jessermeyer

This is a double edged sword, naturally. Old debt becomes cheaper in equal measure to more expensive new debt.

Please. If you actually read the paper you'll come to learn that "practical" here means "we've conclusively shown under strict laboratory conditions that this works".

Novel statistical techniques is a different concern to practical attacks. (And I appreciate the relativity in what is meant by 'practical' -- nation state resources are in a distinct category of capability)

But I would like to see some statistical expectations on 'how long you'd have to wait on an average open network for each key bit to reach 95% confidence'.

This is not inconsistent with what I said.

If the frequency scale is known to user applications, I presume jittering response times proportional of the scale factor just before write() would be effective.

Yes, this is a common technique in optimization. With frequency scaling enabled, a profiled function may have more than one hot region, implying 'hot' and 'code' code paths, but are really just manifestations of CPU speed being non-constant.

There's so much variation (read, noise) intrinsic to response times for network requests to be satisfied on most cloud hosts anyway that I'm very skeptical about any practical attacks being made in the short term.

Mind to unpack that for me?

Here's how I unpack this: ""[1] is the 0 (termination) byte. The 0 byte is then interpreted as an address -- the nil address.

But what's the use of asking for the address of the null terminator? Where is that stored exactly?

But isn't `""` 0 terminated? So the first offset past the nil byte is 0, interpreted as an address.

Neither GCC nor Clang bake the final string into the data segment. If I had to guess, printf is the one preventing the more fancy optimizations to take place.

Ah, so it's the nil address?

As someone who avoids C++ these days ...

Is this a compile time FizzBuzz?

`(char*)&1[""]` is the empty string here returning its data segment address as the offset? Not sure about the purpose of `1`.

Is the iteration achieved by the constructor basically re-invoking itself?

This is some approximation of what half the globe already believes to occur with reincarnation, but it is not felt exclusively as a dark terror. More like the setting and rising of the sun. The nights are dark and full of terror, but it is cast away with the coming rays.

I don't think many models of divinity would consider this a well formed question because there would be nothing 'sub' (e,g under, beneath) divine order itself. The divine is often characterized as self-enduring, self-maintaining, and self-creating. This question is reasonable refutation of a God that is imagined to fundamentally be a 'person' who 'lives' somewhere though.

It's my feeling that the Hindu observation of infinite turtle dependence argues that the notion of divine dependence is ill-fated to begin with.

While I've been waiting for this kind of game, some approximation I've been able to whet my appetite with is the old classic Baldur's Gate (I and II) with the following mods / optional settings.

Sword Coast Stratagems (radically improves AI, making mages especially terrifying), INSANE difficulty Double Damage (only damage dealt to your party is doubled) No Reload ("hard core" mode. No save scrumming).

These combinations turn the game into a strategically deep, and tactically rich experience. And just the hell more memorable.

Nah, concert singers have teleprompts to remind them of the words. They never show the chords though. Curious divide.

I'm looking for a single example of a "really spicy take that one can not call balanced or objective by any measure".

This is because they map to rotors in geometric algebra which is exactly that.

https://marctenbosch.com/quaternions/

Can you provide an example of that?

The discord community seems acutely aware of this. When I first became acquainted with the system last year I made an effort to document my confusion when hitting roadblocks after reading the handbook to them, and most of them came down to usability issues with the implementation of the pages. The response was always the same "we know, and thanks for the report."

Hi Abner. Big fan of the handmade network and conferences!

And likewise. Would love to hear your thoughts. Below is a summary of my point of view, and it is not novel, but the continuation of a few decades long process. If you find it valuable and wish to continue the conversation I'm reachable directly at jesse DOT r DOT meyer AT me DOT com. And this invitation extends to others -- just include the title of this HN post. I've discussed my experiences with mindfulness / meditation and its effect on my life in a previous comment here: https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=24186942 . That may be a good place to begin to get a sense of whether my more philosophical take below will resonate.

'The map is not the territory.'

Wisdom begins with a perception of the world, which includes a perception of our-self. But immediately we seem to run into an issue. The world as represented to us by our brains is subject to, well, features of subjectivity. By thoughts and conventions of thinking and feeling which are not our own, but a heritage of society reaming with subtle assumptions, and by the general pressures and rewards of life, which are so normal to us that we are only dimly conscious of. My hope here is to uproot and expose light on some of our ways of thinking and feeling about ourselves and our relation to the world. The way I go about this is by removing as many conceptual layers as I can, while retaining the ability to articulate ideas. After all, discussion is difficult without categories or ideas. Maybe this is analogous to the software engineering practice of removing layers of abstraction in order to see what exact transform is necessary for the computation. Once the desired computation is understood, only then can we reason about improvements. That is to say, before we can be wise, a clear perception of the world is required. But people have different conceptions of what clear means.

Our culture has taken a restricted view of knowledge. We feel that we can only know something if it can be represented or conceptualized in a symbolic form and manipulated according to an abstract system of rules. This can lead to the false impression that books, words, and ideas are in some sense a final destination but I maintain they are points of departure. Anyone who has taken a few minutes to self-observe (mindfulness meditation) will quickly come to realize without any outside interference that there are other forms of knowledge, which are immediate and non-linguistic, non-symbolic, and vitally, non-categorical in of itself.

I labor on this point because so much of our lives as thinking people is spent thinking -- manipulating symbols in our minds. In seeking wisdom, then, we would feel natural and quite at home at searching for the wisest set of symbols and rules governing them, and how they reform our thinking. A worthwhile activity surely. But the world itself is not composed of thoughts, or symbols. Rather, the mind is, and so it composes the world in thoughts. And I think a good place to establish some baseline is somehow coming to see that. A strict exercise in 'building first principles from first principles'. This is essentially what the notion of 'the void' or 'emptiness' means from Indian / far eastern philosophies. It's not the emptiness of atheism. It's just that the world as it is, is 'thoughtless', or 'mindless', a 'void'. And as it is is an unspeakable beauty of great transformative power.

Non-sarcastically, the best resource is your own life. Every moment is an new opportunity to deepen our sensitivities. And the basic technique could not be any simpler. Breathe, watch, and listen, and feel. The thinking will come all on its own. But return to your breath, your eyes and ears and body.

This is simple mindfulness. Being self-aware of your own internal processes is the first step along a very long path of self-realization.

Not only that, but without even knowing the answer to their (valid) questions, concludes with `it's a patchwork with bad seams.`.

This depends on your reasons for using D. Odin is a smaller language for one (no compile time execution, for example).

This attitude is why modern software is a continuing controlled flight into terrain.

That's not really a problem in the sense that it doesn't align with expectations. That's a genuine unknown.

It's only framed as a problem when it is assumed that the values could be other than what they are. But we have no reason to suspect that they could be different. We have no idea how unlikely the current selection is given our observation is a single observable. For all we know, it's certain.

'What really interests me is whether God had any choice in creation' - Albert Einstein

Can you please read the article before posting?

>We tested Alder Lake on the latest Windows 11 below, but our Ryzen results are on Windows 10—this made certain to avoid AMD being penalized by the current Windows 11 regressions in L3 cache and Preferred Core selection, while giving Alder Lake the big.little architecture support it needs from Windows 11 itself.

Thanks.

It's because they treat music like a math problem -- something that only necessitates reading and writing. That's how you play math, after all, but that's not how music is played.

I have been waiting for high quality studies on practitioners of meditation over the will and other meta-cognitive capabilities. If you ever come across some, please post them here!