View Active Topics          Latest 100 Topics          View Your Posts          Switch to Mobile

There needs to be a prize run by non-skeptics

Discuss General Topics.

Re: There needs to be a prize run by non-skeptics

Postby caniswalensis » 09 Jan 2011, 09:24

G. ADAM wrote:Look up MD5 calculator, relying on you to honestly tell me your question after I've answered it won't work, all skeptics will change their question to cheat.

In my experience, people measure others by their own yardstick.
"It is proper for you to doubt ... do not go upon report ... do not go upon tradition ... do not go upon hear-say." ~ Buddha
caniswalensis
 
Posts: 208
Joined: 02 Jun 2010, 03:41






Re: There needs to be a prize run by non-skeptics

Postby G. ADAM » 09 Jan 2011, 10:53

What?

This is ridiculous, just the usual dumb ass skeptics in disguise.
G. ADAM
 
Posts: 240
Joined: 06 Jan 2011, 18:22

Re: There needs to be a prize run by non-skeptics

Postby Arouet » 09 Jan 2011, 10:58

G. ADAM wrote:What?

This is ridiculous, just the usual dumb ass skeptics in disguise.


Dude, we can't figure your experiment here, but we agreed to do your number guessing one. What's the problem?

Edit: Genesis has clarified in the other thread that he doesn't do the number guessing one. Oh well.As I said in that thread, I'm not terribly interested in this experiment. There are no conclusive results that can come of it.
User avatar
Arouet
 
Posts: 2544
Joined: 07 Aug 2010, 03:07

Re: There needs to be a prize run by non-skeptics

Postby G. ADAM » 09 Jan 2011, 11:32

Will you stop sabotaging my proposed test with your constant lies!

You think of a question. Give me a few multi choice options. I tell you what question you were thinking of!

OBJECTIVE or SUBJECTIVE?
G. ADAM
 
Posts: 240
Joined: 06 Jan 2011, 18:22

Re: There needs to be a prize run by non-skeptics

Postby NinjaPuppy » 10 Jan 2011, 23:07

I'm going to look up "MD5 Calculator" and check that out.
User avatar
NinjaPuppy
 
Posts: 4002
Joined: 28 Jul 2009, 20:44

Re: There needs to be a prize run by non-skeptics

Postby NinjaPuppy » 10 Jan 2011, 23:15

Can I get an interpretation of the following explanation? I take it as, there is a tool called md5 that you can type in text and it encrypts your text. After that I am totally lost as to how it pertains to this specific exercise by G.Adam. I got this information from this: http://md5-hash-online.waraxe.us/

About md5 cryptographic hash function:
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia


In Cryptography, MD5 (Message-Digest algorithm 5) is a widely-used cryptographic hash function with a 128-bit hash value. As an Internet standard (RFC 1321), MD5 has been employed in a wide variety of security applications, and is also commonly used to check the integrity of files. MD5 was designed by Ronald Rivest in 1991 to replace an earlier hash function, MD4. In 1996, a flaw was found with the design; while it was not a clearly fatal weakness, cryptographers began to recommend using other algorithms, such as SHA-1 (recent claims suggest that SHA-1 was broken, however). In 2004, more serious flaws were discovered making further use of the algorithm for security purposes questionable. It is now known how to, with a few hours' work, generate an MD5 collision. That is, to generate two byte strings with the same hash. Since there are a finite number of MD5 outputs (2128), but an infinite number of possible inputs, it has long been known that such collisions must exist, but it had been previously believed to be impractically difficult to find one. The result is that the MD5 hash of some information no longer uniquely identifies it. If I present you with information such as a public key, its MD5 hash might not uniquely identify it; I may have a second public key with the same MD5 hash. However, the present attacks require the ability to choose both messages of the collision. They do not make it easy to perform a preimage attack, finding a message with a specified MD5 hash, or a second preimage attack, finding a message with the same MD5 hash as a given message. Thus, old MD5 hashes, made before these attacks were known, are safe for now. In particular, old digital signatures can still be considered reliable. A user might not wish to generate or trust any new signatures using MD5 if there is any possibility that a small change to the text (the collisions being constructed involve flipping a few bits in a 128-byte section of hash input) would constitute a meaningful change. This assurance is based on the current state of cryptanalysis. The situation may change suddenly, but finding a collision with some pre-existing data is a much more difficult problem, and there should be time for an orderly transition.
User avatar
NinjaPuppy
 
Posts: 4002
Joined: 28 Jul 2009, 20:44

Re: There needs to be a prize run by non-skeptics

Postby Arouet » 10 Jan 2011, 23:32

I don't know anything about it, but I don't think Mr. Adams is coming back, so I wouldn't worry too much about it now. I suspect he's set it up for himself that he presents his experiment in a way that he knows will not be acceptable to most people, and then he can sulk off confident that they are just afraid of him really showing his powers.
User avatar
Arouet
 
Posts: 2544
Joined: 07 Aug 2010, 03:07

Re: There needs to be a prize run by non-skeptics

Postby NinjaPuppy » 10 Jan 2011, 23:40

Yeah, well.... that's pretty much what I figured but since this "encrypting the questions" thing was my sticking point, I wanted to understand it.
User avatar
NinjaPuppy
 
Posts: 4002
Joined: 28 Jul 2009, 20:44

Previous

Return to General Discussions

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 4 guests