We Americans hate the way the American government is treating us, too. At this point we've mostly lost control of our government. This place looks like any other third-world banana republic, except we have a new dictator every few years.
Wake up, get real. If it were like any other third-world banana republic, Kerry would never have lived to see election day.
Dirty bombs aren't any more lethal than a regular bomb with the same amount of explosives. The "dirty" part only causes fear, not death. This means it is an ideal terrorist weapon, of course, and the best countermeasure against one is education.
Just like every other technology which wasn't shared, I'm sure the rest of the world would steal/copy it in short order. The USA's nuclear monopoly lasted all of four years, and look where things are today.
Hence patents give you a tragedy of the commons. Every actor rightly sees an advantage in patenting everything they can lay their hands on, even though this activity hurts everyone when everyone does it.
Take a page from Apple's book and display "this app is starting up" feedback in a manner that does not involve a gigantic window spang in the middle of the workspace. Mac OS X's method of bouncing the app's icon in the Dock while it's starting provides fairly obvious feedback without being annoying.
Why is it our responsibility to protect them? Of course, the bill specifically doesn't protect the involved parties, and that's great. Why should we have to go beyond that? If some idiot wants to buy a ticket that has a 50% chance of blowing himself up, or if he wants to drink and smoke himself to an early grave and doesn't hurt any other people in the process, why should we prevent him?
Thus if we are speaking about fair use and the copying of DVD's to the RAID, it is impossible to excercise fair use and break the law at the same time . ..
I beg to differ. If I break into Joe's house, plunge a butcher knife into his chest, and then use his shiny new DVD copier to make personal-use-only backup copies of my movies, then I believe that I would have both exercised fair use and broken the law at the same time. Not for the same act, though....;-)
One reason somebody might download or buy bootlegs even with such an incredibly expensive jukebox is because the bootlegs and downloads are often available months before the legitimate DVD. Once again, the industry is actively driving people towards the pirates because of their inability to change with the times.
MD5 is not a hash-table hash, it is (was?) a cryptographic hash. It outputs 16 bytes of apparently-random data that depends on the input. If it obeyed good cryptographic properties, the odds of a collision would be incredibly low (1 in 10^38), and finding a collision would be impractical. It appears that MD5 does not, in fact, completely obey good cryptographic properties, and there are ways of generating a collision that do not depend on brute-force searches. It is not "of course" just because you see it all the time in your 4-byte checksum algorithms, any more than factoring a 4096-bit RSA key is "of course" because you can easily decide that 15 = 5 x 3.
Let's say I have a system that downloads files over the internet. To prevent man-in-the-middle attacks, I digitally sign the files. This prevents me from having to vet all of the code that deals with local files for buffer overflows. I implement the digital signatures by simply encrypting a hash of the file with an RSA private key when I create the file, and decrypting and verifying the hash on the receiving side.
If I had decided to use MD5 for the hash in the digital signature, my scheme is now vulnerable. It's not too far-fetched to imagine that somebody could come up with a way to embed an exploit in one of the files while staying within the limitations imposed by this collision technique. Then if he can accomplish a man-in-the-middle attack, he's successfully used my automatic downloader to compromise somebody's machine. Not fun.
This may not be completely feasible currently, but the technique shows that it may be possible in the future. If you're currently designing a system that you plan to have function for several years, you should not assume that MD5 is cryptographically secure.
They have software running locally, so they could do anything from running something to sniff all of your keystrokes, to something that snarfs the page directly out of your IE process, to installing a fresh root SSL cert that lets them monkey with your connection. If the enemy has the ability to execute arbitrary code on your computer, all bets are off.
Cutting NASA to get the government's budget out of debt is the equivalent of being unemployed and skimping on resume paper, while eating caviar every night. You're tossing something that does a great deal of good and costs relatively little, while ignoring the gross overspending that put you into debt in the first place.
Then they can spamproof addresses posted to their private area, and leave stuff that comes from Usenet alone. Surely the geniuses at Google could figure out how to apply an e-mail filter selectively.
It's bad for two reasons. First, you're changing the contents of the post without notification and without the consent of the author. Second, e-mail masking can cause problems with false positives. For example, in Objective-C, there are several keywords that start with @, such as @interface. Some archives of Objective-C mailing lists have e-mail blockers, and so you see weird stuff like:
<E-MAIL REMOVED> MyClass : NSObject {.... }
I doubt if Google's e-mail blocker will be that stupid, but you never know what kinds of false positives it could find.
There is also no purpose to it. Every single post ever made to usenet has already been harvested by spammers, so what's the issue with making them public?
My life has changed a lot since then, but it has nothing to do with the attacks. I don't really mind the phrase, though, as it makes for an easy filter. Anybody who says something like "everything is different post-9/11", or "security is paramount" is an idiot and should not be listened to further.
AppleWorks sucks and Office is tremendously expensive (almost 50% of the purchase price of a new eMac). OO could make a market-share killing on the Mac if they would get it ported for real.
If your if statement's conditional has side effects, and the compiler optimizes away the if statement because the body is empty, you have a broken optimizer. It's possible, but it would be a bug in the compiler.
Slashdot Mirror
We Americans hate the way the American government is treating us, too. At this point we've mostly lost control of our government. This place looks like any other third-world banana republic, except we have a new dictator every few years.
Wake up, get real. If it were like any other third-world banana republic, Kerry would never have lived to see election day.
Dirty bombs aren't any more lethal than a regular bomb with the same amount of explosives. The "dirty" part only causes fear, not death. This means it is an ideal terrorist weapon, of course, and the best countermeasure against one is education.
You would too for free ram. [pctech4free.com]
Actually, no, I wouldn't. Notice how there is no ponzi scheme in my sig.
Just like every other technology which wasn't shared, I'm sure the rest of the world would steal/copy it in short order. The USA's nuclear monopoly lasted all of four years, and look where things are today.
Hence patents give you a tragedy of the commons. Every actor rightly sees an advantage in patenting everything they can lay their hands on, even though this activity hurts everyone when everyone does it.
And whoever said slashdot isn't US-centred?
Er, I don't know, who did? Slashdot has been highly US-centric and not afraid to show it ever since I started reading the site.
IBM isn't even a big player in the PC market.
I don't know what color the sky is on your planet, but here on blue-sky Earth, IBM's PC business is the third-largest in the industry.
Furthermore, you're comparing purchases for a product that just shipped to the revenues for an entire year. The comparison just doesn't make sense.
Take a page from Apple's book and display "this app is starting up" feedback in a manner that does not involve a gigantic window spang in the middle of the workspace. Mac OS X's method of bouncing the app's icon in the Dock while it's starting provides fairly obvious feedback without being annoying.
Why is it our responsibility to protect them? Of course, the bill specifically doesn't protect the involved parties, and that's great. Why should we have to go beyond that? If some idiot wants to buy a ticket that has a 50% chance of blowing himself up, or if he wants to drink and smoke himself to an early grave and doesn't hurt any other people in the process, why should we prevent him?
Thus if we are speaking about fair use and the copying of DVD's to the RAID, it is impossible to excercise fair use and break the law at the same time . . .
;-)
I beg to differ. If I break into Joe's house, plunge a butcher knife into his chest, and then use his shiny new DVD copier to make personal-use-only backup copies of my movies, then I believe that I would have both exercised fair use and broken the law at the same time. Not for the same act, though....
One reason somebody might download or buy bootlegs even with such an incredibly expensive jukebox is because the bootlegs and downloads are often available months before the legitimate DVD. Once again, the industry is actively driving people towards the pirates because of their inability to change with the times.
people will object to fucking anything they just plain don't like.
I don't know about you, but I myself am extremely picky about what I fuck.
MD5 is not a hash-table hash, it is (was?) a cryptographic hash. It outputs 16 bytes of apparently-random data that depends on the input. If it obeyed good cryptographic properties, the odds of a collision would be incredibly low (1 in 10^38), and finding a collision would be impractical. It appears that MD5 does not, in fact, completely obey good cryptographic properties, and there are ways of generating a collision that do not depend on brute-force searches. It is not "of course" just because you see it all the time in your 4-byte checksum algorithms, any more than factoring a 4096-bit RSA key is "of course" because you can easily decide that 15 = 5 x 3.
Let's say I have a system that downloads files over the internet. To prevent man-in-the-middle attacks, I digitally sign the files. This prevents me from having to vet all of the code that deals with local files for buffer overflows. I implement the digital signatures by simply encrypting a hash of the file with an RSA private key when I create the file, and decrypting and verifying the hash on the receiving side.
If I had decided to use MD5 for the hash in the digital signature, my scheme is now vulnerable. It's not too far-fetched to imagine that somebody could come up with a way to embed an exploit in one of the files while staying within the limitations imposed by this collision technique. Then if he can accomplish a man-in-the-middle attack, he's successfully used my automatic downloader to compromise somebody's machine. Not fun.
This may not be completely feasible currently, but the technique shows that it may be possible in the future. If you're currently designing a system that you plan to have function for several years, you should not assume that MD5 is cryptographically secure.
They have software running locally, so they could do anything from running something to sniff all of your keystrokes, to something that snarfs the page directly out of your IE process, to installing a fresh root SSL cert that lets them monkey with your connection. If the enemy has the ability to execute arbitrary code on your computer, all bets are off.
If you could buy a nice, brand-new car for under $1000, you would probably consider tossing it and buying a new one when something serious broke.
Welcome to the United States of Mexico.
I know you're just making a joke, but the United States of Mexico is actually the full name of Mexico.
Cutting NASA to get the government's budget out of debt is the equivalent of being unemployed and skimping on resume paper, while eating caviar every night. You're tossing something that does a great deal of good and costs relatively little, while ignoring the gross overspending that put you into debt in the first place.
Then they can spamproof addresses posted to their private area, and leave stuff that comes from Usenet alone. Surely the geniuses at Google could figure out how to apply an e-mail filter selectively.
There is also no purpose to it. Every single post ever made to usenet has already been harvested by spammers, so what's the issue with making them public?
My life has changed a lot since then, but it has nothing to do with the attacks. I don't really mind the phrase, though, as it makes for an easy filter. Anybody who says something like "everything is different post-9/11", or "security is paramount" is an idiot and should not be listened to further.
AppleWorks sucks and Office is tremendously expensive (almost 50% of the purchase price of a new eMac). OO could make a market-share killing on the Mac if they would get it ported for real.
Don't you mean, we're going to have a 62-year-old man's stunt double doing Indiana Jones stunts?
If your if statement's conditional has side effects, and the compiler optimizes away the if statement because the body is empty, you have a broken optimizer. It's possible, but it would be a bug in the compiler.