By the end of June 2026? Old news.

Interesting. I was pretty sure I had seen that in the desktop web client. I don’t use the mobile app. Oh well, shrug, thanks.

Good point about the annoying screens. I watch the videos sometimes but given that they’re allowed, the bands themselves might as well post them.

I don’t have any extension like that. There’s a button. Idk what it does though.

Added: maybe I’m confused, I see a “Save” button now but I had remembered “download”. Perhaps I equated the terms.

Youtube itself has a download button I thought. I haven’t tried it since you have to be logged in to use it.

I remember that concert venues used to go absolutely berserk about people recording concerts, whether by video or audio. The Grateful Dead were a well known exception since they allowed audio recording, but they still prohibited video recording. There was a famous movie “Diva” about a guy who snuck a portable Nagra reel-to-reel audio tape recorder into opera performances to get bootleg recordings of a famous opera singer.

Today though, there are fancam vids of every concert uploaded to youtube immediately after the concert, or even livestreams during it. IDK what changed but I doubt it’s damaging the concert industry. Ticketmaster on the other hand is destroying the industry.

Just Flock, or even just traffic cameras? Is this even a start? How about banning warrantless border phone searches? How about recognizing that privacy is a right? The California constitution (and maybe other states) already does that, and it seems to help to some extent, despite the presence of Flock cameras here.

How about DRAM? Show me some AI price crashes leading to DRAM price crashes. That’s what we all want, I think.

They can be less convenient, yes, but a situation where you need truly public keys is probably not that secure to begin with. If you’re just trying to talk to your friends from your tree house, symmetric encryption is completely practical, including using something like DUKPT for forward secrecy.

Most of us don’t have control over the public keys we use. We connect to a web site with a browser, and the server supplies the public key.

If you want public keys for your own purposes, I guess nothing stops you from generating 4096 bit (or whatever) ECC keys. Of course the arithmetic will be slow.

If you’re really paranoid about potential math advances affecting ECC and/or RSA, then you may be best off avoiding public key schemes altogether. Just use secret keys, and maybe Merkle tree signatures.

You could say the same things about AES keys being short.

I would say, there are known sub-exponential algorithms for factoring, while nothing better than (exponential) brute force is known for ECC. So, slightly better algorithms that erode RSA further are incremental improvements, while anything sub-exponential at all for ECC would be a breakthrough. Of course as someone once said, predictions are hard to make, especially about the future.

Fwiw, bitcoin mining amounts to brute forcing SHA256 rather than ECC. Tendency these days for ECC (like in TLS) is to use Curve25519 rather than secp256k1. PQ (post quantum) is an entirely different topic and is in the direction of much more complicated schemes. RSA (or rather, integer factoring) has a long history of falling to better and better attacks, with a (now expired) 512 bit CA certificate recently having been factored on a single workstation. The first fielded deployment was at a nuclear lab and it used 336 bit keys! The big crypto nerds all seem to prefer ECC to RSA now. I tend to defer to them.

Data storage: you can do pretty much whatever, they won’t look at your stuff unless you do something that attracts attention. Of course encrypt it anyway.

Streaming: yes that attracts attention if you stream to the public. If it’s edgy or pirated content you can’t use the big providers. If it’s your private collection that only a few people know about, it’s like the situation with storage.

No, we don’t use it as an adjective.

From the first sentence of https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/NP-hardness : “In computational complexity theory, a computational problem H is called NP-hard if…”.

Of course, we can’t rule it out as a possibility.

Exactly, we don’t know for certain. Of course it’s very unlikely, but in math when we say we know something for certain, it means there’s a theorem to that effect. There reason to think that factoring is not NP-hard but we don’t know for certain. If you still claim otherwise, can you cite a theorem?

Anyway, yes, you’re confused, and at this point you’re spouting misinformation. You might consider reading a book or taking a class.

If there were polynomial time solutions to that many problems of that degree of importance, surely we would have discovered something by now.

It’s still an open problem, there’s a $1 million Clay prize waiting for you to claim it if you have a proof either way.

You wrote “we know for certain do that it [factoring] is not in NP hard”. That sentence is 1) borderline ungrammatical (we usually use NP-hard as an adjective, though it also denotes a set); and 2) in error. We suspect factoring is not NP-hard but we don’t know for certain (consider what happens if P=NP). The error suggests confusion about what these terms mean. If you’re really teaching this subject, can I ask what textbook you are using?

We know for certain do that it is not in NP hard

It’s likely to be NP-intermediate (outside of P, but not NP-hard), but it is not known.

(@[email protected])

Factoring is at most NP-complete because we have a polynomial time verification for it.

That means it’s in NP. These terms mean very precise things and it’s easy to get confused, but at the end of the day the new paper didn’t find a faster way to factor.

Google will know you paid Signal

That’s not ok either! Just stop playing these games and stop obstructing self hosting. When they come to round up all the Signal users, they won’t care what account belongs to who. So there should be no database that identifies the users.

IDK maybe that’s possible but I’d rather avoid Signal, except maybe for a self hosted fork.

Yes we’re supposed to use ECC instead of RSA now. The major crypto libraries support it so you just configure your program to use it.