There exist certain classes of prime numbers that should not be used for some cryptographic operations because algorithms exist that reduce the computation required for factoring attacks. This more often applies to cases where smaller primes are applied. Sources for this king of knowledge are mathematics or cryptography textbooks.
For other cryptographic operations, almost any sufficiently large prime can be used. Even a 50% reduction on a computation that will take trillions of years, has no practical impact.
The definition of organ in this article is closest to the body part definition. The use of organ here relies on a less common definition: roughly a constituent part of some larger whole that performs a specific function.
It likely contains a bug but is an uncorrupted file. Corrupted to me means the file was changed or modified in a way from it's intended state and likely won't run anymore.
Yes, driven by local data collection. More tightly packed ground stations and the availability of atmospheric measurement at various altitudes will improve accuracy.
Lyft likely cost customers' funds though a poor process like this in the past.
One could create an account, hail rides and add their own payment method while still being associated with someone else's email. Ride recipes would then be sent to someone else's email where the receiving party could add or increase a tip through an unauthenticated link and have it charged to the riders credit card.
There must be a threshold above which making an engine move is allowed. Because if there's a checkmate move, it will be the best engine move and needs to be allowed.
Close. The federal reserve (or any central bank) will lend money to other banks at a rate just below the target rate, and it will borrow from other banks at a rate just above. Because banks can borrow and lend largely risk free at those two rates, banks will transact amongst themselves at a rate in between. This is how the federal reserve makes banks transact at the target rate.
> The whole idea of a hash is that a tiny perturbation makes the output completely different.
That would be a cryptographic hash you are describing. Not all hash functions share that property. As long as arbitrary input is mapped to a fixed size output it is a hash function. For example see NeuralHash [1] which is a hash function designed to be "insensitive to small changes in the input image."
1Password had a blog post [1] addressing this concern. Essentially you still have the benefit of one-timeness, but not second factor, and need to compare that to what your security needs are.
Hash is applied correctly here. A hash function is "any function that can be used to map data of arbitrary size to fixed-size values." The properties of being a(n) (essentially) unique fingerprint, or of small changes in input causing large changes in output, are properties of cryptographic hashes. Perceptual hashes do not have those properties.