>So what makes this new RNG different from other RNGs based on quantum phenomena, such as Brownian motion, or zener diode avalanches?
That it proves in a live fashion that the data is from a random process, provided the rules of quantum physics are true. This is a higher form of proof from existing RNGs based on sampling noise and running it through entropy extraction algorithms. It's not the only higher form of proof. There are quantum safe extractors which improve on the claims that can be made, but that's different.
Nice, I can finally upgrade my lava lamp entropy source to a quantum source that uses laser light on a crystal. Why? Because/dev/urandom is for peasants.
>It is, and that's exactly how Intel's hardware-based random number generator in their CPUs works
Indeed, it is. I happen to know this well because I'm one of the designers of it.
Quantum proven randomness is proven by showing a violation of Bell's theorem, showing a correlation that exceeds whats could be achieved by unentangled particles and therefore showing that they were a part of a random quantum process.
The form of every mathematical proof is of the form "If this is true, then [blah blah blah], so that it true". The form of this particular proof is "If the rules of quantum physics are true, then [blah blah blah] so 'the output is random' is true".
I would have thought thermal noise in a resistor or semiconductor (which is in itself generated by subatomic so quantum, events) would be just as random.
Via the central limit theorem, the addition of multiple binary random events will combine into a gaussian distribution. It will be random, with the min-entropy determined by the distribution - H_inf(X) = -log_2(max(Pr(X_i)).
So there will be some entropy loss. But that's fine. There's plenty of entropy about us to sample and turn into random bits.
Bullshit. If quantum physics is random, then macroscopic noise is random and there are entropy extraction algorithms are mathematically provable to have a random output in terms of min-entropy or computational predictions bounds, assuming they have a random input with a certain min-entropy.
I avoided saying hypoglycemia or hyperglycemia because this is a lay audience.
Type 2 diabetics basal insulin level can be higher than a fit person's peak insulin level. Getting this down can be achieved through sufficiently low carbs and/or fasting. People have reversed their type 2 diabetes with various combinations of keto diets, low-carb diets and intermittent fasting.
I'm not diabetic, but I live on a keto diet that has dropped me 50 pounds and walked me back from pre-diabetes.
I'm certainly not a fat shamer. I was fat. I'm now fat-ish and getting smaller. I understand the mechanics leading to the insulin resistance viscous cycle and spent years studying the related lipid and hormonal biochemistry so I could solve my own problem and ended up on a keto diet as a result. A1c from 5.6 to 4.5. Liver from fatty to non fatty, glucose 140 to 80 and so on. I understand it is the circumstance of living with one's metabolism in a Western country with a Western diet that makes people fat due to excess fructose fattening the liver, wheat making their gut linings permeable, high carbs driving insulin resistance and stressing the pancreas and so on.
I don't have deep knowledge of pyruvate dehydrogenase complex deficiency, but I understand that it interrupts the citric acid cycle, so I presume a kid like that needs to run off beta-hydroxybutarate as best they can.
This is incredibly ignorant. Insulin is prescribed as the body needs it to function. In the old days before insulin the only "cure" was to have extremely low-carb diets which didn't work well in general.
Nope. You appear to be ignorant. A low carb diet doesn't eliminate basal insulin. It fixes excess insulin. You are referring to type 1 diabetes which affects only a small number of people, whereas the majority of people in the USA are pre-diabetic and on the path to type 2 diabetes as indicated by their insulin response to glucose and most of them don't know.
There's a serious lack of accountability at all levels when it comes to IT security.
One of the biggest benefits of the industry 's move to Cloud, imo, is to remove certain classes of vulnerabilities from the hands of many organizations since I don't expect real accountability to ever increase.
Yep. I hold my head high as a competent techy, but when it comes to my wife's business, it's cloud all the way. Pay someone else to do the storage security, serving, email and access control. It's cheaper than hiring and a lot easier.
My work windows machine keeps close to 100% immediate backups. As soon as I change a file, it's saved over the network and there are a few weeks of all file changes available for recovery.
An infection is identified pretty quickly, the affected machine(s) isolated and rolled back. Pretty much the only thing you can lose (unless you are really trying) is what you've just typed into the editor.
Real work is done on Linux machines we VNC into, where I understand things are more tightly backed up.
This is not hard. I'm sure they paid real money for the windows backup system and storage and I'm sure they used some good unix foo to set the Linux storage security up. But they did it, but in a large organization like a corporation or government, there is no excuse not to.
>Is there something ARM can't do that a whole new CPU design is needed?
It can imbue your computer with a horrible interrupt architecture and a funky set of instructions. There are other CPUs that can do that, but they aren't nearly as popular.
Slashdot Mirror
I own an iPhone 8 and I haven't noticed any apple branding on the screen. It's transparent.
An axiom is an assumption
But yes, there may or may not be deeper patterns.
>So what makes this new RNG different from other RNGs based on quantum phenomena, such as Brownian motion, or zener diode avalanches?
That it proves in a live fashion that the data is from a random process, provided the rules of quantum physics are true. This is a higher form of proof from existing RNGs based on sampling noise and running it through entropy extraction algorithms. It's not the only higher form of proof. There are quantum safe extractors which improve on the claims that can be made, but that's different.
Or beta-hydroxybutyrate. There's no spell checking on /.
Chi-squared test comes close.
Not nearly as close as the Markov-Renye min entropy test or the least common value test.
In fact tests of randomness fill the largest two chapters in my book on random number generators.
https://www.degruyter.com/view...
Available at all good internet portals sometime later this year.
Is 1 less random than 29840972.58792384 ?
Perhaps they mean "randomly generate numbers"?
Not any more.
I can predict them both because you told me their values. Entropy is in the eye of the beholder.
Nice, I can finally upgrade my lava lamp entropy source to a quantum source that uses laser light on a crystal. Why? Because /dev/urandom is for peasants.
And quickrdrand is for kings and queens.
>It is, and that's exactly how Intel's hardware-based random number generator in their CPUs works
Indeed, it is. I happen to know this well because I'm one of the designers of it.
Quantum proven randomness is proven by showing a violation of Bell's theorem, showing a correlation that exceeds whats could be achieved by unentangled particles and therefore showing that they were a part of a random quantum process.
The form of every mathematical proof is of the form "If this is true, then [blah blah blah], so that it true".
The form of this particular proof is "If the rules of quantum physics are true, then [blah blah blah] so 'the output is random' is true".
I would have thought thermal noise in a resistor or semiconductor (which is in itself generated by subatomic so quantum, events) would be just as random.
Via the central limit theorem, the addition of multiple binary random events will combine into a gaussian distribution. It will be random, with the min-entropy determined by the distribution - H_inf(X) = -log_2(max(Pr(X_i)).
So there will be some entropy loss. But that's fine. There's plenty of entropy about us to sample and turn into random bits.
What is "provably random"?
It is bullshit.
Bullshit. If quantum physics is random, then macroscopic noise is random and there are entropy extraction algorithms are mathematically provable to have a random output in terms of min-entropy or computational predictions bounds, assuming they have a random input with a certain min-entropy.
Can you really "prove" that a number is random?
No. See above.
Yes. See above.
I avoided saying hypoglycemia or hyperglycemia because this is a lay audience.
Type 2 diabetics basal insulin level can be higher than a fit person's peak insulin level. Getting this down can be achieved through sufficiently low carbs and/or fasting. People have reversed their type 2 diabetes with various combinations of keto diets, low-carb diets and intermittent fasting.
I'm not diabetic, but I live on a keto diet that has dropped me 50 pounds and walked me back from pre-diabetes.
I'm certainly not a fat shamer. I was fat. I'm now fat-ish and getting smaller. I understand the mechanics leading to the insulin resistance viscous cycle and spent years studying the related lipid and hormonal biochemistry so I could solve my own problem and ended up on a keto diet as a result. A1c from 5.6 to 4.5. Liver from fatty to non fatty, glucose 140 to 80 and so on. I understand it is the circumstance of living with one's metabolism in a Western country with a Western diet that makes people fat due to excess fructose fattening the liver, wheat making their gut linings permeable, high carbs driving insulin resistance and stressing the pancreas and so on.
I don't have deep knowledge of pyruvate dehydrogenase complex deficiency, but I understand that it interrupts the citric acid cycle, so I presume a kid like that needs to run off beta-hydroxybutarate as best they can.
This is incredibly ignorant. Insulin is prescribed as the body needs it to function. In the old days before insulin the only "cure" was to have extremely low-carb diets which didn't work well in general.
Nope. You appear to be ignorant. A low carb diet doesn't eliminate basal insulin. It fixes excess insulin. You are referring to type 1 diabetes which affects only a small number of people, whereas the majority of people in the USA are pre-diabetic and on the path to type 2 diabetes as indicated by their insulin response to glucose and most of them don't know.
In Oregon you need a doctor's prescription. Of course that costs a lot more than a bit of meth.
So Oregonians stock up when they are in another state.
>For better or worse, converting meth into pseudoephedrine is not realistically possible.
But is really is easier to get meth than pseudoephedrine in the United States.
I just wrote a book in Latex. I'm easily triggered right now.
Pop poll: $$ $$ or \[ \] ?
True... but again, LaTeX is relatively modern.
Latex doesn't use ^ for exponentiation. It uses ^ to move the text up a bit and shrink it a bit.
It's humans who read it as exponentiation.
There are plenty of Linux titles on Steam. Maybe not many AAA ones, but a lot of indies, that is for sure.
The majority of games that I have work fine on Linux. Indeed I do not remember the last time that I had to reboot to Windows in order to play a game.
Interestingly some Linux games are way more CPU/GPU intensive than on Windows. Anyone knows why?
So, thanks Valve for Linux support! Please keep it!
If you made Portal 3 availability contigent on a majority voting for Gabe for president, he'd win.
>Audits usually check for the bare minimum.
Audits check for compliance -- to ISO 9000, webtrust, NIST, whatever.
The specs are useless because they can't be too prescriptive.
There's a serious lack of accountability at all levels when it comes to IT security.
One of the biggest benefits of the industry 's move to Cloud, imo, is to remove certain classes of vulnerabilities from the hands of many organizations since I don't expect real accountability to ever increase.
Yep. I hold my head high as a competent techy, but when it comes to my wife's business, it's cloud all the way. Pay someone else to do the storage security, serving, email and access control. It's cheaper than hiring and a lot easier.
My work windows machine keeps close to 100% immediate backups. As soon as I change a file, it's saved over the network and there are a few weeks of all file changes available for recovery.
An infection is identified pretty quickly, the affected machine(s) isolated and rolled back. Pretty much the only thing you can lose (unless you are really trying) is what you've just typed into the editor.
Real work is done on Linux machines we VNC into, where I understand things are more tightly backed up.
This is not hard. I'm sure they paid real money for the windows backup system and storage and I'm sure they used some good unix foo to set the Linux storage security up. But they did it, but in a large organization like a corporation or government, there is no excuse not to.
I have no clue.
I know that since he was an existing Tesla owner, he got priority.
>Is there something ARM can't do that a whole new CPU design is needed?
It can imbue your computer with a horrible interrupt architecture and a funky set of instructions.
There are other CPUs that can do that, but they aren't nearly as popular.
I didn't ask.
Ah. I have no clue what model. I haven't seen it yet.
>That's not really a fair comparison, because you can't actually get a $35k Model 3 today
A friend of mine is getting his model 3 today. He's picking it up from the Tesla shop at 10.00am.
L.L. is a politician? Cool.
For a second I thought you were referring to LL Cool J.
I considered that, but if you have to put Cool in your name to persuade people that you are cool, you are not cool. So L.L. it was. Not LL.