TrueCrypt *does* use different keys for each cipher. Even so, this would seem unlikely:
One night at Langley...
Analyst #1: "Another Commie Chinese Transmission picked up by our Man in Beijing" Analyst #2: "Ah yes. Mr. Jerry Wang GREAT AT SPYING ON THE CHINESE!" Analyst #1: ".. but if they ever found out..." Analyst #2: "Then Mr. ---**Jerry Wang**--- of ---*Yahoo*--- would be in a lot of trouble!" Analyst #1: "Hmm... seems the transmission Jerry picked up is encrypted by that subverise TwoFish." Analyst #2: "No problem... feed it through AES to decrypt it" Analyst #1: "But we don't know the key!" Analyst #2: "Pick anything! It doesn't matter..." Analyst #1: "Wow. I'll never understand cryptography!" Analyst #2: "It's not that hard. Ask any Slashdotter." Analyst #1: "Hey! You.. said AES... but wasn't that designed by..." Analyst #2: "Yes, Mr. Robert Redford. Hollywood Good Looks and a crack hand at cryptography. The perfect cover."
Because if you hear voices in real life, it freaks people out. But if you say you hear them during the game, people assume it's normal.
Seriously: Geeks love stuffing their brains full of obscure facts and extracting them to demonstrate their vast mental superiority. Whether it's from a VAX VMS manual (which is actually worse than hearing voices in your head) or from the Dungeons and Dragons DM's Manual, it impresses others. Not ladies unfortunately, but it will impress other nerds. This is called "The Force Dot Net Syndrome" or "I can't win at the Jocks games so I will invent my own"
I'd love to play D&D, but have you seen those manuals. There are three thick core rulebooks, plus a zillion extra rulebooks and appenpums and addendiums. In a cave? Get the Wilderness Guide. A magical portal opens? Quick! The Planes Guide. It'd be a nice idea if they could describe the whole game in 32 pages, but there must be over a hundred tomes of 'essential' information.
Fortunately Blizzard, Mastercard and Peter Jackson have since invented things for those of us who can't be bothered reading.
Depends on your definition. To my thinking, both Open Source and Public Domain are both "Freeware" (as in "Free Software"). Obviously some here disagree, but the Wiki definition of Freeware is closer to Open Source: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Freeware
Yeah ReactOS is chasing goal posts which Microsoft are constantly changing by design. It'd be nice if they succeeded, but as you say the odds are very much against them. They're a small team with little support. Linux is as much larger team with a lot of support, including big corporations.
If I was a fat ass millionaire I'd sling some large wads of cash the way of ReactOS and WINE, just for the fun of it. Can you imagine Microsoft waking up one morning to discover their cash cow has a free rival? It'll never happen, but I can dream:-)
One of the earlier posters suggested this. I tried change the about:config settings and the plugin with Googlebot/2.1 (+http://www.google.com/bot.html). Unfortunately didn't work with Journals. Guess they've shut down that back route.
Well Darth Springer, the more you tighten your grip, the more academic papers will slip through your fingers.
Now this is nice! Even since PGP took away PGPDisk from the freeware version and Scramdisk went commercial, we've been screwed for open options. I've been using Filedisk: http://www.acc.umu.se/~bosse/ It's Windows and Linux, reliable (used for years with no data losses) and the source is there. But it's very bare bones and a CLI only.
TrueCrypt looks good. It's got a nice GUI, explains everything, has promised not to go commercial and best-yet they give you the option to use MULTIPLE CIPHERS! YAY! As in why choose: Use AES *AND* TwoFish *AND* Serpent. Why other cipher packages haven't offered this is beyond me.
My only bitch: All the online help is on the web. People serious about security work on systems disconnected from the Internet. TrueCrypt *should* be fully self-contained. Overkill? Nah. Consider the case of the Half Life developers: one of them got email with a trojan which found and copied the Half Life source.
Lumpy writes: > change your firefox to look like a google bot when you go web surfing
Lumpy! That's a great idea! How can we do this? Inquiring minds (literally) want to know! Great Mods await!
daff2k writes: > So any journal that you submit an article to gets the right to print it, > but you always keep the right to distribute copies of your article yourself.
That makes a lot more sense.
If "intellectual property" is "Urheberrecht, does that make MIT's decision "Schadenfreude?":-)
> The main advantage of doing that for the authors (outside of altruism) is that you get cited more often,
That's right! I can't cite you if I can't see you!:-) Some authors from prohibitive journals put a draft version which skirts around it. Many don't. Heard on NPR two weeks ago that Congress (may.. always a may!) be about to ban publishing taxpayer-funded papers in restricted-access journals.
> On the plus side, there are emerging journals that have an open access policy and I'm considering one of them for the next paper I submit.
They really need to catch up with the times. It's amazing they've lasted as long as they have. The RIAA could learn something from these guys!;-)
Did you know that when an academic writes a paper, to get it published, they have to surrender the copyright to the academic journal? After that, they can't even give copies away. If someone wants to see it, they're supposed to point them to the journal publisher where they can "buy" reprints.
Who are these academic publishers? Springer, Wiley, etc. Try doing a scholarly search in Google. You'll find many PDF entries show a few words from the article, but no [cache]. When you click, you seen none of the article, but are taken to a "Pay Up!" page run by Springer, Wiley, etc. I wish Google wouldn't even waste my time listing these. (Note they even make an exception, allowing them to show one version of the web page to Google and another to the public. BMW was blacklisted by Google for doing this. Why are these publishers allowed to get away with it?)
In the pre-Internet days they could get away with it. But with the Internet, these companies should have dropped out of the business. Certainly Universities are sick of paying big bucks and would love to spend their money on more important things. Many third world countries can't afford them period:
Springer, Wiley etc should have gone out of business, but they've managed to hang on. How? In part due to Academics who still contribute to them. Prestige and promotion depends on having their papers published in 'prominent' journals. There are alternatives: peer-reviewed journals, organisational or web sites. What really stinks is most of this research is paid for by the tax payer. But the taxpayer has to pay Springer, Wiley, etc to read the research they paid for.
Hopefully Universities will finally read academics the riot act: "We're not going to buy anymore of your publishing buddies overpriced ripoff journals, and we're not going to give you credit for being published in one either" and for government/taxpayers to say "We paid you to do the research. We're not going to let you give away the results"
> Ionescu attempted to demonstrate ReactOS but only succeeded in installing it after two BSoDs.
With alpha or beta software, before giving a demo, test what you are going to do in private. If it doesn't work, don't do it.
Too bad. The world would be a better place with ReactOS. What we need is a fat ass investor with loads of cash and a grudge against Microsoft to donate to this thing.
Linux has proven you can have a viable freeware OS. Now, while Vista makes everyones life miserable, there is an opening.
You can crunch your maths on a computer made of Maple. You can read your mail on a computer made of Pine. You can surf the web on a computer made of Driftwood. Industrialists can punch the numbers on a computer made of Virgin Rainforest.
Grace Hopper: "Ahhh! It seems the program has a 'termite.'"
Microsoft's New AV line: "Look everyone! Bill's got Wood!"
Do they like/encourage digital Bedouins? You would basically be subletting 2m^2 of prime inner city real estate in exchange for nothing more than a stream of coffees. That's very cheap rent!
In 1994 I tried to buy a bare desktop PC from Dell or Gateway. Since it was to replace my old dead IBM PC (dead after 13 months), I didn't need a new OS. But both Dell and Gateway insisted I buy a new license of Windows anyway.
These days when I buy a laptop, it comes with Windows. When the laptop dies, I can't transfer the license to another PC. They simply don't even provide OS or recovery CDs/DVDs.
So much for the DOJ's Anti-trust agreement with Microsoft. Nothing has changed.
> By letting consumers know the watermarks are there, even if they can't see them, > Thomson hopes to discourage piracy without putting up obstacles to activities widely considered fair use,
"Wow! THIS SOUNDS GREAT! Where can I buy one."
In other news today Thomson's share price plunged in the face of sluggish set top box sales. "We're mystified", said the Thomson spokesliar, "but we're expecting great demand for our new screenless TV. It has no screen, so lets see those rat consumers watch pirated videos on that. Hah!"
What really bites here is these reports are always faceless. The USPTO doesn't "say" anything. Some anonymous bureaucrats that work there do. The public deserve to know who they are, because to come out with sheer fiction like this demonstrates they're clearly incompetent.
Many of us work in the corporate sector. If my colleagues and I were to put out a report, but then to hide our names and put it in the name of the company, then say something equally preposterous like this, my Director wouldn't have a bar of it. He'd rip into us, and if it was clearly and utterly incompetent, he'd sack us. He'd be negligent not too.
Yet we have these USPTO bureaucrats, *who we pay the salaries of*, churning out slurf like this? We will only have accountability in government where bureaucrats are named and held to account for what they say.
Can we use the Freedom of Information act to find out who these people are?
> Buy the largest travel towel you can find. They're the ones which feel like thick felt, > absorb crazy amounts of water, and dry out super fast. One of the best investments I ever made.
Personally I go with the smaller, lighter ones: A nice thick hand towel. Less weight, and they can still dry you off.
> Take a padlock with you. Most places that provide lockers expect you to bring your own lock. > A combination lock is better -- no key means one less thing you have to no lose.
Problem with combination locks: In theory a good idea, but the combination is too easy to change accidentally. I now use small keyed locks, with keys in multiple places. No point getting a huge lock, since they can cut through your bag anyway. But don't get a cheap one with only a couple of pins: they can be picked with a paperclip.
Slashdot Mirror
TrueCrypt *does* use different keys for each cipher. Even so, this would seem unlikely:
..."
One night at Langley...
Analyst #1: "Another Commie Chinese Transmission picked up by our Man in Beijing"
Analyst #2: "Ah yes. Mr. Jerry Wang GREAT AT SPYING ON THE CHINESE!"
Analyst #1: ".. but if they ever found out
Analyst #2: "Then Mr. ---**Jerry Wang**--- of ---*Yahoo*--- would be in a lot of trouble!"
Analyst #1: "Hmm... seems the transmission Jerry picked up is encrypted by that subverise TwoFish."
Analyst #2: "No problem... feed it through AES to decrypt it"
Analyst #1: "But we don't know the key!"
Analyst #2: "Pick anything! It doesn't matter..."
Analyst #1: "Wow. I'll never understand cryptography!"
Analyst #2: "It's not that hard. Ask any Slashdotter."
Analyst #1: "Hey! You.. said AES... but wasn't that designed by..."
Analyst #2: "Yes, Mr. Robert Redford. Hollywood Good Looks and a crack hand at cryptography. The perfect cover."
Because if you hear voices in real life, it freaks people out. But if you say you hear them during the game, people assume it's normal.
Seriously: Geeks love stuffing their brains full of obscure facts and extracting them to demonstrate their vast mental superiority. Whether it's from a VAX VMS manual (which is actually worse than hearing voices in your head) or from the Dungeons and Dragons DM's Manual, it impresses others. Not ladies unfortunately, but it will impress other nerds. This is called "The Force Dot Net Syndrome" or "I can't win at the Jocks games so I will invent my own"
I'd love to play D&D, but have you seen those manuals. There are three thick core rulebooks, plus a zillion extra rulebooks and appenpums and addendiums. In a cave? Get the Wilderness Guide. A magical portal opens? Quick! The Planes Guide. It'd be a nice idea if they could describe the whole game in 32 pages, but there must be over a hundred tomes of 'essential' information.
Fortunately Blizzard, Mastercard and Peter Jackson have since invented things for those of us who can't be bothered reading.
Depends on your definition. To my thinking, both Open Source and Public Domain are both "Freeware" (as in "Free Software"). Obviously some here disagree, but the Wiki definition of Freeware is closer to Open Source: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Freeware
:-)
Yeah ReactOS is chasing goal posts which Microsoft are constantly changing by design. It'd be nice if they succeeded, but as you say the odds are very much against them. They're a small team with little support. Linux is as much larger team with a lot of support, including big corporations.
If I was a fat ass millionaire I'd sling some large wads of cash the way of ReactOS and WINE, just for the fun of it. Can you imagine Microsoft waking up one morning to discover their cash cow has a free rival? It'll never happen, but I can dream
One of the earlier posters suggested this. I tried change the about:config settings and the plugin with Googlebot/2.1 (+http://www.google.com/bot.html). Unfortunately didn't work with Journals. Guess they've shut down that back route.
Well Darth Springer, the more you tighten your grip, the more academic papers will slip through your fingers.
And even Bill Gates has admitted to watching pirated movies on YouTube:
i ts-watching-pirated.html
http://www.computerworld.com/blogs/node/2803
http://labnol.blogspot.com/2006/06/bill-gates-adm
Remember Prohibition?
Not as bad as I thought: It only goes online for help during volume creation. Once you start TrueCrypt proper there's a PDF.
Now this is nice! Even since PGP took away PGPDisk from the freeware version and Scramdisk went commercial, we've been screwed for open options. I've been using Filedisk: http://www.acc.umu.se/~bosse/ It's Windows and Linux, reliable (used for years with no data losses) and the source is there. But it's very bare bones and a CLI only.
TrueCrypt looks good. It's got a nice GUI, explains everything, has promised not to go commercial and best-yet they give you the option to use MULTIPLE CIPHERS! YAY! As in why choose: Use AES *AND* TwoFish *AND* Serpent. Why other cipher packages haven't offered this is beyond me.
My only bitch: All the online help is on the web. People serious about security work on systems disconnected from the Internet. TrueCrypt *should* be fully self-contained. Overkill? Nah. Consider the case of the Half Life developers: one of them got email with a trojan which found and copied the Half Life source.
Lumpy writes:
:-)
> change your firefox to look like a google bot when you go web surfing
Lumpy! That's a great idea! How can we do this? Inquiring minds (literally) want to know! Great Mods await!
daff2k writes:
> So any journal that you submit an article to gets the right to print it,
> but you always keep the right to distribute copies of your article yourself.
That makes a lot more sense.
If "intellectual property" is "Urheberrecht, does that make MIT's decision "Schadenfreude?"
> The main advantage of doing that for the authors (outside of altruism) is that you get cited more often, That's right! I can't cite you if I can't see you! :-) Some authors from prohibitive journals put a draft version which skirts around it. Many don't. Heard on NPR two weeks ago that Congress (may.. always a may!) be about to ban publishing taxpayer-funded papers in restricted-access journals.
> On the plus side, there are emerging journals that have an open access policy and I'm considering one of them for the next paper I submit.
They really need to catch up with the times. It's amazing they've lasted as long as they have. The RIAA could learn something from these guys! ;-)
It must take guts to call people names behind the safety of your keyboard. Linux is free. Use your brain.
> You have reviewers, you have professionals looking at submissions and you have indexing.
But are the reviewers paid for their work? The 'professionals' looking at the submissions certainly are: They work for the publishing company.
Publishing costs on the web are low. All you need is peer-reviewers which are drawn from the academic community anyway.
Did you know that when an academic writes a paper, to get it published, they have to surrender the copyright to the academic journal? After that, they can't even give copies away. If someone wants to see it, they're supposed to point them to the journal publisher where they can "buy" reprints.
t ml
e er.review.html
Who are these academic publishers? Springer, Wiley, etc. Try doing a scholarly search in Google. You'll find many PDF entries show a few words from the article, but no [cache]. When you click, you seen none of the article, but are taken to a "Pay Up!" page run by Springer, Wiley, etc. I wish Google wouldn't even waste my time listing these. (Note they even make an exception, allowing them to show one version of the web page to Google and another to the public. BMW was blacklisted by Google for doing this. Why are these publishers allowed to get away with it?)
In the pre-Internet days they could get away with it. But with the Internet, these companies should have dropped out of the business. Certainly Universities are sick of paying big bucks and would love to spend their money on more important things. Many third world countries can't afford them period:
http://www.ojr.org/ojr/stories/121004ohanluain/
http://www.libraryjournal.com/article/CA6289896.h
Springer, Wiley etc should have gone out of business, but they've managed to hang on. How? In part due to Academics who still contribute to them. Prestige and promotion depends on having their papers published in 'prominent' journals. There are alternatives: peer-reviewed journals, organisational or web sites. What really stinks is most of this research is paid for by the tax payer. But the taxpayer has to pay Springer, Wiley, etc to read the research they paid for.
http://eprints.ecs.soton.ac.uk/2900/01/harnad96.p
http://www.press.umich.edu/jep/04-01/varian.html
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Scientific_journal
Hopefully Universities will finally read academics the riot act: "We're not going to buy anymore of your publishing buddies overpriced ripoff journals, and we're not going to give you credit for being published in one either" and for government/taxpayers to say "We paid you to do the research. We're not going to let you give away the results"
Has anyone heard of a house being robbed because burglars found a wireless connection?
Is this a scheme by AOL Skyhook Wireless to sell more Wireless Routers?
> Ionescu attempted to demonstrate ReactOS but only succeeded in installing it after two BSoDs.
With alpha or beta software, before giving a demo, test what you are going to do in private.
If it doesn't work, don't do it.
Too bad. The world would be a better place with ReactOS. What we need is a fat ass investor with loads of cash and a grudge against Microsoft to donate to this thing.
Linux has proven you can have a viable freeware OS. Now, while Vista makes everyones life miserable, there is an opening.
> Adobe Releases Cross-Operating System Runtime
Thanks Adobe. Porting my viruses to Windows, OS X, Linux, *nix, *nix, *nix is such a pain in the ass.
Now I can do it in just one go! Oh sweet!
> "Russian minister Leonid Reiman has announced new legislation to fight software piracy."
Oh Mercy Me! It's great to begin my week with a good joke!
You can crunch your maths on a computer made of Maple.
You can read your mail on a computer made of Pine.
You can surf the web on a computer made of Driftwood.
Industrialists can punch the numbers on a computer made of Virgin Rainforest.
Grace Hopper: "Ahhh! It seems the program has a 'termite.'"
Microsoft's New AV line: "Look everyone! Bill's got Wood!"
PS. You have my apologies if you read this far.
Do they like/encourage digital Bedouins? You would basically be subletting 2m^2 of prime inner city real estate in exchange for nothing more than a stream of coffees. That's very cheap rent!
In 1994 I tried to buy a bare desktop PC from Dell or Gateway. Since it was to replace my old dead IBM PC (dead after 13 months), I didn't need a new OS. But both Dell and Gateway insisted I buy a new license of Windows anyway.
These days when I buy a laptop, it comes with Windows. When the laptop dies, I can't transfer the license to another PC. They simply don't even provide OS or recovery CDs/DVDs.
So much for the DOJ's Anti-trust agreement with Microsoft. Nothing has changed.
> With more research, said Livingston, it may even be possible to find a way to postpone activation indefinitely.
I wonder what will be pushed out in tomorrow morning's Auto-Update?
> By letting consumers know the watermarks are there, even if they can't see them,
> Thomson hopes to discourage piracy without putting up obstacles to activities widely considered fair use,
"Wow! THIS SOUNDS GREAT! Where can I buy one."
In other news today Thomson's share price plunged in the face of sluggish set top box sales. "We're mystified", said the Thomson spokesliar, "but we're expecting great demand for our new screenless TV. It has no screen, so lets see those rat consumers watch pirated videos on that. Hah!"
What really bites here is these reports are always faceless. The USPTO doesn't "say" anything. Some anonymous bureaucrats that work there do. The public deserve to know who they are, because to come out with sheer fiction like this demonstrates they're clearly incompetent.
Many of us work in the corporate sector. If my colleagues and I were to put out a report, but then to hide our names and put it in the name of the company, then say something equally preposterous like this, my Director wouldn't have a bar of it. He'd rip into us, and if it was clearly and utterly incompetent, he'd sack us. He'd be negligent not too.
Yet we have these USPTO bureaucrats, *who we pay the salaries of*, churning out slurf like this? We will only have accountability in government where bureaucrats are named and held to account for what they say.
Can we use the Freedom of Information act to find out who these people are?
You can shop around until you find one to tell you what you want to hear.
They will cluck when you are caught, then offer to defend you.
Then offer to defend you on appeal.
> The Enron guy got to fake his death and walk away with gazillions.
Ok, Ok, You made your point. Where should I send the money?
Some good tips there, G1zmo.
My 2c:
> Buy the largest travel towel you can find. They're the ones which feel like thick felt,
> absorb crazy amounts of water, and dry out super fast. One of the best investments I ever made.
Personally I go with the smaller, lighter ones: A nice thick hand towel. Less weight, and they can still dry you off.
> Take a padlock with you. Most places that provide lockers expect you to bring your own lock.
> A combination lock is better -- no key means one less thing you have to no lose.
Problem with combination locks: In theory a good idea, but the combination is too easy to change accidentally. I now use small keyed locks, with keys in multiple places. No point getting a huge lock, since they can cut through your bag anyway. But don't get a cheap one with only a couple of pins: they can be picked with a paperclip.