Naive question may be. But if quantum can break bitcoin, won't it also be able to break other encryptions that literally everyone else uses as well? So, it's not that bitcoin is particularly vulnerable right any more than banks and Gmails?
Q: A CRQC also breaks banking, military communications, and most of the internet today! If one appears, isn’t Bitcoin the least of our problems?
A: True! Banking software, military communications, and the internet also need to be upgraded. I have high confidence they will be, successfully (I’d put my B_{HTTPS} at close to 1). Unfortunately, I have less confidence that Bitcoin will upgrade successfully since upgrading a decentralized system of honey-badger-like participants is much more challenging and people like the questioner seem to think this is a valid argument that we shouldn’t even worry about it? If you disagree and think there will be a CRQC and the rest of the internet won’t upgrade successfully, maybe you should consider shorting the stock market and buying gold. But not Bitcoin, because if we do nothing that won’t work anymore. Not investment advice.
Yes and no. I'm no expert, but there's two things that don't make it nearly as dangerous as it is for BTC.
The first is the fact that many things are centralized. Things like Signal already have quantum-resistant encryption, and if they don't, they're able to implement it relatively quickly because it's centralized. BTC is not centralized and needs to jump through a bunch of hoops to get anything done.
The second is that because those things are centralized or close to, you can roll back changes with ease. For instance, if you hack a bank and steal a bunch of money from an account you're far more likely to be able to freeze those funds and get other banks to help stop everything before they're gone forever. You can't do that with BTC.
If it could be profitable, the private sector would fund it.
Government funding can help with things that we decide are good for society, but not quite profitable financially.
Examples: CDC lead exposure research, Earthquake Early Warning System… even the tech we use today came out of non-commercialized funding (NIST Post-Quantum Cryptography and ARPANET).
So absurdly myopic to restrict research to what may be profitable in this moment. Why are you wasting time researching number theory bro, that'll never be useful. Why are you studying y^2 = x^3 + ax + b if it can't be turned into a SaaS unicorn tomorrow? So fucking stupid. The whole point is that commercial R&D can find the immediate to short term gains and make billions, while the long shots get funded without putting anyone at risk.
Need a suggestion, and thought might as well ask here. I use a Mac now. Last windows was more than 15 years ago and now I want to try Linux. which version would you recommend? should I go with Ubuntu or Debian or Mint or something else? I am not a tinkerer. I want something that just works, on the lines of a Mac.
Ubuntu. Pay close attention; the normal Ubuntu is what I consider beta. The Long-Term-Support (LTS) variants of Ubuntu is what I consider the normal Ubuntu, which should always be used except maybe when working on Ubuntu components as a developer. This will save you a lot of pain down the road.
The single stupidest thing people new to linux do is try to install it on random hardware and expect it to just work. Mac has the hardware idea right where all of their hardware is thoroughly vetted against their OS so practically no one runs into issues. To get something similar on Linux you'd need to buy from a vendor that offers their OS preloaded with Linux. Kubuntu Focus, System76, Tuxedo, are the ones that focus on Linux and Framework, Lenovo, and Dell offer linux as an option and at least support it.
Netflix is available on Netflix App. HBO is available on HBO app. Normal people don't care.
It's perfectly normal for Netflix the company to run Netflix the service on Netflix the app on Netflix device if they release one. It's not confusing at all. What would be confusing is if they all had different names.
Not sure if you’re cutting my quote in bad faith to fit your rebuttal, or just didn’t read it fully. How is this not confusing?
> Apple TV is available on the Apple TV app … on … Apple TV …
Watch Apple TV in Apple TV on Apple TV.
Why choose Netflix as your example as well when both Google and Amazon already have streaming services that don’t have an identically named hardware device. Do you honestly think if Netflix put out a device they would name it Netflix.
The only time I can see this being confusing is when referring to the Apple TV box by the same name, and even that can usually be figured out by context.
the biggest problem with switching away from Mac is losing the ecosystem benefits. When Apple TV automatically knows to fill your iCloud password, all the Apple Watch integration, syncing everything from notes to reminders. I can't see how any Linux can match all that.
It's rather easy to change the password provider from Apple's to something else, like bitwarden, on an iPad or an iPhone. I assume it's possible on Apple TV too.
I tried syncing notes with IMAP but I never managed to get it to work.
For the Apple Watch, I don't have one or any "smart" watch so I can't say anything.
I haven't. When I read that I was wondering if you were going to say it got better and is good now or something. Oh well. Good to know. Thanks for the info.
When someone asks how something is fair - coming back with life is like that or life isn't fair is not a valid response. Humanity should strive to make the systems as fair as possible while accepting the fact that unfairness will still exist. Why will theft etc be a crime if not for the idea of fairness. You can make the same life is unfair argument to defend theft but that's not the way it should be / is.
reply