If P=NP, you can break every encryption in the world | Scott Aaronson and Lex Fridman

Please support this podcast by checking out our sponsors:

PODCAST INFO:

CONNECT:
- Subscribe to this YouTube channel

[hexertion]

It's funny that Scott brings up the Riemann Hypothesis here because there's an obvious parallel with P vs. NP: we have found trillions of roots of the zeta function on the 1/2 critical line but none off of it and similarly we know many problems to be NP-complete but have no polynomial time algorithm for any of them. It would take just one counter-example for either one but there's probably a deep reason why we haven't found anything yet.

[benjaminkyle]

But Donald Knuth was saying P = NP proof would be merely a proof of existence, and we wouldn't be able to find and implement the algorithms so there are not such high stakes

[AlejandroHernandez-tbev]

"In my proposed solution, I introduce a novel computational paradigm that enables us to efficiently solve NP-complete problems in polynomial time. This paradigm revolutionizes the way we approach complex computations and leverages previously untapped connections between P and NP.

Through extensive testing and analysis, I demonstrate that this new paradigm effectively solves a wide range of previously intractable problems. The proof involves constructing a transformation algorithm that efficiently converts any given NP problem into an equivalent P problem, providing compelling evidence for the equality between the two classes.

The implications of this proposed breakthrough would be tremendous. Industries such as optimization, cryptography, and artificial intelligence would experience a significant leap forward. The ability to efficiently solve NP problems would enhance decision-making, accelerate scientific discoveries, and revolutionize various fields reliant on computation.

[TomBirchy]

Last time I was this early Bill Cosby was popular

[krass]

I guess computational irreduceability would like to have a word...

[directskate]

So this is how AI going to do us dirty 😭

[_yashnimkar]

n=1 there you go Its not that hard guys, what is all the fuss about?

[Graeme_Lastname]

I'd like to see someone point to the ONE thing decides if it's P or NP. What is the one thing to test?

[bobbyjonas]

OpenAI just proved P = NP when its AI cracked AES on a nonquantum computer

[TLSARTWORK]

Very smart....have no clue what it's about but very smart. I am working on the X=MEN equation

[codecampbase]

It’s pure nonsense. You just take a variable and try to make it equal to some solutions that are easy solvable.
You can improve algorithms but you can’t simply reduce x amount of equations by x amount pre known solutions unless you have some algorithm that guesses good.
You can’t simply make encryption easy to solve, as the nature in complex mathematical operations is a complex solution.
It’s in my opinion the same as with energy: you can’t create or delete it, just transform it.
The only way is in my opinion finding new shortcuts/formulas, but they would be still highly complex and only really solvable by the computer.

[aaaab]

I love how everyone in the comments is focusing on the money prize, as if it even mattered, compared to the immense intellectual satisfaction one would get for proving such a thing. This is why none of you will ever succeed.