Slashdot Mirror

Notably, a lead such as: http://www.nist.gov/speech/tests/ctr/h5e_97/echoca n.htm

The echo cancelling software (ec_v2.5.tar.gz) that is applied to telephone data, may be obtained from Mississippi State University.

The LDC has provided a perl script (mu_ec.perl) that will take a sphere-headered, 2-channel mu-law waveform file as input, apply the MSU/ISIP echo cancellation software, and produce a sphere-headered, 2-channel mu-law waveform file as output.

Sig: What Happened To The Censorware Project (censorware.org)

Actually, while the reference within the post is towards a ST:tNG episode, ST Microscope refers to a Scanning Tunneling Microscope.

Yes, electrons can exist in multiple places at once, but that is limited to very short distances - the planck length. Using a beam splitter you can show that the same photon exists in two positions miles apart from each other simultaneously. This is actually done in the Laser Interferometer Gravity Wave Ovservatory. Let's see you do that with electrons, and I'll concede that they are particles in the same sense.

Well again. The use of the term "particle" to describe photons is well entrenched among physicists in order to describe how light interacts with other particles. Saying that a photon is a particle (and that electrons are particles) is a useful abstraction for some kinds of calculations.

QED, as we shall call it, is generally considered to be synonymous with the interaction of electrons and "photons", and the names most commonly associated with the theory are Paul Dirac and Richard Feynman (see the first two references below) who treated both entities, quite unambiguously, as elementary particles. QED achieved its most notable success in the period 1947-49, when the Dirac equation was modified to include the interaction of electrons with the vacuum electromagnetic field, thereby explaining, with enormous accuracy, some small effects in the spectrum of atomic hydrogen (Lamb shift) and in the electron's magnetic moment. This was first achieved by Julian Schwinger, who, building on Victor Weisskopf's ideas developed in the 1930s, described the electronic current by means of another field, so that the electron was no longer a point, but an extended object with a diameter of the order of a few picometers (the Compton wavelength). Schwinger's achievement was largely hidden from public view, though, jointly with Feynman and Tomonaga, he was awarded the Nobel Prize for it. Feynman's contribution was to show that Schwinger's very formidable calculations could be "simplified" by reverting to a pointlike description of both electrons and photons.... http://www.keyinnov.demon.co.uk/qed.htm

However, electrons and photons are both waves in the same sense with the primary difference that electron waves are about the size of an atom while photon waves can be many miles in length. In fact, the principle that electrons are also waves is central to the operation of both electron microscopes and our current explanations of molecular structure. (For example, it explains why graphite is planar while diamond is tetrahedral.) In fact, even protons and alpha particles have wave properties which is central to the operation of nuclear power plants.

But I'll even one-up you one. Not only can electrons exist muiltiple places simultaneously, but multiple larger particles can occupy the same space in a Bose-Einstein condensate. But here is a pdf article reporting the quantum superposition of an electron at a distance comparible to that of microcomputer transistor (0.4 micrometres). Also the NIST acheived superposition of atoms simultaneously in two locations at a scale of around 10 atomic diamters. As a result, particle/waves of light and particle/waves of matter don't look so different after all.

I've always wondered why it was that we've let Congress decide on technological standards, when we already have a government body chartered to do just that.

The National Institute for Standards and Technology has done a fair job in the past of qualifying and quantifying standards in the past, why aren't we using them now? I don't believe that we need to regulate standards in this case at this time, but if others feel so inclined, then why aren't we, the voters, telling Congress to do their jobs?

• Security Self-Assesment Guide for Information Technology Systems

• Security Self-Assesment Guide for Information Technology Systems

Choosing the appropriate SI prefixes for that amount gives the name "13 petawatts".

Here's the question: did they choose the "tera" prefix to create an impressive number, or because somehow "petawatts" doesn't cut it?

Terra is not the right prefix, you should use tera. Se International Units prefixes for more info.

For those who aren't familiar with the SI prefixes, including the story submitting AC: The correct spelling is "tera".

All American first semester physics students maybe. In our neck of the woods, you'd maybe expect a history student, or an English major, to know the difference between furlongs and fortnights, but certainly not a physics student ;-). Oh, and that stupid tagline: the only reason I added it was in order to keep with the style of your original post, and gather a couple of funny points in the process ;-)

(but apparently the guys at NASA did not)

And neither those at NIST ;-) And a google groups search reveals that the "is pound a force unit or a mass unit" question is a very common discussion topic, with apparently most discussions coming to the conclusion that it is indeed a unit of mass.

And if you didn't know, looking it up is cheating :)

The only reason I looked it up was in order to use US units. Indeed, initially this was not meant to be a flame about US versus SI units, but rather a flame about using coherent units (...although it has now become a flame about US versus SI...).

the proper SI notation would be

22 Mb/s

True, and that space between the unit and the quanity is important (see rule #15). Multiplication and division, in this case of Mb and s, is covered by rule #5. Rule #2 shuns "Abbreviations such as sec, cc, or mps", of course that would include "bps".

Quoting the headline... "802.11b at 22mbps". Who the heck would want a 22 millibit per second connection? Sure, I wouldn't mind a 22 megabit per second (Mbps) connection, but that's a whole different story I guess. :)

Here's a link if you're confused or need to brush up. As well as a link for extra info regarding binary multiples.

Have a nice day!

Quoting the headline... "802.11b at 22mbps". Who the heck would want a 22 millibit per second connection? Sure, I wouldn't mind a 22 megabit per second (Mbps) connection, but that's a whole different story I guess. :)

Here's a link if you're confused or need to brush up. As well as a link for extra info regarding binary multiples.

Have a nice day!

The author of the CNN article must not have read the bill yet.

It also includes a requirement that the National Institute for Standards & Technology (NIST) develop a "mark" that would be somehow affixed to the subject line of all sexually explicit advertising e-mail. Failure to use this mark would result in a prison term -- a longer one if the recipient of the e-mail was a minor.

No one seems to have the bill up online yet. Are they all out at CFP? Eventually the text of the bill should be available on Thomas. The bill number will be S. 2137, I'm told.

As always always always, my opinions are my own.

Liza

If not, then as pointed out on the web page, the relative strength of the electrostatic force (which is also inverse square) is far larger than the puny force of gravity and it could swamp the measurement.

For your information, a common way to measure G (the gravitational constant) in the lab is by using an oscillating torsion balance and detecting the frequency change due to the introduction of large masses in the vicinity.

What the heck is a dyne anyhow, what's wrong with good old' SI? NIST for those interested there's a converter between all the old interesting things like the pole, perch, hogshead, American mile, British mile, American short ton, British long ton and various other devients of the mind Here

but according to the IEC it's better to say "Gibibit" or "Gibibyte", etc. when referring to binary numbers.

Look at the national institute of standards' web page dealing with base-2 units.

So the hard-drive makers are right, but can still be flamed for a lot of other reasons:)

read this and learn how kiB means 1024 bytes, kB means 1000 bytes, etc.

If they want to view zoomed out images often, and they want to go through the effort of writing their own tool, storing the data in a quadtree would probably be a good idea to allow fast access to the data needed to generate the overview without having to process the whole file.

Of course, it would suck if they wanted to manipulate the data, but for viewing only it might be a good idea.

Yes, it does -- see this page.

Check out a dictionary of algorithms and data structures at:

http://www.nist.gov/dads

It is. The prefixes youre used to using: kilo, mega, giga, etc., are meant to be in 1000s, not 1024s. The IEEE has invented new, stupid-sounding prefixes to mean 1024-units: kibi, mebi, gibi, and so on.

1000 MB = 1 GB.
1024 MiB = 1 GiB.

one mebibyte = 1 MiB = 2^20 B = 1 048 576 B

See http://physics.nist.gov/cuu/Units/binary.html for more.

Factor Name Symbol Origin Derivation
2^10 kibi Ki kilobinary: (2^10)^1
2^20 mebi Mi megabinary: (2^10)^2
2^30 gibi Gi gigabinary: (2^10)^3
2^40 tebi Ti terabinary: (2^10)^4
2^50 pebi Pi petabinary: (2^10)^5
2^60 exbi Ei exabinary: (2^10)^6

• one kibibit 1 Kibit = 2^10 bit = 1024 bit
  
• one kilobit 1 kbit = 10^3 bit = 1000 bit
  
• one mebibyte 1 MiB = 2^20 B = 1 048 576 B
  
• one megabyte 1 MB = 10^6 B = 1 000 000 B
  
• one gibibyte 1 GiB = 2^30 B = 1 073 741 824 B
  
• one gigabyte 1 GB = 10^9 B = 1 000 000 000 B
  

• one kibibit 1 Kibit = 210 bit = 1024 bit
• one kilobit 1 kbit = 103 bit = 1000 bit
• one mebibyte 1 MiB = 220 B = 1 048 576 B
• one megabyte 1 MB = 106 B = 1 000 000 B
• one gibibyte 1 GiB = 230 B = 1 073 741 824 B
• one gigabyte 1 GB = 109 B = 1 000 000 000 B

A standard megabyte is 1 million bytes. A 1048576 byte unit should be referred to as a mebibyte. See for example this link for more details.

It is indeed the case that the error of using powers of two to approximate powers of ten starts getting very large with these big numbers. The solution to that problem is NOT to continue using decimal prefixes for binary units and expect everybody outside of the computing field who now uses those exact same prefixes correctly to adapt themselves, the solution is to use the correct prefixes for the correct values. That way the confusion will disappear in the long term.

Tom

This was my final year project thesis. Just remember the golden rule unstructured 2 structured == convert 2 XML I wrote a [very bad] program in C++/Perl/tcsh IPC=pipes to add XML tags to English, and then index them into a search engine which would use the lingual data stored in the XML tags to help the search.

NIST does a MASSIVE competition on this annually. I don't want to be an XML-buzzword whore <Arnold Schwarzenegger accent> (XML commando eats Green berets, C++, Java, Perl, COBOL for breakfast)</Arnold Schwarzenegger accent> but you can't beat XML for easily converting anything that you can make sense out of into computer readable format. Real h3cKoRs use SGML, but us underlings have to stick with things we can understand like XML. As for expandability, if we want to encode something else into the document, then just tag-it-and-go

It took me 200 hours to fish out all these links (before the Google days), I don't want anyone to have to waste as much time as I did feeding the search engines exotic foods. It's a year old so pardon me for the odd broken link, armed with these you could probably turn jello into XML ;-)

My favourite bookmarx
PROJect[21 links]
Beginners' Guide[13 links]
Berkeley Linguistics Dept. Course Summaries, general stuffzzzzzzzzzzzzzzCryptic IR Vocabulary defined
Explanations of weird words like hypernym zzzzzzzzzzzzzzHow do we produce and understand speech
How Inverted Files are Created - Univeristy of Berkeley zzzzzzzzzzzzzzNLP Univ. of Indiana, very good basics e.g. word sense d
Simple langauge - useful.... zzzzzzzzzzzzzzWhat is Natural Language Processing, links
What is POS tagging........ zzzzzzzzzzzzzzWord Sense Disambiguation defined
Word Sense Disambiguation in detail, scroll down far zzzzzzzzzzzzzzWord Sense Disambiguator - LOLITA (tested at MUC-7 and SENSEVAL competition as best)
XML for the absolute beginner

HTML, XML stuff + parsers[19 links]
Apache plug-in that uhhh does stuff with XML zzzzzzzzzzzzzzConvert COM to XML
convert XML, HTML to Unix pipeable formats zzzzzzzzzzzzzzconverters to and from HTML
expat XML parser zzzzzzzzzzzzzzHTML Tidy - converts HTML 2 XML + source code!!
Parse DB (RDBMS, whatever) to XML zzzzzzzzzzzzzzPerl-XML Module List
PHP Manual XML parser functions - what the hell are they talking about, PHP Virtual M... zzzzzzzzzzzzzzPublic SGML-XML Software
Pyxie - XML Processor for Python, Perl, etc. zzzzzzzzzzzzzzSGML+XML tools.org
The XML Resource Centre - massive number of links zzzzzzzzzzzzzzW4F wrapper - wrapper converts XML to HTML
XFlat - convert flat file into XML zzzzzzzzzzzzzzXML Parsers and other XML stuff
XML.com - Parsers, etc. zzzzzzzzzzzzzzXML-Data Catalog System - uhhhh looks close
XTAL's general converter - convert anything 2 XML

other Background[8 links]
Is Linux ready for the Enterprise, scalable... zzzzzzzzzzzzzzLinux reliability
Linux Versus Windows NT, Mark(sysinternals bloke) zzzzzzzzzzzzzzPC reliability (pcworld)
SPEC - Standard Performance Evaluation Corp. zzzzzzzzzzzzzzSystems benchmarks
TPC - Transaction Processing Performance Council zzzzzzzzzzzzzzUnix Beats Back NT In EDA Workstation Arena
Proper TREC(-8) QA systems[2 links]

pg. 387 LIMSI-CNRS pretty deep parsing[2 links]
More links....
NLP, IR links - lots to corpii, etc.

pg. 575 U. of Ottawa and NRL (shit system, got 0%)[1 links]
LAKE Lab
pg. 607! University of Sheffield (crap system, but OPEN SOURCE!)[2 links]
GATE - FREE IE app w`source code
LaSIE - ER, coreference, template (cv)

pg. 617 Univ of Surrey (inconclusive matches)[2 links]
System Quirk - Or is this their search system..... Hmmmmmm
Univ of Surrey - pointers (hopefully this is their WILDER search system...)

SMU - Pg. 65[1 links]
Natural Language Processing Laboratory at SMU

Textract[2 links]
Cymfony - Technology
Textract - State of the Art Information Extraction

Xerox uhhhhh maybe[1 links]
Xerox Palo Alto Research Center
(OVERVIEW) 1999 TREC-8 Q&A Track Home Page
NLP bloke, Univ Sussex


Tcl-Tk[4 links] Tcl tutorial
Tcl-Tk Contributed Programs Index
Tcl-Tk Resources, sources
TclXML - manipulating XML using Tcl-Tk
Artificial Natural Language - Is this what I'm trying to parse into...
Comparison of Indexers - Prise vs. Inquery vs. MG, etc.
Eagles - Language Engineering Standards
Language Technology Group - lots of modules!
LDC - Linguistic Data Consortium, lots of corpora
Lexical Resources
Links 2 resources, indexers.....
Lots of IR stuff, University of uhhh
Managing Gigabytes Indexer
Managing Gigabytes Manuals and stuff
Htdig search system
NLP & IR (NLPIR, NIST) Group
OVERVIEW OF MUC-7-MET-2
Perl XML Indexing - XML search engine type thing
Phrasys Language Processing Software Components (money)
QA HCI bullshit
SIGIR - TREC-type thing, resources
SMART indexer system documentation
Text REtrieval Conference (TREC) Home Page
The Natural Language Software Registry
Thunderstone IE and IR products
WordNet - FREE DOWNLOADABLE lexical English database

Page created with URL+, nice utility for working with internet shortcuts

This was my final year project thesis. Just remember the golden rule unstructured 2 structured == convert 2 XML I wrote a [very bad] program in C++/Perl/tcsh IPC=pipes to add XML tags to English, and then index them into a search engine which would use the lingual data stored in the XML tags to help the search.

NIST does a MASSIVE competition on this annually. I don't want to be an XML-buzzword whore <Arnold Schwarzenegger accent> (XML commando eats Green berets, C++, Java, Perl, COBOL for breakfast)</Arnold Schwarzenegger accent> but you can't beat XML for easily converting anything that you can make sense out of into computer readable format. Real h3cKoRs use SGML, but us underlings have to stick with things we can understand like XML. As for expandability, if we want to encode something else into the document, then just tag-it-and-go

It took me 200 hours to fish out all these links (before the Google days), I don't want anyone to have to waste as much time as I did feeding the search engines exotic foods. It's a year old so pardon me for the odd broken link, armed with these you could probably turn jello into XML ;-)

My favourite bookmarx
PROJect[21 links]
Beginners' Guide[13 links]
Berkeley Linguistics Dept. Course Summaries, general stuffzzzzzzzzzzzzzzCryptic IR Vocabulary defined
Explanations of weird words like hypernym zzzzzzzzzzzzzzHow do we produce and understand speech
How Inverted Files are Created - Univeristy of Berkeley zzzzzzzzzzzzzzNLP Univ. of Indiana, very good basics e.g. word sense d
Simple langauge - useful.... zzzzzzzzzzzzzzWhat is Natural Language Processing, links
What is POS tagging........ zzzzzzzzzzzzzzWord Sense Disambiguation defined
Word Sense Disambiguation in detail, scroll down far zzzzzzzzzzzzzzWord Sense Disambiguator - LOLITA (tested at MUC-7 and SENSEVAL competition as best)
XML for the absolute beginner

HTML, XML stuff + parsers[19 links]
Apache plug-in that uhhh does stuff with XML zzzzzzzzzzzzzzConvert COM to XML
convert XML, HTML to Unix pipeable formats zzzzzzzzzzzzzzconverters to and from HTML
expat XML parser zzzzzzzzzzzzzzHTML Tidy - converts HTML 2 XML + source code!!
Parse DB (RDBMS, whatever) to XML zzzzzzzzzzzzzzPerl-XML Module List
PHP Manual XML parser functions - what the hell are they talking about, PHP Virtual M... zzzzzzzzzzzzzzPublic SGML-XML Software
Pyxie - XML Processor for Python, Perl, etc. zzzzzzzzzzzzzzSGML+XML tools.org
The XML Resource Centre - massive number of links zzzzzzzzzzzzzzW4F wrapper - wrapper converts XML to HTML
XFlat - convert flat file into XML zzzzzzzzzzzzzzXML Parsers and other XML stuff
XML.com - Parsers, etc. zzzzzzzzzzzzzzXML-Data Catalog System - uhhhh looks close
XTAL's general converter - convert anything 2 XML

other Background[8 links]
Is Linux ready for the Enterprise, scalable... zzzzzzzzzzzzzzLinux reliability
Linux Versus Windows NT, Mark(sysinternals bloke) zzzzzzzzzzzzzzPC reliability (pcworld)
SPEC - Standard Performance Evaluation Corp. zzzzzzzzzzzzzzSystems benchmarks
TPC - Transaction Processing Performance Council zzzzzzzzzzzzzzUnix Beats Back NT In EDA Workstation Arena
Proper TREC(-8) QA systems[2 links]

pg. 387 LIMSI-CNRS pretty deep parsing[2 links]
More links....
NLP, IR links - lots to corpii, etc.

pg. 575 U. of Ottawa and NRL (shit system, got 0%)[1 links]
LAKE Lab
pg. 607! University of Sheffield (crap system, but OPEN SOURCE!)[2 links]
GATE - FREE IE app w`source code
LaSIE - ER, coreference, template (cv)

pg. 617 Univ of Surrey (inconclusive matches)[2 links]
System Quirk - Or is this their search system..... Hmmmmmm
Univ of Surrey - pointers (hopefully this is their WILDER search system...)

SMU - Pg. 65[1 links]
Natural Language Processing Laboratory at SMU

Textract[2 links]
Cymfony - Technology
Textract - State of the Art Information Extraction

Xerox uhhhhh maybe[1 links]
Xerox Palo Alto Research Center
(OVERVIEW) 1999 TREC-8 Q&A Track Home Page
NLP bloke, Univ Sussex


Tcl-Tk[4 links] Tcl tutorial
Tcl-Tk Contributed Programs Index
Tcl-Tk Resources, sources
TclXML - manipulating XML using Tcl-Tk
Artificial Natural Language - Is this what I'm trying to parse into...
Comparison of Indexers - Prise vs. Inquery vs. MG, etc.
Eagles - Language Engineering Standards
Language Technology Group - lots of modules!
LDC - Linguistic Data Consortium, lots of corpora
Lexical Resources
Links 2 resources, indexers.....
Lots of IR stuff, University of uhhh
Managing Gigabytes Indexer
Managing Gigabytes Manuals and stuff
Htdig search system
NLP & IR (NLPIR, NIST) Group
OVERVIEW OF MUC-7-MET-2
Perl XML Indexing - XML search engine type thing
Phrasys Language Processing Software Components (money)
QA HCI bullshit
SIGIR - TREC-type thing, resources
SMART indexer system documentation
Text REtrieval Conference (TREC) Home Page
The Natural Language Software Registry
Thunderstone IE and IR products
WordNet - FREE DOWNLOADABLE lexical English database

Page created with URL+, nice utility for working with internet shortcuts

This was my final year project thesis. Just remember the golden rule unstructured 2 structured == convert 2 XML I wrote a [very bad] program in C++/Perl/tcsh IPC=pipes to add XML tags to English, and then index them into a search engine which would use the lingual data stored in the XML tags to help the search.

NIST does a MASSIVE competition on this annually. I don't want to be an XML-buzzword whore <Arnold Schwarzenegger accent> (XML commando eats Green berets, C++, Java, Perl, COBOL for breakfast)</Arnold Schwarzenegger accent> but you can't beat XML for easily converting anything that you can make sense out of into computer readable format. Real h3cKoRs use SGML, but us underlings have to stick with things we can understand like XML. As for expandability, if we want to encode something else into the document, then just tag-it-and-go

It took me 200 hours to fish out all these links (before the Google days), I don't want anyone to have to waste as much time as I did feeding the search engines exotic foods. It's a year old so pardon me for the odd broken link, armed with these you could probably turn jello into XML ;-)

My favourite bookmarx
PROJect[21 links]
Beginners' Guide[13 links]
Berkeley Linguistics Dept. Course Summaries, general stuffzzzzzzzzzzzzzzCryptic IR Vocabulary defined
Explanations of weird words like hypernym zzzzzzzzzzzzzzHow do we produce and understand speech
How Inverted Files are Created - Univeristy of Berkeley zzzzzzzzzzzzzzNLP Univ. of Indiana, very good basics e.g. word sense d
Simple langauge - useful.... zzzzzzzzzzzzzzWhat is Natural Language Processing, links
What is POS tagging........ zzzzzzzzzzzzzzWord Sense Disambiguation defined
Word Sense Disambiguation in detail, scroll down far zzzzzzzzzzzzzzWord Sense Disambiguator - LOLITA (tested at MUC-7 and SENSEVAL competition as best)
XML for the absolute beginner

HTML, XML stuff + parsers[19 links]
Apache plug-in that uhhh does stuff with XML zzzzzzzzzzzzzzConvert COM to XML
convert XML, HTML to Unix pipeable formats zzzzzzzzzzzzzzconverters to and from HTML
expat XML parser zzzzzzzzzzzzzzHTML Tidy - converts HTML 2 XML + source code!!
Parse DB (RDBMS, whatever) to XML zzzzzzzzzzzzzzPerl-XML Module List
PHP Manual XML parser functions - what the hell are they talking about, PHP Virtual M... zzzzzzzzzzzzzzPublic SGML-XML Software
Pyxie - XML Processor for Python, Perl, etc. zzzzzzzzzzzzzzSGML+XML tools.org
The XML Resource Centre - massive number of links zzzzzzzzzzzzzzW4F wrapper - wrapper converts XML to HTML
XFlat - convert flat file into XML zzzzzzzzzzzzzzXML Parsers and other XML stuff
XML.com - Parsers, etc. zzzzzzzzzzzzzzXML-Data Catalog System - uhhhh looks close
XTAL's general converter - convert anything 2 XML

other Background[8 links]
Is Linux ready for the Enterprise, scalable... zzzzzzzzzzzzzzLinux reliability
Linux Versus Windows NT, Mark(sysinternals bloke) zzzzzzzzzzzzzzPC reliability (pcworld)
SPEC - Standard Performance Evaluation Corp. zzzzzzzzzzzzzzSystems benchmarks
TPC - Transaction Processing Performance Council zzzzzzzzzzzzzzUnix Beats Back NT In EDA Workstation Arena
Proper TREC(-8) QA systems[2 links]

pg. 387 LIMSI-CNRS pretty deep parsing[2 links]
More links....
NLP, IR links - lots to corpii, etc.

pg. 575 U. of Ottawa and NRL (shit system, got 0%)[1 links]
LAKE Lab
pg. 607! University of Sheffield (crap system, but OPEN SOURCE!)[2 links]
GATE - FREE IE app w`source code
LaSIE - ER, coreference, template (cv)

pg. 617 Univ of Surrey (inconclusive matches)[2 links]
System Quirk - Or is this their search system..... Hmmmmmm
Univ of Surrey - pointers (hopefully this is their WILDER search system...)

SMU - Pg. 65[1 links]
Natural Language Processing Laboratory at SMU

Textract[2 links]
Cymfony - Technology
Textract - State of the Art Information Extraction

Xerox uhhhhh maybe[1 links]
Xerox Palo Alto Research Center
(OVERVIEW) 1999 TREC-8 Q&A Track Home Page
NLP bloke, Univ Sussex


Tcl-Tk[4 links] Tcl tutorial
Tcl-Tk Contributed Programs Index
Tcl-Tk Resources, sources
TclXML - manipulating XML using Tcl-Tk
Artificial Natural Language - Is this what I'm trying to parse into...
Comparison of Indexers - Prise vs. Inquery vs. MG, etc.
Eagles - Language Engineering Standards
Language Technology Group - lots of modules!
LDC - Linguistic Data Consortium, lots of corpora
Lexical Resources
Links 2 resources, indexers.....
Lots of IR stuff, University of uhhh
Managing Gigabytes Indexer
Managing Gigabytes Manuals and stuff
Htdig search system
NLP & IR (NLPIR, NIST) Group
OVERVIEW OF MUC-7-MET-2
Perl XML Indexing - XML search engine type thing
Phrasys Language Processing Software Components (money)
QA HCI bullshit
SIGIR - TREC-type thing, resources
SMART indexer system documentation
Text REtrieval Conference (TREC) Home Page
The Natural Language Software Registry
Thunderstone IE and IR products
WordNet - FREE DOWNLOADABLE lexical English database

Page created with URL+, nice utility for working with internet shortcuts

You don't have to take our word for how secure this crypto iButton really is. The National Institute of Standards (NIST) and the Communications Security Establishment (CSE) have validated a version of the crypto iButton for protection of sensitive, unclassified information. FIPS 140-1 validation assures government agencies that the products provide a trusted, physically secure module to properly protect secure information.

FIPS 140-1 classification doesn't necessarily imply tamper resistance. It sets out 4 levels, with level 4 being the highest. At time of printing of my source doc (Ross Anderson's "Security Engineering", published 2001) there was only one level 4 device (IBM 4758 - the crypto unit used in e.g. ATM machines). The iButton falls officially into class 3 in FIPS 140-1, but in fact exceeds level three by some way. (Level 3 only requires potting of the components which doesn't rule out any scraping, sandblasting, drilling, EM leakage or memory remanance attacks etc.). FIPS 140-2 (which supercedes 140-1) is available online here .

The iButton falls into an area commonly known as level 3.5 and attacking it would be difficult, but not to the level of difficulty of a 4758 or similar device.

I would be particularly curious of how the iButton intends to detect "Micro-probing the chip" in order to trigger zeroisation. If this is purely based on the mesh layer in the chip then a sophisticated attacker using the "drill through the side" approach may be able to bypass this since the tamper resistant layer doesn't completely enclose the chip.

Not easy by any means, and certainly orders of magnitude better than a smart card, but it doesn't warrant the "You CANT do this to an iButton" position!

In fact, the IBM 4758, (or rather the CCA software supplied with it) can be cracked under certain privileged access conditions as demonstrated by a team in Anderson's group in Cambridge.

Definition: A model of computation consisting of a finite state machine controller, a read-write head, and an unbounded sequential tape. Depending on the current state and symbol read on the tape, the machine can change its state and move the head to the left or right. Unless otherwise specified, a Turing machine is deterministic.

(From: here)

*NITSCAP
*DITSCAP
*Common Criteria
*FIPS 102 Not to mention all the other FIPS criteria, esp. regarding crypto and PKI.
*NIAP (Information Systems Certification Procedures and Assessment Scheme)
*A Plethora Of Schema and Policy
*Ye Olde Rainbow Series
*MIT GASSP [warning, .doc file]

And these are just US criteria...other nations have their own. These are becomming very important, if typical job requirements on security-jobs list are any indication. Need a BS, a clearance, and 5 years practical experiance in everything from LAN wiring, vulerability finding and exploit production, penetration testing, firewalls and IDS, to the evaluation and application of these federal criteria, and everything in between. And that will get you an entry level position!

*NITSCAP
*DITSCAP
*Common Criteria
*FIPS 102 Not to mention all the other FIPS criteria, esp. regarding crypto and PKI.
*NIAP (Information Systems Certification Procedures and Assessment Scheme)
*A Plethora Of Schema and Policy
*Ye Olde Rainbow Series
*MIT GASSP [warning, .doc file]

And these are just US criteria...other nations have their own. These are becomming very important, if typical job requirements on security-jobs list are any indication. Need a BS, a clearance, and 5 years practical experiance in everything from LAN wiring, vulerability finding and exploit production, penetration testing, firewalls and IDS, to the evaluation and application of these federal criteria, and everything in between. And that will get you an entry level position!

The Common Criteria:
here and here.

Which supersedes the Orange Book:
here and here.

The actual department of the U.S. National Institute of Standards and Time is CSRC I would point you to the Computer Security Expert Assit Team and their guidlines
Their audit and risk checklists are quite extensive.

The actual department of the U.S. National Institute of Standards and Time is CSRC I would point you to the Computer Security Expert Assit Team and their guidlines
Their audit and risk checklists are quite extensive.

according to the National Institute of Standarts and Technology.

so we know it by definition, which is pretty accurate. it has to be, our definition of a meter depends on it.
but you wouldn't believe how a kilogram is defined...

One advantage of the new clock is that it ticks much faster. Today?s international time and frequency standards, such as NIST-F1, measure an atomic resonance of about 9 billion cycles per second. By contrast, the new NIST device monitors an optical frequency more than 100,000 times higher or about 1 quadrillion (US) cycles per second.

A 9 GHz oscillation can be hooked up directly to electronic circuits, counters, PLLs, etc. My first question when I read this article was, how the heck do you synchronize anything else to a "frequency" that's in the optical / ultraviolet range? I found some more information on this page and this one, so I guess that's how this new clock works.

One advantage of the new clock is that it ticks much faster. Today?s international time and frequency standards, such as NIST-F1, measure an atomic resonance of about 9 billion cycles per second. By contrast, the new NIST device monitors an optical frequency more than 100,000 times higher or about 1 quadrillion (US) cycles per second.

A 9 GHz oscillation can be hooked up directly to electronic circuits, counters, PLLs, etc. My first question when I read this article was, how the heck do you synchronize anything else to a "frequency" that's in the optical / ultraviolet range? I found some more information on this page and this one, so I guess that's how this new clock works.

One second is "the duration of 9 192 631 770 periods of the radiation corresponding to the transition between the two hyperfine levels of the ground state of the cesium 133 atom." (http://physics.nist.gov/cuu/Units/current.html)

However, you can take an online tour if that floats your boat.

However, you can take an online tour if that floats your boat.

I found this list of manufacturers that produce watches and other gadgets that use GPS, NIST, and other time syncronizing signals. They are listed under the VBC column in the table.

Like the contributer of the story, I have also often wondered why watches do not use these readily available radio signals to keep and display accurate time.

Although I came across this several days after the story posted, I hope this will be helpful anyone looking through the Slashdot archives. Better late than never! (?)

http://www.nist.gov/smartspace/

If you have questions about the system, please feel
free to ask.

Personally, I find bulky watches with millions of features and complex digital displays cumbersome and outright dorky. Yes, we are nerds here, but we can have a LITTLE style, right?

The perfect watch, as far as I'm concerned, is the Junghans Atomic Solar line. The styling speaks for itself, and technically they're a marvel. Since they're solar powered and sync to the NIST WWVB radio station, all you have to do set your time zone once - and never do anything ever again. No batteries to change, no daylight saving to worry about, no time drifting ever. Junghans, being a German company, also makes watches that can sync to European time standard stations.

Check 'em out here and here. Unfortunately, at just under $1000, they certainly aren't for everyone. .

I certainly can't afford one (yet), so I have to be content with my trusty Timex for now. :)

Ian

Until there is reliable encryption that takes prohibitively long periods to break (remember, WEP is broken, and the break is a relatively quick one), this technology is simply unsecure, particularly for corporate use.

You can two parties can use Diffie-Hellman key exchange to agree on a key even when all traffic is being watched.

Also, there is plenty of "reliable encryption that takes prohbitibitively long periods to break", such as triple DES (Data Encryption Standard), and any of the the Advanced Encryption Standard finalists, at least in the sense that a lot of very qualified people have tried hard to break them for a long time in a very open process and so far failed. (Rijndael won the AES endorsement, but, not to my knowledge, because of a vulnerability discovered in any of the other finalists.) Granted, these algorithms are not mathematically proven to require a substantial number of cycles to break or even to be as difficult as some other famous problem (like Michael Rabin's public key algorithm), but, if that is your standard of security, then you also should not be sending even your encrypted traffic over any internet backbone links that are not known to you to be physically secure.

Until there is reliable encryption that takes prohibitively long periods to break (remember, WEP is broken, and the break is a relatively quick one), this technology is simply unsecure, particularly for corporate use.

You can two parties can use Diffie-Hellman key exchange to agree on a key even when all traffic is being watched.

Also, there is plenty of "reliable encryption that takes prohbitibitively long periods to break", such as triple DES (Data Encryption Standard), and any of the the Advanced Encryption Standard finalists, at least in the sense that a lot of very qualified people have tried hard to break them for a long time in a very open process and so far failed. (Rijndael won the AES endorsement, but, not to my knowledge, because of a vulnerability discovered in any of the other finalists.) Granted, these algorithms are not mathematically proven to require a substantial number of cycles to break or even to be as difficult as some other famous problem (like Michael Rabin's public key algorithm), but, if that is your standard of security, then you also should not be sending even your encrypted traffic over any internet backbone links that are not known to you to be physically secure.

FIPS 140-1 is Federal Information Processing Standard 140-1. It's a document describing how the U.S. Government requires itself to do things. Read it here You can be certified compliant, but the process is done by independent labs, not NIST (home of FIPS).

TCSEC is also not a company. TCSEC, or Trusted Computer System Evaluation Criteria, is a book. "The Orange Book", to be specific. It can be found here as well.

The orignal poster's point is well taken, though. Whichever companies provided the certification might consider examining their process.

You might not be able to have internet access, but what about a standard voice line?

NIST has an Acutomated Computer Time Service (ACTS) that you can call with a 300-9600 baud modem. (The full data is only available at 1200B or higher.)

If a modem is also out, you may be still be able to use this by setting up a special-purpose system that has a modem, but all network services are disabled except NTP. Delete the binaries for all other network services, seal it in a plywood box, and it will be hard to distinguish from one of the GPS or wireless time servers.

As a worst case scenario, once a week call 303 449 7111 (NIST phone service for WWV), set your watch, then walk into the computer room to set the time server's time.

Here is one from NIST, detailing differnt ways (you could always use a modem, the cheap route):http://www.boulder.nist.gov/timefreq/genera l/pdf/834.pdf

How about this ? It is a Powerpoint (SORRY!!) presentation given by the Texas Instruments people at the 2001 Dcinema conference at NIST. Unfortunately it was out of date even back then, and is asssuredly more so now. For example, the 1920x1080 DLP Cinema was brand spanking new then. I was told that TI had the demo unit at only one location (other than the TI lab) before the NIST conference.

About the projector you mention, the Kiniton E, I don't know projectors by make and model (I should...) In any case, I have seen some projectors with a feature like the one you mention, it may have been the same. (Did I mention I MAKE films, seen a lot of projectors...) The thing is though that you still have to mechanically move the film. You can't eliminate jitter and weave in a mechanical system. Remember my yammering about how much the frame gets magnified ? Even small errors get magnified dramatically.

Jitter in a DLP system comes from external sources, i.e. the table shaking etc. (Should I point out that a film projector is more likely to make a table shake...Uh, guess I just did.)

There is a huge difference between litte jitter and NO jitter. There is no weave either. When you spend an hour or two watching DLP and then watch even well maintained quality projectors with trained projectionists...there is a difference. You really don't want to go back. That is just my opinion.