Maeher

So what's the policy? We just let this crap fly?

What's the current policy on LLM generated crap? This was not written by a human being: crypto.stackexchange.com/questions/112545/…

@bdegnan mostly stuff like that would be published as regular papers.

@bdegnan not that I'm aware of, no. I'm honestly not quite sure what kind of paper would go into that.

@MaartenBodewes maybe collision resistant hash function?

twitter.com/talayhan_a/status/1561714946341224453

askcryp.to

@nobody that's clearly the take of someone who knows nothing about crypto whatsoever. Of course we don't know if any trapdoor OWF secure against quantum computers. We don't even know if regular OWF against classical computers exist.

@nobody That carries some very weird American exceptionalism. Apparently, not only are all the best cryptanalysts American, they also ask lack any kind of moral compass.

@nobody Matt explained more consicely than I could why the outcome is off all of this is likely to be very bad mobile.twitter.com/matthew_d_green/status/1556001134376009730

And if you think international academic cryptographers would give a rat's ass about the NSA's opinion on assumptions, I don't know what to tell you.

And now he's trying to construct a big conspiracy out of a bog standard FOIA lawsuit (for a FOIA request that's of the "I want everything containing the letter e" variety)

Because let's face this whole thing is him throwing a hissy fit because people didn't select his stuff. And he's perfectly willing to discredit the whole process because of that. He's so far accused other teams of plagiarism and taking NSA bribes.

@forest that's exactly what he's saying.

Man, he really is a dick.

@DanielS Ah, but how can that be, when according to djb's insinuations all of those Italian, Belgian, French, German, and Ukrainian cryptographers were bribed by the NSA and didn't tell anyone about it. Check mate!

Kind of surprised that there's no question about the SIDH break yet.

@bdegnan probably because, despite common misconception, the two are very different tasks.

When a question is migrated you can no longer delete your own comments without creating an account on the other site. 🤦‍♂️

Oh no, what have they done to eprint. eprint.iacr.org

Additionally, djb's opinions very rarely reflect any kind of consensus in the cryptographic community.

🦗

@Titanlord Why would it be well known? It's a weird ad hoc encryption scheme that doesn't seem to have any argument for its security. It's not even clear how it relates to SAT at all. And if it does, it would likely relate to average case hardness of SAT. However SAT is not average case hard over uniformly chosen instances, so there would need to be some argument, why the chosen distribution is likely to lead to average case hardness.

@forest yes, but the original answer read like you were saying the two things are equivalent.

@forest (not the downvoter) unless I'm misunderstanding you, yes that answer is partially wrong. P=/=NP is not known to imply the existence of (average-case) OWF.

Just like AES, despite its name, is not an encryption scheme (in a useful sense). It's a PRP.

@forest as a first step people have to stop teaching that RSA is an encryption scheme. Teach it as a trapdoor permutation.

@forest well, forward secure signatures are a thing. (Not that, based on all of this, they would know about that.)

@forest Projectile=Nuclear Projectile

You're considering having a student removed from your class for asking a question about course policies?

Well, congrats @forest.

I wonder if the low participation is about average or if other sites do a lot better.

Another one!

How many voted

If I remember correctly from the last election, it's released immediately.

@ElectionBot uhhh, it can predict the future

Most of those users are probably completely inactive.

I guess my prediction that we will not reach double digits was still a bit optimistic.

@ElectionBot How many voted

Well that didn't work.

Who should I vote for

how many voted

I'd be impressed if we reach double digits.

@forest right, it says so at the top of the election page. Not enough time to reach 100%

how many voted

Could have worked.

How long is the voting phase?

Amazing, interpolating based on these two data points, we'll reach 100% in 533 hours.

how many voted