P = NP

[Anonymous No.10336274]

The P vs. NP problem has been solved about a year ago. P = NP. This means there is no random. Which means cryptocodes can be cracked. No matter how long.
At least american and israeli intelligence agencies have the solution and are capable of doing so. The solution somehow leaked.

This is not a joke nor troll. The outcome is the reason china alone announced a 100 BILLION investment in AI last year. Other nations did as well.

[Anonymous No.10336292]

>>10336274
ur gay, but its k, cuz me too

[Anonymous No.10336300]

>>10336274
yeah my algorithm is O(n^3)
what is yours?

[Anonymous No.10336377]

>>10336300

Believe it or don't believe it. Tor browser is useless since last year. I made this post to ease my conscience.

[Anonymous No.10336386]

>>10336274
Post proof

[Anonymous No.10336403]

>>10336386

Funny. So you can crack codes from nukes? No i won't.

[Anonymous No.10336439]

>>10336403
bro I could really use some nukes rn, pretty please?

[Anonymous No.10336445]

>>10336274
Hey OP that's pretty cool, could you post your address and email so I can send you your Nobel prize in the mail? Make sure to look for a black van.

[Tuba Jam No.10336468]

>>10336377
If tor was already backdoored by the big bad gibmint why did they recently move to the controversial elliptic curves? Surely there would be no advantage to switching for the government if it could already read everything?

[Tuba Jam No.10336471]

>>10336403
proof =/= general form P solution for every NP problem.

[Anonymous No.10336478]

>>10336274
>P=NP is important
Nope. Even an [math]\Omega\left(n^4\right)[/math] solution to SAT is still worthless.

The math is simple enough that even a CS major could understand it. A [math]\Theta\left(n^4\right)[/math] algorithm for SAT composed with the usual [math]\Theta \left(n^3 \log(n) \right)[/math] Cook-Levin algorithm for converting NP problems into SAT gives a complexity of [math]\Theta \left(n^7 \log^4(n) \right)[/math] for a general NP solver.

A typical 1024bit RSA key will take approximately [math](2^{10})^7 \log^4(2^{10}) = 2^70*10000 \approx 2^84 [/math] operations to crack. That will require 1.5*10^8 years on a single core 4GHz machine. Even the super polynomial algorithms are better than that.

Similarly, A 256bit AES key will take over 2339 years to crack.

[Anonymous No.10336485]

>>10336445

Your answer shows you have no idea what that means. A nobel prize could be given if the solution would have been p unequal np.
Why noone will ever get a prize for the other solution i won't tell you. You should know if you know what it means.

[Anonymous No.10336508]

>>10336485
what if i prove p=np by contradiction through p!=np huh?
checkmate atheists

[Anonymous No.10336562]

>>10336478
>use 200,000 computers
>crack 256bit keys in mere minutes
>???
>GET V&

[Anonymous No.10336564]

N=1

[Anonymous No.10336572]

>>10336468

Only american and israeli angencies have the solution. As far as i am aware of. So ofc it makes sense to switch for those. Since russia for instance or china don't have the solution. They just know it was solved. So do a lot of mathematicians at the universities...

[Anonymous No.10336592]

>>10336572
stop shitposting you dumb maggot

[Anonymous No.10336694]

>>10336468
>>10336471
Namefag

[Anonymous No.10337474]

>>10336562
>implying it would necessarily be parallelizable

Even if it was, use AES-Twofish-Serpent which is effectively 512bit and would take 479,725 years to crack.

[Anonymous No.10338125]

>>10337474

Yeah i didn't want to mention but everything is p. NP- Complete, BBP, EXP everything. EVERYTHING but the singularity can be done in polynomial time.
Btw. Last year the nobel prize comitee made a foto of the selection process. There have been some ballots which were "randomly" chosen. You know why they did this? Because there is no random. Since P = NP. Google the foto if you don't believe it.

[Anonymous No.10338134]

>>10336274
AI algorithms in use today depend in no way on P=NP.

[Anonymous No.10338153]

>>10336274
It is over.

[Anonymous No.10338161]

>>10338134

P = NP means the costs for programming AI is going down. Since there are new algorithms. For instance quantum physics is wrong. Since there is no random. You do know the double- slit experiment, right? Physicists can now predict where each photon hits. I'm not kidding.

[Anonymous No.10338162]

>>10336274
Fucking nigger, P=NP doesn't mean the polynomial algorithm is trivial to find, integer factorization problem has been around for centuries and there is still no general polynomial method unless you run Shor's algorithm with enough qbits.

[Anonymous No.10338209]

>>10338162

I'm not black. Not that i would care if i would be.
I didn't say the algorithms are ez to find... did i?
This being said: There have been some improvements in algorithms because of the P = NP proof.

[Anonymous No.10338299]

P = NP
N = P/P
N = 1
whats the big deal lol

[Anonymous No.10338347]

>>10338161
>You do know the double- slit experiment, right? Physicists can now predict where each photon hits
Post proof

[Anonymous No.10339931]

>>10336274
p vs np doesn't say much interesting things about AI.

[Anonymous No.10339948]

>>10338299
You missed a solution, Chad
P = NP
P-NP = 0
P(1-N) = 0
P = 0, N=1