This seems to me the best suggestion, and there's a simple visual way to accomplish it!
The hardest hit part of the image is going to be the chroma information, which your eye normally has reduced resolution sensitivity for in a normal scene. To overcome this, load your JPEGs into your favorite image editor and crank the saturation to the max(this throws away the luminance data). Now the JPEG artifacts in the chroma information will HIT YOU IN THE FACE, even in images that seemed rather clean before. Pick the least blocky of the two, and there you go!
X0563511, you're beating yourself up over something that ISN'T YOUR FAULT.
The diet and MODERATE exercise(extreme exercise will make it worse...just talk to some older bodybuiders) will probably help some, but we're talking changes of a few percent here and there. If your testosterone and estrogen levels are "quite low" and "high" as you say, you're really not going to fix all of it with diet and exercise. Its not worth beating yourself up because you're sick and can't achieve a fairy tale fix.
If you are very overweight, I do admit that much of the aromatase enzyme that converts testosterone to estradiol(the strongest estrogen made by the body) is present in adipose tissue, and losing some weight might be beneficial. But I don't really hear too many stories of people with true endocrine problems turning things around JUST by losing weight. Heck, in your state, your body probably doesn't want to burn fat anyway.
So what can you do?
Unless you're luck and find some root underlying illness, you're going to need to treat your hormone levels directly. That means going on HRT(hormone replacement therapy), or as it is sometimes referred to, TRT(testosterone replacement therapy). The problem is that while HRT for women is well-accepted, HRT for men isn't understood by many well-meaning doctors. Some refuse to give it as a treatment, while others don't understand how to properly dose and manage it. Which means you're going to have to educate yourself.
Read the following things:
TRT: A Recipe for Success
This is almost like a bible to many. Since its publication, a few things have changed though. Transdermal testosterone is largely preferred over IM, if your body is capable of absorbing it. And HCG has become almost mandatory.
HCG Update
Talks about the benefits of HCG while on TRT
All Things Male Forum
Read the stickies and some posts to get a feel for what's going on.
Bodybuilding.com TRT Forum
Same thing here, read a bit. Maybe not as technical as the previous forum, but a strong community.
The problems you're having are shared by a LARGE, and GROWING(as this article indicates) number of men. You aren't alone. But many doctors are just starting to wake up to the treatment, and you will have to educate yourself. Rest assured though, there is a solution out there.
Or another way of putting it...any cryptosystem can be broken if the users intentionally misuse it by sharing keys, using unauthenticated keys, sharing all their plaintext on their blog, etc. That shouldn't factor into an analysis of the intended use of the system.
SSL requires a chain of trust somewhere. If you use self-signed certificates without some process of authenticating them(say, in person), you're not using SSL as intended.
This system always trusts DNS...which is NEVER secure without some additions(like DNSSEC).
Except breaking SSL with a self-signed cert can be automated and simple. If someone else controls any part of the path between you and the destination(read ISP, access point owner, etc), they can automatically man-in-the-middle any connection with a self-signed cert.
It's like using a sign in sheet on your door to detect if anyone has entered your house without your permission. Without locks. No effort to break, and easy to give a false sense of security.
EXACTLY! With a self-signed certificate, there's no indication that a man in the middle attack is taking place. In which case, anyone that can sit between you and the server, can pretend to be the server(controls/owns/attacks your DNS server) or can beat the server in responding to you, can eavesdrop.
SSL without a trusted certificate provides NO additional security over communicating in the clear. AT ALL.
For those who haven't heard of the attack(and have lived under a rock ever since asymmetric cryptography was invented), it consists of an evil entity that you connect to instead of the server. You negotiate an encrypted connection with the evil entity, which then negotiates an encrypted connection to the real server. It then passes all the data between the two connections in addition to logging it. BAM, eavesdropping.
A certificate allows a proof that the entity you THINK you negotiated the encryption with REALLY IS the entity you have negotiated the encryption with.
So, basically we have the same concept as SSL, except instead of trusting the CA signature on the certificate, we trust DNS.
Forging a CA signature on a certificate would be a BIG DEAL. Forging a DNS entry, especially with ISP cooperation(read government snooping), is DEAD SIMPLE.
So we replace real security with, well, a CPU hog that's only a smidge better than running everything in the clear. It only keeps out the MOST casual, lazy, and uninterested snooper.
It does work by breaking the disk up into sectors, each of which starts a new chain. The problem is an IV is used to "start" the CBC chain, and this IV is static as the underlying plaintext changes. So new changes on the same point of the HD get encrypted with the same IV.
By breaking the disk up into sectors, each of which start a new chain. The problem is an IV is used to "start" the CBC chain, and this IV is static as the underlying plaintext changes. So new changes on the same point of the HD get encrypted with the same IV.
The problem is many CBC and other disk-encryption modes used an IV based on the disk sector number. So when that sector changes, the changes continue to be encrypted with the same IV and key.
The cause is similar to the watermarking attack, but the idea is used backwards. The watermarking attack reveals the presence of maliciously constructed decoy plaintext encrypted by the user, whereas this attack reveals information about the change in an unknown plaintext.
In both attacks the issue is that the salt, as you call it, is constant for a given disk block. If that salt can be predicted, a decoy plaintext can be revealed in the ciphertext. If data is changed while using the same salt, sections of identical plaintext before and after the change can be identified.
Actually, muscle burns more calories than fat at rest...but both burn so little that they're completely insignificant. So the "myth" is technically true, but utterly insignificant.
On the other hand, GP was trying to say was that weight training is an effective way to loose weight. Many prefer it to pure cardio. Either one can work, so just find one that suits you best.
I'm tired and can't think of the data for metabolic rate after exercise for weight training vs pure cardio, but many methods of exercise do raise your metabolism for some time after the exercise. You just have to exercise in the first place.;) If you're in the pure cardio camp, interval training can really raise your metabolism for the rest of the day.
Slashdot Mirror
This seems to me the best suggestion, and there's a simple visual way to accomplish it! The hardest hit part of the image is going to be the chroma information, which your eye normally has reduced resolution sensitivity for in a normal scene. To overcome this, load your JPEGs into your favorite image editor and crank the saturation to the max(this throws away the luminance data). Now the JPEG artifacts in the chroma information will HIT YOU IN THE FACE, even in images that seemed rather clean before. Pick the least blocky of the two, and there you go!
X0563511, you're beating yourself up over something that ISN'T YOUR FAULT.
The diet and MODERATE exercise(extreme exercise will make it worse...just talk to some older bodybuiders) will probably help some, but we're talking changes of a few percent here and there. If your testosterone and estrogen levels are "quite low" and "high" as you say, you're really not going to fix all of it with diet and exercise. Its not worth beating yourself up because you're sick and can't achieve a fairy tale fix.
If you are very overweight, I do admit that much of the aromatase enzyme that converts testosterone to estradiol(the strongest estrogen made by the body) is present in adipose tissue, and losing some weight might be beneficial. But I don't really hear too many stories of people with true endocrine problems turning things around JUST by losing weight. Heck, in your state, your body probably doesn't want to burn fat anyway.
So what can you do?
Unless you're luck and find some root underlying illness, you're going to need to treat your hormone levels directly. That means going on HRT(hormone replacement therapy), or as it is sometimes referred to, TRT(testosterone replacement therapy). The problem is that while HRT for women is well-accepted, HRT for men isn't understood by many well-meaning doctors. Some refuse to give it as a treatment, while others don't understand how to properly dose and manage it. Which means you're going to have to educate yourself.
Read the following things:
TRT: A Recipe for Success
This is almost like a bible to many. Since its publication, a few things have changed though. Transdermal testosterone is largely preferred over IM, if your body is capable of absorbing it. And HCG has become almost mandatory.
HCG Update
Talks about the benefits of HCG while on TRT
All Things Male Forum
Read the stickies and some posts to get a feel for what's going on.
Bodybuilding.com TRT Forum
Same thing here, read a bit. Maybe not as technical as the previous forum, but a strong community.
The problems you're having are shared by a LARGE, and GROWING(as this article indicates) number of men. You aren't alone. But many doctors are just starting to wake up to the treatment, and you will have to educate yourself. Rest assured though, there is a solution out there.
Or another way of putting it...any cryptosystem can be broken if the users intentionally misuse it by sharing keys, using unauthenticated keys, sharing all their plaintext on their blog, etc. That shouldn't factor into an analysis of the intended use of the system.
SSL requires a chain of trust somewhere. If you use self-signed certificates without some process of authenticating them(say, in person), you're not using SSL as intended.
This system always trusts DNS...which is NEVER secure without some additions(like DNSSEC).
Except breaking SSL with a self-signed cert can be automated and simple. If someone else controls any part of the path between you and the destination(read ISP, access point owner, etc), they can automatically man-in-the-middle any connection with a self-signed cert.
It's like using a sign in sheet on your door to detect if anyone has entered your house without your permission. Without locks. No effort to break, and easy to give a false sense of security.
EXACTLY! With a self-signed certificate, there's no indication that a man in the middle attack is taking place. In which case, anyone that can sit between you and the server, can pretend to be the server(controls/owns/attacks your DNS server) or can beat the server in responding to you, can eavesdrop.
SSL without a trusted certificate provides NO additional security over communicating in the clear. AT ALL.
For those who haven't heard of the attack(and have lived under a rock ever since asymmetric cryptography was invented), it consists of an evil entity that you connect to instead of the server. You negotiate an encrypted connection with the evil entity, which then negotiates an encrypted connection to the real server. It then passes all the data between the two connections in addition to logging it. BAM, eavesdropping.
A certificate allows a proof that the entity you THINK you negotiated the encryption with REALLY IS the entity you have negotiated the encryption with.
So, basically we have the same concept as SSL, except instead of trusting the CA signature on the certificate, we trust DNS.
Forging a CA signature on a certificate would be a BIG DEAL.
Forging a DNS entry, especially with ISP cooperation(read government snooping), is DEAD SIMPLE.
So we replace real security with, well, a CPU hog that's only a smidge better than running everything in the clear. It only keeps out the MOST casual, lazy, and uninterested snooper.
As I replied before:
It does work by breaking the disk up into sectors, each of which starts a new chain. The problem is an IV is used to "start" the CBC chain, and this IV is static as the underlying plaintext changes. So new changes on the same point of the HD get encrypted with the same IV.
By breaking the disk up into sectors, each of which start a new chain. The problem is an IV is used to "start" the CBC chain, and this IV is static as the underlying plaintext changes. So new changes on the same point of the HD get encrypted with the same IV.
The problem is many CBC and other disk-encryption modes used an IV based on the disk sector number. So when that sector changes, the changes continue to be encrypted with the same IV and key.
The cause is similar to the watermarking attack, but the idea is used backwards. The watermarking attack reveals the presence of maliciously constructed decoy plaintext encrypted by the user, whereas this attack reveals information about the change in an unknown plaintext.
In both attacks the issue is that the salt, as you call it, is constant for a given disk block. If that salt can be predicted, a decoy plaintext can be revealed in the ciphertext. If data is changed while using the same salt, sections of identical plaintext before and after the change can be identified.
Actually, muscle burns more calories than fat at rest...but both burn so little that they're completely insignificant. So the "myth" is technically true, but utterly insignificant.
On the other hand, GP was trying to say was that weight training is an effective way to loose weight. Many prefer it to pure cardio. Either one can work, so just find one that suits you best.
I'm tired and can't think of the data for metabolic rate after exercise for weight training vs pure cardio, but many methods of exercise do raise your metabolism for some time after the exercise. You just have to exercise in the first place. ;) If you're in the pure cardio camp, interval training can really raise your metabolism for the rest of the day.