= 27d567bc2d48d9f40e9ccc20ea370b15)
RobinZ comments on Easy Predictor Tests - Less Wrong
You are viewing a comment permalink. View the original post to see all comments and the full post content.
= 783df68a0f980790206b9ea87794c5b6)
Loading…= b715d02e85f7b3b4ae65ca3d3e450868)
Subscribe to RSS Feed
Powered by Reddit
= f037147d6e6c911a85753b9abdedda8d)
You are viewing a comment permalink. View the original post to see all comments and the full post content.
Comments (66)
I will not predict that my prediction will be wrong. That would be silly.
I have a file in my home directory which includes my prediction, along with some extraneous text. md5 hash of this file: cc58112f13e9e92495782bac4a9443bc
Edit: wedrifid and AngryParsley have correctly informed me that md5 is broken. sha1 hash: 0cc4e8bd90a897c2f0d0c561780f69561b7af072
File.
Predicted 1, got 0.
Now that could have been an interesting one to bet on. All kinds of second guessing. Including calibrating the reward size compared to the overheads (ethical and practical) for cheating.
Were it practicable to prevent sabotage...
Just makes the prediction more difficult.
Was thinking on the other end, actually.
MD5? Colluder!
I get ... a reference? All I know about MD5 is that (1) it shows up in the same UNIX man page as sha1, (2) it's a command in Macintosh UNIX, and (3) it's a cryptographic hash.
I'm really just ripping off AngryParsley.
MD5 isn't very useful as a cryptographic hash these days. It's not hard to find collisions for a given hash or create two plaintexts with the same hash. In fact, this has been used to create a rogue certificate authority. SHA-1 is looking pretty weak, but finding or constructing collisions with it is still infeasible.
To quote a certain BBC television presenter: oh, cock. Is there a better cryptographic hash than those two commonly available?
Edit: Let me clarify - of course they're out there, but I was hoping to pick something which is very easy to find, install, and use among those interested. (Anything with a reputable website I could link to for Windows & UNIX downloads would be fine, I'm sure.)
Yup. There's SHA-2 and some other algorithms. Right now the NIST is holding a contest for SHA-3. It's narrowed down to 14 candidates. The winner will be announced in 2012.
ETA: Really though, unless you're some super-spy, SHA-1 should be good enough until stronger hashes become common.
I don't even have SHA-2 on my computer - SHA-1 hash added to original comment.
shasum should support all the algorithms:
Take a look at the shasum man pages for more parameters.
Unfortunately, I don't have shasum on my MacBook - I had to use openssl.
Are you using an earlier version of OS X? I'm on 10.6 and it looks like shasum comes with 10.6.