We know that AI can find patterns in things that humans otherwise couldn't.
What if we created a dataset with billions of public-private key pairs, then have it generate a private key with a given public one?
This was from a while ago:
https://medium.com/@aicavaleiro/the-q-star-revelation-openais-alleged-breakthrough-in-encryption-and-its-global-implications-c70aa0d98d6e
 |
 Ape Out Shirt $21.68 |
|
no shit we knew that a decade ago
homies have a weaker bone structure due to their aversion to milk and dairy in general. Not to mention that if most X-Rays are of the upper torse it will also show undeveloped lung cavities due to their other aversion: swim. Those "doctors" are just plain moronic.
t. African American GP
I thought we had higher bone density on average compared to other ethnicities though.....
depends on the race. Africans have more genetic diversity than whites do wrt asians
>Africans have more genetic diversity than whites do wrt asians
This is gonna sound kinda racist but I promise that's not the intention (hard to believe given this place 's reputation and userbase):
If we (well, my ancestors/cousins, I'm a black burger) have so much more genetic diversity then how come that's not visually noticable? Are the diverse genes you refer to hard to notice, relatively unimportant stuff like the length of your eyelashes or how nappy your head is? Whenever I hear "X people group has a lot of genetic diversity" I initially think "oh they have several kinds of hair color, hair texture, eye color, etc). Most of us either have brown, black or sometimes green/greenish eyes but I'd wager that while they do exist, you've probably never seen a blue eyed (not contacts or dyes, actual blue eyes) black person irl (I think black eyes are a dominant gene but I could be wrong). Without any information to disprove it I'd assume whites have the higher amount of genetic diversity due to them having every kind of hair color, eye color, skin tone type, varying levels of melanin (some of you can sunbathe with no sunscreen no problem while others start peeling if their lamp lightbulb color is the wrong hue)
Black person, I'm not reading that unless it is actually racist, try again
I've never heard that black people have more genetic diversity than whites, although what would that even mean?
White people having more variation in hair/skin/eye color could just be due to less melanin. In-bred morons don't all have the same hair/eye/skin color.
I guess maybe a test would be to compare in-bred whites vs blacks, and see which are more moronic. Deformities from in breeding happen AFAIK due to a smaller gene pool (which I take to mean less genetic diversity). So if blacks are more genetically diverse, then they might be able to less-moronic in-bred offsprings.
Or maybe it doesn't work like that at all.
it's because our species is at least a quarter million years old, but everyone who's not black has only been around 50,000 years at most. The diversity they refer to is genetic diversity, as in the actual sequences of ATGC and how different they are from one another. Two random black africans might have sequences that differ 5x as much as two random asians, or a turk and a native american, because they might not have shared an ancestor for 200,000 years, whereas everyone else is descended from the proto-middle easterners that resulted from the northernmost africans meeting and sexing cavemen in eurasia.
genotype != phenotype
human genetic diversity is a subset of african genetic diversity
>several kinds of hair color, hair texture, eye color
a lot of these things are recessive traits. if you bred one person from every corner of the globe together eventually you'd eventually wind up with someone who had more genetic diversity than anyone you started with and they'd almost certainly have brown hair and brown eyes because they're the dominant traits
think of dogs - wolves spent millions of years evolving all sorts of genetic diversity and when we came along and domesticated them we spent generations taking the genes from the biggest, smallest, fastest, most obedient, best hunter, etc. - all of those different selection criteria ended us up with hundreds of different breeds of dog that all look very different, but ultimately pretty much all of those genes were in the wolves to begin with. We haven't been breeding dogs nearly long enough for them to have evolved brand new traits out of nothing
Scientists have traced lactose tolerance back to a *mutation* - it is not a "recessive" trait.
The idea of "dominant" or "recessive" traits is itself antiquated.
Why did human skin become lighter as they migrated northwards? Because they needed less protection from the sun at higher latitudes, and they needed more Vitamin D synthesis.
Genetics has a major folly in that it assumes "mutations" happen by random chance, and that genetic information only spreads via genetic information spreading through reproduction.
Economics is essentially just studying about how humans are capable sharing information and reacting to the environment much faster than genetics can. Obviously this will never not be true, but it shows much of the issues that Evolutionary Biology faces. Evolutionary Biology is really just Game Theory at a longer time scale.
It is not an optimal evolutionary strategy to rely solely on selection to respond to the signal that there is less sun at higher latitudes. It would be a better strategy to encode and respond to a signal directly: e.g. level of Vitamin D in the mother's womb. Then you get the phenotype expression based on environment.
Perhaps melanin production genes are "dominant" when there is a signal that there is lots of sunlight, but "recessive" when there is signal that there is scarce sunlight. This strategy is strictly better from an evolutionary perspective than hardcoding the genes and phenotypes.
>Genetics has a major folly in that it assumes "mutations" happen by random chance,
They.... Do... Though... Why do you think you and I even exist? We exist because we are the moronic mutated freaks of bipedal clever monkeys in the past. Time travel back in the past and bring an astralopithocus to the modern day and we look like abominations to them. You know how some people see hairless cats and get freaked out because cats aren't "supposed" to be hairless? That's what we would look like to them. We are quite literally there mutated fricked up moronic children that happened to be a lot more intelligent (well.... "A lot" is debatable). Pale skinned blue-eyed blonde haired people are the results of genetic mutations that cost their skin and hair and eyes to have LESS melanin. Then they kinda HAD to move up north because the higher UV rays near the equatorial regions of the planet was cutting their skin to peel and their hair to get fricked up and cost more eye strain. Every single human phenotype you see today is the result of genetic "frickups" caused by the genes of their ancestors. I have no clue why you suggest it doesn't happen by chance. Yes it does happen by chance come up but those random changes in the genes happen to be advantageous and clearly visible in a lot of cases for humans.
>and that genetic information only spreads via genetic information spreading through reproduction.
You failed your intro to biology class didn't you? Unless you're talking about real-time gene editing gene therapytechniques like CRISPR, or gene editing viruses like AIDS, you sound like a weapons great moron
>. It would be a better strategy to encode and respond to a signal directly: e.g. level of Vitamin D in the mother's womb. Then you get the phenotype expression based on environment.
>Perhaps melanin production genes are "dominant" when there is a signal that there is lots of sunlight, but "recessive" when there is signal that there is scarce sunlight. This strategy is strictly better from an evolutionary perspective than hardcoding the genes and phenotypes.
Are you suggesting this is how it IS or how it SHOULD be? I highly doubt that's how it works, at least to the degree you are describing it as, and humans. We aren't alligators where A slight temperature change determines whether or not we are male or female. Those things are way more sensitive to the environment than we are. Who you are and what you express and what your allergic to and shit like that is primarily determined by your parent's genes
You can get good at ethnic profiling and tell (roughly, this gets harder when people can move around the world and crossbreed more easily than ever before) where a white person is from just from their look. I assume it's the same for blacks, it's just that actual black people living in Africa are seen a lot less.
If you've descended from slaves, then the majority of slaves that were brought over to America came from one singular region (I don't remember what it is), which resulted in what you're describing. There is a lot of genetic diversity amongst peoples who live in Africa, compare someone of Bantu descent to someone of Somalian descent and you can definitely see a difference in appearance.
Why are Black folk in this webpage? Leave
Despite dairy having high Calcium content, dairy consumption is not correlated with stronger bones— at least, not by itsel. To get Calcium from dairy, you need to be healthy and active. Bone density differences between skin colors is just one of those funny genetics things.
>inb4 "imagine not being healthy and active"
homie, we're on BOT.
>>inb4 "imagine not being healthy and active"
>homie, we're on BOT.
BOT is weird. You've got BOT alongside neo nazis that think lifting weights will bring back Hitler.
Dr. Black person, heal your people.
>ai can recognize obvious things
>lol but how
1-800-come-on-now-son
noooooooooo race isnt real we are all the saaaaaaaaame reeeeeeee
>Nobody knows how
I thought different ethnicies had slightly different skeletal structures. That's how we know a thousand year old skeleton is a male or female because of different pelvic shapes and a different number of ribs.
Ethnic differences are extremely more subtle than sexual dimoprhism.
Still not surprising though, the entire point of AI analysis is that it can find and account for lots of tiny details that people might miss.
>Ethnic differences are extremely more subtle than sexual dimoprhism.
WRONG, take a look at a sub-saharan africans jawline and forehead and then at say an asians. That's not just genetics, that's also formed by how these people carry themselves.
How they carry themselves? How would that affect skull shapes? In any case, we do know that regional skull shapes are a real thing, but what's surprising is how the rest of the skeleton is different too, something we apparently didn't know until recently (according to sensationalist online news articles, grains of salt everywhere).
Go look up how many bones the human skeleton has and you'll see "on average" 206.
We don't even have the same number of bones across the board.
I've got a "bone" right here for you. 😀
SHA != RSA
Correct. One uses the other.
If it's possible, it has already been done and is being actively exploited by world governments. If it isn't being exploited, then it isn't possible or we haven't publicly detected it yet.
Won't work. AI are probabilistic models that will give you an approximation to a solution. You would need the exact key which they AI will never give you.
By the way, haven't forensic pathologist been using bones of decomposed cadavers to determine the race of a corpse for years now? Is this image meant to be a meme or just a gay clickbait news article?
>We know that AI can find patterns in things that humans otherwise couldn't.
Nope. This is because Correlation does not imply Causation.
Through beating statistics into the heads of doctors over and over, we taught them this, but AI doesn't understand this.
For example:
A machine learning algorithm was found to be more likely to diagnose you with skin cancer if your photo has a ruler in it.[1]
No, taking photos of your mole next to a ruler does not cause cancer.
But that's what happens when you overfit. You fit on noise, and get erroneous results.
[1] https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC9674813/
SHA256 is a hashing algorithm.
Possibly, but not an LLM. There are families of algorithm AIs that have done interesting things like matrix multiplies faster than any human. So maybe qstar but this is speculative. A lot of such work actually comes out of google's deepmind
This also assumes these functions are easily reversible, which may not be the case.
>Can AI break SHA256 encryption?
Are you fricking stupid?
would actually be worth a try just as a learning experience to see what it outputs
SHA is a hash
I mean if you wanna be evil and Satanic, you could add chunk data into brute forceable sizes, salt it with a known password and the prior hash, and take the hash of each chunk as your 'encryption' algorithm. It's beyond moronic, but you can turn it into a shitty encryption algorithm.
e.g.
#encrypting 123 456
SHA256(123PASS) = 58069da89307a175f3d36c55a0ab80d6eee3f81d2053da5f62f0d7c745bd051e
SHA256(456PASS58069da89307a175f3d36c55a0ab80d6eee3f81d2053da5f62f0d7c745bd051e) = ee5c07701059b4da61641813c462f8a33b812a80870acc942b74459f4dce1b0f
#thus our encrypted output
58069da89307a175f3d36c55a0ab80d6eee3f81d2053da5f62f0d7c745bd051eee5c07701059b4da61641813c462f8a33b812a80870acc942b74459f4dce1b0f
#to decrypt, brute force with known PASS each chunk and last hash
idk but I was breaking your mom last night
In other news, Forensic anthropologists can recognize race from skeletons -- and nobody knows why!!!
Q* is a hoax to raise investor money so you may disregard anything said about it.
Even the name sounds like Qanon conspiracy stuff.
>nobody knows how!
because they have intentionally blinded themselves to it and refuse to even look for the differences since they are ideologically convinced that we are all the same.
if they did that, they'd cost blackrock tens of billions in btc profit, possibly hundreds of billions. Whoever did that would have a lot of very very rich people angry at them. It would probably wind up breaking a whole lot of other things, like power grids and water supplies and international shipping. It could completely destroy the modern world.
>xray the head of some Black person
>giant fricking nostrils
>"nani?! how does AI-san know this xray is from Black person-san?!"
>nobody knows how
You mean these "journalists" don't know how? Here's why white men are better swimmers and black men better sprinters: slightly different center of mass.
There's nothing wrong being different. Libtards are fricking moronic.
SHA256 is not an encryption algorithm. It is a hash function.
Since you obviously have no idea what you are talking about, you should retract your question and do some reading on the subject to educate yourself before you further embarrass yourself.
Firstly sha256 isn't encryption
secondly sha256 has been mathematically proven to have no pattern.
It’s not really that hard
i feel sad for you if this is the 56th photo in your shitty iphone