My theory is that there is no organic NSFW content creation on the fediverse, and that everything is rbots, scrapers, spammers who don’t actually engage with the platform, etc.

If nobody who creates NSFW content ever interacts with lemmy/piefed directly, they won’t know to try to lean into this trend that doesn’t exist elsewhere.

Somewhere along the line someone is going to have a password that is their favorite sports team followed by their anniversary. Someone will reuse the same password over and over including a site with exploitable security flaws.

None of this is new, and none of this has destroyed the feasibility of electronic payments. AI has nothing to do with any of it.

The ability to conduct fraud, hack websites, and hijack accounts has always been around. The systems we’ve built will always assume that occurs on a regular basis, and are resilient against needing to address this reality. How does any of this prevent electronic payments from being processed?

That SEO slop article is simply wrong on the math of cryptography, and relies on an example of the one time pad not being used only one time. Either way, the interesting thing about the OTP is that you cannot prove that any particular plaintext exists, so the nonsense about trying to infer any particular plaintext from the encrypted text. Frequency analysis doesn’t help when there is no correlation between different bits of the key, the same way that flipping a fair coin 10 times reveals nothing about what it will likely be on the 11th flip.

40 and 56 bit encryption keys are obsolete as they are now easily broken. 128, 192, and 256 are the standard now. 512 bit encryption is being played around with.

You might be tricked into believing that a 512 bit key is twice as hard to crack as a 256 bit key. No, a 257 bit key is twice as hard to crack, and a 512 but key is 2^256 (1.5 x 10^77 ) times harder to crack. So if you can crack a 256 bit key in 1 second, a 512 bit key would take 3,672,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000 years to crack using that same technique. Or, if you can crack 1 million 256-bit keys in a second, go ahead and take 6 zeroes off the number I just listed.

Throw in developments in quantum computing

Good luck with that. Quantum computers aren’t anywhere close, and more importantly, have nothing to do with AI.

AI isn’t going to make cryptography obsolete.

Any cryptography can be broken with enough computing power and time,

This is wrong. A one-time pad is provably secure against an adversary with infinite time and infinite computing power.

And there isn’t infinite time or computing power. The math means you can use keys that can’t be cracked before the heat death of the universe, using even as many transistors as there are atoms on earth.

There will always be vulnerabilities and patches. I wouldn’t count on them actually breaking trust forever. And AI doesn’t have anything to do with that general statement.

AI can’t be smart enough to break math.

No amount of AI processing can draw a triangle whose angles add up to more than 180°, factor a prime number into integer factors, find the square root of a negative number without using imaginary numbers, etc.

If the protocol and the cryptography is secure, no amount of smarts can overcome that security. If something is insecure, someone will probably figure it out (with or without the help of computers and AI) and take advantage of it until it’s patched.

What does AI have to do with any of this. Secure is secure, insecure is insecure, AI won’t change what is or isn’t secure.

Focal length equivalent assumes a 35mm sensor or film format. 50mm on 35mm is basically the human range of view (although human eyes are interesting in that our resolution is so much sharper in the middle of the sensor than on the edges, and there’s significant variation between individuals.

But the important part is that it isn’t actually focal length that makes the effect. It’s distance from the camera. If you do a dolly zoom with a fixed focal length lens, where you still push or pull the camera towards or away from a subject, you can still see this effect on the nose and the ears.

A flat, two dimensional representation of a three dimensional object will always have distortion. The effect we see here is about distortion that changes with camera distance, and the change itself is what makes things feel strange.

Yes, the rules of Conway’s Game of Life is Turing Complete.

The glider shape (the thing moving diagonally out of the window in this meme) can be created non-destructively by a glider gun (another shape that creates gliders), which can be controlled using stored pixels in another configuration within the glider gun, including taking in input from other gliders, such that the whole thing can loop and do everything necessary to be a universal Turing machine. Not super efficiently, but it will still do the things that Turing machines can do, given enough cycles.

Microsoft Exchange and the web-based Outlook probably still has a plurality of email volume, because of their dominance in enterprise. Even on the web based consumer space, Apple and Yahoo still have significant market share.

The U.S. basically made them illegal in workplaces in the 70’s, when it was shown that employers were using so-called intelligence tests unrelated to job functions to discriminate on the basis of race. Plus, in the 90’s they passed a law banning discrimination on the basis of disability. Now workplace testing needs to be shown to be directly related to job responsibilities, so general purpose tests are pretty much too much of a compliance nightmare to be worth the effort.

Maybe they’re still common in some other countries, but they’re really rare in the U.S.

I never needed more because I just had a dock. My monitor, keyboard, mouse, and Ethernet cable stayed in the same place, so I’d just bring my laptop home and plug in a thunderbolt dock, and I’d have every peripheral I needed. And I’m someone who tries to use wired stuff over wireless whenever convenient.

JPEG Organisation?

The G in JPEG already stands for “Group.”

I’m giving some reasons why turning on or off location services at the OS level doesn’t appreciably change battery life.

You can turn off higher level location services at the OS level, but at the radio level the cellular network will always need a precise enough location to handle tower handoffs and timing issues between the tower and phone, as well as modern beam forming techniques where the tower “aims” the signal at the phone. The simple act of the phone communicating with a specific tower tells the phone where it is (sometimes with surprisingly high precision).

911/emergency services also use more low level location techniques, but I’m pretty sure those functions don’t get called unless you dial an emergency number.

Apple’s discounting strategy is generally to sell last year’s model, sometimes the model before that, with roughly $200 discounts for each year since its release. They sometimes release a lower spec model (the 16e is the current example, prior SE models or even the mini models from previous generations were part of this strategy as well) and that sometimes means the 2-year-old model isn’t kept available as long.

That’s where their 5-7 year support window really shines, in that they can just sell older models as discounted models, knowing that the new owner will still get 3-5 years of support.

The other thing is that the used market for iPhones is pretty robust. I can go buy used phones that are 3 or 4 years old and still get a good 1-4 years of additional support. At least in the U.S., if you told me my budget for a phone was gonna be $300 for the next 2 years, I think I’d probably buy a used iPhone.

As it currently stands, I’m still on Pixels on a 2 year cycle, but I also know that my “sell used to offset the price of my new phone” strategy also would be much cheaper if I did it with iPhones instead of Pixels.

It’s like the relationship between mathematics and accounting. Sure, almost everything accountants do involve math in some way, but it’s relatively simple math that is a tiny subset of what all of mathematics is about, and the actual study of math doesn’t really touch on the principles of accounting.

Computer science is a theoretical discipline that can be studied without computers. It’s about complexity theory and algorithms and data structures and the mathematical/logical foundations of computing. Actual practical programming work doesn’t really touch on that, although many people are aware of those concepts and might keep them in the back of their mind while coding.