Honestly, "I just saved a file and now I don't know where I put it" is more indicative of the human operating the computer, than it is of the computer apparently lacking facilities to find the files.
And this statement perfectly demonstrates why Linux is not now, and will not be for a very long time, a true Desktop OS.
I couldn't find my keys this morning. It's a real shame, too, since I used to think my car was roadworthy. But it turns out that it expects me to know where I put my keys, and blames the user when they go missing.
I just want to drive to work! I don't want to manage a bunch of keys...
... that surely gives them about 128 milliseconds to detect an incoming laser beam from initiation on earth to the target light hitting the satellite's detector.
Right, because light travels faster than... light.
How many landers must we see touch down
Before you can send one that's manned?
Yes, and how many times must you scoop the soil
Before you get some in the pan?
Yes, and how many sols must the dust storms fly
Before there's ice on polar land?
The answer, my friend, is blowin' in the wind,
The answer is blowin' in the wind.
I shall leave it as an exercise to Slashdotters who are also on OpenCores to develop a microprocessor instruction set that is (a) Turing-Complete, but (b) possesses the nature that no non-trivial program can ever be optimized for the above reason. (ie: the limits of any function describing a characteristic are always Strange Attractors, not minima or maxima.)
At its most basic, security by obscurity is relying on a secret to remain secure. Obscuring your password is security by obscurity. It's only a matter of time before an attacker could guess your password, so it keeps you secure for only a period of time.
Depends on the nature of the secret. By your reasoning, all shared-secret cryptography is security by obscurity, because every secret key can be brute-forced (and if it doesn't work, you're not using enough).
You have security by obscurity of your security depends on the secrecy of not only a cryptovariable, but the design or implementation of the system in question. For example, the construction of a GIFAR. As GGP notes, obscurity may work for a while (but there's no telling how long). GGGP's point was that "concatenate two files" is not all that obscure.
A secret survey conducted by the Rand Corporation in the 1970s confirmed that any person attracted to white, plastic machines completely without sharp edges is an utter homosexual, subconsciously wishing to insert them into his rectum.
Schneier et al don't break TrueCrypt's deniability, per se. They simply show that Word, Google Desktop, and other automatically-indexing programs may reveal a hidden partition's possible existence.
Quite right. TrueCrypt doesn't give up the existence of files on its hidden partition. Files on the non-hidden partition give up the existence of files on the hidden partition, in the act of pointing at them.
Although this may break deniability of those files' existence, I wonder if it breaks deniability of those files' presence. If shortcuts exist to files using a drive letter that doesn't (appear to) occur in the system, it looks like you may still claim that the files in question are or were on an external drive somewhere that has since left your possession / gotten stepped on / fallen into a volcano, etc.
if you disagree with me, make a proposal to filter out child porn submissions on all of the alt.binaries. not volunteering, huh? no idea how to do it, huh? don't deny it doesn't exist. don't deny there is a lot of child porn posted there. don't deny it is wrong and must be fought. don't deny shutting down the distribution channels is a valid means of fighting it.
I say we take off and nuke the entire 'Net from orbit. It's the only way to be sure.
Learned this in the very excellent Brain Hacks book by O'Reilly, which isn't about hacking the brain, really, at all, but just a top to bottom description of how the brain works, with various experiments to demonstrate their points (like optical illusions and such). I highly recommend it.
The title of the book is Mind Hacks. To learn why you remembered it as Brain Hacks, see Hack #85: Create False Memories.
Eerily enough, I reported the same title the first time I tried to recommend the book to somebody, having just recently read it cover to cover. Perhaps my hub had a collision.
But you need a towel. A towel will insulate the beer for a few minutes. You want cold beer, but not beer at -273C.
Insulate it from what? Heat loss from conduction and convection is not much of an issue in the local environment, and radiation certainly takes longer than a few minutes. Besides, a towel won't help you keep your beer liquid.
Slashdot Mirror
And he died from trying to hold in his piss during a drinking game.
While playing Prince of Persia
... where writing the claim includes performing research using a computer to convert the unobservable aspect to an observable aspect...
Amazing. They've described reverse engineering, but thrown in those three magic words "using a computer" for good measure.
Honestly, "I just saved a file and now I don't know where I put it" is more indicative of the human operating the computer, than it is of the computer apparently lacking facilities to find the files.
And this statement perfectly demonstrates why Linux is not now, and will not be for a very long time, a true Desktop OS.
I couldn't find my keys this morning. It's a real shame, too, since I used to think my car was roadworthy. But it turns out that it expects me to know where I put my keys, and blames the user when they go missing.
I just want to drive to work! I don't want to manage a bunch of keys...
... that surely gives them about 128 milliseconds to detect an incoming laser beam from initiation on earth to the target light hitting the satellite's detector.
Right, because light travels faster than... light.
Thats why Linux is kicking Microsofts ass right now amirite?
What we need is an ad campaign in which Seinfeld meets Torvalds. That should do it.
How many landers must we see touch down
Before you can send one that's manned?
Yes, and how many times must you scoop the soil
Before you get some in the pan?
Yes, and how many sols must the dust storms fly
Before there's ice on polar land?
The answer, my friend, is blowin' in the wind,
The answer is blowin' in the wind.
I wondered where the 2-digitters had gone.
What? Sorry, you spazzed out there for a second.
I shall leave it as an exercise to Slashdotters who are also on OpenCores to develop a microprocessor instruction set that is (a) Turing-Complete, but (b) possesses the nature that no non-trivial program can ever be optimized for the above reason. (ie: the limits of any function describing a characteristic are always Strange Attractors, not minima or maxima.)
Look out! It's a nerd sniper!!
You haven't standardized your passwords to "Password1" yet?
God dammit.
*changes password to "Password2"*
At its most basic, security by obscurity is relying on a secret to remain secure. Obscuring your password is security by obscurity. It's only a matter of time before an attacker could guess your password, so it keeps you secure for only a period of time.
Depends on the nature of the secret. By your reasoning, all shared-secret cryptography is security by obscurity, because every secret key can be brute-forced (and if it doesn't work, you're not using enough).
You have security by obscurity of your security depends on the secrecy of not only a cryptovariable, but the design or implementation of the system in question. For example, the construction of a GIFAR. As GGP notes, obscurity may work for a while (but there's no telling how long). GGGP's point was that "concatenate two files" is not all that obscure.
...I'm not clicking that with a ten-foot pole.
File extensions are, currently, the sole determining factor that Windows machines use to determine what a file is.
That's not an argument in favor of using file extensions as metadata; it's an argument against Windows.
*thud* *thud* *thud*
Well, you did say "blogosphere".
Mine goes up to eleven!
Text editors do not work that way!
Goodnight!
A secret survey conducted by the Rand Corporation in the 1970s confirmed that any person attracted to white, plastic machines completely without sharp edges is an utter homosexual, subconsciously wishing to insert them into his rectum.
Wow. I gotta watch Wall-E again...
Yes, it breaks the pattern of using apostrophes in possessives. Yay English.
And adheres to the more specific pattern of not using apostrophes in possessive prnouns, as in "his", "her", and "shkler".
Patent troll beating up shopkeeper for royalty money: very naughty.
Shopkeeper not paying royalty money: exactly as naughty
Now not only do they have to decipher four languages, first they have to discover that the writing is actually even in more than one language.
That might actually help.
Schneier et al don't break TrueCrypt's deniability, per se. They simply show that Word, Google Desktop, and other automatically-indexing programs may reveal a hidden partition's possible existence.
Quite right. TrueCrypt doesn't give up the existence of files on its hidden partition. Files on the non-hidden partition give up the existence of files on the hidden partition, in the act of pointing at them.
Although this may break deniability of those files' existence, I wonder if it breaks deniability of those files' presence. If shortcuts exist to files using a drive letter that doesn't (appear to) occur in the system, it looks like you may still claim that the files in question are or were on an external drive somewhere that has since left your possession / gotten stepped on / fallen into a volcano, etc.
if you disagree with me, make a proposal to filter out child porn submissions on all of the alt.binaries. not volunteering, huh? no idea how to do it, huh? don't deny it doesn't exist. don't deny there is a lot of child porn posted there. don't deny it is wrong and must be fought. don't deny shutting down the distribution channels is a valid means of fighting it.
I say we take off and nuke the entire 'Net from orbit. It's the only way to be sure.
A rose by any other name might smell as sweet
Not if you call 'em "stench blossoms".
Learned this in the very excellent Brain Hacks book by O'Reilly, which isn't about hacking the brain, really, at all, but just a top to bottom description of how the brain works, with various experiments to demonstrate their points (like optical illusions and such). I highly recommend it.
The title of the book is Mind Hacks . To learn why you remembered it as Brain Hacks, see Hack #85: Create False Memories.
Eerily enough, I reported the same title the first time I tried to recommend the book to somebody, having just recently read it cover to cover. Perhaps my hub had a collision.
But you need a towel. A towel will insulate the beer for a few minutes. You want cold beer, but not beer at -273C.
Insulate it from what? Heat loss from conduction and convection is not much of an issue in the local environment, and radiation certainly takes longer than a few minutes. Besides, a towel won't help you keep your beer liquid.