h a l f b a k e r y
Like a magnifying lens, only with rocks.
idea:
add, search, annotate, link, view, overview, recent, by name, best, random
meta:
news, help, about, links, report a problem
account:
Browse anonymously,
or get an account
and write.
Login
Create account.
|
|
|
There are commonly held conceptions of lotteries that they are a "tax on the stupid" or that "one has the same chance of winning if not to play at all". These may be fair appraisals of the scheme, as every time I've taken the gamble I've ended up with nothing to show for it, but a weaker will.
However,
I do like the premise of lotteries; that a large number of people pool their insignificant money against some odds or another which results in a redistribution of a significant amount of money to a fewer number of people. Why lotteries choose to base the redistribution on dumb luck and not on something enriching to the masses is unpredictable.
Well, not really. But it would be better if there was a lottery that was just barely predictable. A Cipher Lottery would be a daily draw that would have players pick their numbers based on a daily encrypted cipher. If a player successfully decodes or solves the cipher they select those numbers for their ticket. If their ticket wins they have either successfully solved the cipher or have chosen the correct answer by dumb luck as they would have in any other lottery.
This type of lottery could have more than just codes to be broken but numeric and alphabetic puzzles that could be wagered on. As long as the odds of selecting the correct answer randomly are comparable to other lotteries there should be enough interest in the lottery to make it sustainable.
RSA Factoring Challenge
http://en.wikipedia...Factoring_Challenge
Looking this up today, I learnt that these are no longer active - time to shut down the server-farm... [zen_tom, Jan 05 2008]
[link]
|
| |
I'll assume, for the sake of convenience, that I have understood the embodiment of the idea correctly, as follows: |
|
| |
1. A sequence of characters (ciphertext, denoted C) of length (denoted Lp) is published by the Lottery.
2. There is a key (denoted K), of length (denoted Lk) held privately, that would decipher the published sequence (C) into another sequence (plaintext, denoted P). Lk < Lp.
3. Punters would buy tickets based on their calculation of P (or even better, K), or would take a random or personal sequence, hoping that it was correct.
4. The lottery then publishes P. Those who have chosen P hit the jackpot. Other permutations rerwarded on a sliding scale. |
|
| |
Firstly we have to eliminate OTP encryption (where Lk >= Lp, and Lk is chosen randomly) as your method of producing C from P, as this would then be the equivalent of Lotteries as they are now played.
Then, before we look at encyphering security, we will need to investigate procedural or system security. For this, it would be best if the system designers just died, and the systems maintenance people operate with zero-knowledge. Process auditors are employed once, and once only, and executed afterwards (ticket sales for this event at the authorised lottery outlets). A highly volatile situation, at best.
Next, we presume the use of a polyalphabetic cipher such as a Vigenère cipher. Here we have a bit of a catch 22. An Lp of sufficient characters is needed for there to be any chance of cryptanalysis. However, an Lp of significant length would reduce the "stupid" or "random" punter's chance exponentially (i.e. for lowercase only alphabet: 26^Lp). These two issues would also imply the need for some meaning, or lowered entropy, either in K or P. Just so that a)cryptanalysts have a shot; and b) "stupid" punters can feel like they have a shot.
Further, let's assume that instead of buying lottery tickets, clever punters decide to sell the answer to stupid punters. On average your lottery will part with half the takings from ticket sales in the form of prizes. The other half reserved for running costs and the (on average) 36% distribution to meaningful causes. Of that, half is reserved for the jackpot, and the rest distributed among the other permutations. Now, a large portion of the purchasing population become jackpot winners and dilute the jackpot to such an extent that it might be worth more to come second, or third, or fourth. Which is exactly what the clever punters did, clearing money from lesser permutations and answer sales. |
|
| |
I say, bring it on! Why should making money from the stupid be the preserve of the Church and State. |
|
| |
We think that this is sort of baked, in many forms of betting. Horse and dog races have a certain degree of predictability, as well as random factors, and a history to examine. |
|
| |
8/7 is correct. We don't see wolf racing, because the outcome can be reproduced, a priori, by Bay's Theorem. |
|
| |
It would, however, open up a whole new field (or steppe) of employment for smaller humans as wolf jockeys - possibly with little red riding hoods ? |
|
| |
I like it - there has already been a sort of implementation of this in the various RSA challenges (now sadly ended) - these could be approached by means of random guesswork - not that you'd have much chance of guessing the correct pair of primes - but that's irrelevant. |
|
| |
A regular challenge could be set but with only a short window of time for coming up with a solution - not sure exactly how you'd set the difficulty such that people would still have a punt if they weren't able to work on finding a definite solution. |
|
| |