Quote from: mcdouglasx on Today at 12:12:36 PM

Quote from: kTimesG on Today at 09:11:01 AM

but it's not exactly like spinning a magic circle, when we also have a job or life to attend to.

Quote from: RetiredCoder on October 10, 2024, 09:58:42 PM

Excellent! Grin

I think now it's time for some magic circles, don't hesitate!

multi user detected, try harder. Cool

Are you not tired of this yet? Let me help you. I am @RetiredCoder, you catched me again. I am also the guy with the magic circle that everyone (except you) seems to know about. Oh and I'm also @mcdouglasx, just to annoy everyone who reads this. I'm also your mom, please come downstairs, your school lunchbox is ready.

Quote from: RetiredCoder on Today at 11:21:13 AM

Quote from: kTimesG on Today at 09:11:01 AM

Here's another kicker: Kangaroo doesn't rely on the birthday paradox. That would be Gaudry-Schost.

Correct.
But in practice, nobody implements original kangaroo with only few kangs. Practical implementation always contains a lot of kangs with random start points and they don't go far, so it's exact or similar to Gaudry-Schost and it does use birthday paradox.

There isn't a single paper that says to use random starting points when we have multiple kangaroos per herd; on the contrary, they start from well-defined positions. To use random start points is an arbitrary decision: first of all, on average, it degrades the expected runtime; second, it's used for spin-off strategies, like in Bernstein's pre-computation paper "Computing discrete logs faster".

It's debatable if walking forward and hitting a collision is the same as the birthday paradox, which requires all the balls are in the same urn. The common factor is conceptual only: probability of success.

Quote from: mcdouglasx on Today at 11:58:52 AM

https://github.com/JeanLucPons/Kangaroo?tab=readme-ov-file#how-it-works

"Due to the birthday paradox, a collision happens (in average) after 2.08*sqrt(k2-k1)"

You can make up whatever you want, but without the Kangaroo birthday paradox or any other implementation, they'll just be pretty paperweights.

That statement, just like JLP's entire kangaroo implementation in general, is not reviewed or confirmed by any real expert, and it might be a very contextual statement relative to his implementation and personal opinions at that time, influenced by whatever he was reading or thinking. Also, I don't understand, now you defend Kangaroo or what are you doing?