News for hackers. Stuff that matters.
Re:More backwards functions: Unevaluating polynomials by pm90 on Wednesday September 25, 2013 @02:09PM (#6446240)
I knew I had seen this somewhere before: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Euclidean_algorithm

This is such a natural way to introduce it! I remember that I didn't fully grasp the concepts of what a 'base' is until my first year in college.

Re:More backwards functions: Unevaluating polynomials by j2kun on Wednesday September 25, 2013 @06:06PM (#6447617)
One reason this is interesting is because polynomial interpolation is used for secret sharing, so this method constitutes an "attack" on a poorly implemented polynomial interpolation sharing scheme.

Luckily for crypto, the coefficients used in a properly implemented scheme are so large as to not be vulnerable to such an attack.

Re:More backwards functions: Unevaluating polynomials by Osmium on Wednesday September 25, 2013 @12:35PM (#6445597)
Very fun. I love how it's possible to accidentally discover something cool like this, only to realise (in retrospect) that the result is "obvious." Almost always learn something really useful from it.
Re:More backwards functions: Unevaluating polynomials by chinpokomon on Wednesday September 25, 2013 @02:32PM (#6446388)
That reminds me of the time I rediscovered averaging. I thought I was "inventing" a new type of averaging by imagining masses attached to a massless beam. I started solving for a fulcrum when the torque would evenly balance. I then imagined instead of points, that I had one or more masses distributed continuously along the line, where the mass at any point along the line could be described by the area under a curve. It was only after I realized that I had calculated a centroid for the system, that it donned on me, I was actually calculating the average, as I had first done in elementary school. In short, nothing I was doing was new. I had simply discovered a new way to think about the problem that was not immediately clear when I came up with the thought experiment. In hind sight, it was completely obvious, but not before I ventured into calculus to solve this "tough" problem.
Re:More backwards functions: Unevaluating polynomials by eliteraspberrie on Wednesday September 25, 2013 @12:18PM (#6445456)
Great article, very useful for someone learning Scala like myself. If I understood correctly this is an example of polynomial interpolation. One method of solving is Neville's algorithm.
Re:More backwards functions: Unevaluating polynomials by pm90 on Wednesday September 25, 2013 @01:54PM (#6446147)
Polynomial Interpolation:

Input: a set of points

Output: polynomial that passes through all points of Input

Here, since the input are just two numbers, I don't think it is polynomial interpolation.

Re:More backwards functions: Unevaluating polynomials by gohrt on Wednesday September 25, 2013 @05:44PM (#6447483)
2 numbers, plus the assumption that the cooefficients are smaller than some amount, plus luck. It is interpolation with an underconstrained solution
Re:More backwards functions: Unevaluating polynomials by brianpgordon on Wednesday September 25, 2013 @09:18PM (#6448350)
With the constraint that none of the coefficients are negative there's no element of luck.
Re:More backwards functions: Unevaluating polynomials by gohrt on Tuesday October 01, 2013 @01:51PM (#6477810)

    f(x) = x^2 + 11x  
OR f(x) = x

    f(10) = 110

     = 1 * 10^2 +  1 * 10^1
     = 0 * 10^2 + 11 * 10^1

    f(0) = 0
     = 1 * 0^2 +  1 * 0^1
     = 1 * 0^2 + 11 * 0^1