67
you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
[-] Colloidal@programming.dev 1 points 2 weeks ago

The assumption is there though.

Wouldn't multiplying the hash simply relabel the hash sites, as hashes non divisible by the factor simply be not accessible/not exist?

[-] The2b@lemmy.vg 2 points 1 week ago

The hashes not being there isn't particularly relevant within a hash function outputting a specific size. If your hash function is always 64 bits for example, the fact that you have 3/4th of them not exist means you should be operating as if its a 16 bit hash, not a 64 bit hash. If you still do this math based on the 64 bits outputted (2^64 boxes) you'd arrive at very inaccurate numbers.

[-] anton@lemmy.blahaj.zone 3 points 1 week ago

That would be 62 bit, not 16 bit.

this post was submitted on 05 Jul 2025
67 points (100.0% liked)

Programming

21634 readers
354 users here now

Welcome to the main community in programming.dev! Feel free to post anything relating to programming here!

Cross posting is strongly encouraged in the instance. If you feel your post or another person's post makes sense in another community cross post into it.

Hope you enjoy the instance!

Rules

Rules

  • Follow the programming.dev instance rules
  • Keep content related to programming in some way
  • If you're posting long videos try to add in some form of tldr for those who don't want to watch videos

Wormhole

Follow the wormhole through a path of communities !webdev@programming.dev



founded 2 years ago
MODERATORS