data:image/s3,"s3://crabby-images/2d9b7/2d9b7e36a605c41706447f8335950a68ca9116a6" alt=""
data:image/s3,"s3://crabby-images/fd89d/fd89d60f281bc5b809b177d43f1fc4e389d2c82a" alt=""
12·
8 days agoThen we can finally get people to write
Don’t subtoot me bro
Is that the controversial part?
Then we can finally get people to write
Don’t subtoot me bro
Is that the controversial part?
You are correct it’s an confusing article Quantamagazine have written, why do they start highlighting “Tiny Pointers” https://arxiv.org/pdf/2111.12800 when “Optimal Bounds for Open Addressing Without Reordering” https://arxiv.org/pdf/2501.02305 is the main paper, and it disproves part of Tiny Pointers.
Here’s a link to the paper “Tiny Pointers” https://arxiv.org/pdf/2111.12800 those editors at Quantamagazine writes their summary in a strange fashion, for instance using x in stead of n which is normally used in computer science when talking about big O notation.
Drilling, hammering, or throwing them hard on the ground until the platters shatter.