Because for practical things we have a faster solution that might also be wrong ... | Hacker News

Hacker Newsnew | past | comments | ask | show | jobs | submit

		dgacmu on June 4, 2024 \| parent \| context \| favorite \| on: A breakthrough towards the Riemann hypothesis Because for practical things we have a faster solution that might also be wrong occasionally (randomized testing). There's no benefit to using any of the known deterministic tests if they're not truly deterministic. The speed gap vs randomized is huge.

olddustytrail on June 4, 2024 [–]

Then it seems it wouldn't be better to use the deterministic test ever. Just use the randomised test and accept the failure rate.

Guidelines | FAQ | Lists | API | Security | Legal | Apply to YC | Contact