“Bitcoin, Chance and Randomness” by @hugohanoihttps://medium.com/@hugonguyen/bitcoin-chance-and-randomness-ba49a6edf933 …
-
-
Replying to @TuurDemeester @hugohanoi
Cryptography is not new – in fact it's millenia older than Girolamo Cardano
1 reply 0 retweets 1 like -
Replying to @GabrielDVine @TuurDemeester
Good point. I should perhaps correct it to "modern cryptography".
1 reply 0 retweets 1 like -
-
Replying to @GabrielDVine @TuurDemeester
yeah, there's definitely overlap & I think either term is fine :-) the general point is that the new breed of cryptography is based on computational hardness (& math), and pseudorandomness is one such tool.
1 reply 0 retweets 0 likes -
Replying to @hugohanoi @TuurDemeester
Cryptography has always been based on the computational hardness of the math. As the tools got better linearly, the techniques get better exponentially
1 reply 0 retweets 1 like -
Replying to @GabrielDVine @TuurDemeester
Actually it wasn't always based on math or computational hardness :-) Early cryptography was more about obscurity than about having solid math proof.
1 reply 0 retweets 0 likes -
Replying to @hugohanoi @TuurDemeester
Whether users were aware or not, cipher systems in use for thousands of years were based on mathematical principles. Most of them however were greatly weakened by Middle Ages frequency analysis.
1 reply 0 retweets 0 likes -
Replying to @GabrielDVine @TuurDemeester
IMO there's a difference between being describable by math, and actually intentionally built on math for computational hardness. An example is a simple substitution cipher that uses a single alphabet. Yes, you can describe it with math, but it's easily breakable.
1 reply 0 retweets 2 likes
So it's not really about math but the _right kind_ of math. If there was any math involved in early ciphers, it's likely accidental.
Loading seems to be taking a while.
Twitter may be over capacity or experiencing a momentary hiccup. Try again or visit Twitter Status for more information.
