yeah, but in the future maybe all of us would have 200GBs (or more) of auxiliary multimedia memory. Remember the articles about people "seeing" with their tongue, and people controlling cursors and stuff just by thoughts? All you'd need is a decent high density, compact and light power source and then many could be carrying around their auxiliary brains with them 24/7.
Only trouble is if the laws don't change, we'd have to pay RIAA and MPAA and Disney for access to our auxiliary memories and so on.
If you haven't noticed already, the US picked a fight in Iraq, and has not given _honest_ reasons why it did so. That sure didn't make the rest of the world happy, or reduce the odds of the USA getting attacked.
You also miss the other point. The major weakness is not being attacked by missiles. Drugs and people get smuggled in ALL the time. What's stopping nukes from being smuggled in? They aren't that big you know. And they don't have to be that complex - bomb complexity is only to improve yields and stuff like that. I'm sure terrorists aren't so fussy about that.
Someone could just take a boat right into SF bay and nuke SF. Same for NY. Most of the major cities are close to waterways.
IIRC a drug smuggler went right into the SF bay before and dropped off stuff. No problems...
Hijack a boat (in the south china sea or thereabouts), rebadge it, load it up send it on a one way trip to SF or NY.
To defend against such attacks the US would have to make itself poorer and less free.
The best defense is to not to be such a desirable target.
You piss a few extremists off, they kill a few thousand. You piss LOTS of people off in a major way, the stakes are higher. Sure it's a sad thing when 3000 people die. But it's sadder if millions die, and the lives of tens of millions are badly affected.
Perhaps if the US had taken the billions it spends each month on Iraq and spent it on making the US's enemies not hate the US so much, it'd actually be much safer.
You don't nuke or suicide bomb someone if you just dislike them...
My personal experience with reporting PHP Nuke bugs is the author just doesn't want to fix them (he appears to expect fixes to come with reports ) and grumbles at you, so I stopped bothering. Why should I fix PHP Nuke? Judging from the code I'd use some other software - I was just checking for other people to see if PHP Nuke was fit for use. My verdict was "not fit for use".
If you can't find anymore in PHP Nuke, just look for other PHP software that requires "track vars" and other insecure options.
The students who fail shouldn't have taken the class at all - if they are checking software that is already likely to have been audited, they obviously lack the necessary way of thinking, and that sort of thing is not DJB's fault.
Basically there are huge gaping vulnerabilities in the US's defenses. Hundreds of tons of cocaine gets through EVERY year despite the billions spent in the war vs drugs.
The US can only close many of these vulnerablities at great cost to themselves (great impact on freedom and economy ) - e.g. by declaring martial law, curfews and such.
If you know you can't win a no-holds-barred fight if an opponent chooses to attack your major weakness AND your weakness is common knowledge, then perhaps you shouldn't keep trying to piss everyone off.
However it seems the US is going out of its way to pick fights. Makes me wonder why.
Sure the US got whacked in 9/11 and lost 3000 people. But what the US is doing sure looks like it's making things worse and not better.
Yeah, first thing I thought of. I'm sure you could find at least 3 new security bugs:) within a week.
Then look for 2-3 other php web apps, and you should be able to find 3-4 SQL injection and cross site scripting bugs easily. Just look for those that require enable track vars *LOL*.
There's plenty of shoddy code around. It's amazing how long obvious bugs hang around undiscovered. It's usually more a matter of "no one's bothered to look".
I suppose many of the students probably shouldn't have taken the course.
Another thing - perhaps they're taking the course to learn interesting stuff. And if they do learn lots of interesting stuff, it may actually be worth it even though they don't pass or get a decent grade. Not all of them are just there for the cert, friends and beer right?
Heck if you "only" find 5 significant bugs instead of 10, you could probably get a job at many IT security firms. Many of "security consultants" can't find any bugs that nessus or ISS Internet Scanner doesn't already find *ROFL*...
Nah. Any two bit dictator sending nukes to US would do it via standard shipping containers, or via whatever way the _hundreds_ of tons of cocaine are smuggled into the US _every_ year.
Of course if you only had ONE nuke and wanted to hurt the US, there are perhaps one or two targets OUTSIDE the USA which if hit in the "right" way and time, could arguably hurt the USA more than hitting targets within the USA.
Re:best math model - attractive_girl = my_age / 2
on
Mathematics and Sex
·
· Score: 2, Interesting
What's the corresponding formula for ladies though?
Open letter from DoomedWhisky Product Manager Glenholwood distillery: Sometime in the last week or so there was quite an uproar over the announcement of our latest DoomedWhisky product.
The DoomedWhisky produced does differ in a number of ways from our other very popular whiskies. I want to be very honest and forthcoming in saying that, and I know I won't make any friends amongst the fans of whisky in doing so.
But it should be mentioned that it was never the goal of anyone involved in DoomedWhisky to make it exactly like whisky. Because let's be honest, we were never going to top the other whiskies anyway. Instead we have toyed with some ingredients of the product and yes, I am pretty much solely responsible for that, since it was my idea and my whisky that got made. Let me assure you, though, that the themes and elements that you love about Whisky are ALL represented strongly in DooomedWhisky...just with some new twists - like _real_ lemon juice (twist of lemon included!), and lots of pure spring water (so that we can meet regulations and sell it to kids ). We did away with the casks/barrels and we are using rice instead of barley.
I don't enjoy watching a bunch of strangers bastardize my whisky any more than you do, but really none of us can do anything about it at this point, so I hope that at least some of you will fret, with me, in the direction of optimism. We all have high expectations, and a lot of them won't be met, but the bottom line is the Whisky is going to be pretty cool.
Longer routes means the batteries and electrical systems become a deadweight - they do nothing much. So no surprise they are not as efficient.
They should do better in stop and go traffic conditions.
Probably the caterpillar diesel engines which they switched to just aren't as economical.
If they had wanted better emissions perhaps they should have gone for a diesel mix- aquadiesel or vegetable oil+diesel, and stuck with the old engines...
Apparently some 4x4 owners here add a bit of vege oil into their tanks to pass emissions tests;). Wonder if that's a legal tactic... But if diesel prices keep going up, mixing in vege oil could become commonplace.
The antispam software at my previous workplace had a DNSBL feature (SpamCop?). When it was on, it was flagging _entire_ network ranges (whole ISPs), so it blocked email from legitimate companies - customers, partners etc.
Fortunately it didn't just drop connections with a 500 message - it used the DNSBL as a weighting (but had a pretty hefty default weight). So it was easier to figure out what it was doing wrong.
I see so many users using DNSBLs and they're so happy about the spam reduction... They probably don't correspond with anyone from the blacklisted ISPs, but even if I don't either, I am not going to rely on antispam tech that blocks entire ranges of IPs just because of spam from a few IPs.
1) transparent HTTP proxying. e.g. Use squid as the web proxy and delay pools. squid -k reconfigure reconfigures squid.
2) Use bandwidth control on your firewall (My internet gateway runs FreeBSD, IPFW, pipe and queue, and I give small outbound packets priority over outbound large ones, AND limit the outbound large packets to a certain bandwidth so that externals downloading stuff from my machine don't affect MY downloads and other network stuff much - this is because many of the important outbound packets related to my Internet experience are small - e.g. DNS, TCP-ACKs, TCP-SYNs, quake UDP packets;). Of course this does clamp stuff a bit when sending mail or uploading files, I could tweak the rules a bit, but so far nobody's seems to mind (including me;) ).
For incoming traffic, I give my computer 4 x the weighting compared to other PCs;). That said, since my ISP's router decides what to stuff down my internet connection to my firewall and my firewall only gets to decide what to pass to the rest, I can only control TCP traffic somewhat - by dropping packets inbound TCP connections will tend to use less bandwidth. This isn't as effective for high latency connections. Other connectionless traffic like typical UDP/ICMP packets will fill my pipe at whatever rate the ISP's router decides to send them.
I also have transparent web proxying active on the gateway as per 1) - the caching helps when updating windows on the various machines at home. To do that I configure squid to cache files that are up to a few hundred MB in size. The LFUDA caching policy might be helpful.
In your father in-laws case you probably would have to clamp his bandwidth to say half or quarter of your total download bandwidth. It'll still affect the interactivity and other latency dependent stuff like online games (since you don't have control over the ISP's router), but his TCP downloads should end up about whatever you set. If he's using something like UDP for downloading then I'm not sure what you can do about it - it does depend on whether the app has something "TCP like" at higher layers - e.g. doesn't keep blasting at max rate if there's no acknowledgement - not sure if all P2P apps are well behaved if using UDP.
He's talking about those who claim to be LDS, are practicing homosexuals AND say it's fine. That would be hypocritical.
It's just like those who claim to be LDS (or other Christians) and are committing adultery AND say it's fine. That would be hypocritical too.
"We Latter-day Saints know that we are eternal beings who must gain control of our bodies and direct our lives toward the good of others in order to be worthy of an adult role in the hereafter. So the regulation of sexual drives is designated not just to preserve the community of the Saints but also to improve and educate the individuals within it. The Lord asks no more of its members who are tempted toward homosexuality than it does of its unmarried adolescents, its widows and widowers, its divorced members, and its members who never marry. Furthermore, the Lord even guides the sexual behavior of those who are married, expecting them to use their sexual powers responsibly and in a proportionate role within the marriage. "
Card's ending paragraph: "I suppose I can take some comfort from the fact that over the years I have been savaged both for showing too much sympathy for the "abomination" of homosexuality and for showing too much "homophobic" opposition to the political agenda of the radical homosexual community. If either group of intolerant extremists felt comfortable with my works and my words, I would have reason to reexamine my position. As things stand right now, however, I think I am annoying exactly the right people on both sides, and so will continue as I have in the past, to attempt to discover the truth of every aspect of human life and then to tell what truth I believe I have found, as best I can, in both my fiction and my nonfiction. "
The people who extend copyright laws are not just cheating.
They're stealing. They are _stealing_ works from the public, by preventing them from entering the public domain.
They are more thieves than those who are _copying_. People who make copies don't really reduce access to the work. Whereas copyright extensions and similar stuff do.
People who make copies could reduce the copyright holder's access to money that is not the copyright holder's. But that is quite a different thing. After all that money is not automatically the copyright holder's.
"Although no official timing was done, Gordon's fastest lap in the Williams was approximately one second slower than Montoya's fastest time in the warm up that morning. Likewise, Montoya's fastest time in the Chevrolet Monte Carlo was off by about one second from Gordon's best time."
I don't know what era F1 car you are talking about, but driving a modern F1 car isn't that hard. F1 is NOT the same as NASCAR.
After all you just keep going round the same track over and over, there's semi auto transmission, tons of computers taking care of stuff. Give a decent driver some coaching and an hour or so and I think he/she could get the hang of driving it fast.
Do a search for "Alex Yoong" and F1. Driving it fast _enough_ is the hard part, as Alex Yoong found out.
In contrast driving in a rally race is probably harder for normal drivers. I'd probably crash and die the first bend I tried to go fast on.
Note, I'm not saying that rally drivers would be faster than F1 drivers when driving F1 cars.
IMO the problem is I don't think most people's memories are good at holding something as very important and THE THING to remember, then after 3 months it's something else to remember.
I believe most peoples memories work such that if something is of great interest you remember it for a very long time AND it's usually contextual.
E.g. You press this button to do this, you use this tool for this job, you use this berry to dye stuff this colour, this leaf tastes like this and produces this effect, etc. And human memories work fine if these contexts/links don't change every 3 months.
After changing passwords every 3 months after 5 years even if you can remember those passwords, your memory might be associating ALL those 20 passwords with the "access"/application and you might not know which password is the one out of 20 that's linked to the stuff you want to "unlock" with the password.
If there's a lockout after 3 tries that makes it even more fun. In which case you ALSO have to remember that previous passwords are no longer valid as well, rather than just try all of them;).
I wonder if it could work if you carry around a coloured pattern (or some other mnemonic/symbol/picture) that you change each time your password has to change. That way you are cued to remember the right password. And you associate the pattern with the password, and not the access/application with the password (which is probably what most people do).
Scents could produce very strong cues since scents can be tied strongly to memories, but you could run out of distinct scents pretty rapidly.
Maybe one could make a software/device that generates and stores passwords.
First you enter the context, it supplies the symbol and/or musical tones AND password. You associate the mnemonic (symbol and/or musical tones) with the password.
When you want to use it, you enter then context or select the context from a list of contexts, then the mnemonic is displayed/played. Hopefully this cues you to remember the right password.
The passwords could be encrypted and stored in the device too. If you use public key encryption then you can have it so that the passwords can only be unlocked with a key/associated device that's stored in a safe place elsewhere.
You could store the password in the secured device, but that means you need to take out the secured device everytime you make a new password.
A good way would be to have the passwords encrypted on the carried device, and copied to the secured device whenever you connect the two together.
Don't think there's big money in this. All that tech and the user's brain still needs to work;).
I'll wait for auxiliary digital brains. Then you can shove the problem under a different carpet...
Slashdot Mirror
Sure that's fun.
But it stops being fun if the FBI kicks in your door at 3am and carries off your stuff.
If you're lucky they might come back to you 6 months later and say "Oops", and hand you back _some_ of your stuff (hopefully still useable).
yeah, but in the future maybe all of us would have 200GBs (or more) of auxiliary multimedia memory. Remember the articles about people "seeing" with their tongue, and people controlling cursors and stuff just by thoughts? All you'd need is a decent high density, compact and light power source and then many could be carrying around their auxiliary brains with them 24/7.
Only trouble is if the laws don't change, we'd have to pay RIAA and MPAA and Disney for access to our auxiliary memories and so on.
A penny for your thoughts?
I don't think they'd settle for just a penny.
I'm fine with that if _everyone_ gets to see what everyone else does in public.
That'll be fair.
It's not fair if only a certain select bunch get to see what everyone else does in public.
Worse if the public money is used to pay for it AND most of the public don't like it.
Of course sometimes (often?) the public is too ignorant/stupid to know they are being tricked/screwed.
"Pregnant" one maybe :).
Seriously though, you really think 300+ tons of cocaine is mainly smuggled into the US that way year after year?
Since we're on that topic, ever heard the joke about a cyclist carrying bags of sand across the border?
"What do the Brits have - just standard English and that silly dialect where people call things after other words that rhyme."
Do a search on english dialects and you'll see how wrong you are. I'm not a Brit and even I know that.
For a _start_ you can check this site out.
I wonder if they put something in the US tap water. That might help explain a few things...
If you haven't noticed already, the US picked a fight in Iraq, and has not given _honest_ reasons why it did so. That sure didn't make the rest of the world happy, or reduce the odds of the USA getting attacked.
You also miss the other point. The major weakness is not being attacked by missiles. Drugs and people get smuggled in ALL the time. What's stopping nukes from being smuggled in? They aren't that big you know. And they don't have to be that complex - bomb complexity is only to improve yields and stuff like that. I'm sure terrorists aren't so fussy about that.
Someone could just take a boat right into SF bay and nuke SF. Same for NY. Most of the major cities are close to waterways.
IIRC a drug smuggler went right into the SF bay before and dropped off stuff. No problems...
Hijack a boat (in the south china sea or thereabouts), rebadge it, load it up send it on a one way trip to SF or NY.
To defend against such attacks the US would have to make itself poorer and less free.
The best defense is to not to be such a desirable target.
You piss a few extremists off, they kill a few thousand. You piss LOTS of people off in a major way, the stakes are higher. Sure it's a sad thing when 3000 people die. But it's sadder if millions die, and the lives of tens of millions are badly affected.
Perhaps if the US had taken the billions it spends each month on Iraq and spent it on making the US's enemies not hate the US so much, it'd actually be much safer.
You don't nuke or suicide bomb someone if you just dislike them...
Forget CPAN, have you seen PHP Nuke?
My personal experience with reporting PHP Nuke bugs is the author just doesn't want to fix them (he appears to expect fixes to come with reports ) and grumbles at you, so I stopped bothering. Why should I fix PHP Nuke? Judging from the code I'd use some other software - I was just checking for other people to see if PHP Nuke was fit for use. My verdict was "not fit for use".
If you can't find anymore in PHP Nuke, just look for other PHP software that requires "track vars" and other insecure options.
The students who fail shouldn't have taken the class at all - if they are checking software that is already likely to have been audited, they obviously lack the necessary way of thinking, and that sort of thing is not DJB's fault.
Basically there are huge gaping vulnerabilities in the US's defenses. Hundreds of tons of cocaine gets through EVERY year despite the billions spent in the war vs drugs.
The US can only close many of these vulnerablities at great cost to themselves (great impact on freedom and economy ) - e.g. by declaring martial law, curfews and such.
If you know you can't win a no-holds-barred fight if an opponent chooses to attack your major weakness AND your weakness is common knowledge, then perhaps you shouldn't keep trying to piss everyone off.
However it seems the US is going out of its way to pick fights. Makes me wonder why.
Sure the US got whacked in 9/11 and lost 3000 people. But what the US is doing sure looks like it's making things worse and not better.
Yeah, first thing I thought of. I'm sure you could find at least 3 new security bugs :) within a week.
Then look for 2-3 other php web apps, and you should be able to find 3-4 SQL injection and cross site scripting bugs easily. Just look for those that require enable track vars *LOL*.
There's plenty of shoddy code around. It's amazing how long obvious bugs hang around undiscovered. It's usually more a matter of "no one's bothered to look".
I suppose many of the students probably shouldn't have taken the course.
Another thing - perhaps they're taking the course to learn interesting stuff. And if they do learn lots of interesting stuff, it may actually be worth it even though they don't pass or get a decent grade. Not all of them are just there for the cert, friends and beer right?
Heck if you "only" find 5 significant bugs instead of 10, you could probably get a job at many IT security firms. Many of "security consultants" can't find any bugs that nessus or ISS Internet Scanner doesn't already find *ROFL*...
Nah. Any two bit dictator sending nukes to US would do it via standard shipping containers, or via whatever way the _hundreds_ of tons of cocaine are smuggled into the US _every_ year.
Of course if you only had ONE nuke and wanted to hurt the US, there are perhaps one or two targets OUTSIDE the USA which if hit in the "right" way and time, could arguably hurt the USA more than hitting targets within the USA.
What's the corresponding formula for ladies though?
Open letter from DoomedWhisky Product Manager Glenholwood distillery:
Sometime in the last week or so there was quite an uproar over the announcement of our latest DoomedWhisky product.
The DoomedWhisky produced does differ in a number of ways from our other very popular whiskies. I want to be very honest and forthcoming in saying that, and I know I won't make any friends amongst the fans of whisky in doing so.
But it should be mentioned that it was never the goal of anyone involved in DoomedWhisky to make it exactly like whisky. Because let's be honest, we were never going to top the other whiskies anyway. Instead we have toyed with some ingredients of the product and yes, I am pretty much solely responsible for that, since it was my idea and my whisky that got made. Let me assure you, though, that the themes and elements that you love about Whisky are ALL represented strongly in DooomedWhisky...just with some new twists - like _real_ lemon juice (twist of lemon included!), and lots of pure spring water (so that we can meet regulations and sell it to kids ). We did away with the casks/barrels and we are using rice instead of barley.
I don't enjoy watching a bunch of strangers bastardize my whisky any more than you do, but really none of us can do anything about it at this point, so I hope that at least some of you will fret, with me, in the direction of optimism. We all have high expectations, and a lot of them won't be met, but the bottom line is the Whisky is going to be pretty cool.
Longer routes means the batteries and electrical systems become a deadweight - they do nothing much. So no surprise they are not as efficient.
;). Wonder if that's a legal tactic... But if diesel prices keep going up, mixing in vege oil could become commonplace.
They should do better in stop and go traffic conditions.
Probably the caterpillar diesel engines which they switched to just aren't as economical.
If they had wanted better emissions perhaps they should have gone for a diesel mix- aquadiesel or vegetable oil+diesel, and stuck with the old engines...
Apparently some 4x4 owners here add a bit of vege oil into their tanks to pass emissions tests
Just wondering if they'd ever support FreeBSD as a host O/S (for more recent versions of vmware).
I suppose Linux will have to do for the meantime. The trouble is which linux distro? Looks like I'd have to try CentOS.
If fuel cells are still having problems, a decent alternative should be hybrid diesels.
Diesels are already very efficient. Hybrid diesels would be even more so. Esp if you have regenerative braking.
Interesting diesel options:
1) Bio-diesel (waste cooking oil, palm or soya oil).
2) diesel-water emulsions (e.g. Shell's Aquadiesel licensed from Gunnerman's A-55 fuels/Clean Fuels Tech).
How good are the DNSBLs? "false positive" rates?
The antispam software at my previous workplace had a DNSBL feature (SpamCop?). When it was on, it was flagging _entire_ network ranges (whole ISPs), so it blocked email from legitimate companies - customers, partners etc.
Fortunately it didn't just drop connections with a 500 message - it used the DNSBL as a weighting (but had a pretty hefty default weight). So it was easier to figure out what it was doing wrong.
I see so many users using DNSBLs and they're so happy about the spam reduction... They probably don't correspond with anyone from the blacklisted ISPs, but even if I don't either, I am not going to rely on antispam tech that blocks entire ranges of IPs just because of spam from a few IPs.
4) Dumb luck?
5) Dumb customers/users/voters?
Or they got it right a while ago, and now they're just living off their "goodwill/branding capital".
"This means fully 1/3 of the spam received at my mail servers originates within APNIC."
And employees have about a 40% probability of calling in sick on Mondays and Fridays.
Any other stats? Like what percentage of spam comes via the USA?
1) transparent HTTP proxying. e.g. Use squid as the web proxy and delay pools. squid -k reconfigure reconfigures squid.
;). Of course this does clamp stuff a bit when sending mail or uploading files, I could tweak the rules a bit, but so far nobody's seems to mind (including me ;) ).
;). That said, since my ISP's router decides what to stuff down my internet connection to my firewall and my firewall only gets to decide what to pass to the rest, I can only control TCP traffic somewhat - by dropping packets inbound TCP connections will tend to use less bandwidth. This isn't as effective for high latency connections. Other connectionless traffic like typical UDP/ICMP packets will fill my pipe at whatever rate the ISP's router decides to send them.
2) Use bandwidth control on your firewall (My internet gateway runs FreeBSD, IPFW, pipe and queue, and I give small outbound packets priority over outbound large ones, AND limit the outbound large packets to a certain bandwidth so that externals downloading stuff from my machine don't affect MY downloads and other network stuff much - this is because many of the important outbound packets related to my Internet experience are small - e.g. DNS, TCP-ACKs, TCP-SYNs, quake UDP packets
For incoming traffic, I give my computer 4 x the weighting compared to other PCs
I also have transparent web proxying active on the gateway as per 1) - the caching helps when updating windows on the various machines at home. To do that I configure squid to cache files that are up to a few hundred MB in size. The LFUDA caching policy might be helpful.
In your father in-laws case you probably would have to clamp his bandwidth to say half or quarter of your total download bandwidth. It'll still affect the interactivity and other latency dependent stuff like online games (since you don't have control over the ISP's router), but his TCP downloads should end up about whatever you set. If he's using something like UDP for downloading then I'm not sure what you can do about it - it does depend on whether the app has something "TCP like" at higher layers - e.g. doesn't keep blasting at max rate if there's no acknowledgement - not sure if all P2P apps are well behaved if using UDP.
He seems to be quite reasonable.
He's talking about those who claim to be LDS, are practicing homosexuals AND say it's fine. That would be hypocritical.
It's just like those who claim to be LDS (or other Christians) and are committing adultery AND say it's fine. That would be hypocritical too.
"We Latter-day Saints know that we are eternal beings who must gain control of our bodies and direct our lives toward the good of others in order to be worthy of an adult role in the hereafter. So the regulation of sexual drives is designated not just to preserve the community of the Saints but also to improve and educate the individuals within it. The Lord asks no more of its members who are tempted toward homosexuality than it does of its unmarried adolescents, its widows and widowers, its divorced members, and its members who never marry. Furthermore, the Lord even guides the sexual behavior of those who are married, expecting them to use their sexual powers responsibly and in a proportionate role within the marriage. "
Card's ending paragraph: "I suppose I can take some comfort from the fact that over the years I have been savaged both for showing too much sympathy for the "abomination" of homosexuality and for showing too much "homophobic" opposition to the political agenda of the radical homosexual community. If either group of intolerant extremists felt comfortable with my works and my words, I would have reason to reexamine my position. As things stand right now, however, I think I am annoying exactly the right people on both sides, and so will continue as I have in the past, to attempt to discover the truth of every aspect of human life and then to tell what truth I believe I have found, as best I can, in both my fiction and my nonfiction. "
The people who extend copyright laws are not just cheating.
They're stealing. They are _stealing_ works from the public, by preventing them from entering the public domain.
They are more thieves than those who are _copying_. People who make copies don't really reduce access to the work. Whereas copyright extensions and similar stuff do.
People who make copies could reduce the copyright holder's access to money that is not the copyright holder's. But that is quite a different thing. After all that money is not automatically the copyright holder's.
He and his team probably had a lot of these moments 30-40 years ago.
Different version of what happened.
"Although no official timing was done, Gordon's fastest lap in the Williams was approximately one second slower than Montoya's fastest time in the warm up that morning. Likewise, Montoya's fastest time in the Chevrolet Monte Carlo was off by about one second from Gordon's best time."
I don't know what era F1 car you are talking about, but driving a modern F1 car isn't that hard. F1 is NOT the same as NASCAR.
After all you just keep going round the same track over and over, there's semi auto transmission, tons of computers taking care of stuff. Give a decent driver some coaching and an hour or so and I think he/she could get the hang of driving it fast.
Do a search for "Alex Yoong" and F1. Driving it fast _enough_ is the hard part, as Alex Yoong found out.
In contrast driving in a rally race is probably harder for normal drivers. I'd probably crash and die the first bend I tried to go fast on.
Note, I'm not saying that rally drivers would be faster than F1 drivers when driving F1 cars.
IMO the problem is I don't think most people's memories are good at holding something as very important and THE THING to remember, then after 3 months it's something else to remember.
;).
;).
I believe most peoples memories work such that if something is of great interest you remember it for a very long time AND it's usually contextual.
E.g. You press this button to do this, you use this tool for this job, you use this berry to dye stuff this colour, this leaf tastes like this and produces this effect, etc. And human memories work fine if these contexts/links don't change every 3 months.
After changing passwords every 3 months after 5 years even if you can remember those passwords, your memory might be associating ALL those 20 passwords with the "access"/application and you might not know which password is the one out of 20 that's linked to the stuff you want to "unlock" with the password.
If there's a lockout after 3 tries that makes it even more fun. In which case you ALSO have to remember that previous passwords are no longer valid as well, rather than just try all of them
I wonder if it could work if you carry around a coloured pattern (or some other mnemonic/symbol/picture) that you change each time your password has to change. That way you are cued to remember the right password. And you associate the pattern with the password, and not the access/application with the password (which is probably what most people do).
Scents could produce very strong cues since scents can be tied strongly to memories, but you could run out of distinct scents pretty rapidly.
Maybe one could make a software/device that generates and stores passwords.
First you enter the context, it supplies the symbol and/or musical tones AND password. You associate the mnemonic (symbol and/or musical tones) with the password.
When you want to use it, you enter then context or select the context from a list of contexts, then the mnemonic is displayed/played. Hopefully this cues you to remember the right password.
The passwords could be encrypted and stored in the device too. If you use public key encryption then you can have it so that the passwords can only be unlocked with a key/associated device that's stored in a safe place elsewhere.
You could store the password in the secured device, but that means you need to take out the secured device everytime you make a new password.
A good way would be to have the passwords encrypted on the carried device, and copied to the secured device whenever you connect the two together.
Don't think there's big money in this. All that tech and the user's brain still needs to work
I'll wait for auxiliary digital brains. Then you can shove the problem under a different carpet...