Silk Road forums
Discussion => Newbie discussion => Topic started by: caligirl on June 25, 2013, 09:20 pm
-
Look
If good girls get down on the floor
Tell me how low will a bad girl go
She probably pick it up drop it down real slow
Either that or she's upside down on the pole
That's when I grab the knot throw it up in the sky
Let it come down slow watch it all fly
Front to the back
Then side to the side
Can we head back to my crib for the night
-
That's how it goes down
All night long
She whisper in my ear says she loves my song
This is Why I'm Hot, she got it on her phone
Top ten download number one ring tone
I'm in my zone
Tell me what's good, what it be
Can't say I'm whatcha want
I got whatcha need
All night, it's alright
We can dance, but ya gotta keep it up a lil somethin'
-
Like this, Like This, Like This, Like This
Like this, Like This, Like This, Like This
Baby do you want it
Like this, Like This, Like This, Like This
Like this, Like This, Like This
-
real girls get down on the flo, on the flow
-
fdsfs
-
Bad girls are heaven
or so they say :)
-
DROWNING IN REVERY!
-
I'm like the 2007 nino
Dropped a few G's
Imma shape like Gino
Homey don't act like you know what I mean
Oh see I'm the freshest ************ on the screen oh
Back of the club
All night long
Grand Monea pop a case till the dawn
Shortie says she love it when I let her call me Sean
So if you really down baby we can get it on
-
Like this, Like This, Like This, Like This
Like this, Like This, Like This, Like This
Baby do you want it
Like this, Like This, Like This, Like This
Like this, Like This, Like This
Now break it down
Gimme, gimme
Gimme, gimme, gimme
Say wha
Say wha
Say wha
Say wha
Say wha
Say wha
Gimme that all of that break it down
Girl shake it up now drop it to the ground
Girl you're way too hot
Go a little lower
Now baby beat it up like Rocky Balboa
Yeah that's what I said
Shortie go 'head
Show me whatcha got
Here's a little more bread
You know how I shine
A hundred on the wrist
If you like what you see
Then ya gotta keep it up a lil something
Like this, Like This, Like This, Like This
Like this, Like This, Like This, Like This
Baby do you want it
Like this, Like This, Like This, Like This
Like this, Like This, Like This
-
really....
-
burp
-
Cryptographers have designed some pretty good one-way functions the Rivest-Shamir-Adleman public key encryption algorithm, built on the tremendous difficulty of factoring large integers, is one that people have bet a lot of money on. So far, it has resisted all efforts to break it through sheer computational power.
But every cryptographer knows theres no guarantee that some smart person wont figure out a formula that allows them to work backward from Y to get X, to work backward from the public key to get the private one. All the algorithms we think are one way, could be broken. Venkie says.
-
Venkie and his colleagues Peter Montgomery, Kristin Lauter and Dan Simon assume that, someday, RSA may be broken. When that day comes, the world will need a new one-way function to replace it. We religiously believe that a true one-way function exists, says Venkie. We pray to God daily that a one-way function exists, because without one there is no cryptography. Digital signatures, stream ciphers, block ciphers, message authentication, all depend on the existence of a one-way function.
So whats he got up his sleeve? I have one that may work, he says. It may be ready in one or two years.
-
Probability theory is one of the most widely applicable mathematical theories. It deals with uncertainty and teaches you how to manage it. It is simply one of the most useful theories you will ever learn.
In real life, probability theory is heavily used in risk analysis by economists, businesses, insurance companies, governments, etc. An even wider usage is its application as the basis of statistics, which is the main basis of all scientific research. Two branches of physics have their bases tied in probability. One is clearly shown from its name: statistical mechanics. Another branch is quantum physics.
-
Probability comes in two flavours: discrete and continuous. The continuous case is considered to be far more difficult to understand, and much less intuitive, than discrete probability, and it requires knowledge of calculus.
-
One of the main goals of complexity theory is to prove lower bounds on the resources (e.g. time and/or space) needed to solve a certain computational problem. Cryptography can therefore be seen as its main "customer". (There are of course plenty of customers for upper bounds, i.e., for efficient algorithms.) While complexity theory has flourished and generated some beautiful and deep results, the needs of the very demanding customer have not even closely been met. The fundamental problems are still wide open.
-
To begin with, in order to be independent of the details of the computational model, the complexity is not defined for a specific function, but only for an infinite class of functions parameterized with a parameter k (e.g. the input size). The complexity is a function of k. In contrast to such asymptotic definitions, concrete cryptosystems (e.g. DES) are fixed and an asymptotic extension is usually not defined. Moreover, often one distinguishes only between polynomial and super-polynomial complexity, but a finer distinction is of course possible and desirable for concrete security statements and reductions.
-
Second, for the most part, classical complexity theory deals with worst-case complexity, a concept useless in cryptography where breaking a system must be hard for almost all instances, not just for some of them. Ajtai's celebrated worst-case average-case hardness result was a break-through in the right direction. In cryptography even average-case complexity results are not sufficient: hardness almost everywhere is required.
-
Third, instead of proving the hardness of finding an exact solution to a computational problem, one would like to prove that even approximating the correct solution is hard. There has been substantial progress in complexity theory in this direction, initiated by Feige et al., based on the theory of probabilistically checkable proofs.
-
Fourth, the state of the art in lower bound proofs for the computational complexity of any NP-problem is quite miserable, even only for worst-case complexity. The best lower bounds are linear in the input size, which corresponds basically to the time needed to read the input. For example, in the circuit model of computation, a simple counting argument shows that almost all functions from n bits to 1 bit (i.e., {0,1}n→{0,1}) have circuit complexity Θ(2n/n), but the best lower bound by N. Blum for any concrete function is only 3n gates. Proving a lower bound of 4n, let alone n⋅log n or n2, would be a major breakthrough.
-
Fifth, in 1994 the discussion about the right model of computation as the basis for complexity lower bounds was reopened when Peter Shor showed that certain problems (in fact the two most relevant cryptographic problems, namely factoring integers and computing discrete logarithms) can be solved in polynomial time on a quantum computer. While a quantum computer is still a theoretical model which may perhaps never be implemented at sufficiently large scale to be of practical interest, computer scientists need to rethink the concept of computation. Basically, any process consistent with the laws of physics should be considered a computation, not just steps on an idealized computational model like a Turing machine.
-
From a cryptographic viewpoint, the most pressing research problem in complexity theory is to prove non-trivial lower bounds, perhaps polynomial}, perhaps super-polynomial, on the complexity of breaking concrete cryptographic systems, for instance a one-way function. Even if P=NP were proved, which would rule out the existence of secure cryptosystems in a classical complexity-theoretic framework, secure cryptography might still be possible within the realm of polynomial computation.
-
ok so close..
-
and done
-
good work
-
bravo
-
Venkie and his colleagues Peter Montgomery, Kristin Lauter and Dan Simon assume that, someday, RSA may be broken. When that day comes, the world will need a new one-way function to replace it. We religiously believe that a true one-way function exists, says Venkie. We pray to God daily that a one-way function exists, because without one there is no cryptography. Digital signatures, stream ciphers, block ciphers, message authentication, all depend on the existence of a one-way function.
Adding to your spam thread. I gotta start somewhere
-
nice start
-
aaaahhhhhhhhhhh
-
spammmmmmmmmm
-
spammmmmmmmmm
-
spammmmmmmmmm
-
spammmmmmmmmm
-
spammmmmmmmmm
-
reregrgd
-
trhrthrth
-
65uj655ef
-
trhtrhgrth
-
54y5454eg
-
fbgvsfdbsfgbfd
-
dfshbsdh
-
fthftftts
-
tghrtshrtshsthsdf
-
fghfghnsdfhf
-
hgfhshsg
-
sdfgvsdfgedf
-
chsfgdfg
-
reaergr
-
SPAMSPAMSPAM
-
i use to be in the same mining pool as vladmair and in a few other places haha small world online