I do this too. I always figured that most people do this before starting a complex coding project. I actually frustrate myself because sometimes I can't remember my solutions once I actually sit down to code them.
That's not what "superset" means... it means quite the opposite, in fact. If Ryzen PRO chips are a superset of Ryzen chips, then all Ryzen chips are Ryzen PRO chips, but not all Ryzen PRO are necessarily Ryzen chips. The intended meaning is the other way around, isn't it? All Ryzen PRO chips are Ryzen chips, but not all Ryzen chips are Ryzen PRO chips, therefore Ryzen chips are a superset of Ryzen PRO chips, or Ryzen PRO chips are a subset of Ryzen chips.
Alternatively, one could say that the *features* of Ryzen PRO chips are a superset of the *features* of Ryzen chips.
A smaller set cannot be a superset of a larger set.
On a different note, I have a very simple question: is there evidence that these kinds of hardware security features actually do thwart attacks in the real world? Just curious.
I remember using AIM in the late '90s, and it had built-in support for graphical smilies. They don't count? I always thought graphical smilies were considered a subset of emojis... that's certainly how they're handled today.
...because programmers will already notice the problem when their code won't compile.
Substitutions of the letter 'O' for the number zero in numeric literals, function names, variable names, and other similar constructs will usually generate syntax errors, yes. (This makes me want to create a library called "Input0utput", just for headaches.)
However, the compiler probably won't notice if you make the substitution within a string or character literal (if the user types "Outbound", but the software is expecting "0utbound", this might be a hard problem to debug). I've only done this once or twice, but it was infuriating. It's one of those few times when commenting out the line and retyping it verbatim will actually fix the problem.
The fact that the keys are adjacent on QWERTY keyboards doesn't help anything.
...but that's true for other people writing text that might contain digits and letters, too.
I misunderstood this at first. I was picturing something like, "Mr. Orville's appointment is at 1O:OO.", where the substitution is harmless, so I didn't understand. In something like a model number, "MSO001" might be the first (001) release of a Mixed Signal Oscilloscope (MSO). Writing it as "MSOOO1" definitely obfuscates the meaning behind the model number. Of course, "MSO-001" would probably be best, but it's preferable to match the label on the hardware itself. So yes, I see your point.
But no, I'm firmly of the belief that the average programmer has a greater need (than the average typist) for easily distinguishable characters.
This sounds almost exactly like a gadget from Alias... Season 5, Episode 5, 'Out of the Box':
"There is a tomographic camera right on the bottom there. It basically acts like an X-RAY or a CAT scan. It takes images layer by layer. See? Look at that. This will allow us to take images of the Desantis files... without ever having to remove them from their storage container."
That episode aired in late 2005. Perhaps the writer should have patented it...
Alias is still on Netflix until the 15th of this month, for what it's worth.
The text of the third link reads "this post", but the target is "https://github.com/vjex", which is not actually a post. The *expected* target (avicoder's original post) is quite possibly the most relevant and useful page to associate with the story, yet that's missing in its entirety.
I try to cut the editors some slack (typos, incomplete sentences, poor wording/grammar, etc...), but a blatantly false title and a mistargeted link are enough to pull me out of the woodwork.
One of the things that always bothered me about this is the ambiguity of the approximation as well. Two interpretations: More than 500 times but less than 1500 times, using the interpretation Parent suggests, suggests ratios of 0.00067-0.00200. More than a ratio of 0.0005 but less than a ratio of 0.0015, suggests 667-2000 times.
How much overlap is there between these two ranges? 55.5% (667-1500) of the total range (500-2000) is overlap. The same is true for writing it as ratios: the range from 0.00067-0.00150 is 55.5% of 0.0005-0.0020.
This is tangentially related to why getting 40% off from someone charging 50% over MSRP is better than buying at MSRP. Without thinking about it, one might expect to spend 10% more in the first case (50% - 40% = 10%), but they're actually saving 10% instead (1.5 * 0.6 = 0.9).
Also, what would it mean if they were one time smaller than our galaxy (instead of a thousand times smaller)? How big would they be?
I'll try to keep this short. I am a graduate Physics research student, so I have a lot of first-hand experience here.
First, you're right. Get a laptop that runs Linux well. Others have discussed this thoroughly already, no need for me to repeat what they've already said. Second, definitely get one with the best nVidia graphics you can afford. If Quadro is an option, choose it, hands down.
I've seen people try to do physics and chemistry research in Mac OS or in Windows. It's a pain in the ass (but possible). It's really not worth the trouble... just use Linux. Worst case scenario, even running Linux in a virtual machine is better than being that one person spending half their time trying to figure out how to do XYZ in windows, because the instructions will all be written targeting Linux systems. Also, in physics research, you'll probably be writing code that will eventually run on a supercomputer (or, in our terms: high-performance cluster), so you might as well be running something as similar as possible to the cluster nodes.
Regarding graphics cards, nVidia Quadro is where you want to be (and try to get a good one, if you can afford it). I prefer AMD. I don't *like* nVidia. Unfortunately, being productive doesn't mean getting to use what I *like*. Everybody uses CUDA, which is an nVidia technology. If you want to be able to test CUDA code, you're going to need an nVidia graphics card. There are different versions/levels of CUDA support, I think the technical term is "Compute Capability" or something like that. You want to get the most recent one that you can, and I think these come to the Quadro cards before they come to the consumer lines. The Quadro cards also have other features that make developing CUDA code easier, although I forget exactly what they are. I think they're related to debugging. Consumer GeForce cards DO support CUDA, but still try to get Quadro if you can. By the way, recent "GPU equipped" supercomputers usually have nVidia hardware, too. I really hope AMD steps up their game soon, but the fact is, nVidia owns the high performance GPU computations market right now.
For background info: I personally do computational biophysics research. Yes, I have supercomputers at my disposal, but no, I'm not comfortable using them to test early versions of my code. The on-site supercomputer is CPU-only. I have a workstation that I use for development, which has a quad-core Xeon and an nVidia Tesla card in it (Teslas aren't available in laptops, otherwise I would recommend that instead). Yes, I reach the computational limits of my workstation CPU and my GPU. It's not hard in computational research. Other types of research will also make heavy use of the processor and GPU as well... the difference is that you might wait a few minutes, while a computational researcher waits 80 hours for his results. My laptop is an 8-year-old 17-inch macbook pro. The nVidia GeForce 8600M GT supports CUDA, but not a recent enough "compute capability" to be able to test code that will run on my workstation or the remote supercomputers. I mainly use my laptop to remotely connect (ssh) to my workstation, but that only works well because all of my work is command-line anyway. Speaking of remote supercomputers, I just got a grant that will let me use the Oak Ridge National Labs supercomputer, called "Titan". You can look it up, but it's got an nVidia Tesla in every one of its thousands of nodes (Maybe tens of thousands? I forget.). My advisor and I are hoping to get access to Oak Ridge's brand-new "Summit" supercomputer, which will also be running lots of nVidia GPUs. You can google Titan and Summit for details. Even if you're not doing computational research, or using supercomputers, most research packages support using CUDA for GPU acceleration, so it's a good idea to have anyway.
Point is: Linux + nVidia Quadro. As for brands? Who knows. My workstation is a Dell. My laptop is a Mac. I bought a Mac way-back-when because I knew it would be a "common" hardware configuration (since there's less variety in M
I disagree, I see FAR more CD-Rs floating around than DVD-Rs. I also find the CD-Rs are more readily available for "borrowing" from friends and co-workers, although I wouldn't consider that supporting evidence for their popularity. A 500 GB disk is roughly 700 times bigger than a CD.
Regardless, using whatever stretch you want, it was poorly worded. I read it as suggesting an increase of 100x the most dense available dvd-sized disks today, 50GB Bluray.
If you're securing something like THAT, it's very sensible to use algorithms that permit decoys using one key and hiding the real data under an alternative key. Truecrypt does this, for example.
I couldn't say that better myself. The only comment I would like to add is that there may be some clever people out there who might be able to devise a simple encryption algorithm that may be stronger than SSL, but I'd bet they have a degree in mathematics rather than computer science, if you know what I mean. Check out the Vernam cipher, for example. Simple, yet perfectly secure (in theory, implementations may vary). I don't know what education Gilbert Vernam had, but in 1917 I doubt it was in computer science.
My first thought upon reading the summary was, "Nine percent? I'm glad that at least the majority of slashdot users have switched." And then I thought, "Oh wait, look what I'm running..."
I bounce from machine to machine at work, never staying long enough on one machine to bother customizing it. Rather than install Firefox or Chrome on each computer I use, I just use whatever's already there. IE 8 is on every machine, so I find myself using it more often than I realized.
It never occurred to me that a lot of the 9% is probably people who aren't using it by preference, but simply because they're lazy (myself included).
Come on guys, this is Slashdot we're on here! There's another big problem with using a centralized server. As soon as someone wants to wreak havoc on Facebook, all they have to do is DDOS the key server. If this were to catch on and most images become encrypted like that, it'd be a pretty quick and easy way to upset a lot of people.
I remember, and have pictures to prove it! I was on the computer at a very young age; I was even using DOS at the age of four. I understood the basic concepts and got along just fine. Prior, I was using custom menus made by my dad. Yes, I could read and spell, although hand writing is still debatable. Admittedly, I remember thinking "and" was spelled "n" and similar things (wait, maybe I was just ahead of my time!!). Internet access wasn't available as far as I'm aware, but I think my dad dialed into my uncle over the phone every once in a while. I didn't start getting into that kind of stuff until Windows 98 (SE). Memories.... I messed with all kinds of settings. My rule of thumb: if it asked me if I was sure, the answer was (almost) always NO!
I've been using it for the past few months. I must warn that it's not the most user friendly, but it has a lot of commercial backing. As long as you read the documentation, you'll be fine.
It runs on x86 hardware. I'm running it in a virtual machine running on an Ubuntu box, there's one gigabit NIC in it, but the VM has two virtual NICs. It works incredibly well.
The new version has support for wireless, including N, but I can't vouch for that since I haven't used it. If it's anything like the rest of their stuff, it works flawlessly.
One of my favorite parts about Vyatta is that all its configuration is stored in a single file. If you've put this file on a flash drive, you can boot the livecd and run right off of that if you like. Obviously, if you install extra software or configure things outside of the Vyatta shell, that doesn't go in the config file. Although I don't run off of the livecd, this convenient config file is an easy way to verify the integrity of the system. If you're worried you got hacked, just back up your config and do a clean install. All you have to do is look over the file to make sure everything looks right, and you're good to go.
I'm not fond of Vyatta's commercial aspects, but if you can live with the details listed here then the only thing you have between you and a brilliant setup is the manuals!
I was looking at DD-WRT for a while, but then decided against it because of all the controversy. I honestly don't remember what I didn't like about OpenWRT, but something kept me from trying that too. The big difference between almost everything that's been mentioned so far (DD-WRT, OpenWRT, Tomato, etc...) and Vyatta is that while the former are mostly intended for SOHO users, Vyatta is intended as a Cisco competitor for big business. I actually like pouring hours into reading documentation so I can use "enterprise" stuff like Vyatta at home, but it's up to you to decide which way you want to go.
For the record: like many other posters above, I'm not affiliated with Vyatta in any way, I'm just completely startled by the fact that nobody's mentioned it so far. Does Vyatta have a big black mark that nobody's told me about, or is it just not as well known?
By the way: Vyatta sells their own hardware too, but it's pretty pricey. It starts at ~$800 and reaches up over $10K. Personally, I think it's way overpriced, but I suppose there are appropriate situations for such equipment.
Very interesting, I don't know anything about that yet. What does such an effect depend upon? It obviously depends on the material and its metallic properties. Does it depend on the quantity of the material? Why does it apply only to metals? Would it apply to metals that do not conduct well, like Tungsten? Is your post theory, or is the effect known to be significant enough to be serious? Do you have any theories about why we are not using plastics instead of titanium then?
If the conductor follows a path that keeps the strength of the magnetic field constant, there will be no induced electric current. Without knowing much about MRI machines (specifically the shape of their field), I can't say whether it's likely or not to move along such a path. If the conductor moves such that the strength of the magnetic field at the conductor barely changes, there would be barely any current induced.
One case where no current would be produced would be if a conductor is moved parallel to a current-carrying wire. The wire generates a static magnetic field which does not change along the length of the wire, so the conductor does not experience any change in the magnetic field as it moves.
Now, I'm not entirely up on my E&M, but this ought to be somewhat informative to some people reading it. There are only three metallic elements (not including Rare Earth Metals) that can be magnetized: Iron, Nickel, and Cobalt. Titanium is not one of them, thus it won't be sucked toward a simple magnet. Note: Steel has Iron in it, that's why it is attracted to magnets and can be magnetized, etc...
Therefore, the reason why everyone uses titanium implants may be because they CAN in fact be near (or in) MRI machine.
On the other hand, there may be other things at play here. This is why my iffy E&M knowledge comes into play. I'm pretty much positive that the following is true, but I'm not sure that the effects are significant enough to matter. A changing magnetic field creates a current in conductors, which in turn creates its own magnetic field (opposite to the original one). These two magnetic fields would lead to a force. So... you may have current and a force acting on your titanium implant IF MRI machines use constantly changing magnetic fields. These effects are only present as the field changes, and go away if the field becomes constant.
I believe the MRI machine's magnetic field is constantly changing, but I don't believe that the current generated is enough to be even slightly harmful. The strength of a magnetic field decreases as an inverse-square relation to the distance away, so at 40 centimeters away the field is one sixteenth as strong as at 10 centimeters away from the magnet(s). I also don't believe that the resulting magnetic field would be strong enough to cause a noticeable force, for the same reasons. I would not be afraid to use an MRI with titanium implants.
If I remember correctly, they let me wear my brass belt-buckle in the MRI and it was fine. Brass is Copper and Zinc, neither of which are magnetic. There are some more fine details about ferromagnetics and paramagnetics, but for simplicity I'm leaving them out. I'm a Physics major, but I'm only starting my first college E&M course on the 19th (the above knowledge was from three years of physics in high-school).
I would love to see what a diamagnetic material would do in an MRI.
Whoa whoa whoa, slow down there. I'm a college freshman, in fact I just finished my first semester of classes today and have my finals on Wednesday and Friday. I take my laptop with me every day for several reasons.
First, all of my professors expect us to check our e-mail multiple times each day, and several have specific coursework that must be completed on a computer outside of class. At the college I attend, most of the students have laptops (I can't think of anyone specifically who doesn't). Although these tasks can be accomplished in the university labs, having a laptop makes it considerably easier.
Second, I never let it out of my sight (literally, with the one exception of when it's on my back), and take rather good care of it. I paid the $3200 price tag for a laptop I could get decent virtualization and CUDA performance out of, so it's not surprising that the only damage it has suffered since April 2008 is a small nick in the edge of the plastic below my trackpad (I dropped my graphing calculator).
Third, I'll admit that I have one friend whose laptop might as well be disposable as far as his parents' wallet is concerned, but that is not the norm. My best friend bought his laptop out of pocket (similar price tag to mine), and most of my other friends split the cost with their parents.
That all set aside, I strongly support giving children laptops. My dad started me on his computer when I was two years old, and I don't mean with big plastic attachments or anything, not even a mouse at that time. Sixteen years later I'm not a computer-science major because of the sheer boredom I find in taking the classes. Unfortunately the University won't let me test out of prerequisites. On the other hand, my parents barely ever bought anything for my computer. Being limited to minimal software (Windows and Office, not much else) pushed me to try out FOSS, which I quickly came to love. Being limited by dated hardware caused me to explore Linux and Unix operating systems as well as to learn how to sap the most power possible out of the hardware available to me.
Just my two cents, take it from a college kid who wasn't spoiled but grew up with computers his whole life. Really, we don't all party, many (most) of us take good care of our laptops and don't risk them being stolen, and often mommy and daddy won't buy us the first one, let alone a new one. Not technically, but realistically, we do need them to do our college work as well.
Where do I need to relocate to in order to get a 100mbit residential connection? As far as I'm aware, the only things "widespread" in the US is Verizon and Comcast, and they only go up to 50 mbit it seems. I know Japan's got it all over the place, I'm curious where you guys are getting it from.
Slashdot Mirror
I do this too. I always figured that most people do this before starting a complex coding project. I actually frustrate myself because sometimes I can't remember my solutions once I actually sit down to code them.
That's not what "superset" means... it means quite the opposite, in fact. If Ryzen PRO chips are a superset of Ryzen chips, then all Ryzen chips are Ryzen PRO chips, but not all Ryzen PRO are necessarily Ryzen chips. The intended meaning is the other way around, isn't it? All Ryzen PRO chips are Ryzen chips, but not all Ryzen chips are Ryzen PRO chips, therefore Ryzen chips are a superset of Ryzen PRO chips, or Ryzen PRO chips are a subset of Ryzen chips.
Alternatively, one could say that the *features* of Ryzen PRO chips are a superset of the *features* of Ryzen chips.
A smaller set cannot be a superset of a larger set.
On a different note, I have a very simple question: is there evidence that these kinds of hardware security features actually do thwart attacks in the real world? Just curious.
I remember using AIM in the late '90s, and it had built-in support for graphical smilies. They don't count? I always thought graphical smilies were considered a subset of emojis... that's certainly how they're handled today.
Here's a shortcut to the original blog post (linked in the article).
How the Web Became Unreadable
https://backchannel.com/how-th...
...because programmers will already notice the problem when their code won't compile.
Substitutions of the letter 'O' for the number zero in numeric literals, function names, variable names, and other similar constructs will usually generate syntax errors, yes. (This makes me want to create a library called "Input0utput", just for headaches.)
However, the compiler probably won't notice if you make the substitution within a string or character literal (if the user types "Outbound", but the software is expecting "0utbound", this might be a hard problem to debug). I've only done this once or twice, but it was infuriating. It's one of those few times when commenting out the line and retyping it verbatim will actually fix the problem.
The fact that the keys are adjacent on QWERTY keyboards doesn't help anything.
...but that's true for other people writing text that might contain digits and letters, too.
I misunderstood this at first. I was picturing something like, "Mr. Orville's appointment is at 1O:OO.", where the substitution is harmless, so I didn't understand. In something like a model number, "MSO001" might be the first (001) release of a Mixed Signal Oscilloscope (MSO). Writing it as "MSOOO1" definitely obfuscates the meaning behind the model number. Of course, "MSO-001" would probably be best, but it's preferable to match the label on the hardware itself. So yes, I see your point.
But no, I'm firmly of the belief that the average programmer has a greater need (than the average typist) for easily distinguishable characters.
This sounds almost exactly like a gadget from Alias... Season 5, Episode 5, 'Out of the Box':
"There is a tomographic camera right on the bottom there. It basically acts like an X-RAY or a CAT scan. It takes images layer by layer. See? Look at that. This will allow us to take images of the Desantis files... without ever having to remove them from their storage container."
That episode aired in late 2005. Perhaps the writer should have patented it...
Alias is still on Netflix until the 15th of this month, for what it's worth.
Agreed, I noticed this immediately. I RTFA (which is practically the same as the summary anyway) just to check. Thanks for the link.
The text of the third link reads "this post", but the target is "https://github.com/vjex", which is not actually a post. The *expected* target (avicoder's original post) is quite possibly the most relevant and useful page to associate with the story, yet that's missing in its entirety.
I try to cut the editors some slack (typos, incomplete sentences, poor wording/grammar, etc...), but a blatantly false title and a mistargeted link are enough to pull me out of the woodwork.
One of the things that always bothered me about this is the ambiguity of the approximation as well. Two interpretations:
More than 500 times but less than 1500 times, using the interpretation Parent suggests, suggests ratios of 0.00067-0.00200.
More than a ratio of 0.0005 but less than a ratio of 0.0015, suggests 667-2000 times.
How much overlap is there between these two ranges? 55.5% (667-1500) of the total range (500-2000) is overlap. The same is true for writing it as ratios: the range from 0.00067-0.00150 is 55.5% of 0.0005-0.0020.
This is tangentially related to why getting 40% off from someone charging 50% over MSRP is better than buying at MSRP. Without thinking about it, one might expect to spend 10% more in the first case (50% - 40% = 10%), but they're actually saving 10% instead (1.5 * 0.6 = 0.9).
Also, what would it mean if they were one time smaller than our galaxy (instead of a thousand times smaller)? How big would they be?
I'll try to keep this short. I am a graduate Physics research student, so I have a lot of first-hand experience here.
First, you're right. Get a laptop that runs Linux well. Others have discussed this thoroughly already, no need for me to repeat what they've already said. Second, definitely get one with the best nVidia graphics you can afford. If Quadro is an option, choose it, hands down.
I've seen people try to do physics and chemistry research in Mac OS or in Windows. It's a pain in the ass (but possible). It's really not worth the trouble... just use Linux. Worst case scenario, even running Linux in a virtual machine is better than being that one person spending half their time trying to figure out how to do XYZ in windows, because the instructions will all be written targeting Linux systems. Also, in physics research, you'll probably be writing code that will eventually run on a supercomputer (or, in our terms: high-performance cluster), so you might as well be running something as similar as possible to the cluster nodes.
Regarding graphics cards, nVidia Quadro is where you want to be (and try to get a good one, if you can afford it). I prefer AMD. I don't *like* nVidia. Unfortunately, being productive doesn't mean getting to use what I *like*. Everybody uses CUDA, which is an nVidia technology. If you want to be able to test CUDA code, you're going to need an nVidia graphics card. There are different versions/levels of CUDA support, I think the technical term is "Compute Capability" or something like that. You want to get the most recent one that you can, and I think these come to the Quadro cards before they come to the consumer lines. The Quadro cards also have other features that make developing CUDA code easier, although I forget exactly what they are. I think they're related to debugging. Consumer GeForce cards DO support CUDA, but still try to get Quadro if you can. By the way, recent "GPU equipped" supercomputers usually have nVidia hardware, too. I really hope AMD steps up their game soon, but the fact is, nVidia owns the high performance GPU computations market right now.
For background info: I personally do computational biophysics research. Yes, I have supercomputers at my disposal, but no, I'm not comfortable using them to test early versions of my code. The on-site supercomputer is CPU-only. I have a workstation that I use for development, which has a quad-core Xeon and an nVidia Tesla card in it (Teslas aren't available in laptops, otherwise I would recommend that instead). Yes, I reach the computational limits of my workstation CPU and my GPU. It's not hard in computational research. Other types of research will also make heavy use of the processor and GPU as well... the difference is that you might wait a few minutes, while a computational researcher waits 80 hours for his results. My laptop is an 8-year-old 17-inch macbook pro. The nVidia GeForce 8600M GT supports CUDA, but not a recent enough "compute capability" to be able to test code that will run on my workstation or the remote supercomputers. I mainly use my laptop to remotely connect (ssh) to my workstation, but that only works well because all of my work is command-line anyway. Speaking of remote supercomputers, I just got a grant that will let me use the Oak Ridge National Labs supercomputer, called "Titan". You can look it up, but it's got an nVidia Tesla in every one of its thousands of nodes (Maybe tens of thousands? I forget.). My advisor and I are hoping to get access to Oak Ridge's brand-new "Summit" supercomputer, which will also be running lots of nVidia GPUs. You can google Titan and Summit for details. Even if you're not doing computational research, or using supercomputers, most research packages support using CUDA for GPU acceleration, so it's a good idea to have anyway.
Point is: Linux + nVidia Quadro. As for brands? Who knows. My workstation is a Dell. My laptop is a Mac. I bought a Mac way-back-when because I knew it would be a "common" hardware configuration (since there's less variety in M
I disagree, I see FAR more CD-Rs floating around than DVD-Rs. I also find the CD-Rs are more readily available for "borrowing" from friends and co-workers, although I wouldn't consider that supporting evidence for their popularity. A 500 GB disk is roughly 700 times bigger than a CD.
Regardless, using whatever stretch you want, it was poorly worded. I read it as suggesting an increase of 100x the most dense available dvd-sized disks today, 50GB Bluray.
If you're securing something like THAT, it's very sensible to use algorithms that permit decoys using one key and hiding the real data under an alternative key. Truecrypt does this, for example.
I couldn't say that better myself. The only comment I would like to add is that there may be some clever people out there who might be able to devise a simple encryption algorithm that may be stronger than SSL, but I'd bet they have a degree in mathematics rather than computer science, if you know what I mean. Check out the Vernam cipher, for example. Simple, yet perfectly secure (in theory, implementations may vary). I don't know what education Gilbert Vernam had, but in 1917 I doubt it was in computer science.
My first thought upon reading the summary was, "Nine percent? I'm glad that at least the majority of slashdot users have switched." And then I thought, "Oh wait, look what I'm running..."
I bounce from machine to machine at work, never staying long enough on one machine to bother customizing it. Rather than install Firefox or Chrome on each computer I use, I just use whatever's already there. IE 8 is on every machine, so I find myself using it more often than I realized.
It never occurred to me that a lot of the 9% is probably people who aren't using it by preference, but simply because they're lazy (myself included).
Come on guys, this is Slashdot we're on here!
There's another big problem with using a centralized server. As soon as someone wants to wreak havoc on Facebook, all they have to do is DDOS the key server. If this were to catch on and most images become encrypted like that, it'd be a pretty quick and easy way to upset a lot of people.
I remember, and have pictures to prove it! I was on the computer at a very young age; I was even using DOS at the age of four. I understood the basic concepts and got along just fine. Prior, I was using custom menus made by my dad. Yes, I could read and spell, although hand writing is still debatable. Admittedly, I remember thinking "and" was spelled "n" and similar things (wait, maybe I was just ahead of my time!!). Internet access wasn't available as far as I'm aware, but I think my dad dialed into my uncle over the phone every once in a while. I didn't start getting into that kind of stuff until Windows 98 (SE). Memories.... I messed with all kinds of settings. My rule of thumb: if it asked me if I was sure, the answer was (almost) always NO!
See: their commercial site and their community (read: free!) site
I've been using it for the past few months. I must warn that it's not the most user friendly, but it has a lot of commercial backing. As long as you read the documentation, you'll be fine.
It runs on x86 hardware. I'm running it in a virtual machine running on an Ubuntu box, there's one gigabit NIC in it, but the VM has two virtual NICs. It works incredibly well.
The new version has support for wireless, including N, but I can't vouch for that since I haven't used it. If it's anything like the rest of their stuff, it works flawlessly.
One of my favorite parts about Vyatta is that all its configuration is stored in a single file. If you've put this file on a flash drive, you can boot the livecd and run right off of that if you like. Obviously, if you install extra software or configure things outside of the Vyatta shell, that doesn't go in the config file. Although I don't run off of the livecd, this convenient config file is an easy way to verify the integrity of the system. If you're worried you got hacked, just back up your config and do a clean install. All you have to do is look over the file to make sure everything looks right, and you're good to go.
I'm not fond of Vyatta's commercial aspects, but if you can live with the details listed here then the only thing you have between you and a brilliant setup is the manuals!
I was looking at DD-WRT for a while, but then decided against it because of all the controversy. I honestly don't remember what I didn't like about OpenWRT, but something kept me from trying that too. The big difference between almost everything that's been mentioned so far (DD-WRT, OpenWRT, Tomato, etc...) and Vyatta is that while the former are mostly intended for SOHO users, Vyatta is intended as a Cisco competitor for big business. I actually like pouring hours into reading documentation so I can use "enterprise" stuff like Vyatta at home, but it's up to you to decide which way you want to go.
For the record: like many other posters above, I'm not affiliated with Vyatta in any way, I'm just completely startled by the fact that nobody's mentioned it so far. Does Vyatta have a big black mark that nobody's told me about, or is it just not as well known?
By the way: Vyatta sells their own hardware too, but it's pretty pricey. It starts at ~$800 and reaches up over $10K. Personally, I think it's way overpriced, but I suppose there are appropriate situations for such equipment.
Very interesting, I don't know anything about that yet. What does such an effect depend upon? It obviously depends on the material and its metallic properties. Does it depend on the quantity of the material? Why does it apply only to metals? Would it apply to metals that do not conduct well, like Tungsten? Is your post theory, or is the effect known to be significant enough to be serious? Do you have any theories about why we are not using plastics instead of titanium then?
Sorry for all the questions, I'm curious.
If the conductor follows a path that keeps the strength of the magnetic field constant, there will be no induced electric current. Without knowing much about MRI machines (specifically the shape of their field), I can't say whether it's likely or not to move along such a path. If the conductor moves such that the strength of the magnetic field at the conductor barely changes, there would be barely any current induced.
One case where no current would be produced would be if a conductor is moved parallel to a current-carrying wire. The wire generates a static magnetic field which does not change along the length of the wire, so the conductor does not experience any change in the magnetic field as it moves.
Now, I'm not entirely up on my E&M, but this ought to be somewhat informative to some people reading it. There are only three metallic elements (not including Rare Earth Metals) that can be magnetized: Iron, Nickel, and Cobalt. Titanium is not one of them, thus it won't be sucked toward a simple magnet. Note: Steel has Iron in it, that's why it is attracted to magnets and can be magnetized, etc...
Therefore, the reason why everyone uses titanium implants may be because they CAN in fact be near (or in) MRI machine.
On the other hand, there may be other things at play here. This is why my iffy E&M knowledge comes into play. I'm pretty much positive that the following is true, but I'm not sure that the effects are significant enough to matter. A changing magnetic field creates a current in conductors, which in turn creates its own magnetic field (opposite to the original one). These two magnetic fields would lead to a force. So... you may have current and a force acting on your titanium implant IF MRI machines use constantly changing magnetic fields. These effects are only present as the field changes, and go away if the field becomes constant.
I believe the MRI machine's magnetic field is constantly changing, but I don't believe that the current generated is enough to be even slightly harmful. The strength of a magnetic field decreases as an inverse-square relation to the distance away, so at 40 centimeters away the field is one sixteenth as strong as at 10 centimeters away from the magnet(s). I also don't believe that the resulting magnetic field would be strong enough to cause a noticeable force, for the same reasons. I would not be afraid to use an MRI with titanium implants.
If I remember correctly, they let me wear my brass belt-buckle in the MRI and it was fine. Brass is Copper and Zinc, neither of which are magnetic. There are some more fine details about ferromagnetics and paramagnetics, but for simplicity I'm leaving them out. I'm a Physics major, but I'm only starting my first college E&M course on the 19th (the above knowledge was from three years of physics in high-school). I would love to see what a diamagnetic material would do in an MRI.
Whoa whoa whoa, slow down there. I'm a college freshman, in fact I just finished my first semester of classes today and have my finals on Wednesday and Friday. I take my laptop with me every day for several reasons.
First, all of my professors expect us to check our e-mail multiple times each day, and several have specific coursework that must be completed on a computer outside of class. At the college I attend, most of the students have laptops (I can't think of anyone specifically who doesn't). Although these tasks can be accomplished in the university labs, having a laptop makes it considerably easier.
Second, I never let it out of my sight (literally, with the one exception of when it's on my back), and take rather good care of it. I paid the $3200 price tag for a laptop I could get decent virtualization and CUDA performance out of, so it's not surprising that the only damage it has suffered since April 2008 is a small nick in the edge of the plastic below my trackpad (I dropped my graphing calculator).
Third, I'll admit that I have one friend whose laptop might as well be disposable as far as his parents' wallet is concerned, but that is not the norm. My best friend bought his laptop out of pocket (similar price tag to mine), and most of my other friends split the cost with their parents.
That all set aside, I strongly support giving children laptops. My dad started me on his computer when I was two years old, and I don't mean with big plastic attachments or anything, not even a mouse at that time. Sixteen years later I'm not a computer-science major because of the sheer boredom I find in taking the classes. Unfortunately the University won't let me test out of prerequisites. On the other hand, my parents barely ever bought anything for my computer. Being limited to minimal software (Windows and Office, not much else) pushed me to try out FOSS, which I quickly came to love. Being limited by dated hardware caused me to explore Linux and Unix operating systems as well as to learn how to sap the most power possible out of the hardware available to me.
Just my two cents, take it from a college kid who wasn't spoiled but grew up with computers his whole life. Really, we don't all party, many (most) of us take good care of our laptops and don't risk them being stolen, and often mommy and daddy won't buy us the first one, let alone a new one. Not technically, but realistically, we do need them to do our college work as well.
Where do I need to relocate to in order to get a 100mbit residential connection? As far as I'm aware, the only things "widespread" in the US is Verizon and Comcast, and they only go up to 50 mbit it seems. I know Japan's got it all over the place, I'm curious where you guys are getting it from.