Assange / Wikileaks doesn't do business with Bank of America, and likely never has.
Bank of America did not close a bank account (like the swiss postbank) or terminated a payment processing contract (like Paypal, Visa and Mastercard), it stops transferring money to other banks. So anybody with a Bank of America account is no longer allowed to transfer his money to another bank account without "moral approval" of the BoA.
I am surprised that this hasn't led to more media coverage jet.
Encryptions that rely on the difficulty large integer factorization like RSA are indeed "doomed", because Shor's algorithm will be able to do that in polynomial time. This is a very rare exception. You can literally count the number of quantum algorithms known which can reduce the complexity class of such interesting problems with your fingers. Simply choosing an encryption method that doesn't rely on the difficulty of large integer factorization or one of the other in the "quantum age" no-longer-difficult problems will save traditional encryption.
Grover's algorithm is a good example of what quantum computers may actually be useful for: reduce execution times without reducing the complexity of many problems. The solution for these attacks on classic cryptography will be (as you pointed out) to simply increase the problem size (e.g. key length).
Having a face to associate with an organization can be advantageous. Wikileaks wouldn't have had that much impact if it were a completely anonymous organization, without Assange and without the recent newspaper cooperations.
No interviews, no discussions, nobody to defend the organization in public makes it too easy to morally justify any measures deemed necessary against it. IMHO
Wikileaks was probably the first platform of its kind that people heard of (e.g. cryptome doesn't ring a bell for most people). Now that people seem to've gotten the idea of how leaking of information can work in the "information century" with almost no risk to them, having more and "faceless" platforms appearing is a nice thing. Wikileaks created the demand for such platforms (or better said, helped people discover their need for such), which means supply can be increased massively.
The US is probably the only country that combined diplomacy and military intelligence into one network (SIRPNet) that is completely accessible by far more than 100.000 people worldwide. They therefore put usability far above the need for security.
Other countries like Germany have (afaik) relatively small, logically separated intelligence and information networks/databases. Having the right security clearance level is not enough to go around and view all documents of that level, because every request for information is tracked and access has to be confirmed/granted by another person. This is very slow but relatively secure.
IMHO it is a matter of choice. The US system isn't really better or worse than other systems, it just has other priorities. The really important stuff (>= "top secret") isn't available in their network anyway.
GPUs are very specialized processors, therefore they will always outperform the general purpose CPUs in their domain of computational problems (graphics, physics, other massively parallel/pipelineable problems like password cracking). However they would really suck at doing "normal" tasks like running the OS and other applications. GPUs having their own memory and other components directly wired to and optimized for them on graphics cards gives them additional advantages. Finally most gamers forget that they paid up to $ 500 for their graphics card and only $ 200 or less for their CPU.
"The police acknowledge that they have yet to make an arrest based on the DNA mist, which was developed in Britain by two brothers, one a policeman and the other a chemist. But they credit its presence — and signs posted prominently warning of its use — for what they call a precipitous decline in crime rates (though they could not provide actual figures to back that up).
I don't see any burglars, so it has to be working.
This is probably about identity theft and getting e.g. loans by simply knowing the "magic" numbers of someone else's life.
Why is it still possible to get these things in the US without going into e.g. a bank and showing them a valid photo ID (passport, driver license,...) to let them check if you are really the person you claim to be? Makes it a lot more difficult to get these things, and shifts liability back to the banks (if you can show you never went there to prove your identity, they screwed up by giving that loan - their fault).
If you've got a problem with a bank seeing you in person (why?), maybe a new institution could be founded that does only that: Check IDs of people for others. Like this:
1. Request a loan
2. Get a unique magic number of your bank that doesn't carry any information but the bank knows it belongs to you and that loan
3. go to the ID-check-service and let them sign that number, e.g. with: "Person xyz has proven his identity" (if paperwork, or better get a digital signature)
4. Give signed number back to the bank
Bank knows you are you, without you ever going there in person and the ID-check-service doesn't know what you needed that signature for (they just got a "random" number and signed it for a fee).
Expand this scheme for other services (governmental, etc.) and you get all the privacy you got now with a whole bunch of more security.
It's like asking why China can have growth rates of over 10% while "Western" countries only get 1-3%. It is very hard to improve if you're already close to technical and physical limits and any made improvement won't look as impressive. Handhelds will soon enough hit the same walls that Desktop Systems currently try to tear down.
I would have expected more AMD-based systems in the top-100, because super computers are usually built with cheap and moderately fast Processors, the market segment where AMD gives lots of bang for the buck.
- Charlie entangles Particles A+B
- Charlie sends Alice Particle A over fiber
- Charlie sends Bob Particle B over air
- Alice measures A and sends Charlie information about measurement (classic part needed for actual information transfer)
- Charlie sends classic information to Bob
- Bob measures Particle B, combines result with classic information, and voila, Bob can reconstruct the information "sent" by Alice
Clearly no way to transfer information securely or fast, but a proof that entanglement in Particle B for Bob can survive long transfer through air.
You are right. What TFA probably means is that Alice doesn't have to send Bob a traditional signal, because Charlie (the guy that creates the entanglement and distributes the 2 photons to Alice and Bob) does that classical comunication for them.
I mean his proposed strategy for Nintendo to leave their pretty much uncontested "niche" market to compete in a market that already has been split up between two heavy-weight contestants, who are willing to ultimately lose money just to increase their market share further, is pure genius.
Seems the experiment runs very well. The slashvertisment surely helped to spread the word.
Biggest problem for such Indie-Developers is imho not the intentional lack of DRM and the resulting unlicensed copying of the games, but the lack of media coverage. As the numbers show, there are enough people out there who are willing to pay for games, even if they could get them for free. And I was one of them.
btw. while I typed this, the counter went over 84.000 $. I wonder how much they'll collect over the remaining 6 days.
Why take it out? He wants to and will die anyway when his attack is successful and the plane goes down in flames.
Better yet, he could implant the bomb into his body and therefore pass all security checks, well, everything except for an x-ray. To trick that one, he'd have to either implant the bomb at an unusual spot (e.g. legs, lower arms, head) that won't be x-rayed in search for drugs and other swallowable stuff, or disguise it as an artificial organ/one of those metal plates or bars that get implanted to treat complicated broken bones.
Have fun trying to overwhelm and "disarm" a terrorist that IS a bomb.
Just read some comments below that the server is rented and the client doesn't own a single piece of hardware of it. So Sargonas was right, and http was the jerk here.
How is that contradicting? How does the potential to install VMware help decide if the server is rented from the hosting company or really owned (and just colocated) by the client?
If they can keep his data "hostage" like that it is a clear hint at what GP said - likely not colocated, therefore probably just a rented rootbox, which usually comes with such limitations in the hosting contract.
I also use Teamviewer. It's free for noncommercial use, does the whole port forwarding stuff for you. You don't have to know the IP-Address of the target PC - just a unique ID number and a (temporary) password. The servers of the company will keep track on which ID belongs to which IP-Adress, which very convenient for people with dynamic IPs. This feature can of course be turned off, if you want to do this stuff yourself.
It also has a included chat-program to allow you to exchange messages. Good to keep the phone bill small.
If the spammer owned the email server, he wouldn't need much space to store spam mails. He could send out billions of notifications to potential receivers and create the spam mails on the fly when a receiver wants to download the mail.
Not only would the spammer ultimately save bandwidth in this case by only sending the full mails to those who "requested" them by reacting to the notification, but he would get first class information about validity of email adresses. In addition, the receiver would have to do his own spam filtering, because his ISP likely can't decide if a notification is spam or not - and therefore will have to forward all notifications to the client (A notification may be completely unrelated to the actual mail that is waiting for delivery).
If the mail server is not his own server, the spammer doesn't care for storage space requirements anyway and will keep on spamming as usual.
Internet Mail 2000 would imho make most things even worse than they are, without providing any benefits besides "unlimited inbox size" - which is pretty much useless to most people.
Were you always logged into your account when you used Google?
My web history contained almost everything I ever searched through Google for the last years.
It only had "holes" for some weeks in between, when I e.g. started to use another computer to go online and didn't bother to check my E-Mails or do anything else that would need me to enter my credentials.
Of course, Google is and always will be a black box like any other company when it comes to storage of such data.
But by deleting and disabling it I at least make sure that nobody besides Google can access that information, even if they somehow find out my password.
But it would be a even worse privacy nightmare to present someone all the data that has been collected associated to a specific cookie and/or IP address if it is not somehow verified, that the person trying to watch that information is actually the same that produced the data (e.g. the one who made the search queries).
So even if cookie or IP-specific data is stored, showing it to you is a bad idea.
"Web History" is what you were looking for. It is available at the dashboard.
It's the list of everything you searched through google when you were logged into your account, complete with dates. My backlog in there reached back to early 2007. Now I've deleted all entries and deactivated that "feature".
Exactly. With paper votes, you can be sure that whatever you've written on the ballot doesn't change in the time between putting it in the voting box and the opening of said box by the people who count the votes and record the results at the end of the day.
This timespan is the most critical, because manipulation can be done without leaving traces. And this is where you would have to trust a black box more than a piece of paper. Tough call.
Slashdot Mirror
Assange / Wikileaks doesn't do business with Bank of America, and likely never has.
Bank of America did not close a bank account (like the swiss postbank) or terminated a payment processing contract (like Paypal, Visa and Mastercard), it stops transferring money to other banks. So anybody with a Bank of America account is no longer allowed to transfer his money to another bank account without "moral approval" of the BoA.
I am surprised that this hasn't led to more media coverage jet.
Encryptions that rely on the difficulty large integer factorization like RSA are indeed "doomed", because Shor's algorithm will be able to do that in polynomial time. This is a very rare exception. You can literally count the number of quantum algorithms known which can reduce the complexity class of such interesting problems with your fingers. Simply choosing an encryption method that doesn't rely on the difficulty of large integer factorization or one of the other in the "quantum age" no-longer-difficult problems will save traditional encryption.
Grover's algorithm is a good example of what quantum computers may actually be useful for: reduce execution times without reducing the complexity of many problems. The solution for these attacks on classic cryptography will be (as you pointed out) to simply increase the problem size (e.g. key length).
Having a face to associate with an organization can be advantageous. Wikileaks wouldn't have had that much impact if it were a completely anonymous organization, without Assange and without the recent newspaper cooperations.
No interviews, no discussions, nobody to defend the organization in public makes it too easy to morally justify any measures deemed necessary against it. IMHO
Wikileaks was probably the first platform of its kind that people heard of (e.g. cryptome doesn't ring a bell for most people). Now that people seem to've gotten the idea of how leaking of information can work in the "information century" with almost no risk to them, having more and "faceless" platforms appearing is a nice thing. Wikileaks created the demand for such platforms (or better said, helped people discover their need for such), which means supply can be increased massively.
The US is probably the only country that combined diplomacy and military intelligence into one network (SIRPNet) that is completely accessible by far more than 100.000 people worldwide. They therefore put usability far above the need for security.
Other countries like Germany have (afaik) relatively small, logically separated intelligence and information networks/databases. Having the right security clearance level is not enough to go around and view all documents of that level, because every request for information is tracked and access has to be confirmed/granted by another person. This is very slow but relatively secure.
IMHO it is a matter of choice. The US system isn't really better or worse than other systems, it just has other priorities. The really important stuff (>= "top secret") isn't available in their network anyway.
GPUs are very specialized processors, therefore they will always outperform the general purpose CPUs in their domain of computational problems (graphics, physics, other massively parallel/pipelineable problems like password cracking). However they would really suck at doing "normal" tasks like running the OS and other applications. GPUs having their own memory and other components directly wired to and optimized for them on graphics cards gives them additional advantages. Finally most gamers forget that they paid up to $ 500 for their graphics card and only $ 200 or less for their CPU.
"The police acknowledge that they have yet to make an arrest based on the DNA mist, which was developed in Britain by two brothers, one a policeman and the other a chemist. But they credit its presence — and signs posted prominently warning of its use — for what they call a precipitous decline in crime rates (though they could not provide actual figures to back that up).
I don't see any burglars, so it has to be working.
This is probably about identity theft and getting e.g. loans by simply knowing the "magic" numbers of someone else's life.
...) to let them check if you are really the person you claim to be? Makes it a lot more difficult to get these things, and shifts liability back to the banks (if you can show you never went there to prove your identity, they screwed up by giving that loan - their fault).
Why is it still possible to get these things in the US without going into e.g. a bank and showing them a valid photo ID (passport, driver license,
If you've got a problem with a bank seeing you in person (why?), maybe a new institution could be founded that does only that: Check IDs of people for others. Like this:
1. Request a loan
2. Get a unique magic number of your bank that doesn't carry any information but the bank knows it belongs to you and that loan
3. go to the ID-check-service and let them sign that number, e.g. with: "Person xyz has proven his identity" (if paperwork, or better get a digital signature)
4. Give signed number back to the bank
Bank knows you are you, without you ever going there in person and the ID-check-service doesn't know what you needed that signature for (they just got a "random" number and signed it for a fee).
Expand this scheme for other services (governmental, etc.) and you get all the privacy you got now with a whole bunch of more security.
Because PCs have a headstart of decades?
It's like asking why China can have growth rates of over 10% while "Western" countries only get 1-3%. It is very hard to improve if you're already close to technical and physical limits and any made improvement won't look as impressive. Handhelds will soon enough hit the same walls that Desktop Systems currently try to tear down.
I would have expected more AMD-based systems in the top-100, because super computers are usually built with cheap and moderately fast Processors, the market segment where AMD gives lots of bang for the buck.
To further clarify what I meant:
- Charlie entangles Particles A+B
- Charlie sends Alice Particle A over fiber
- Charlie sends Bob Particle B over air
- Alice measures A and sends Charlie information about measurement (classic part needed for actual information transfer)
- Charlie sends classic information to Bob
- Bob measures Particle B, combines result with classic information, and voila, Bob can reconstruct the information "sent" by Alice
Clearly no way to transfer information securely or fast, but a proof that entanglement in Particle B for Bob can survive long transfer through air.
You are right. What TFA probably means is that Alice doesn't have to send Bob a traditional signal, because Charlie (the guy that creates the entanglement and distributes the 2 photons to Alice and Bob) does that classical comunication for them.
Why is TFA contradicting itself? A traditional signal is always needed, that's one fundamental principle of quantum comunication.
I mean his proposed strategy for Nintendo to leave their pretty much uncontested "niche" market to compete in a market that already has been split up between two heavy-weight contestants, who are willing to ultimately lose money just to increase their market share further, is pure genius.
[/sarcasm]
Seems the experiment runs very well. The slashvertisment surely helped to spread the word.
Biggest problem for such Indie-Developers is imho not the intentional lack of DRM and the resulting unlicensed copying of the games, but the lack of media coverage. As the numbers show, there are enough people out there who are willing to pay for games, even if they could get them for free. And I was one of them.
btw. while I typed this, the counter went over 84.000 $. I wonder how much they'll collect over the remaining 6 days.
Why take it out? He wants to and will die anyway when his attack is successful and the plane goes down in flames.
Better yet, he could implant the bomb into his body and therefore pass all security checks, well, everything except for an x-ray. To trick that one, he'd have to either implant the bomb at an unusual spot (e.g. legs, lower arms, head) that won't be x-rayed in search for drugs and other swallowable stuff, or disguise it as an artificial organ/one of those metal plates or bars that get implanted to treat complicated broken bones.
Have fun trying to overwhelm and "disarm" a terrorist that IS a bomb.
Just read some comments below that the server is rented and the client doesn't own a single piece of hardware of it. So Sargonas was right, and http was the jerk here.
How is that contradicting? How does the potential to install VMware help decide if the server is rented from the hosting company or really owned (and just colocated) by the client?
If they can keep his data "hostage" like that it is a clear hint at what GP said - likely not colocated, therefore probably just a rented rootbox, which usually comes with such limitations in the hosting contract.
I also use Teamviewer. It's free for noncommercial use, does the whole port forwarding stuff for you. You don't have to know the IP-Address of the target PC - just a unique ID number and a (temporary) password. The servers of the company will keep track on which ID belongs to which IP-Adress, which very convenient for people with dynamic IPs. This feature can of course be turned off, if you want to do this stuff yourself. It also has a included chat-program to allow you to exchange messages. Good to keep the phone bill small.
If the spammer owned the email server, he wouldn't need much space to store spam mails. He could send out billions of notifications to potential receivers and create the spam mails on the fly when a receiver wants to download the mail.
Not only would the spammer ultimately save bandwidth in this case by only sending the full mails to those who "requested" them by reacting to the notification, but he would get first class information about validity of email adresses. In addition, the receiver would have to do his own spam filtering, because his ISP likely can't decide if a notification is spam or not - and therefore will have to forward all notifications to the client (A notification may be completely unrelated to the actual mail that is waiting for delivery).
If the mail server is not his own server, the spammer doesn't care for storage space requirements anyway and will keep on spamming as usual.
Internet Mail 2000 would imho make most things even worse than they are, without providing any benefits besides "unlimited inbox size" - which is pretty much useless to most people.
Were you always logged into your account when you used Google? My web history contained almost everything I ever searched through Google for the last years. It only had "holes" for some weeks in between, when I e.g. started to use another computer to go online and didn't bother to check my E-Mails or do anything else that would need me to enter my credentials.
Of course, Google is and always will be a black box like any other company when it comes to storage of such data.
But by deleting and disabling it I at least make sure that nobody besides Google can access that information, even if they somehow find out my password.
But it would be a even worse privacy nightmare to present someone all the data that has been collected associated to a specific cookie and/or IP address if it is not somehow verified, that the person trying to watch that information is actually the same that produced the data (e.g. the one who made the search queries).
So even if cookie or IP-specific data is stored, showing it to you is a bad idea.
"Web History" is what you were looking for. It is available at the dashboard.
It's the list of everything you searched through google when you were logged into your account, complete with dates. My backlog in there reached back to early 2007. Now I've deleted all entries and deactivated that "feature".
Exactly. With paper votes, you can be sure that whatever you've written on the ballot doesn't change in the time between putting it in the voting box and the opening of said box by the people who count the votes and record the results at the end of the day.
This timespan is the most critical, because manipulation can be done without leaving traces. And this is where you would have to trust a black box more than a piece of paper. Tough call.
Heck, there's even a modified xkcd homepage to mark the occasion.
I almost forgot why I stayed away from geocities hosted websites whenever possible.
Thanks xkcd for reminding me one last time!