ausudhz

Well, luckily what prolog screams is irrelevant.

Most programming language are Turing complete and if so they're also general purpose by definition. You can use them to build anything.

That said of course our definition might be different and if you don't have plenty of layers of abstraction that speed your development you won't consider that programming language compared to another.

After all, we are running JavaScript in the servers now and you can find an npm module for nearly everything. Probably someone 20 years ago would've said that "JavaScript is not a general purpose language"

Don't get me wrong, prolog may never be the next JavaScript, but is just fun how people would define something is "general purpose" or not (no hate, just a pure comment seeing things from a different angle)

If you read the response you'd realize that it depends on how the key is generated.

Is not a "bad design", is a feature that allows to include or exclude derived values, if you do so then the original values are used and the encoded private key would be smaller.

The reason why they'd keep the original values when the derived are available might have to do with backwards compatibility and/or legacy constraint

What I find interesting about RSA is how it became so popular and important in our daily life, yet it uses basic math from hundred or thousands of years back.

It uses the Fermat's little theorem of prime numbers, which was defined in 1640 then proved by Euler almost 100 years after that.

Plus uses the Chinese reminder theorem that was discovered in the 300 CE

What is more crazy is that RSA (or something comparable to that) was discovered in parallel also by another mathematician working for a government agency 4 years prior to the RSA algo

Cambridge analytica would think otherwise

Probably they learned from Microsoft's past mistakes

https://www.theverge.com/2016/3/24/11297050/tay-microsoft-ch...

or bots that do not become Nazi learning from tweets maybe.

https://www.theverge.com/2016/3/24/11297050/tay-microsoft-ch...

This doesn't make sense. You're going to say either hello or what's up and you get different reactions.

That's definitely not what the model should be doing.

Ericsson and Nokia sell their 5G technology in China.

Actually funny enough they were siding China too on this in Europe because a ban of Chinese tech in Europe could've resulted in a ban of European tech in China.

and for anyone that doesn't live under a rock, they know pretty well that china is far a bigger market than Europe

Paper was invented in China

The website is not responsive (seems to be just the homepage that is broken)

China and India have more internet users than the US.

Unless you specify, I might assume you're Asian.

(most probably they'd speak English too. I'm gonna say because I think you'd be concerned)

Well, the alternative is that other phones don't have it.

So I think this is an advantage. If, lets say, it costs 4.99 a year, I think a good percentage of people would do that (me included, even though I'm not an iPhone user).

You really missed the point.

We're talking about a Hollywood production making 220 millions, not a couple of people running a show for a small town of 300 people.

You do understand that this is exploitation right?

Paying someone 250k and profiting 220 millions?

I'm not on the position to give anything to the guy because he was not asking for it.

Since the Hollywood production made a fortune on his, they could've at the very least provided him with a normal life for the time he was around.

Yay, lets move the conversation into something totally irrelevant since you can't argue on my point.

I replied already here

https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=33582060

Also, actors don't get paid if the movie doesn't go well? How about the technicians, crew, marketing etc?

Lol

This doesn't mean anything. Is really hard to have a constructive conversation with people that read to reply instead of understanding the point.

The production has decided to invest 60 million dollars, these money are going to be wasted ok? They have to do the production, pay the actors, technicians, marketing, royalties etc.

Whatever is the case, BEFORE the movie is out, they lost 60 millions. That's what an investment is, losing money in the short term, with the intention to make more on the long run.

So, in any case, someone smarter than me and you, decided that this guy story is worth, at the very least, an investment of 60 millions dollar. THIS IS MY POINT!

The fact that they did more money, good for them, no problem at all that's their business. If nobody went to see the movie, they'd lose 60 million dollars. Not a big deal, cause the production will make not 1 movie but plenty, so from a diversification point of view, they're covered. They can make the 60 million or more in the next movie if this would've had a bad result.

Is that clear?

Replying with the fact that movie lose money too, doesn't change anything upfront. Cause the production spent 60 millions, so for them IS A MULTI MILLION DOLLAR STORY

So tell me about it, magic internet user.

What if the stars that got paid millions would've instead cut their own profit for a small amount (eg. 100k) each, that would've provided the man with a reasonable amount of money, while at the same time they wouldn't even feel the difference.

If really there was any budget constraint.

Lol go an leave there long-term then.

Is well known to everyone that there are plenty of people living long term in hostel, especially the people who made someone else millions in profit, because they consider it a really suitable long term solution where you can live comfortably.

But ya, I was the idiot to think that hostel are instead short term accomodations for students / travelers / disadvantaged people (in very few instances) that are willing to sacrifice part of their freedom (like is also well known to everyone that sleeping every night with strangers in your room is a great thing) to have more cash to travel from place to place (or to put together their life)

Today I learned that there are a lot of people living long term in the hostel just because is great!

Also why are you comparing the global situation while we're talking about Paris here? Mystery

There's if they're willing to invest 60 mil for the movie...

Lol nonsense

You have a budget, you know that, right?

60 mil budget, they could've increased easily to lets say 61 or 65 and let this guy pocket the difference (1 to 5 mil)

Why not?

You clearly have no idea what are you talking about.

Outside of the popcorn movies, 90% of a proper movie are the stories behind. All bio movie have a powerful story to tell... Not the always available Hollywood plot: world in danger -> bad guy to fight -> Americans to save the world -> we'll live in peace and prosperity

So lets leave him in the airport right.

250k in France is definitely not the right number

Again, you've no idea what are you talking about.

Overwhelming majority of people live in single family houses/apartments.

That's a reasonable living condition.

And by comparing it to other people in worst condition you are just missing the point

You're for real, I hope is sarcasm.

The fact that your story is worthless doesn't mean that a multimillion dollar story can be bought at 250k

Just saying

I hear you, but that's not the point!

They point is that either the production or the stars that got featured could've provided a better result.

Even if only for charity. I don't think is hard to understand.

But ya, lets argue for the sake of arguing

Because there's a movie that feature the same story and made 220mil?

Even if he'd made 2 mil would've been better than 250k.

Sometimes books have been written after the movie that featured the story and have generally done well