Video

fantastic video, and of course someone made a manim rubiks cube library lol

Btw twin primes conjecture is provable if you relax some mental constraints/parameters or just have chatgpt prove it to you. Since chatgpt is that stupid

Also widen your shot. The elbows being cut off really annoy me. Crash course channel layouts can teach you a thing or two

Stupidity and ignorance

It's worth noting that many of the historic pseudo random generators had a repetition cycle that wasn't large enough to fully explore the possible options in many games of chance such as card games. If worst case, there was never a chance that four aces were not even dealable, so you'd have a lousy game, and it would be easier to fiddle the game. There's a lot of interest in the on-line gambling field about ensuring that overall the house wins, yet it's still 'random' enough. 52 cards, go through all the shuffle orders, once per second, every billion years take a 1cm step along the equator, when you reach the pacific ocean remove a 5mL spoon of water, every time the pacific empties, and a A4 sheet o paper to a pile, when it reaches the moon start actual counting, when you get to a million, realise you are still less than 90% of the way to completing the task. [you need 4 x 64bit words to represent the 52 card deck shuffle number]. And that's not even a 'large' number, never mind an 'arbitrarily large' one.

Where’s the other video

2:14 Zwo Franken spotted !! hahah 🇨🇭 Gruezi von Genf :) 🇨🇭 Danke fürs Video, esch wirklich toll !

It just confuses me more. I won't question why people pursue the perfect "randomness" because I'm not a scholar, but things happen and while 111111 happens once in 1/2^6 occasions, when it happens it happens. True random number machine might just drop 11111111111111 and casually go on. Like how monkeys playing with typewriters might write a whole hamlet. I'm happy with my hardware noises processed through linear equstions.

and cache

amazing

Can I use the paused image at 8:05 in a presentation ?

Can you explain to me how it is possible I have not yet learned about this wonderful channel? Dobrá práce kluci❤🇨🇿

I was not prepared for the bowl cut... bro you could be handsome just buzz your hair and let it grow out jesus. great video otherwise.

Alright guys, here's the secret behind Google Maps' algorithm: it's **not** A*. It's Contraction Hierarchies. Nice animations, though 👍

just lol that you can get award for thing that programmers use for 20 years

More details here: vasekrozhon.wordpress.com/2024/05/18/avi-wigderson-has-won-the-turing-award/

🤯

Bro really got the 13th century monk cut

Thanks for the video <3 These topics are so interesting

So...PRNGs can be used for random algorithms. This is a huge , groundbreaking, "no shit".

God dammit is everything relative to the observer!?

Does that mean if the 3-SAT problem can be reduced to a BPP polynomial equivalence problem then P = NP?

uzasne video!

Thank you I know have a full understanding of randomness. Not sure what to decide about this nowledge though. Guess the pseudo part is part of this paradoxically parallell uni... Never mind. It seems to actually be hard to reapeth the zero knowledge proof in practice.

what IS the assumption MOST researchers believe to be true.

Noam Nisan from Nand to Tetris!!!!!!

Very nice!

9:35 - sorry for dragging semantics and philosophy into the discussion, but is there truly such a thing as "random"? You said that Pi only "looks" random, which is perfectly fair, since we have formulas to calculate it. However, if we had a way to perfectly predict any "random" physical process (such as radioactive decay, fluctuations in temperature, etc.) then all of those phenomena would become PRNGs. The state is the state of the universe, the function is physical formulas, and the outcome is perfectly predictable. I think you already touched on that when you mentioned flipping a coin as an example: randomness-as-unpredictability disappears if you can predict the outcome. Besides, once you get a "random" value, doesn't it stop being "random" because you just generated it? Like you said, if you take some digits from pi, they look random, but they're not actually random, because you obtained them through a computation. In more general terms, does that mean that "computable" and "random" are mutually exclusive, and that it's impossible to have a truly random value, because any value we can think of will be "computed" somehow?

My pb was 2.37 i swear

Is formula for circle (c1) x formula for cylinder (c2)= donuts (d) as in topology?? Admin plz do answer.

My nondeterministic computatortron always solves problems in the least possible finite number of steps, or it runs forever. It runs all possible programs against all possible inputs in parallel. Each cycle of the computatortrob runs one cycle of each program/input. As soon as one of them spits out the solution, the computatortron halts.

7:44 or more likely, it would terminate because of an algorithm that says something like this: return 2,2

Y not use quantum error in lottery😅😂😂 using three body problem i.e. input chaos.

Idk why but I’m in love w you

is there anybody in there

Does this advance us in finding the elusive solution to the P vs NP problem?

thanks a lot. very simple and clear explanation.

wow, you should call it "bubble sort"

Fantastic video, thank you. I understood not everything but enough to put it in my little brain folder of clever math tricks and algorithms in case I never need inspiration. Thanks for presenting this recent work so clearly and concretely, I really liked how you used concrete things like 99% and the polynomial detection algorithm instead of variables and generalities, it helps me think.

Avi on the preview looks a lot like an old Maxim Katz, a russian politician and youtuber I actually confused with him. He's also an all-russian poker champion, the game you mentioned in the video. Now answer, is that random? 0_0 Nice video though, wasn't disappointed

Surprise Mario

14:20 - "Since A is correct for at least some seeds" -- where did this guarantee come from? A is correct for some pseudo-random inputs, but since the seed is shorter than the sequence of inputs, it doesn't seem that there's a guarantee that you will hit a random input for A is correct simply by iterating over all seeds. The space of potential inputs (of which >1% produce correct results) is exponentially bigger than the spaec of seeds; it could very well be that by the way the PRNG works, you'd miss all those sequences. Or is this guarantee coming from the assumption that the PRNG cannot be distinguised from 'real' random sequences?

8:40 finding the k+1 ... k+nth digits of pi doesn't require finding the first 1...k digits.

What if this isn't even a good question... what if the idea of 'randomness' in the way that mathematicians 'want' it to be... what if this is just a nonsensical idea....

Nice

Do the video where you do the zero knowledge proof with who is watching to prove you got right sudoku now

Hans Reichenbach: The Concept of Probability. Read it for a philosophical discussion of one of humanity’s most useful concepts that has no real philosophical basis and no empirical basis in reality.

I have learned and subsequently forgotten how zero knowledge proofs work far too many times

For that polynomial matching problem, for a polynomial of degree d, we can just match values of polynomials for d+1 values. As different polynomials can have atmax d intersections, we can deterministically find if it's the same or different polynomial in polynomial time. Thus, it's a P problem.

The hair.