All ownership is essentially a monopoly, enforced (if not created) by the State. If I build a pool in my back yard, I have monopoly control over who uses the pool. If I have an idea for a better mousetrap then I have monopoly control over who uses the idea. Both are enforced by the State. If they weren't, both would be enforced (probably less effectively) by the shotgun. Arguing that a monopoly granted by the state is wrong is arguing that all property is theft: it undermines the whole basis of capitalism.
Copyright "socialist"? I've got news for you: "socialist" doesn't mean "anything I don't like". Copyright is strictly capitalist. The socialist equivalent would be all IP belonging to the State.
2) WOPR can figure out a password (launch code) one character at a time.
I was once responsible for acceptance testing of a particular system, and discovered that it rejected a password as soon as a single incorrect character was entered. Because the specifier (not me) hadn't specified the password behavior precisely that was compliant with the spec, and passed the official acceptance tests, so we were forced to accept it. So that bit was plausible (well, at least as far as system development and acceptance -- deployment might be a different matter.)
I think "War Games" had a measure of accuracy, where the cracker spent weeks researching the private life of a system developer to try to work out what he might have used as a back-door password. Compared, say, to one of the Superman films -- was it Superman IV? -- in which all the cracker had to do was type "Override all security".
And don't forget the back-handed accuracy of Airplane II:
"Have you worked out what all those flashing lights mean yet?"
"No, sir. We're working on it"
I've met some very cute girls at conventions. It was more a case of telling them which comic books I read and which anime I watch. Mind you, I wasn't trying to pull. Had I been trying to pull in a context like that I'd probably have to claim to write or illustrate the comic books.
Right. When you originally said "Orthogonal frequencies...do not interfere at all even when one is extremely high-powered" which is completely incorrect in the context of radio interference.
The whistle that Hedy Lamarr requested would have had a beginning at least, and almost certainly an end, or it would not have communicated useful information. As soon as a pure sinusoid is bounded it ceases to be a pure sinusoid (the start and end are a form of amplitude modulation, if you like, used to signal one bit of information).
In the real world (hello???), the interfering signal isn't locked against the desired signal, so they're not orthogonal. No oscillator is mathematically perfect. No amplifier/transmitter is mathematically perfect. No filter is mathematically perfect. No receiver is mathematically perfect. A 2 MHz signal, with it's alway present first harmonic which isn't shown by your math, will interfere quite easily with a desired 4 MHz one, although they would be orthogonal Fourier components if part of the same signal.
If you look through the thread you'll find that I made exactly that point.
[sigh]
Orthogonality is a mathematical property of pairs of functions. There is no requirement that the functions are combined into a signal; in fact, Fourier analysis is done by multiplying the signal in question by a series of sinusoids that are not part of the signal. "Orthogonal frequencies" does assume that the frequencies in question are the frequencies of sinusoids, but no competent EE could miss that assumption and need it stated.
No. They're saying that terrorists could be a pain in the butt just by texting each other furiously. No surprise there. Loss of navigation systems does not bring a plane down.
I guess you're not an EE either, then, because no communication system uses pure, unmodulated frequencies. And anyway, if that extremely high-powered signal is lower in frequency than the other one there's every chance it will contain harmonics that are not necessarily orthogonal to the other signal.
In the UK at least you do pay to receive some texts. Watch late-night satellite TV and you'll see lots of ads for dating services which they say in the small print will keep sending you texts costing something like £1.50 each until you stop them.
Yes, and the button in an aircraft cockpit to fire a missile shouldn't have a little red flap over it, because the users should be looking at what buttons they press. Er...
Slashdot Mirror
All ownership is essentially a monopoly, enforced (if not created) by the State. If I build a pool in my back yard, I have monopoly control over who uses the pool. If I have an idea for a better mousetrap then I have monopoly control over who uses the idea. Both are enforced by the State. If they weren't, both would be enforced (probably less effectively) by the shotgun. Arguing that a monopoly granted by the state is wrong is arguing that all property is theft: it undermines the whole basis of capitalism.
Copyright "socialist"? I've got news for you: "socialist" doesn't mean "anything I don't like". Copyright is strictly capitalist. The socialist equivalent would be all IP belonging to the State.
Well, yes, but how long do you think it takes for the news to reach /.?
Click "Discussion" at the top of the main Wikipedia article.
2) WOPR can figure out a password (launch code) one character at a time.
I was once responsible for acceptance testing of a particular system, and discovered that it rejected a password as soon as a single incorrect character was entered. Because the specifier (not me) hadn't specified the password behavior precisely that was compliant with the spec, and passed the official acceptance tests, so we were forced to accept it. So that bit was plausible (well, at least as far as system development and acceptance -- deployment might be a different matter.)
If it were Forth it would be "security all Override"
Yes, that will be the one -- I remember it being Richard Pryor.
I think "War Games" had a measure of accuracy, where the cracker spent weeks researching the private life of a system developer to try to work out what he might have used as a back-door password. Compared, say, to one of the Superman films -- was it Superman IV? -- in which all the cracker had to do was type "Override all security".
And don't forget the back-handed accuracy of Airplane II:
"Have you worked out what all those flashing lights mean yet?"
"No, sir. We're working on it"
Boats float? Who'd a thunk it?
I'm an unashamed comics and anime geek (geek in general tbh) - and it's one of the first things I would divulge to a potential ladyfriend
Well, better that than they find out I work with computers...
I've met some very cute girls at conventions. It was more a case of telling them which comic books I read and which anime I watch. Mind you, I wasn't trying to pull. Had I been trying to pull in a context like that I'd probably have to claim to write or illustrate the comic books.
Are you from Westboro, by any chance?
See! It worked!
Gryphons would scare the unicorns.
Right. When you originally said "Orthogonal frequencies...do not interfere at all even when one is extremely high-powered" which is completely incorrect in the context of radio interference.
I didn't say that. That was imgod2u, not me.
The whistle that Hedy Lamarr requested would have had a beginning at least, and almost certainly an end, or it would not have communicated useful information. As soon as a pure sinusoid is bounded it ceases to be a pure sinusoid (the start and end are a form of amplitude modulation, if you like, used to signal one bit of information).
In the real world (hello???), the interfering signal isn't locked against the desired signal, so they're not orthogonal. No oscillator is mathematically perfect. No amplifier/transmitter is mathematically perfect. No filter is mathematically perfect. No receiver is mathematically perfect. A 2 MHz signal, with it's alway present first harmonic which isn't shown by your math, will interfere quite easily with a desired 4 MHz one, although they would be orthogonal Fourier components if part of the same signal.
If you look through the thread you'll find that I made exactly that point.
[sigh] Orthogonality is a mathematical property of pairs of functions. There is no requirement that the functions are combined into a signal; in fact, Fourier analysis is done by multiplying the signal in question by a series of sinusoids that are not part of the signal. "Orthogonal frequencies" does assume that the frequencies in question are the frequencies of sinusoids, but no competent EE could miss that assumption and need it stated.
If the particle came into existence at some point, it's not a pure frequency. I guess you're not a math major...
As I and others keep saying, interference with navigation systems does not make planes drop out of the sky.
No. They're saying that terrorists could be a pain in the butt just by texting each other furiously. No surprise there. Loss of navigation systems does not bring a plane down.
There is a definition of orthogonality for frequencies -- read up on Fourier analysis.
I guess you're not an EE either, then, because no communication system uses pure, unmodulated frequencies. And anyway, if that extremely high-powered signal is lower in frequency than the other one there's every chance it will contain harmonics that are not necessarily orthogonal to the other signal.
In the UK at least you do pay to receive some texts. Watch late-night satellite TV and you'll see lots of ads for dating services which they say in the small print will keep sending you texts costing something like £1.50 each until you stop them.
Yes, and the button in an aircraft cockpit to fire a missile shouldn't have a little red flap over it, because the users should be looking at what buttons they press. Er...