The Constitution of a country, including the American, is the rulebook by which the country is run. It applies to what the government of the country does anywhere in the world and not just its own soil. The cittizen/non-cittizen does not have anything to do about it.
Arguing the opposite means that the we immediately give any government the right to rape a 7 year old, skin it, boil in oil, quarter, castrate and burn the remains provided that it is not on its own soil.
Further to this, if America claims this right, than reciprocally all governments should have it. From there on the crimes of British slaver hunters are OK, the "punishment gang rapes" done by Russian occupying troops in Germany in 1945 are also OK. Going to extreme, following the logic that outside your territory your rules do not apply nearly anything Hitler troops did in occupied Europe like Hatun', Aushvitz, Oradour-sur-Glane are also OK.
Sorry mate, the world does not work this way. Actually, according to Bush and Cheney it does. The rest of the world disagrees.
And as far as "universal" this is called "marketing & PR". A beautiful move actually because out of all editable document standards this is the most popular one and it has some market share in all countries. So they can actually safely claim "universal" without being dragged through the mud for misselling it
And this is the exact reason why SCO is going chapter 11, not 7. They have a valuable asset - the smoking gun of Sun and Microsoft correspondence (let's do not forget that MSFT was not alone here). Further to this, while under 11 they can continue litigating without paying to Novell. The bancrupcy court is not entitled to judge the merits of other cases, so if they put to the bancrupcy court judge that they should continue to litigate to get money and not pay until then, he has no grounds to refuse that. As a result Novell gets nothing and the saga continues for around 2+ more years (by their current burn rate) unless someone injects more money in them.
DNS server, NTP server, LDAP server and the rest of the zeroconf paraphernalia. In other words most of what it takes to set up a client to manage it. IPv6 autoconf does none of that.
The fine is a percentage of worldwide revenue. Even one fine can make a considerable difference, because it is calculated to be comparable with the average operating margins for large businesses. IT usually has these slightly higher than most other industries so a company can sustain one fine. One more for let's say Vista's DRM and lock-out of 3rd party security apps and Microsoft balance sheet will go into red colour numbers.
You can also use them for performing art. If they are really annoying you can score a 3 point hitting a suitable bucket at the other end of the office (filled with waste water from that kitchenette floor mop if possible). If that does not qualify as performance art the performance thrown by the person who put "The Winner Takes it All" by Abba as a ringtone will. Especially afer he has fished the phone out of the bucket.
1. The performance of Li-X batteries in cold weather is abissmal. Just a refit will not do, you need different battery tech which we simply do not have today. 2. That plane was military tech. It is marketed by Quinetic which means that most likely someone else has designed it an built it on their behalf. All Quinetic realistically does nowdays is put 400-800% markup (seen that actually) and write a tender spec in a military friendly format. You have to find who designed the plane and hope that it was not a one-off exclusive. 3. Considering how long it takes to make something Quinetic sells into a working system I would suggest you look elsewhere. By the time this plane is useable it will be obsolete compared to competing tech.
If you look at browser stats it is actually clear that OSX on Intel did not take any significant amounts of the Windows marketshare. Many of the new users came from elsewhere - from the morass of desktop Unix.
This is not surprising, the average desktop Unix user in Western Europe and USA has more than enough disposable income to afford a Mac without blinking an eye. He gets a viable replacement for most of the tools he used to use on his Unix desktop, useable UI and possibly even a chance to hook up the machine to the corporate network. People want to get work done. If you are working with Unix or networks on a day to day basis the Mac is a very good value for the money especially for someone who is not a professional sysadmin.
I probably did not express my thoughts clear enough. Let's give it another go.
There are two portions to a P2P network - discovery and data fetch. Discovery determines where do you get your data from and fetch is the actual data flow. An ISP can confine a P2P service to its own network by either limiting discovery or by limiting the actual fetches.
The discovery is where the P2P networks lamely emulate a multicast application. They try to determine if a piece of data A is present in any of the surrounding nodes B,C,D,E,F. In order to do that they in the trivial case transmit to each node. In the more modern networks they transmit to hypernodes and get info from there. In either case they try to emulate a multicast network via a tunnel mesh (just the way people try to emulate Multicast on ATM LANE).
Compared to that a discovery mechanism based on multicast with a unicast reply can give you the information on where exactly is the piece which you are interested with one request. There is usually no need for hypernodes either. It just works. Magically. Further to this, you can set your discovery scope to find nodes which are 1,2,3...n hops away by tweaking TTL. Further to this, it is a true P2P network - totally serverless. If you throw in PKI authentication you can also make it as secure as you wish.
May I suggest dear Anonymous Coward that you get a clue. TV is where the multicast continues to fail due to a variety of reasons. Data delivery and p2p like applications are where it excels.
The second biggest application for multicast is data delivery in financial networks. It does exactly what says on the tin - propagate the same data from point A to point B,C,D,E with minimal resource expenditure per link. Peer-to-Peer systems simulate this by retransmitting date between B and C, D and E, etc as they get it. Same principle.
The biggest application for multicast are actually some routing protocols. If you abstract yourself from the implementation detail the ones that use multicast follow a classic P2P-like model where every one of the nodes has something to say and the information is of interest to more than one other node. Multicast also provides a mechanism to subscribe to the data and to unsubscribe when you are no longer interested.
It depends how well the system is designed and how pervasive is the PKI thoughout it. While it may be possible to introduce a MIM (man in the middle) via an exploit or via a timing attack on boot it may end up being prohibitively difficult.
For example, on a well designed system you cannot get the key, because it never leaves the hardware. As a result you have to intercept all requests to the crypto hardware and all replies. Depending on the implementation this may actually be quite hard. It may be useless as well. For example, if the authentication is based on two-way public key crypto (device to executable/servcie and executable/service to device) and both keys are unique most MIMs have very little chance to succeed. In the Nintendo case due to the limitations of its storage system, this can be done only for games that mandate online connectivity. For its bigger "brothers" from Sony and Microsoft it can be done even for games that do not require online connectivity provided that at least some components are distributed or activated via their network services.
Especially when someone points to the idiots from Redmondia (and other places) that they should stop reinventing multicast again and again. The technology to do what is needed is there, the ability of ISPs to control it so that it is not detrimental to other users is also there. It has been there since the dawn on the Internet. And it is Multicast. From the viewpoint of network design and network operation theory, P2P is nothing, but an extremely lame sorry and sad excuse for Multicast emulation.
Implementing it is solely a matter of minor network tidy-up for most ISPs along with some software updates for the CE devices (where not supplied by the ISP).
By the way, the same methods which are used to control multicast are also valid for P2P services. TTL adjustment down to under 8 will usually cut down the traffic to be solely within an ISP while cutting it down to under 4 will cut it down so it stays within the same RAS device (2 for non-NAT setups). It is also trivial to deliver a correct setting on a per-ISP basis and to autodetect the necessary setting adjustment.
There is no rocket science here and no research to be done. All the tech is already out there. The problem is that the suppliers of P2P services and developers of P2P software deliberately do not want to do this. In fact, they are doing everything they can to steal more service than the ISP is willing to allocate to them. As a result the ISPs have no other choice but to love this and use a big stick to provide the luving to the customer.
It is signing all the data with a certificate. Proper crypto, not DIY snakeoil ala most DRM schemes out there. The only way to break it is to get to the device key.
If they have done is right the key is per device and hardware protected by a crypto module. From there on breaking this at the crypto level is absolutely impossible.
The consequences are actually the opposite to what the clueless editor posted:
1. No chance for homebrew unless someone steals a cert from somewhere and even then Nintendo can simply revoke it using their online service or in a service pack.
2. All communication from the console to a server and back can be signed with strong crypto so no online game cheating.
As far as the elliptic curve cipher choice, this is a common choice for devices with very limited CPU or memory resources. That is what these ciphers are designed for.
All I can say: Applause Nintendo, applause, well done.
Provided that it does not download the aforementioned third world country security service to beat you up and stuff your new digital camera up your arse that can probably be tolerated..
Does EDGE actually provide much more capacity over standard GPRS anyway
On average - you get 3-4 times more capacity with EDGE compared to GPRS. The investment to do this per MBit via an upgrade where applicable is only a fraction of the investment into deploying the same capacity via 3G. In addition to that if you are using dynamic channel allocation on the base station (and most operators do), deploying EDGE capacity for data frees some GSM capacity for voice.
EDGE is no replacement for 3G, but not deploying it for religious reasons ala Vodafone UK is stupid.
There is an alternative explanation. Based on personal observations O2 and TMob are nearly up to capacity on GPRS due to the recent crackberry explosion. If you are in the morning on a UK commuter train you get nearly 90% packet loss on the downlink on GPRS. Regardless of how much they hate RIM the crackberry is the biggest sources of data revenue by far outstripping any other data product. So having the network loaded to the point where it stops working is very bad news.
AFAIK Crackberries have been doing EDGE for 2+ years now while 3G is still absent in all but the latest model (which is yet to launch actually). As a result getting the crackberry capacity to a point where the service works again is a definite must for every operator. The only practical solution for this is EDGE. I am surprised Vodafone is not doing it (their GPRS during commuting hours is even worse than O2).
Add VAT to 150 and you have 150*1.175=176.25 Add further 10-15 pounds for compliance with the EU Electronic Waste disposal directive and you are more or less there. If it has radio (I do not know the spec) there is an extra levy for EU which will put it bang on the 199 mark. This is actually much better than the usual 1USD=1GBP price conversion practised by most US companies.
The artificial restrictions are a definite merit as far as shareholder value and suitability for media from the perspective of the MAFIAA is concerned. Most MAFIAA members are making funny noises about going elsewhere with their wares. So, I would expect Apple to show itself as even more compliant and more determined to deliver obscene market models. They want the MAFIAA members back onboard and they do not care about the consumer in the slightest.
I am not that up on Steam to be honest. I know some of its functionality, but as I do not myself play HL some other parts are clearly beyond my interest scope.
Encryption will give you the copy protection function of it which is essential to use it for secure distribution. Copies shipped to one account will not be useable by other accounts. This can be done under linux in a fashion which is very hard to break.
The other function of Steam and similar frameworks AFAIK is to be software police and make sure players are not cheating. Same as with windows every one of these is circumventable. End of the day, the syscalls it has to intercept are documented so even if you do not have the source you can still break it. Once again, using crypto in a few places can make this task considerably harder.
No it does not.
Sun's gravity already plays the keel role.
You are orbiting at orbital speed, right? In order to go anywhere you either accelerate or decelerate. If you want to decelerate you put your solar batteries at an angle where the "reflection" points in the direction of your orbital movement. Beam from laser goes same place. Opposite for deceleration.
In other words, nothing prevents you from using the batteries as a solar sail and combining the solar sail vector with the laser thrust vector. In fact this may allow to reduce the sail to a size where it can be built using modern technology.
Slashdot Mirror
Not quite so.
The Constitution of a country, including the American, is the rulebook by which the country is run. It applies to what the government of the country does anywhere in the world and not just its own soil. The cittizen/non-cittizen does not have anything to do about it.
Arguing the opposite means that the we immediately give any government the right to rape a 7 year old, skin it, boil in oil, quarter, castrate and burn the remains provided that it is not on its own soil.
Further to this, if America claims this right, than reciprocally all governments should have it.
From there on the crimes of British slaver hunters are OK, the "punishment gang rapes" done by Russian occupying troops in Germany in 1945 are also OK. Going to extreme, following the logic that outside your territory your rules do not apply nearly anything Hitler troops did in occupied Europe like Hatun', Aushvitz, Oradour-sur-Glane are also OK.
Sorry mate, the world does not work this way. Actually, according to Bush and Cheney it does. The rest of the world disagrees.
Err... No. It is.
And as far as "universal" this is called "marketing & PR". A beautiful move actually because out of all editable document standards this is the most popular one and it has some market share in all countries. So they can actually safely claim "universal" without being dragged through the mud for misselling it
Go to the USA or Kingston-on-HULL in the UK and look around. You will see plenty of laps ready to comfortably accommodate it.
And this is the exact reason why SCO is going chapter 11, not 7. They have a valuable asset - the smoking gun of Sun and Microsoft correspondence (let's do not forget that MSFT was not alone here). Further to this, while under 11 they can continue litigating without paying to Novell. The bancrupcy court is not entitled to judge the merits of other cases, so if they put to the bancrupcy court judge that they should continue to litigate to get money and not pay until then, he has no grounds to refuse that. As a result Novell gets nothing and the saga continues for around 2+ more years (by their current burn rate) unless someone injects more money in them.
DNS server, NTP server, LDAP server and the rest of the zeroconf paraphernalia. In other words most of what it takes to set up a client to manage it. IPv6 autoconf does none of that.
Read the thread further up. There was a suggestion there to use that aircraft that stayed for 56h in the air on solar. My post refers to it http://www.theregister.co.uk/2007/09/10/qinetiq_zephyr_solar_power_plane_record_endurance/, and not the KU aircraft. It was definitely built by Quinetiq.
The fine is a percentage of worldwide revenue. Even one fine can make a considerable difference, because it is calculated to be comparable with the average operating margins for large businesses. IT usually has these slightly higher than most other industries so a company can sustain one fine. One more for let's say Vista's DRM and lock-out of 3rd party security apps and Microsoft balance sheet will go into red colour numbers.
They are art. The art of annoyance.
You can also use them for performing art. If they are really annoying you can score a 3 point hitting a suitable bucket at the other end of the office (filled with waste water from that kitchenette floor mop if possible). If that does not qualify as performance art the performance thrown by the person who put "The Winner Takes it All" by Abba as a ringtone will. Especially afer he has fished the phone out of the bucket.
1. The performance of Li-X batteries in cold weather is abissmal. Just a refit will not do, you need different battery tech which we simply do not have today.
2. That plane was military tech. It is marketed by Quinetic which means that most likely someone else has designed it an built it on their behalf. All Quinetic realistically does nowdays is put 400-800% markup (seen that actually) and write a tender spec in a military friendly format. You have to find who designed the plane and hope that it was not a one-off exclusive.
3. Considering how long it takes to make something Quinetic sells into a working system I would suggest you look elsewhere. By the time this plane is useable it will be obsolete compared to competing tech.
Ahem, someone to say that finally.
If you look at browser stats it is actually clear that OSX on Intel did not take any significant amounts of the Windows marketshare. Many of the new users came from elsewhere - from the morass of desktop Unix.
This is not surprising, the average desktop Unix user in Western Europe and USA has more than enough disposable income to afford a Mac without blinking an eye. He gets a viable replacement for most of the tools he used to use on his Unix desktop, useable UI and possibly even a chance to hook up the machine to the corporate network.
People want to get work done. If you are working with Unix or networks on a day to day basis the Mac is a very good value for the money especially for someone who is not a professional sysadmin.
I probably did not express my thoughts clear enough. Let's give it another go.
There are two portions to a P2P network - discovery and data fetch. Discovery determines where do you get your data from and fetch is the actual data flow. An ISP can confine a P2P service to its own network by either limiting discovery or by limiting the actual fetches.
The discovery is where the P2P networks lamely emulate a multicast application. They try to determine if a piece of data A is present in any of the surrounding nodes B,C,D,E,F. In order to do that they in the trivial case transmit to each node. In the more modern networks they transmit to hypernodes and get info from there. In either case they try to emulate a multicast network via a tunnel mesh (just the way people try to emulate Multicast on ATM LANE).
Compared to that a discovery mechanism based on multicast with a unicast reply can give you the information on where exactly is the piece which you are interested with one request. There is usually no need for hypernodes either. It just works. Magically. Further to this, you can set your discovery scope to find nodes which are 1,2,3...n hops away by tweaking TTL. Further to this, it is a true P2P network - totally serverless. If you throw in PKI authentication you can also make it as secure as you wish.
May I suggest dear Anonymous Coward that you get a clue. TV is where the multicast continues to fail due to a variety of reasons. Data delivery and p2p like applications are where it excels.
The second biggest application for multicast is data delivery in financial networks. It does exactly what says on the tin - propagate the same data from point A to point B,C,D,E with minimal resource expenditure per link. Peer-to-Peer systems simulate this by retransmitting date between B and C, D and E, etc as they get it. Same principle.
The biggest application for multicast are actually some routing protocols. If you abstract yourself from the implementation detail the ones that use multicast follow a classic P2P-like model where every one of the nodes has something to say and the information is of interest to more than one other node. Multicast also provides a mechanism to subscribe to the data and to unsubscribe when you are no longer interested.
It depends how well the system is designed and how pervasive is the PKI thoughout it. While it may be possible to introduce a MIM (man in the middle) via an exploit or via a timing attack on boot it may end up being prohibitively difficult.
For example, on a well designed system you cannot get the key, because it never leaves the hardware. As a result you have to intercept all requests to the crypto hardware and all replies. Depending on the implementation this may actually be quite hard. It may be useless as well. For example, if the authentication is based on two-way public key crypto (device to executable/servcie and executable/service to device) and both keys are unique most MIMs have very little chance to succeed. In the Nintendo case due to the limitations of its storage system, this can be done only for games that mandate online connectivity. For its bigger "brothers" from Sony and Microsoft it can be done even for games that do not require online connectivity provided that at least some components are distributed or activated via their network services.
Especially when someone points to the idiots from Redmondia (and other places) that they should stop reinventing multicast again and again. The technology to do what is needed is there, the ability of ISPs to control it so that it is not detrimental to other users is also there. It has been there since the dawn on the Internet. And it is Multicast. From the viewpoint of network design and network operation theory, P2P is nothing, but an extremely lame sorry and sad excuse for Multicast emulation.
Implementing it is solely a matter of minor network tidy-up for most ISPs along with some software updates for the CE devices (where not supplied by the ISP).
By the way, the same methods which are used to control multicast are also valid for P2P services. TTL adjustment down to under 8 will usually cut down the traffic to be solely within an ISP while cutting it down to under 4 will cut it down so it stays within the same RAS device (2 for non-NAT setups). It is also trivial to deliver a correct setting on a per-ISP basis and to autodetect the necessary setting adjustment.
There is no rocket science here and no research to be done. All the tech is already out there. The problem is that the suppliers of P2P services and developers of P2P software deliberately do not want to do this. In fact, they are doing everything they can to steal more service than the ISP is willing to allocate to them. As a result the ISPs have no other choice but to love this and use a big stick to provide the luving to the customer.
You are all missing the point.
Sing along to get it. This should be sung to the closing tune from "All That Jazz":
One, Two, Three
Bye Bye Gulfstream, Bye, Bye...
No.
This means that Nintendo has a clue.
It is signing all the data with a certificate. Proper crypto, not DIY snakeoil ala most DRM schemes out there. The only way to break it is to get to the device key.
If they have done is right the key is per device and hardware protected by a crypto module. From there on breaking this at the crypto level is absolutely impossible.
The consequences are actually the opposite to what the clueless editor posted:
1. No chance for homebrew unless someone steals a cert from somewhere and even then Nintendo can simply revoke it using their online service or in a service pack.
2. All communication from the console to a server and back can be signed with strong crypto so no online game cheating.
As far as the elliptic curve cipher choice, this is a common choice for devices with very limited CPU or memory resources. That is what these ciphers are designed for.
All I can say: Applause Nintendo, applause, well done.
Provided that it does not download the aforementioned third world country security service to beat you up and stuff your new digital camera up your arse that can probably be tolerated..
Exactly where it belongs - nowhere. Hence the best thing which can happen now is to vote through at least a couple of amendments.
On average - you get 3-4 times more capacity with EDGE compared to GPRS. The investment to do this per MBit via an upgrade where applicable is only a fraction of the investment into deploying the same capacity via 3G. In addition to that if you are using dynamic channel allocation on the base station (and most operators do), deploying EDGE capacity for data frees some GSM capacity for voice.
EDGE is no replacement for 3G, but not deploying it for religious reasons ala Vodafone UK is stupid.
O2 and TMob - that should be O2 and Vodafone and the last BB actually does 3G (mea culpa).
There is an alternative explanation. Based on personal observations O2 and TMob are nearly up to capacity on GPRS due to the recent crackberry explosion. If you are in the morning on a UK commuter train you get nearly 90% packet loss on the downlink on GPRS. Regardless of how much they hate RIM the crackberry is the biggest sources of data revenue by far outstripping any other data product. So having the network loaded to the point where it stops working is very bad news.
AFAIK Crackberries have been doing EDGE for 2+ years now while 3G is still absent in all but the latest model (which is yet to launch actually). As a result getting the crackberry capacity to a point where the service works again is a definite must for every operator. The only practical solution for this is EDGE. I am surprised Vodafone is not doing it (their GPRS during commuting hours is even worse than O2).
Add VAT to 150 and you have 150*1.175=176.25
Add further 10-15 pounds for compliance with the EU Electronic Waste disposal directive and you are more or less there. If it has radio (I do not know the spec) there is an extra levy for EU which will put it bang on the 199 mark.
This is actually much better than the usual 1USD=1GBP price conversion practised by most US companies.
Merit is in the eye of the beholder.
The artificial restrictions are a definite merit as far as shareholder value and suitability for media from the perspective of the MAFIAA is concerned. Most MAFIAA members are making funny noises about going elsewhere with their wares. So, I would expect Apple to show itself as even more compliant and more determined to deliver obscene market models. They want the MAFIAA members back onboard and they do not care about the consumer in the slightest.
I am not that up on Steam to be honest. I know some of its functionality, but as I do not myself play HL some other parts are clearly beyond my interest scope.
Encryption will give you the copy protection function of it which is essential to use it for secure distribution. Copies shipped to one account will not be useable by other accounts. This can be done under linux in a fashion which is very hard to break.
The other function of Steam and similar frameworks AFAIK is to be software police and make sure players are not cheating. Same as with windows every one of these is circumventable. End of the day, the syscalls it has to intercept are documented so even if you do not have the source you can still break it. Once again, using crypto in a few places can make this task considerably harder.
No it does not. Sun's gravity already plays the keel role. You are orbiting at orbital speed, right? In order to go anywhere you either accelerate or decelerate. If you want to decelerate you put your solar batteries at an angle where the "reflection" points in the direction of your orbital movement. Beam from laser goes same place. Opposite for deceleration. In other words, nothing prevents you from using the batteries as a solar sail and combining the solar sail vector with the laser thrust vector. In fact this may allow to reduce the sail to a size where it can be built using modern technology.