prime. P equals NP is related, of course, if it happens to be an NP-intermediate problem, but the difficulty of factoring is not because it’s NP-complete.
There are already classical algorithms that are sub-exponential to solve the problem. If it were the case that the problem was NP-complete, then we would have had a big advance in our theory and practice based on it.


Man, the photographer is trying so hard with that upward facing angle to be cool.
But fuck if Trump just doesn’t look like a dumpy asshole.


That sounds cool this hell. You should call up your friends.


Unfortunately, the current administration doesn’t exactly follow the law.
Even if it was on the books, we might have still gotten this result.


Shockingly hitting your face with a hammer may age you.
I’ve not cross referenced, but the account appears to post a lot of memes that likely came from similar forums on Reddit.
I’m not confused. I’ve been teaching this subject for over a decade.
I’m not certain are you arguing with me?
I was largely agreeing with you.