The complexity theory result is actually huge. P problems can be solved in polynomial time. It was widely believed that NP-complete problems require exponential time. P = NP states that NP-complete problems can be solved in polynomial time. OpenAI didn't prove that. But, they proved that (some) NP-complete problems can be solved faster than exponential time, meaning: - P = NP, or - the complexity of NP problems is a "middle thing" between polynomial and exponential, eg. O(n^log n) If it survives peer reviews, this could be one of the biggest CS breakthroughs in decades.

Effective Immediately, all organizations using PHP for their systems are advised to be prepared for an update addressing two critical vulnerabilities. PHP is widely used for web applications. These vulnerabilities often provide a direct path to the server's file system or database. If an immediate update is not feasible, it is recommend that organizations take the system offline until it can be fully mitigated. NSA will follow up shortly with more specific guidance.

皆様に、今夜に対応して頂きたい大至急のお願いです。   多くのウェブサイトで使用されているPHPに関し、PHPのセキュリティチームが、重大な２件の脆弱性に関する注意喚起を行っています。   公開しているウェブサイトでPHPを使用しているか確認し、今夜、10月21日午後11時（日本時間）に公開される修正パッチについて、可及的速やかに適用できるよう準備をお願いします。   修正パッチを速やかに適用することが困難な場合は、例えばウェブサイト等を一時的に停止させることも、リスクを低減させるための有効策の一つと考えられます。   国家サイバー統括室のXアカウントでも関係する情報を発信していますので、そちらも参考にして下さい。 国家サイバー統括室(注意・警戒情報)（@cyber_forecast） / X

Not just PHP. Node.js has also announced security releases for October 21, with HIGH-severity vulnerabilities affecting its 26.x, 24.x and 22.x release lines. If you run either stack in production, keep an eye on official advisories and apply patches promptly. Security maintenance doesn't stop at your application code. Your runtime matters too. Node.js advisory:

Be careful when developing on macOS now. Apple did not yet revoke the vulnerable certificates, so /usr/bin/curl still trusts them because. $ curl Your client successfully connected to the site. That's bad! Workaround: mkdir -p ~/.config/certs awk '/^(###|===) /{skip=0} /^=== .*\/CN=(AAA Certificate Services|emSign ECC Root CA - G3)$/{skip=1} !skip' /etc/ssl/cert.pem > ~/.config/certs/cert.pem echo 'export CURL_CA_BUNDLE="$HOME/.config/certs/cert.pem"' >> ~/.zshrc source ~/.zshrc This only fixes curl. Update certifi, Go, pip/Python, Node, Docker images etc. separately.

So the private-key for the eMudhra (revoked) intermediate was apparently 4. How is the root still trusted? How broken are your processes if this can happen? And honestly: How have we (as an industry) not noticed earlier :(

‼️ BREAKING: 8 Private keys belonging to eMudhra intermediate certificate authorities (CA) have been compromised. Chrome and Firefox blocked the affected certificates within hours. Go, NSS, and other software have issued fixes. Full details -

Introducing Safe Rollup. Ethereum-anchored, operator-controlled. Safe as in Safe multisig, not safe funds. Safe Rollup gives institutions the credibility of Ethereum and the control of a database. Live on Sepolia today.

Comparing results for buyback vs. ve-tokenomics. A small case study comparing two baskets consisting 4 biggest buyback tokens and 3 biggest ve-tokens. Takeaways: 1. The peformance gap "buyback vs. ve" is much smaller that it was stated in the original post: $67 vs $300 -> $81 vs. $139 2. The highest valuation multiples are concentrated in major assets like $HYPE and $UNI. This suggests that market attention and valuation premiums remain heavily concentrated in the largest projects. Ongoing observations: 1. Buybacks outperformed on price returns. $100 invested in each of the four buyback tokens one year ago would be worth $130 on average today (equal-weighted across the group). 2. ve-tokenomics underperformed. The same $100 investment across each of the three ve-tokens would be worth just $72 on average. 3. But price performance doesn't tell the whole story. Both groups generate economic value for token holders beyond price appreciation. 4. To account for this: - Buybacks: we account the reduction in total supply as a kind of an income, since each remaining token represents a larger share of the supply. - ve-tokenomics: we account for revenue claimable by token holders. 5. $HYPE was the strongest price performer. Excluding $HYPE, the buyback group's average ending value drops from $130 to $115. 6. Accounting for accumulated revenue in the position: Buybacks: $130 → $139 ve-tokenomics: $72 → $81 7. $HYPE and $UNI have relatively small supply reductions: just 1.6% and 1.3%, respectively. We calculate these figures against maximum supply (the FDV basis), since buybacks increase the proportional ownership of all remaining tokens. 8. $PUMP and $CAKE burned significantly larger portions of their supply, making their buyback-driven value accrual more substantial. 9. $PUMP and $CAKE trade at roughly the same P/FCFt multiples as $CRV and $PENDLE, around 17x, despite their fundamentally different value accrual mechanisms. 10. $AERO stands out with a P/FCFt below 10x, making it one of the cheapest assets in this comparison on a token-holder revenue basis. All the results are presented at the infographic Source: Valueverse API

we're so damn cooked 😭 google's gemini 4 argon just did something actually crazy for fusion energy in 1967 a physicist named harold grad guessed that the magnetic fields inside twisty fusion reactors could never be solved exactly. people believed him for 59 years last month two papers finally proved him wrong. one of them used openai's GPT-6 Astra then google deepmind gave that paper to a team of argon agents and they found a whole new family of answers nobody had. the first answers showed up in a few hours. the paper literally says "promising candidates appeared within hours" NOT YEARS. HOURS!!!! the scientists checked every step by hand and it held up 59 years of humans vs a few hours of AI???? it's over. ai won.