On Tue, Mar 20, 2018 at 12:52 PM, Lawrence Crowell < [email protected]> wrote:
> *> My point is that to load my brain states into a computer requires some > process for measuring and cataloging the neural nets in my brain. Processes > such as computing subsets of combinatorial processes are NP-complete. This > will form some limit on this claim, and it could be a fundamental barrier. * If a general class of problems has been proven to be NP-complete that does not necessarily mean all instances of that problem are unsolvable, or even that most of them are, it only means some exists that are. For example, in the early days knapsack encryption competed with RSA encryption which is based on factoring, the knapsack problem has been proven to be NP-complete but factoring has not so you might think the knapsack method would be more secure than RSA, but actually the exact opposite is true. Some particular knapsack problems are devilishly hard to solve but the vast majority are far far easier. And with RSA you don’t have to factor just any old number, you’ve got to factor a particularly difficult one that is the product of two prime numbers. Today nobody uses knapsack because it is horribly insecure while RSA has become the standard. John K Clark -- You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "Everything List" group. To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email to [email protected]. To post to this group, send email to [email protected]. Visit this group at https://groups.google.com/group/everything-list. For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/d/optout.
