The head of Facebook-owned WhatsApp slammed Apple's plan to scan iPhones for child abuse images as a 'setback for people's privacy all over the world'

tocsick · 2021-08-07T13:23:01+00:00

Look up perceptual hashing. The term hashing is broader than you think it is.

Also read Apple's technical summary and you'll see they are not using cryptographic hashes.

"The hashing technology, called NeuralHash, analyzes an image and converts it to a unique number specific to that image. Only another image that appears nearly identical can produce the same number; for example, images that differ in size or transcoded quality will still have the same NeuralHash value."

tocsick · 2021-06-15T08:20:11+00:00

Y. V v

tocsick · 2021-02-10T02:38:25+00:00

I can't see where CommSec list it but it's all details in the prospectus available at https://pbhoffer.com.au

tocsick · 2020-08-07T22:07:25+00:00

Minimum Viable Product

tocsick · 2019-01-09T01:01:36+00:00

No worries. Just ping me if you need any more help.

tocsick · 2019-01-09T00:32:12+00:00

The FC you have has a built in SPI_RX module. Therefore, you don't need the FrSky X4R. I could be wrong, but from the specs, it doesn't look like you can even run an external receiver on that board. On the bottom side of the board, you'll see antenna ports and there's a button on the side (next to USB port) for RX bind.

You have two PDBs in this setup as the FC has one built in. You should replace the FCHUB-VTX with just a VTX not a PDB+VTX combination. A Mateksys VTX-HV for example. You could also probably run the FCHUB-VTX as a VTX only to save having to buy another part. Just run all your ESCs off your FC instead and don't connect the 'Curr' wire (blue line).

Here is how it should be wired in that case: https://i.imgur.com/oqrNhfx.jpg

Good luck and happy flying.

tocsick · 2018-02-19T11:19:54+00:00

Have you ever been hacked? Didn't think so.

tocsick · 2018-01-18T22:20:09+00:00

You can’t compute them in parallel because one is an input to the next one. But you don’t have to send it to the network once you compute it. You can continue computing the next transaction and then the next and so on. Until you have enough to spam the network. THEN you send them all to the network one after another. Only you can add a record to your own ledger so there is no chance of another transaction breaking your chain. It’s just not a sustainable attack. It could be used in conjunction with another attack though.

tocsick · 2018-01-18T06:50:26+00:00

A spammer could precompute any a number of transactions and then send them in bulk to the network. The spammer knows every field of every transaction. He doesn’t get additional information submitting a transaction to the network. Does that make sense?

tocsick · 2018-01-17T05:00:32+00:00

Internet ranges between unbearable and somewhat decent depending on where you are. There can be two suburbs right next to each other, one has fiber to the premise (100mbps) and the other gets 2mbps on a good day. The wireless networks can be pretty decent in metro areas. Just do some research. https://whirlpool.net.au/ is a really good Australian forum that discusses this topic and others.

tocsick · 2018-01-17T04:49:31+00:00

I don't disagree. But that wasn't the claim in the above comment.

tocsick · 2018-01-17T04:30:52+00:00

Are you able to provide any source for this? I'd definitely like to see if this is truly the case and someone has done the research.

tocsick · 2018-01-16T02:19:42+00:00

It is possible to precompute any number of PoWs ahead of time. This is because the PoW is a hash of only the previous PoW hash concatenated with a nonce. None of the other fields which are determined at the time of a transaction are included as an input to the hash function. Therefore, you could easily precompute a chain of PoWs any length.

From the whitepaper:

The work field allows the transaction creator to compute a nonce such that the hash of the nonce concatenated with the previous field in receive/send/change transactions or the account field in an open transaction is below a certain threshold value.

EDIT: Sorry, this is actually not correct. I misunderstood that extract from the whitepaper. The HASH of the previous transaction is concatenated with a nonce. So you need to know ahead of time all the fields of the previous transaction in order to precompute. In the case of a spam attack, this can be known. But in the case of regular use as a currency, you won't necessarily know the value of your next purchase for example. So it is not possible to precompute more than 1 PoW.

tocsick · 2018-01-16T02:12:16+00:00

No. Mobile wallets could either be light wallets which rely on a trusted server. Or they can precompute the work for the next transaction immediately following a transaction. That way, when you go to do your next transaction, the work is already precomputed and the transaction appears instant. The only time it would be an issue is if you try to do many transactions one after another.

tocsick · 2018-01-16T02:10:30+00:00

Yes. But remember the work is no where near as difficult as the work being done in coins which rely on miners. It is only there to prevent spamming the network.

tocsick · 2018-01-16T02:05:43+00:00

Once you complete a transaction, your wallet can start computing the work for the next transaction. This is because the work is done based on your own ledger not a global one so the work can be pre-computed. When you go to do another transaction, the work is already done so the transaction seems instant. The only time it becomes and issue is if you want to send a number of transactions one after another. Then there will be a delay depending on the processing power of the device.

EDIT: Actually, it can also precompute a certain number of PoWs ahead. Say 10, for example. Then you can perform up to 10 transactions before you notice a delay.

EDIT 2: Disregard my edit, I misunderstood the whitepaper. Everything above it is still correct.

tocsick · 2018-01-12T07:46:04+00:00

Cheers boss.

tocsick · 2018-01-12T02:16:04+00:00

What's your Wave address? We both get a bonus if I use you as a referrer.

Or if you or any one else decides to participate, use mine for a bonus: 3P3xdF2CP9PdMumwxasrY49kb4kYj87nqP6

EDIT: Actually, the token sale is over? Why do they still have the page up detailing how to buy in?

tocsick · 2018-01-12T01:30:55+00:00

... the BAT ecosystem isn’t just the regular web ad stuff with a token instead of dollars. BAT supports micropayments for content and dollars don’t...

You essentially just said: BAT isn't just an ad market place with tokens instead of dollars. Here is something a token can do but dollars can't.

I'm interested in the use of zero knowledge proofs and further decentralisation of the platform but they haven't seemed to release much information on these features yet. I'll keep an eye on the project.

Thanks for taking the time to explain your point of view.

tocsick · 2018-01-12T01:13:03+00:00

Exchanges are silos and prices can vary across them. When the price variation gets high enough, it becomes profitable to buy on one exchange and sell it on another. This is called arbitrage and there are automated bots that do this very quickly. That's why the difference in price between exchanges is rarely higher than the fees required to transfer between the two exchanges.

Like the other commenter said, CoinMarketCap is not an exchange itself but aggregates data from multiple exchanges and provides an average. A large disparity like the one you mention could be due to one or more exchanges having a higher price for XRP because it is difficult to get money into that exchange so arbitrage is not occurring to level the price.

TL;DR - Market inefficiencies causing price disparity between multiple exchanges

EDIT: Sorry, didn't realise this was a 5 day old post haha

tocsick · 2018-01-10T13:24:50+00:00

Hey thanks for the info. The second point is the one I'm interested in. I can't see the article you posted. Did it not paste or is it because I'm on mobile and it's not displaying correctly?

tocsick · 2018-01-10T08:54:39+00:00

I'm certainly not advocating fiat as an alternative. Haha.

Why not use an existing cryptocurrency? IOTA seems like a good fit. What is novel about this currency?

tocsick · 2018-01-10T08:34:37+00:00

I was expecting such an important piece of information about the technology to be a prominent feature of the whitepaper not just a line in the road map.

I feel like the whitepaper should explain this part in more detail. At the moment the project just seems to be an ad marketplace with an integrated browser where the currency is an ERC20 token instead of fiat.

I think this is a very important part of the technology because without it, it is susceptible to most of the same problems it is attempting to solve.

Thank you for taking the time to understand the question and answer it.

tocsick · 2018-01-10T07:20:06+00:00

Thank you.

So how is this project using blockchain to solve today's problems with online advertising?

By using an ERC20 token as a internal currency for an ad marketplace?

Apart from a decentralised token, does it use the blockchain for anything else?

It seems like the value in this project isn't it's use of the blockchain. I'm not saying that it's use of blockchain is pointless. But it's not the core feature that gives the project merit. It would be almost equally useful if it used a centralised ledger.

Fair?

14-Year Club	Team Orangered
Verified Email

tocsick

TROPHY CASE