Ask Jack Smith, but you should wait until the GOP in the senate is done embarrassing themselves trying to perjury trap him.

This is more like worrying when someone successfully brute forces a 6 bit RSA key (which has been doable for a very long time. 6 bits isn't much space to do an exhaustive search in).

It's not even a legal stretch to do so. If I encourage a 6 year old to drive a car and there is an accident, I'm legally on the hook for the lot of it with criminal charges on top. Why shouldn't the AI companies face the same liabilities?

Moving from 1024 to 2048 when 768 is broken is one thing. But so far, quantum computers have only managed 6 bits and had to cheat a bit to do it. It took longer than a child with pencil and paper would take. The new improved quantum computers that were going to do better than that some 6 years ago just kinda didn't happen. We'll get 'em next year?

The fact that this RSA weakness is not based on quantum computation is irrelevant

It's extremely relevant. An actual computer that we can build today can exploit the new RSA weakness. We have no computers today that can run Shor or Grover and the timeline for one that can on a useful scale is somewhere between years and never.

Also how we got to post-quantum when quantum computers have yet to factor anything faster than a 6th grader with pencil and paper.

You are both done laughing and not done laughing.

If they would reprocess it, much of that 3.6 million pounds would become either valuable nuclear fuel or totally inert scrap.

The rest would only last 200-500 years before becoming totally inert.

Who wizzed in your wheaties?

And I stand by what I said. Practically no phone that still works at all does it at the low level of a capacitor anymore.

But the purpose of the stop was not enforcement of the vehicle code.

"When there is not probable cause to believe that a driver is violating any one of the multitude of applicable traffic and equipment regulations 24 -- or other articulable basis amounting to reasonable suspicion that the driver is unlicensed or his vehicle unregistered -- we cannot conceive of any legitimate basis upon which a patrolman could decide that stopping a particular driver for a spot check would be more productive than stopping any other driver." Delaware v. Prouse, 440 U.S. 648, 661, 99 S. Ct. 1391, 1400 (1979)

In California, as I suspect in most states, the driver is required to produce a license and registration when being pulled over for a traffic stop.

California Vehicle Code 12951(b) states: "The driver of a motor vehicle shall present his or her license for examination upon demand of a peace officer enforcing the provisions of this code."

Since the vehicle was not involved, the stop would not require a license to of produced. Of course, the cop would lie and make up a reason.

You are conflating a consensual encounter with a detention.

Exactly. For example, spreadsheets were often used day to day but the accountants kept the actual books as books and had the final word. That changed over time, only after spreadsheets proved out (and got the bugs out).

Also, humans stayed in the loop. Sure there were occasional funnies like a medical database claiming a few male patients had a history of pregnancy, but humans were in the loop and cited those as obvious errors. There were still backup paper records to fall back on.

But a lot of people when they hear someone say "it's nowhere near ready for prime time" will claim the person is saying "It'll never work".

Back in the day when the "Board of Education" was an actual wooden board.