pufferfisherpowder

joined 1 year ago
[โ€“] pufferfisherpowder 9 points 4 hours ago

Geminis answer: LLMs cannot perform the computations needed to find a SHA-512 hash with specific characteristics. This requires specialized hardware and software designed for brute-force calculations.

ChatGPT: Yes, getting an AI to solve a problem like finding a SHA-512 hash with 12 leading zeros would indeed take a significant amount of computational time and resources. This is because it would require brute-forcing through a vast number of inputs to find one that produces the desired hash, which is a computationally intensive task.

Finding a SHA-512 hash with 12 leading zeros involves iterating through possible inputs and hashing each one until you find a hash that starts with 12 zeros. This is a classic example of a proof-of-work problem, similar to what is used in cryptocurrency mining.

Here's a Python script that demonstrates how one might go about attempting this task:

import hashlib

def find_hash_with_leading_zeros(target_zeros):
    target = '0' * target_zeros
    nonce = 0
    
    while True:
        input_str = f'{nonce}'
        hash_result = hashlib.sha512(input_str.encode()).hexdigest()
        
        if hash_result.startswith(target):
            return nonce, hash_result
        
        nonce += 1

# Example: Find a SHA-512 hash with 12 leading zeros
target_zeros = 12
nonce, hash_result = find_hash_with_leading_zeros(target_zeros)

print(f'Nonce: {nonce}')
print(f'Hash: {hash_result}')

Running this script can take a very long time, especially as the number of leading zeros increases. The number of possible combinations grows exponentially, making it a time-consuming process.

To actually implement this in a controlled and efficient manner, specialized hardware (like ASIC miners used in cryptocurrency mining) would be required. This is beyond the capabilities of typical general-purpose CPUs and would indeed tie up computational resources for a significant amount of time.

[โ€“] pufferfisherpowder 5 points 2 days ago

I can think of ways you could please me ๐Ÿš€๐Ÿคค

[โ€“] pufferfisherpowder 9 points 2 days ago (2 children)

What an effortless Troll

[โ€“] pufferfisherpowder 1 points 2 days ago (1 children)

The client works fine, it's just the virtual file system option that turns off after a reboot.

[โ€“] pufferfisherpowder 3 points 3 days ago (4 children)

Yes, but I can't get the virtual file system/on-demand sync to work properly. It turn off every time I reboot. I gave up after a while since it's experimental for now anyway.

[โ€“] pufferfisherpowder 2 points 3 days ago

Thanks! I looked at it but I would like to stop giving money to MS. So my plan is to ultimately move away from OneDrive.

[โ€“] pufferfisherpowder 2 points 3 days ago

Thank you! I thought was going nuts. It's been such a long time since I had think about whether something is synced or a way to set it up. With OneDrive I could just grab the files I needed from the cloud and push them off the drive if I needed space. It really took away any hassle about sync.

It really feels like moving to Linux is a step back 10 years when it comes to cloud storage.
I also tried nextcloud but the smart / on-demand/ virtual file system is experimental in the Linux client and doesn't work as seemlesly as OneDrive. Besides being turned off every time I restart.

[โ€“] pufferfisherpowder 14 points 3 days ago (15 children)

Funnily, or sadly enough, OneDrive integration is one of the things I miss from my windows days. It's just extremely convenient how it's integrated into explorer and office. And how well the smart/ on-demand sync works. I can't find a setup to replicate this on Linux.

That being said I don't intend to go back and this move is insane.

[โ€“] pufferfisherpowder 25 points 4 days ago

Yes, contradicting the claim that it's "more objective".

[โ€“] pufferfisherpowder 2 points 4 days ago* (last edited 4 days ago)

I was pretty desperate for a job at that point and didn't even tell him what a fucking idiot he is.

But it's all good, I landed another job with roughly 60% higher pay. Two interviews, one 20min for screening, and a second one 1h with higher ups. They did ask me to prepare and present a case to them for the second interview. But I was fine with that, I could tell they are serious.

[โ€“] pufferfisherpowder 12 points 4 days ago (2 children)

Applied for a job with a 6 tier interview process for an entry level support position. Tier 2 was a 45(!!!)min assessment test. Queue level 3 were we spend 20min discussing the results. The 20min end with the interviewer telling me they filled the position the day before but he wanted to give me the courtesy of a talk about the test anyway. What . The . Fuck. You wasted both of our time?!

[โ€“] pufferfisherpowder 18 points 1 week ago

Lol Jesus would hate that, remember when he went to the Pharisees and went like

You guys fucking slay, LOVE IT

 

Like OneDrive for Windows or iCloud on MacOS. So files only her downloaded when needed and you can specify directories/files to be available offline.

Needs to integrate into nautilus context menu with the option to get a shareable link through that. Though I'm open to switching my file manager. Nextcloud can do it but the feature is experimental and every time I restart it just syncs everything again.

Gnome online accounts doesn't let you specify folders to be available offline. Onedriver is the same and I'd like to stop paying MS money. Plus neither integrate into nautilus' context menu.

It's the one thing I really miss from win 11. Basically all folders I worked were synced and for a secondary backup I synced OneDrive to a NAS. My Cloud Storage is bigger than the available space on my machine. I could do insync with selective sync, it nautilus integration as well. But that's just not as elegant as smart/on demand sync, having everything available in your file manager when you need it.

view more: next โ€บ