Slashdot Mirror

Are there actually people on Slashdot with enough postings to have mod points who haven't read War of the Worlds?

Yeah, almost impossible. But be sure to read the DRM roadmap so you know what tactics to expect to see being used: How big brother and big media can put the Internet genie back in the bottle.

--

Second, The Digital Imprimatur is recommended reading for people that believe Point-to-Point is still feasible. Seriously, it's a better read than anything I could say. Interestingly enough, the author (see link above) wrote a Voice over IP - point-to-point application, too.

Artificial scarcity enforcement will always fail.

Even in the face of a draconian future where DRM is mandated to be wired into all hardware, and each person needs an identifying digital certificate to access the "SECURE internet", there will STILL be huge subchannels where information flows freely as well as a huge blackmarket for open hardware (from China no doubt).

The best business model for CREATORS to switch to in the face of this new reality is to GET PAID UPFRONT FOR THE SCARCE ACT OF (GOOD) ORIGINAL CREATION, instead of relying on many small forced payments for an artifically scarce copy (carried over from when the media itself was scarce and distribution expensive). The Street Performer Protocol is one such model; there are many more variations. These kinds of distributed patronage systems are the way to go, IMO; not lock and key.

--

The sky is not back yet, but it is goind exactly as described in Digital Imprimatur. It's a long but important read.

And how is it that the Digital Imprimatur is happening right now? Well take a look at this Slashdot story Cisco Working to Block Viruses at the Router. But guess what? The Slashdot story completely missed one vital point. These new Cisco routers DO NO BLOCK VIRUSES. No, what they really do is check that you are running a TRUSTED COMPUTER and then they remotely scan the software running on your computer. If you are not Tursted Computing compliant, or of you are not running the approved and mandated software (or if you are running prohibited software) THEN THIS ROUTER DENIES YOU INTERNET ACCESS.

Of course it is being billed to enforce that you are running an approved and up-to-date firewall and/or anti-virus software and/or that your operating system has the latest patches. That's how it supposedly "fights viruses".

Of course enforcing that you are using a Trusted Computer means that you no longer own/control your own computer. Of course enforcing that you are running all of that approved software and latest approved operating system patchs also means that you are forced to run only the approved operating system (Palladium anyone?). It also means that if you attempt to change any of your settings or modify your software in any way you get locked out completely, you lose your net connection, you can't open any of your 'secure' files, and most of your software will refuse to run.

It's true that ISP's can't start installing these new Cisco Routers unless most of their customers already have Trusted Hardware - they'd be locking out almost all of their customers. However the plan is to simply include the Trust Chip as standard hardware on all new motherboards sold, starting this year. They don't have to convince you to buy a new Trusted Computer, they simply HAND you the new hardware when you replace your old PC. There's no reason not to accept a computer with the Trust Chip in it, you can simply leave the chip off and the machine can do everything a normal computer can do and run all existing software. Over the course of 4 years or so essentially all PC's get replaced as obsolete. Around 2008 or so pretty much everyone is expected to have a Trust Chip. Then the ISP's can install the new routers and lock out anyone that has failed to comply. It will only be a few percent, and the company will simply say "Your Fault, you have an incompatible computer, go buy a modern machine to replace your obsolete hunk of junk."

At a Washington DC Global Tech Summit, Richard Clarke Special Advisor to the President for Cyberspace Security called on ISP's to enforce exactly such a policy. See the PDF here. His speech starts on page 7, but you can skip to the last two paragraphs on page 11 through the end. He says TCPA(Trusted Computing) is a "Good beginning, but not enough", tells ISPs to use TCPA to enforce the use of firewalls and other software in order to get a hookup, asks them to implement a National Strategy to Defend Cyberspace. He asks them to do so "in the spirit of 9/11", to do so for our National Economy, to do so for our National Defence, to do so for Our Way Of Life For People Around The Globe, and even to defend us against Osama bin Laden himself. And the PDF notes that the audience responded with applause.

If there is no massive public backlash against Trusted Computing it will simply be dumped in our laps and the sky will become very dark indeed.

-

There are Peer-to-Peer uses of IM, FTP and EMail, but these uses are being degredated by firewalls.

That is to say that every hacker that decides they want to try their hand at cracking, or play with some script kit is directly causing the further segmentation of the internet into discreet networks connected only by the proxy servers hardened for use on the "open" internet.

The genie's out, ...
Funny that you describe it this way.
Have you read the paper
The Digital Imprimatur - How big brother and big media can put the Internet genie back in the bottle
?

Of course, I also hope that there will be a backslash. But I'm not too optimistic.

A gallon of water is actually ~ 8 pounds. Or 8.345404 to be exact.

The really interesting part is that we don't really know what process would produce such a thing. Since then, several other cosmic rays(subscription required) entering the atmosphere with energies over 10^20 eV have been detected by Japanese, Russian, and American observers.

For the sake of reference, this is the best pair of pictures I could find. Notice that the humanitarian ration is square, and about four times the size of the cylindrical cluster bomb. (The pictures are in very different scales, unfortunately.) They're not quite the same yellow, but close enough. You'd certainly want to get a good look before grabbing anything about this color.

(Oddly, there were a great many sites that harp on this cluster bomb/food package gaffe, but none of them saw fit to bother to educate viewers with pictures of actual cluster bombs to help them avoid the problem.)

Some readers may recall that back in the 80s, the Soviet Union was accused of manufacturing mines to look like toys in order to attack children. Third from the top is a picture of the "butterfly" mine in question.

You might have a day or two left but well the Lunar Land tides maxed on June 3 and they do it again on July 1. The orbital max differential occurred on June 15 for apogee and will max for Paragee on July 1. I suppose with all the other data we see a high probablility of Earthquake as the moon approaches the close approach on July 1.

The time to be concerned is when the moon is at 45 Deg to the longitude of So. CA.

Click on the Earth Moon Viewer Apogee/Paragee Calc if you want to check out the exact times etc.

Well, firstly: there are a lot of stupid inventions (e.g.: hat that spreads into an umbrella).
Secondly: there are a lot of inventions that are developed based on previous ideas and are fully exploited (e.g.: paperclips - there are many designs, quite a few still being used).
Thirdly: many inventions are innovative, but just not quite good enough to use (e.g.: the development of the zipper took several tries).
Fourthly: The technology is often not good/economical enough in practice (e.g. Lilienfeld's invention of the field effect transistor in 1925 (patented in 1930).
Finally: some inventions are so far advanced for the time that no one (other than the inventor) sees any realistic use for it (e.g. Babbage's analytical engine)

If you've ever wondered what hard drives were like in 1968, this might be the page for you. :-) OK, it was a drum, but it's almost the same as a disk!

No, and if they don't, wheather here, or in Mozambique, they can't get shell access either.

are they all familiar with strong passwords?

No, I assign the passwords, because I can't trust the users to do this. Yet, it's not difficult to get a user to tell you their password. It's sad, but true.

must all of your shell users be allowed to ssh from anywhere in the world?

If they need shell access, yes. This is rare though.

if many of your users have laptops that come and go from the building, just setup a seperate subnet for those users with strong firewall protection so it creates a separation between them and your critical systems. If I protect my network from my laptops, then I have only servers (and only 25 desktops) to protect. Then, I'm back to trying to use a personal firewall on every system we have. Check my other posts in this story to see how that's going. (not well).

after reading your reply, it is becoming clear that all of your backend network glue is all handled my Microsoft machines

Sadly, no. I only have a few Windows servers, all of my other servers run Linux (RedHat ES 2.1 and 3). However, 90% of my network is transient Windows XP laptops. All of the solutions that I can find are based on an Army of nailed down desktops that never turn off, and will always be able to quickly submit to the will of a domain controller.

if you think that usability is sacrificed because of security, then you really have a lot of learning to do.

Read this essay: http://www.fourmilab.ch/documents/digital-imprimat ur/
I found it quite interesting. And I find it's very easy to fall victim to this mentality. Why is WebEx the most successfull internet service company ever. Before two years ago, I used to be able to do software demos/desktop sharing and meetings with simple free software offerings. Now, due to firewalling, everyone has to pay WebEx for a really, painfully, simple service that used to be readily availble for free (NetMeeting, VNC, CUSeeMe, you name it). That's 0.30 to 0.50 cents per user per minute for something that should be free. Why? Because so many have freely and willingly sacrificed usability for security.

However, I would really be interested in any counterpoints. While others may think me a loud-mouth, I will listen, and on occasion will change my position if given a convincing argument.

I love the story about using the UNIVAC as a morse code oscillator. Wouldn't that be the equivalent to using a SUN E15k to play Doom?

The page about the game ANIMAL brought back memories. I can't remember the name of the computer I played this on - it was about 20-25 years ago.

I didn't know the game was a 'virus'. Very interesting.

http://www.fourmilab.ch/documents/univac/animal.ht ml

From The Case 1107

The central processor was a 36 bit architecture, capable of executing most simple arithmetic instructions in one 4 microsecond cycle time. Multiplication of two 36-bit integers took 12 microseconds, and division of a 72-bit dividend by a 36-bit divisor 31.3 microseconds. The processor performed 36-bit single precision floating point arithmetic in hardware, but did not implement double precision floating point.

From Univac I

The UNIVAC's word size was 72 data bits, which held eleven digits plus a sign, plus one parity bit for each six data bits, giving a total of 84. The mercury delay line memory amounted to 1000 words. Besides numbers, the UNIVAC could represent alphanumeric data (letters of the alphabet and some punctuation marks) using six bits for each character with twelve characters to the word. Codes were assigned for the letters of the alphabet and punctuation marks, such as 010100 for A, 010101 for B, 010110 for C and so on.

According to Why do We need a floating-point arithmetic standard?

Univac 110x float:

Underflow limit = 2^-129 ~ 1.5 x 10^-39
Overflow limit = 2^27 ~ 1.7 x 10^8

"WHAT YOU SAY!?"

I run a corporate network without a firewall. Every time a major issue comes around and destroys every freaking company around me, I go by with maybe two systems effected. Why? I stay up-to-date on all patches, and I keep relatively SANE security policies in place.

A firewall is a lot less necessary than firewall vendors would have you believe. My experience is that firewalls breed a false sense of security. Someone goes home over the weekend with a laptop - and comes back with a zombie virus/worm/etc. that goes and infects everything while the IT department is "taking their time" evaluating a security update for a month (I do 24 hour tests).

Why not firewall, is the other thing I hear. Mostly, it's so that every one of my systems can be an internet service provider. That's what the internet is about. Enabling users to say, hey - I've got that file right here on my local FTP, come get it. Here, log onto my VNC desktop, and I'll show you.

Firewalls create industries like WebEx. Because technology has come from 'wow, I didn't know you could do that,' to, 'I didn't know you could do that because I'm firewalled.'

Finally, "It doesn't happen very often," quite clearly means that it has happened. Call it pre-teen style bitching if you will, but a lawsuit should have never been threatened (AFAIK, a lawsuit never actually went to court). Is someone finds a vulnerability, full disclosure should not be the only method to have Microsoft take you seriously. My teen years are LONG behind me, maybe I'm just sick of having to deal with Microsoft's crap since Windows for Workgroups 3.11 (when the problems started for me).

1. Accelerate the New World Order totalitarian government takeover conspiracy (hello my freemason brothers!).
2. Mandate fuzzy-sounding "Trusted Computing" and the "Secure Internet" infrastructure, effectively putting the internet genie back in the bottle.
3. Profit!

You're ignoring a huge chunk of the problem. Most patent applications are worded in such a way that it's often hard for anyone but a patent lawyer to even guess what it might mean. How do you search for something if you couldn't tell it might apply even if it's handed to you? Surely you don't expect me to read every patent ever filed just to be sure?

How do you guard against patents being granted in spite of prior art? For example, the infamous patent on using XOR to draw a cursor ( Please see: Patent Nonsense). In that case, the technique was already in wide use. If I wanted to be as prudent as possible, I would have done a patent search, and come up empty. I would know many people were using it, so I would feel quite safe. I would have been wrong. However, the only way I could know would be to predict that a patent would be granted in spite of ample prior art. It is unreasonable for the law to require that a person have a working crystal ball.

It's one kilogram of raw fat stored : in volume, this is more than a liter.
This is really serious, guys, you should watch this, then read this.

--

I'm not arguing against the necessity of good nutrition (far from it). Indeed, my routine tended to be:

Breakfast - cereal with milk and a banana Lunch - Big salad from the cafeteria at work Dinner - Lean Cuisine / Healthy Choice frozen dinner

It's certainly not easy, especially when you're first getting used to it. But, check out The Hacker's Diet. His thesis (which makes a lot of sense to me) is that weight gain or loss is directly proportional to calories burned - calories eaten. I suspect that if you look at it, by cutting out wheat and sugar you're cutting calories by proxy.

But, if it's working for you, stick with it. Congrats.

Charles Babbage gave up on the differiensial engine because he thought he could build a general purpose mechanical computer - the Analytical Engine! To recreate that device would really rock... if I had the time, money and (last but not least) the knowhow, I might try it myself...

Off course, an Analytical Engine would be way larger than a Difference Engine , since it would have to include a CPU (the 'mill'), a input device (Babbage himself suggested punch cards - an idea which the early electromechanical computers picked up), an output device (Babbage wanted to built a complete, automated printingpress, curveplotter and a bell to alert the operator of errors),and last but not least a 'store' (memory - the one envisoned by Babbage would store 1000 numbers, each 50 digits long). The Analytical Enginge was to be programable - which was it great strenght compared to the Differensial Engine - in a language resembling todays assembler languages. Such a machine would be slow and lowpowered by our standards, but would have been a gigantic leap forward back in the 1830's... shame he never got around to build it.

0---->
0---->

Which one traveled father? In a two dimensional universe, you'd say that they traveled the same distance. But then comes our third dimension that our fictional inhabitants perceive as "time". Here's a cross section of their X/Z axis (X is left and right, Z is up and down):

0----->
>

0

(Please forgive the lack of a line of the second item. Slashdot ate my ASCII art. Just pretend there's a line between the '0' and '>'.

Now which one drove farther? If you said the second one, you're correct. The second one, "took his time". He was traveling at an angle through the third dimension (Z) and thus traveled farther to reach the same destination.

If you understand the above, you should now understand time dilation. If I travel faster through the first three dimension of "space" (as our first car did), I would travel slower through the forth dimension of "space" that we perceive as "time". Thus time would appear to "slow down" as I go faster. But how does this explain light being invariable?

Ok, let's assume for a moment that the first car above represents a photon, and the second car represents an object occupying our universe. The second object has a vector that always tilts (at least some) in the direction of time. That allows the object to perceive time. But the second object only travels on the X/Y plane. This means that from its perspective, it wil

Yup. I was never as overweight as you were, but 3 years ago I was 195 (6'1") and wanted to get back down to my college weight of 160. 10 weeks of the Hacker's Diet did it. I kept tracking my weight for another 6 months and then slowly stopped doing it. Life got busier, and now I'm right back at 195 and easily in the worst shape of my life. I used to run a sub 5 minute mile, do all kinds of crazy mountain biking, etc. Now I'm sure I couldn't make it a half mile without walking. Fucking sucks! :)

This time I'm going to emphasize exercise more than limiting calories. Instead I'll try to eat better, not less, and let the exercise and a healthier appetite do the rest. Maybe tomorrow morning I'll finally get up early and go for a walk/run/bike ride.

You're right, though. Maintaining weight (and more importantly, overall health) is a lifelong activity. if you stop, you will backslide - ABSOLUTELY!

I've been trying to find some way to get exercise but nothing seemed to stick.... I'm fucking 24

If your wife is OK with that, then it sounds like you've already found the ideal exercise program.

Now, if I could just find a fun diet...

Take some advice from one of your elders, youngster. Take a look at the Hacker's Diet . It fits very well with a hackerish lifestyle, and is very effective.

I use it as the exercise part of The Hackers' diet and voilà! instant weight control. I lost 10 of the 20 pounds extra I had.

First, try playing at an arcade first. A few games will be relatively cheap. If it turns out you don't like it, you'll have saved much more money. Investing in a game you end up not liking is ever bit as bad as investing in exercise equipment you don't use. DDR Freak offers a directory of machine locations.

If you do like it (and don't have downstairs neighbors... *sigh*) playing at home is the cheapest option. Again, I'd go cheap at first; you can scale up as you need to. If you don't have a console already, grab a cheap used PS1 ($30 bucks or so), a cheap vinyl dance pad ($20), and a used copy of the original DDR or DDR Konamix for the PS1 ($10). The cheap pads are just fine to start. Which of the expensive pads to get is a much more complex question, but if you reach the point where you really want one, you'll have learned what you're looking for and be better able to sort through the available information.

All that said, just increasing your exercise level alone won't necessarily help if you just eat more to compensate. I know this to be true. Ummm, I'm talking about, er, a friend, yeah, a friend, that's it. Anyway, consider at least some minimal dieting in addition. I, erm, I mean my friend found The Hacker's Diet to be a welcomely rational discussion of dieting.

Trust me. I know how good it feels to plan out the good things you're going to do. That way, you're not really procrastinating. No, no. You're preparing. The project is underway.

Nicely put. Physically getting started is the hardest part of exercis. Well, no, continuing your chosen form of exercise for a second day when your flabby body is sore after the first day is *really* the hardest part. Nike's tag line is annoying but correct... just do it. Stop planning out how you're *going* to do it, and just do it. Or, if you like, keep planning the ideal approach, but start doing something while you continue to plan (and plan and plan).

I'll toss in a plug for the Hacker's Diet , too. Good exercise plan, good diet. I've lost 18 pounds so far, and I've gone from being doughy and pudgy to more toned and muscular. YMMV, but the important thing is to actually get up off your ass and do someting.

On a "me too" note, this "diet" just makes a crazy amount of sense, ESPECIALLY for the "lazy". The premise is: calories in must be less than calories out, or "burned". Line that up, and you'll lose weight. Period.

If you're a logical engineer-type, this document will appeal to you in a big way. Even his "lifetime ladder" exercise program is really, really easy and can provide you with a good, simple base for getting some basic tone in your body. Can you do one sit-up? Then you can start the "lifetime ladder".

If you're at all interested in losing weight, give his link a read. It's refreshing.

Doug

After a similar question was posted on /. a couple of years ago, I tried the Hacker's Diet, written by the co-author of AutoCAD, which several people recommended.

The book and the tools are all downloadable for free. It aims for gradual and consistent weight change through slight adjustments to your diet (just "smaller portions" rather than "thou shalt not eat X"), with light excercise thrown, in mainly to make you feel better. Because its not prescribing a massive life change, its fairly easy to get started and keep it going.

I lost 2 1/2 stone, and havent put it back on.

That isn't the scent of an evolution denier. That is the scent of someone making a goofy little crack about how stupid people are nowadays, despite the effects of billions of years of evolution. There is credible evidence that we really are getting dumber.

While Jacqard certainly has a major place in the history of computers, his looms can not be said to been computers in the sence we use today as they could "solve" only one problem - how to make fabrik.

No, the true inventor, if such a word can be used, of the true programable, mulitpurpose computer is one of Great Britans great geniuses from the early 1800s - Charles Babbage. In 1835 he presented a design for a programable, mechanical computer - the Analytical engine. It was to be powered by steam, and would been 30 meters long (roughtly 100') and 10 meters wide (roughtly 30'). It would use cards simular to those invented by Jacqard for input, while output was via a mecanical printer (rather simular to the printingpresses employed by newspapers), a curveplotter and a bell. Unlike modern, binary machines it would use base 10 in it's calculations.

Ada Lovelace, as someone else pointed out, was the first programmer for the analytical engine. It would have employed a launguage very simular in most respects to modern assembler, including the possibility to branch and loop.

More on his analytcal engine can be found here.

Enforced accountability in the routers? That would be scary.

--

Look at screens. Graphics cards have improved massively (electronics), screens (optics) used to be 1024x768 quite a while back, and typically aren't more than 1600x1200 now. The LCDs will hopefully change that though, since they're much more scalable (make more pixels) than a CRT (move beam faster).

See, this is why I want one of these. Unfortunately, there are no Mac-compatible video cards (yet) that can drive this puppy, and the PC cards that can still cost thousands of dollars. Still I must say, 3840x2400 at 22" (204dpi) is nothing to sneeze at. (or on.)

Then again, my Dell laptop packs 1920x1200 resolution into a 15" display, which is razor-sharp in its own right (150dpi). Jarring to realize that's barely over 2 megapixels.

Of course, as soon as they have a WHUXGA screen (7680x4800) on a 12" laptop, I'm there.

Here's a link for you on this oddity of relativity:

http://www.fourmilab.ch/cship/cship.html

Remember, everything is relative. All frames of reference are equally valid, and there is no "universal speeed limit". There is however, a universal time dilation limit. Once you reach light speed (impossible with a rocket or particle accelerator), you'll be forever frozen in time (just like a photon).

If you really want to protect your correspondences, check out JavaScrypt, a Javascript based MD5 encryption site. Explanations of why Javascript are inside.

This gibberish is always in spam to fool filters, but it could easily be used to send secure messages.

Running was a big part of my life- but a mixture of fatherhood, getting into I.T. and gaining weight got me out of the groove.

In february I went on the Hacker's Diet and got running again. The running has gotten much better as I have lost weight. The biggest help tech has been was replacing my radio with an mp3 player. I picked up a Nomad MuVo NX and it is awesome. No commercials, no sucky songs and it is a quarter of the size of my old radio.

The loneliness of the long distance runner is much nicer with my tunes.

I am currently working on developing a full featured 'running log' for the palm os. Once I get it past the initial design stage I intend to GPL it and put is up on source forge. Any other geek runners interested? Is there something already out there I've missed (that is open)?

Sure, it's only 2.8 million words. I'm sure you could throw together a solution quite easily. Here you go... http://www.fourmilab.ch/uscode/26usc/

I'm of the mind that the genie can't be put back - that open hardware will prevail, DRM will fail, and that alternative means of funding digital works will emerge such as variations on the street performer protocol, where it's the SCARCE act of creation that is funded, rather than the zero marginal cost of reproducing abundant old data.

--

The Cold War may be done for, but there are still guns in space, and all of them are Russian. The survival kit in the Soyuz spacecraft which ferries cosmonauts to and from the Mir space station is said to contain, among other things, a pistol and ammunition. This is not so much to put down the occasional space mutiny, but as a precaution in case of an off-course landing in a region with dangerous wildlife. In March 1965, due to failure of the prime retro-rocket system, the crew of Voskhod 2 landed in a remote region in the Ural Mountains and rescue crews could not reach them until the next day. They were forced to retreat to their re-entry capsule to escape wolves in the forest where they landed.

Vostok 2 finally landed near Perm in the Ural mountains in heavy forest at 59:34 N 55:28 E on March 19, 1965 9:02 GMT. The crew spent the night in the woods, surrounded by wolves, before being located. Recovery crew had to chop down trees to clear a landing zone for helicopter recovery of the crew, who had to ski to the clearing from the spacecraft. Only some days later could the capsule itself be removed.

See a rocket a day.

P.S. www.fourmilab.ch is by far the coolest site on the web.

The University of Geneva and the company id Quantique team to launch the first web site offering the possibility to download random numbers from quantum origin.

You are probably thinking of limestone. Calcium carbonate.

If memory serves, limestone isn't necessarily laid down by critters, but finding stromatolites or chalky cliffs ala Dover would be a very good sign indeed.

As would finding a fossilized opabinia, or one of the cannons the Martians used to launch their cylinders to Earth back in 1898.

Stefan

Last I checked HotBits was still in the random number business, using some radioactive sources.

The problem is that we're coming from vastly different points of view; so different that it seems we're talking around each other. So I'll start making a bridge. I ought to say I'm sorry for calling you an idiot, but I won't, since it seems you've brought your best thinking to the debate, at least once you got done whining. You think I didn't read your post at all when in fact I spent a long time reading it and working on my reply (notwithstanding the diversion into how many binary numbers are in fact evenly distributed).

You took my argument the wrong way; I have no intention of attempting to map the tortured turnings of your byzantine mind. I was trying to get you to accept that there are random events in the world. You went off and started talking about Laplace's Demon. My tactic was to make you see what a repugnant idea your radical determinism is, but that failed. I'll just put it to you straight. Determinism is dead. Heisenburg's Uncertainly Principle shot it and Godel's Incompleteness Theorem buried it. Einstein might not like it, but there are events in this world that cannot and will not succomb to the mechanistic tyrrany of a Turing Machine. God does play dice.

So skip the coin flip, quantum physics tells us that there are random events. It is not possible to calculate or predict alpha particle emissions.

That's the corner of the debate. You're not an idiot, you're right, it's not very useful in some situations to have a random number generator hooked up as input for a scientific experiment, because you can then never repeat the results. An LCG with a "properly chosen seed" is the correct tool to generate "random" input, when reproducibility of results matters. What you're not seeing is that there are situations, such as cryptography, where repetition is NOT desired, and so truely random numbers are needed and in fact do exist.

Where we actually differ is that you see that "properly chosen seed" as merely the output of a complex system, and I see true unpredictability.

If you'd like a random number of your very own, try HotBits which uses radioactive decay as its source of entropy, or if you prefer something cooler, try Random.org who can serve up random bits in whatever package you like, even via CORBA! Now, if you'll excuse me, it's time for me to take my completely predictable dog out for a walk.

jaz

I've seen a card with holes punched in it used at motor carrier fleet refueling stations. The reader is optical and these heavy plastic credit-card sized cards bear a suspicious resemblence to these cards right down to the square holes.

Sure does. At least until "Trusted Computing" comes along and takes control away from the individual at the hardware level. In such a scenario, subversive software like Freenet would never be "trusted" (by an authority other than YOU) to execute locally, and even if it could (like on chinese blackmarket hardware), its packets would be deemed "untrusted", and dropped, by the new breed of UN-approved "trusted" routers.

--