Technology
Which posts fit here?
Anything that is at least tangentially connected to the technology, social media platforms, informational technologies and tech policy.
Rules
1. English only
Title and associated content has to be in English.
2. Use original link
Post URL should be the original link to the article (even if paywalled) and archived copies left in the body. It allows avoiding duplicate posts when cross-posting.
3. Respectful communication
All communication has to be respectful of differing opinions, viewpoints, and experiences.
4. Inclusivity
Everyone is welcome here regardless of age, body size, visible or invisible disability, ethnicity, sex characteristics, gender identity and expression, education, socio-economic status, nationality, personal appearance, race, caste, color, religion, or sexual identity and orientation.
5. Ad hominem attacks
Any kind of personal attacks are expressly forbidden. If you can't argue your position without attacking a person's character, you already lost the argument.
6. Off-topic tangents
Stay on topic. Keep it relevant.
7. Instance rules may apply
If something is not covered by community rules, but are against lemmy.zip instance rules, they will be enforced.
Companion communities
!globalnews@lemmy.zip
!interestingshare@lemmy.zip
Icon attribution | Banner attribution
If someone is interested in moderating this community, message @brikox@lemmy.zip.
view the rest of the comments
Did you read the article? The claim is that they have invented a new kind of hash table that has vastly improved algorithmic complexity compared to standard hash tables.
I haven't read the paper yet, but if what the article claims is true, it could be revolutionary in computer science and open up a ton of doors.
I'm very skeptical
You can read the full paper yourself here: https://arxiv.org/pdf/2501.02305.
I haven't had time to fully read it yet, but glancing through, it looks pretty legit.
This is a graduate computer science student working with accomplished CS faculty at Rutgers and Carnegie Mellon, we aren't talking about some rando making outlandish claims.
The thing about theoretical computer science is that, like math, it isn't subject to the pitfalls of empirical science. It isn't dependent on reproduction. The proof is provided in the paper, so either it indeed proves what it claims to, or the proof is erroneous, which can readily be refuted.