cryptophile | 11 years ago | on: How we end up marrying the wrong person
cryptophile's comments
cryptophile | 11 years ago | on: How we end up marrying the wrong person
People are always compatible, if they have to. That is why rampant marriage failure is a cultural problem, not an individual one. Therefore, if you just avoid to pick someone from the wrong (western) community, you should already be ok.
cryptophile | 11 years ago | on: How we end up marrying the wrong person
I do not believe that marrying the "wrong person" is fundamentally that common. The problem is rather that it could be simple and easy to divorce someone for the inevitable quirks that you do not want to learn to put with.
That is why I have never considered and would never consider to marry a woman from a mainstream western community. The fact that it is culturally an easy option to move on, turns them into unsuitable marriage material. I would just be getting into an accident waiting to happen.
Prince Charles and lady Diana only divorced because it was culturally acceptable and rather easy to do. Otherwise, they would still be married today. Especially Diana would have learned how to deal with the drawbacks of that, and probably not be more unhappy for it.
cryptophile | 11 years ago | on: Shamir's Secret Sharing Scheme (2005)
Distributed signing is useful in other contexts too. It does not always have to be bitcoin-related ...
cryptophile | 11 years ago | on: Your high IQ might kill your startup (2010)
It has always been like that. Women have never "fallen in love" with men who are not sufficiently socially successful. There is nothing new under the sun in that respect.
But then again, "socially successful" is a very relative thing. You will find that women "fall in love" with you all the time in third-world countries, even if you are only on unemployment benefits back home where women may snub you over that.
Furthermore, the appearance of success is probably much more important to women than any real success. The ability to pretend that they caught a fish who could have money, is often enough.
cryptophile | 11 years ago | on: Costs of multi-process architectures
Enlisting more cores in order to get something done faster, you know, by splitting the work is indeed a serious pain.
I recently wanted to get lpsolve to split an integer branch-and-bound programming problem across multiple cores and then get a large on-demand AWS instance to deal with.
The branch-and-bound algorithm is eminently parallellizable. So, it should have been possible.
I came to the conclusion, however, that I would have to rewrite lpsolve for that. That program sticks to one process and there is no way to get it to fork other processes and read back the results.
cryptophile | 11 years ago | on: Tor users are selected and monitored by the NSA as extremists
Trust that I have implemented no back doors.
Yes, you are right. This entire NSA thing is bad business for American companies. Even an erstwhile global darling such as Google suffers from this. They are now being viewed with suspicion ...
cryptophile | 11 years ago | on: Tor users are selected and monitored by the NSA as extremists
It does not even matter that "the majority of Tor users are using it for nefarious purposes". Any attempt at intimidation will work out exactly the other way around.
Doing anything that the NSA do not like, is "cool"; even more so in the global scene.
Seriously, if you want to get people to use Tor, all you have to say is that the NSA do not like it.
cryptophile | 11 years ago | on: Tor users are selected and monitored by the NSA as extremists
The NSA strategy of spying on everyone only works when most people are not aware of it. The surprise element is now gone. They can undoubtedly already see the effect of the recent scandals in a serious decrease in quality of the information that they collect. The entire internet is now slowly but surely moving to stronger forms of encryption. On the long run, it probably means that the entire internet will go dark for them. In other words, the ones who wanted to see everything will end up seeing nothing at all.
cryptophile | 11 years ago | on: Shamir's Secret Sharing Scheme (2005)
It would be enough to attack the machine holding the decrypted bitcoin key in order to steal the money. So, you still have that dreaded single point of failure problem there.
The security solution consists in forcing the attacker to attack lots of machines and successfully control them in order to steal the money.
cryptophile | 11 years ago | on: Shamir's Secret Sharing Scheme (2005)
Unfortunately, multisig forces you to use the blockchain. There are use cases where you don't want that. SSS, on the other hand, seems too complex to feed back through the ECDSA signing algorithm. In the link above they just use the factors of the private key to distribute as shared secrets. So, your private key cannot be a prime. But then again, ECDSA does not seem to require that from a private key. It's not that using a composite number would make it easier to work your way back to the discrete ECC logarithm ...
cryptophile | 11 years ago | on: New RFS: One Million Jobs
Uber is actually a good example of how existing regulations can be a formidable barrier to startups; or even any kind of innovation. You are not just free to offer a new product or service that competes with existing ones. The incumbents will have the existing regulations on their side and use them to shut you down.
cryptophile | 11 years ago | on: Are We Welcome Entrepreneurs or Unwanted Criminals?
They may not have a choice. I can perfectly well see why they erect barriers and put large obstacles in front of people trying to cross their borders. The problem is rather that startups should not demand that you physically move over there. I have had the case several times and I had to refuse the project. Moving over there, is unpractical. Why not collaborate remotely with people around the world? Do people really need to sit next to you in order to work with them?
cryptophile | 11 years ago | on: Are We Welcome Entrepreneurs or Unwanted Criminals?
I personally think that companies should avoid asking anybody to physically come over. Working or even partnering up remotely is perfectly possible.
cryptophile | 11 years ago | on: Are We Welcome Entrepreneurs or Unwanted Criminals?
To some extent, you may still need to be physically present in the US/Silicon Valley in order to join in on some of the startup fun. However, it is often possible to do that without moving over.
I personally only participate in a startup, if I don't have to come over. It is expensive over there and your simple living expenses will add to the burn rate of the startup's seed capital; in addition to having to face unpleasant bureaucracy concerning your attempts at immigration.
There are just too many people who are desperate to move there and who are not bringing anything that the local population would be interested in.
Why not pick a cheap and easy country to live in, and work remotely with your colleagues from all over the world? Why physically move to the US/Silicon Valley?
cryptophile | 11 years ago | on: Shamir's Secret Sharing Scheme (2005)
A method to explode a bitcoin private key with SSS into multiple secret parts and use them to collaboratively sign transactions has unfortunately not yet been discovered.
What exists already, though, is something similar. Instead of fitting a polynomial through the points (=secret shares), where the intercept would be the full secret, there is a scheme where the full private key is just the simple multiplication of the secret shares.
From there, the co-signers use Pallier encryption to collaboratively compose the signature without revealing their secret parts to each other. It only works with two co-signers at the moment. Here is a demo:
page 1
I think that this is the wrong approach.
Anybody is suitable for marriage, on the condition that their culture says that there is no other realistic option than to stay married. That is the reason why both of you will do what it takes to make it work, and believe me that it will work.
In that respect, women from the wrong (western) communities are simply not suitable for marriage. Pick randomly a woman elsewhere and you should be ok.