cultural reviewer and dabbler in stylistic premonitions


Supersingular isogeny key exchange (SIKE) is very secure post-quantum replacement for Diffie-Hellman…
SIKE!


FYI, the day after you published this blog post, a spam blog posted… their AI reimplementation of it 🤦
here is a snapshot of (maybe?) the “original” slop post borrowing from your title; i first saw it reposted on this slightly-more-credible-looking (at least if you haven’t seen it in previous search results and already realized it is spam) page:

i tried to archive that page with the repost of it, to avoid directly linking to spam from this comment, but it crashes archive.org’s browser:

i also was curious to see if this spam is in search engines, so i searched for AI reimplementation, and… well, the good news is that your blog post is the first hit and the above-linked spam blog is pretty far down in the results list.
The bad news is that the second hit is to yet another piece of slop/spam evidently also “inspired” by your post:



Nice post. Relatedly, see also malus.sh and this talk by the people that made it (both of which I posted in this lemmy community here).
A couple of minor corrections to your text:
Blanchard’s account is that he never looked at the existing source code directly.
Blanchard doesn’t say that he never looked at the existing code; on the contrary, he has been the maintainer (and primary contributor) to it for over a decade so he is probably the person who is most familiar with the pre-Claude version’s implementation details. Rather, he says that he didn’t prompt Claude with the source code while reimplementing it. iirc he does not acknowledge that it is extremely likely that multiple prior versions of it were included in Claude’s training corpus (which is non-public, so this can only be conclusively verified easily by Anthropic).
The GPL’s conditions are triggered only by distribution. If you distribute modified code, or offer it as a networked service, you must make the source available under the same terms.
The GPL does not require you to offer GPL-licensed source code when using the program to provide a network service; because it is solely a copyright license, the GPL’s obligations are only triggered by distribution. (It’s the AGPL which goes beyond copyright and imposes these obligations on people running a program as a network service…)








This post caused me to look up what changed: sadly they aren’t exiting the consumer space but rather are just ceasing to include lane-keeping in their basic package to instead require new customers who want it to pay a monthly subscription fee for what they amusingly call “Full Self Driving (Supervised)”.


If you are not able to rationally argue why we shouldn’t be bigoted, I don’t know what to tell you.
it’s not that people can’t, but spaces which have unlimited tolerance for sealions suggesting that it’s necessary to argue about that are likely to have less interesting discussions than spaces which do not 🙄


But don’t call it an anarchist space
tell me you’ve never been in a non-internet anarchist space without telling me 😂
(hint: offline anarchist bars tend not to tolerate fascists either)
rules of anarchism
(this is a bit, right?)


It’s ironic you state it like this, since we are an explicitly anarchist server ;)
it’s not really ironic as i am well aware that you are and i appreciate you for that :)
what i’m saying is that i’m glad that, despite obviously being a (fellow!) proponent of freedom of expression, you haven’t fallen victim to the childish line of thought which leads some people to let their spaces become nazi bars. so: thanks!


unmoderated internet spaces are quickly overrun with bigotry, csam, and spam.
if, in the name of “free speech”, you only moderate the csam and spam, the space will be primarily occupied by people looking for a forum that welcomes bigotry.
respect to @[email protected] for rm’ing bigotry and not letting childish anarchist free speech ideals cause lemmy.dbzer0.com to be a nazi bar 🥂


from page 7 of Joseph Weizenbaum’s Computer Power and Human Reason: From Judgement to Calculation (1976):

a pdf of the whole book is available here


Idk it works for me.
I don’t think there is any possible value for the sign variable which would make that if statement do anything other than raise a TypeError.
Also
"8:00:00" > "10:00:00"
but "08:00:00" < "10:00:00". comparing timestamps as strings is weird but actually works, as long as the hour is zero-padded :)
the problem with this code is that & (bitwise AND) has higher operator precedence than and == do, so it is first trying to bitwise AND "10:00:00" with sign (which i’m assuming would also be a string) and that will always raise a TypeError.
to do what the author appears to have intended to do, they would either need use parenthesis around both comparisons to actually bitwise AND their results, or (better) to use the boolean AND operator (and) instead of &.
The boolean and operator is the right tool for the job, and since it is lower precedence it also wouldn’t require that any parenthesis be added here.
don’t trust anyone over 30 0x30


TypeError: unsupported operand type(s) for &: 'str' and 'str'
It’s good to see someone in this thread who knows what an IPv5 address looks like:
IPv5 addresses consist of four hextets a 16bit each. For the visual representation, those grouping are used. The hextets might be written in decimal, separated by dot '.' characters, or as hexadecimal numbers, separated by colon ':'.It’s long past time to start replacing our IPv4.1 deployments!