OptAck has been around for a while, but any commercial IP stack isn't going to implement it. It can and does break TCP transfers, and lusers will just complain the network is broken.
I did like the graph of how a flood of TCP packets shows up at the same time, essentally dumping all 60Mb of IE across a fat pipe all at once. That works when you are only a few hops away from the server (UoW to Redmond, line of sight), but it falls apart if you have 18-20 routers inbetween with widly fluctuating available bandwidth.
The problem is this can be turned into a very effective DoS tool. By using OptAck you can get the server to flood the outgoing pipe.
Sounds great! But I thought patents include "likeness" as well? Or am I mistaken? Wouldn't it still be infringed upon regardless?
I wonder how this would be applied to filters? (Very important to DSP). You can implement the same filter (transfer function) using different techniques, e.g. Direct implementation verse filter bank decomposition.
I've always wondered this... why don't we use 2, 4, etc. bit bits? as I've learned more about processing, I've been able to reason it out, but it still doesn't make sense why we don't do it for storage. say, have a magnetic disk that writes/reads like 16 levels of magnetic strength per bit, so each bit is 16 times more compact than normal... true, this would require conversion to binary, so it'd be a little slower (probably less than a picosecond per bit, but things add up...), but it'd be denser... as we get down to smaller and smaller media, this would become more difficult...
This idea is actually used in data communications. You have two different thing that effect the bandwidth.
Baud Rate - Number of Symbols per Second
Number of Symbols in Alphabet.
For example, a 28.8Kbps modem might have a alphabet of 12 valid symbols and send 2400 symbols per second for a total of 28.8Kbps. NOTE: Baud rate is equal bandwidth only for binary alphabets.
well, if we want nanorobotics (and I'm sure that I do), we need some computers to power them. would you like to try to stick a pentium in my nanorobot that's the size of a blood cell?
Why do we need to put computers into a nanobot? Granted, nanobots need some logic circuits but they really don't need a fully programable computer on board. Why not use remote control instead of on board computational power. A transceiver and some simple control logic would be more useful than trying to build a fully programmable computer using nanologic.
A lot of people run programs from strangers; the press and computer industry don't do a good enough job of educating people about these things.
I saw something funny on CNBC during the ILOVEYOU worm outbreak. They were advising people not to save attachments to disk, as that could lead to infection, but to just execute the attachment. Not only was the mainstream media not educating people, they were actively making it worse.
They mention this in the article but I don't really think that they emphasised it enough. This is just some work building basic bulding blocks, not entire systems.
Building systems is where the real challenge lies. It the difference between having a transistor or simple logic gate and VLSI circuits. There are heat dissipation problems that were not even mentioned in the article.
transistors work well for what they do. We need new computing models (i.e. Quantum Computing) not just smaller/faster version of what we have.
The problem is the objective evaluation of a person's skills. It isn't that hard to determine the skills of an applicant for a techincal position.
I wouldn't agree with that. I know plenty of people that have the technical skills required to do a job but not the social (people) skills. Also, don't forget that people will spin things there own way to get work, or even outright lie. Finding really technically strong developers to work for you is not an easy task. Even using tests and asking for sample code is not all that useful.
Besides, it is not all about technical skills. Most professional software development requires that you interact with others, and I have seen too many technically skillful people fail at jobs because they wanted to do things there own way.
With non-commerical OSS you can do this. If you don't like how a project is going, you can fork it. With commerical projects you can't let your developers fork your projects because they don't like the way that the project is being developed.
How about setting up a test case? We set up a website which is either non-commerical or a parody, and wait for IDG to sue over it. We goto court on this, don't back down and get a ruling. We also counter-sue. Any lawyer's willing to do a little pro-bono work?
Sounds like politics was involved in this arrest more than the actual crime. I think it is amazing that someone can be arrested for creating macro viruses at all - the mere creation of them should not place liability on the creator.. only the person who maliciously spreads it. Why does this apply only to the digital world? If somebody leaves their lunch out at their desk and I steal it, eat it, and then get food poisoning.. should I be able to sue them?
It may depend. If you are working with hazardous substances, you have an obligation to be careful. For example, if you create a poison gas and it get's out and kills your neighbors, you are still responsible. It doesn't matter that you didn't mean to release the gas.
> "the Pentagon wouldn't have wasted its money on anything that wasn't completely feasible." > >Ahhhh yes. $400 for a hammer but the Pentagon would never even dream of wasting money. Not them.
But a hammer is completely feasible, therefore the Pentagon would waste its money on a hammer.
Stenganographic encoding of data into images was part of the research I was doing for my Ph.D. a few years ago. Most good techniques are not this trivial. The are typically based upon spread spectrum coding techniques, which when properly employed are very secure. An excellent starting place for research in this area is at Neil Johnson's site.
I don't think that you are correct about memory prices remaining constant. They have been falling. In 1988 I bought 1MB SIMMs for approx. $100 per SIMM. A very good price at the time. Today I can get 128MB Sims for $80. That's $1.60 per MB. That's pretty close to Moore's law.
Well, as a Network Engineering Consultant in a Heavy Nortel Shop, I have had a chance to see the OPTera and Verselar 25000 in action. These devices are Electro/Optical not pure optical and I believe the break through with the Aligent device is that it is purely optical.
Slashdot Mirror
I did like the graph of how a flood of TCP packets shows up at the same time, essentally dumping all 60Mb of IE across a fat pipe all at once. That works when you are only a few hops away from the server (UoW to Redmond, line of sight), but it falls apart if you have 18-20 routers inbetween with widly fluctuating available bandwidth.
The problem is this can be turned into a very effective DoS tool. By using OptAck you can get the server to flood the outgoing pipe.
I bet Intel is trying to push out technology which depends on patents that they own.
I wonder how this would be applied to filters? (Very important to DSP). You can implement the same filter (transfer function) using different techniques, e.g. Direct implementation verse filter bank decomposition.
This idea is actually used in data communications. You have two different thing that effect the bandwidth.
For example, a 28.8Kbps modem might have a alphabet of 12 valid symbols and send 2400 symbols per second for a total of 28.8Kbps. NOTE: Baud rate is equal bandwidth only for binary alphabets.
Why do we need to put computers into a nanobot? Granted, nanobots need some logic circuits but they really don't need a fully programable computer on board. Why not use remote control instead of on board computational power. A transceiver and some simple control logic would be more useful than trying to build a fully programmable computer using nanologic.
I saw something funny on CNBC during the ILOVEYOU worm outbreak. They were advising people not to save attachments to disk, as that could lead to infection, but to just execute the attachment. Not only was the mainstream media not educating people, they were actively making it worse.
Building systems is where the real challenge lies. It the difference between having a transistor or simple logic gate and VLSI circuits. There are heat dissipation problems that were not even mentioned in the article.
transistors work well for what they do. We need new computing models (i.e. Quantum Computing) not just smaller/faster version of what we have.
I wouldn't agree with that. I know plenty of people that have the technical skills required to do a job but not the social (people) skills. Also, don't forget that people will spin things there own way to get work, or even outright lie. Finding really technically strong developers to work for you is not an easy task. Even using tests and asking for sample code is not all that useful.
Besides, it is not all about technical skills. Most professional software development requires that you interact with others, and I have seen too many technically skillful people fail at jobs because they wanted to do things there own way.
With non-commerical OSS you can do this. If you don't like how a project is going, you can fork it. With commerical projects you can't let your developers fork your projects because they don't like the way that the project is being developed.
Think of it this way, 11 line of code could be a bug fix. So the 0.139% of a project could be someone fixing a bug. It is a useful contribution.
How about setting up a test case? We set up a website which is either non-commerical or a parody, and wait for IDG to sue over it. We goto court on this, don't back down and get a ruling. We also counter-sue. Any lawyer's willing to do a little pro-bono work?
It may depend. If you are working with hazardous substances, you have an obligation to be careful. For example, if you create a poison gas and it get's out and kills your neighbors, you are still responsible. It doesn't matter that you didn't mean to release the gas.
>
>Ahhhh yes. $400 for a hammer but the Pentagon would never even dream of wasting money. Not them.
But a hammer is completely feasible, therefore the Pentagon would waste its money on a hammer.
Stenganographic encoding of data into images was part of the research I was doing for my Ph.D. a few years ago. Most good techniques are not this trivial. The are typically based upon spread spectrum coding techniques, which when properly employed are very secure. An excellent starting place for research in this area is at Neil Johnson's site.
Seriously, a few hours of Quake causes my left arm to cramp. It from that adadadadadadadada (strafe left and right) actions to dodge.
I don't think that you are correct about memory prices remaining constant. They have been falling. In 1988 I bought 1MB SIMMs for approx. $100 per SIMM. A very good price at the time. Today I can get 128MB Sims for $80. That's $1.60 per MB. That's pretty close to Moore's law.
Well, as a Network Engineering Consultant in a Heavy Nortel Shop, I have had a chance to see the OPTera and Verselar 25000 in action. These devices are Electro/Optical not pure optical and I believe the break through with the Aligent device is that it is purely optical.