Re:SHA-1 'fully and practically broken' by new collision (2020)
by Jensson on Wednesday October 13, 2021 @05:22AM
(#28850019)
You focused on the shark side and not on the lightning side. You will never get struck by lightning in a city, so there the probability is 0. Similarly if you go out swimming in the ocean on a sunny day the probability of getting struck by lightning is also 0, but the probability of getting eaten by a shark is not 0.
[ Parent
| on HN ]
Re:SHA-1 'fully and practically broken' by new collision (2020)
by Dylan16807 on Wednesday October 13, 2021 @05:32AM
(#28850094)
You're going too granular. This is about populations that live in certain areas, not specific people on specific days. "depends on where you are" when talking about an over-time risk ratio. The goal isn't to find some dude with weird habits.
And while a population that mostly stays inside a city has a reduced lightning chance, it also has a reduced shark chance. I don't think that's anywhere near the point of equalizing the rate.
If you have an idea for a factor that dramatically reduces lightning risk but doesn't reduce shark risk much, I'm interested.
Re:SHA-1 'fully and practically broken' by new collision (2020)
by kragen on Wednesday October 13, 2021 @08:10AM
(#28851142)
0 is not a probability; trying to use it as one leads to division-by-zero errors.