He was offered an exclusive patent by the Governor of Pennsylvania. He refused.
Re:Warning : Ignorance in the name of piety
on
Digital Biology
·
· Score: 3, Insightful
I would probably not respond to the above and disregard it if it were not for a recent Sci Am article that showed ~40% of Americans believe in creationism over evolution.
I cannot understand how seemingly intelligent people can ignore overwhelming scientific evidence. Evolution is the most widely explanation for how we came to be. I do not see any inconsistencies with the Genesis *metaphor* for the creation of life. The Bible is written by humans, not God. They may have had divine inspiration, but it was not God's pen in the inkwell. Why do you think there are four "Gospel according to XXXX"?
BTW, God is omniscient. Don't you think He can understand and use a metaphor?
Of all the types of ignorance in the world. Those that perpetuated under the guise of religion are the most virulent and dangerous.
The referring site does not link to the page containing the HitBox Main Code or you have not installed the HitBox Main Page code properly (Free HitBox V5 only).
The HitBox code does not fully execute.
The reverse DNS lookup is unable to complete.
The visitor's JavaScript is disabled. "
I'd say that a Linux user is much more apt/able to turn off Javascript in their browser than an IE user.
IF computing speed can continue to double every 18 months, then
today's 56 bit key will be roughly as strong as
a 128 bit key in 108 years
a 192 bit key in 204 years
a 256 bit key in 300 years
But that is a huge "if".
I recently did a study of future trends with regard to processors. Let me sum up....
Processing speeds are currently limited by charge dissipation (no pun intended). Charge dissipation is related to feature (transistor) size. It is a hard fact that feature size can only shrink at the Moore's Law rate for about another 12 years before we get transistors that are only a few molecules thick.
I'm not saying that it will be impossible to continue with efficiency gains beyond that point. But who's going to pay for the research to continue at such a break-neck pace?
Perhaps, I am being short-sighted, but I think we are starting to see a slowing of the demand for ever-faster technology. Graphics-intensive games are staying on store shelves for years, instead of months. Even Microsoft is having a hard time making software that is bloated enough to demand the latest hardware.
Developing new processor technologies is horrendously expensive. Unless there is sufficient demand for faster processing speed, it will simply not be viable for companies to research the technology.
The movie was not consistent enough with *any* of the possible plot lines, much less all of them.
If Prot was an alien intelligence inhabiting Robert's body -- How did he have UV vision?
If he was just crazy -- explain the UV vision or talking to the dog.
If Prot was a completely separate body -- why did he react so emotionally under hypnosis? Why did he freak out about the sprinkler?
Don't get me wrong -- I really enjoyed the movie. I just wish it had been done with a little more thought to the different scenarios to make them all plausible -- or any of them plausible for that matter.
I think it could have had a truly great ending like Sixth Sense, where everything up to the end takes on a different meaning. I've seen it 4-5 times. I am amazed at how perfectly equivocal every scene is, while maintaining the appearance of a single plot line.
Thanks for opening up your skull and letting us peek at the cavern inside. I normally wouldn't reply to flamebait such as yours, but I'll make an exception in this case to try to stem the flow of ignorance that pours from your keyboard.
1)
Script kiddies do not break ciphers. They do not find exploits. They do not reverse engineer systems. If they could do any of these things, they would not fall under the derogatory category, "script kiddie".
2)
Pick any of the following algorithms and break it: IDEA, 3DES, RSA, DH. I guarantee you will be famous, at least within security/cryptography circles. These are algorithms that have been scrutinized for decades by professors and professionals. I don't think a 12 year old could break these, except in a movie.
3)
SDMI (I assume this is what you mean by SDMA), was a copyright protection system not an encryption system. Anyone who believes they can create a secure, stand-alone, software copyright protection scheme is either ignorant or a genius. Given the ratio of ignorance to genius in the world, I know how I'll bet.
4)
The reason so many crypto systems are broken usually falls into one of two categories
a) The developers think they can design a system just as strong as the professionals who have devoted their lives to making and breaking ciphers.
b) The designers were forced to use limited strength crippto due to stupid crypto laws.
Incidentally, the DVD CSS system was broken by the combination of government-mandated 40 bit key length, and a home-made algorithm that reduced the effective keylength to around 30 bits. This makes it possible for an attack to be completed in seconds. FWIW, a 40 bit key search takes 1024 times longer than a 30 bit key search.
You may not use this oxygen tank to breath disparaging statements about Bigbux HMO, speak swearwords, or say the word "zucchini". We just don't like that word.
Oh my god. We are in the presence of greatness. For those of you who do not recognize this grand master's work, let me enlighten you. This is the author of, "All your base are belong to us".
Truly a genius of absurdist prose.
The brutality with which he murders the English language while equivocating multiple meanings boggles the mind.
He starts out with what appears to be valid english . Then throws a plot twist at thte reader by using words and phrases in ways so vile, so twisted, so ludicrous; it would make Tarentino shiver.
Bravo on another work of linguistic horror! Bravo!
"By [...] keeping an internal log of tarpits, a virus could learn which IPs to avoid"
This makes no sense to me. Why would a worm ever revisit a previously attempted IP? Either the scan/exploit was successful or the tarpit trapped the connection. Either way, there is no reason to return.
Re:Sorry, folks, but I have to say it...
on
Handling the Loads
·
· Score: 1
So you don't care about how they managed the load? OK. Then don't read it.
However, I am interested. Slashdot's main focus is on technology. As far as technology subjects go, scalability of computer solutions is one of the more fascinating ones, IMO.
The overcoming of an interesting technological hurdle does not detract from the tragedy that occurred Tuesday. If you feel it does, then JUST DON'T READ IT.
Their study states "There was, however, a slight difference in movement times with the new design about 16 hundredths of a second slower. "
160 ms! Slight?
I just tested my stimulus-response time (visual cue until key press). In ten trials, my average reaction time was 261 ms. That 160 ms represents a very dramatic slowdown.
I doubt my r/t is very special. I imagine a die-hard gamer would be faster than me, either through training or innate ability.
If this mouse-stick really makes the user 160ms slower, it will be way too slow for many types of games, regardless of any ergonomic benefits it may have.
If he had bothered to read the context, the original poster would realize that the author of the quote was the author of the webpage. The point was to show how vague the prophecies are and how they are subject to ipso facto interperation:
here's the context from the webpage
If I make say a thousand prophecies that are fairly abstract for example:
In the City of God there will be a great thunder, Two brothers torn apart by Chaos, while the fortress endures, the great leader will succumb
Do you think light is limited to the three little bands you can detect with your eyes? (Or two if you're colorblind)
Visible light is electromagnetic radiation, same as x-rays, infrared, radio waves, and yes, microwaves. They could all be considered light.
The only noteworthy difference is the frequency. The fact that the experiments have not worked with visible light suggests attenuation at those frequencies. Not a fundamental difference.
Databases are similar to crypto algorithms. If I were to create a cipher in my basement, it might be just as safe as more established algorithms...
Should/Would anyone have any confidence in this algo until it had been widely analyzed for many years? No.
It is the same with databases. You might test a huge PostGreSQL db for years and get some amount of confidence in its reliability and scalability. But until it has been tortured as much as Oracle, it won't be trusted as much.
Cautious DBAs will be slow to accept free databases, just as cautious cryptographers will be slow to accept AES (Rijndael). There are already more time-tested alternatives like IDEA(crypto) and Oracle(db). It is not that they distrust the newcomer, per se. It is just that the stakes are so high that the utmost caution is demanded.
In databases and cryptography, there is only black and shades of gray -- either proven unsuitable for a task; or so far, so good. It is almost impossible to prove stability or security.
Meaningless buzzwords or actual concepts?
on
eWeek on Linux
·
· Score: 1
"[Linux] still falls short when it comes to supporting workloads required by applications like ERP (enterprise resource planning), business intelligence, CRM (customer relationship management) and supply chain planning"
WTF are these things?
"business intelligence"? What the hell is that (besides an oxymoron)?
I have a good solution, but it would need to be driven by search engines.
Suppose google were to introduce a query option that excluded matching pages incompatible with the user's web browser. For example, if I am using Mozilla, then I won't get sites in my results that require IE widgets.
By making it a highly visible option, people (web designers, system architects, PHBs) would be forced to realize that not everyone uses (insert your browser here).
This increased awarenesss of browser-specificity would exert pressure on providers to create browser-neutral content.
Here's the idea. I believe it's provable given a few assumptions; like Einstein was right, f'rinstance.
A network of satellites constantly transmit time-coded challenges.
The land based receiver grabs at least three of these challenges at the same time, combines them, signs them with the user's private key and sends them back up to the sky. By using the time difference and the speed of light, the receiving satellite can verify that the private key is within a certain distance from the receiving satellite. Verifying that the private key is the same place as the user is a bit more difficult, but we have to start somewhere.
The actual precision with which this method could pinpoint the user would depend upon the speed of computation.
If specialized hardware could perform the capture, signing and transmission in 10 microseconds, then the position of the signer could be pinpointed to within 3e8 * 1e-5 / 2 = 1.5 kilometers. (Speed of light in m/s times the number of seconds equals the time it would take to transmit the signal to somewere else and back)
Assumptions:
* User alone maintains control of their private key. (This is a biggie. A user could give the signing device to an accomplice and send them off somewhere. )
* Tamper proof, time-synchronized satellites (this is fairly safe now, but for how long?).
* No information travels faster than the speed of light in a vacuum. (I believe work has been done with connected quantum spins that already threatens this assumption.)
Slashdot Mirror
He was offered an exclusive patent by the Governor of Pennsylvania. He refused.
I would probably not respond to the above and disregard it if it were not for a recent Sci Am article that showed ~40% of Americans believe in creationism over evolution.
I cannot understand how seemingly intelligent people can ignore overwhelming scientific evidence. Evolution is the most widely explanation for how we came to be. I do not see any inconsistencies with the Genesis *metaphor* for the creation of life. The Bible is written by humans, not God. They may have had divine inspiration, but it was not God's pen in the inkwell. Why do you think there are four "Gospel according to XXXX"?
BTW, God is omniscient. Don't you think He can understand and use a metaphor?
Of all the types of ignorance in the world. Those that perpetuated under the guise of religion are the most virulent and dangerous.
I've been having tons of Korean spam lately.
in KMail, I set up a filter (under 'settings')
if a message contains
ks_c_5601-1987 or euc-kr
it goes straight to the trash.
I'd say that a Linux user is much more apt/able to turn off Javascript in their browser than an IE user.
But that is a huge "if".
I recently did a study of future trends with regard to processors. Let me sum up ....
Processing speeds are currently limited by charge dissipation (no pun intended). Charge dissipation is related to feature (transistor) size. It is a hard fact that feature size can only shrink at the Moore's Law rate for about another 12 years before we get transistors that are only a few molecules thick.
I'm not saying that it will be impossible to continue with efficiency gains beyond that point. But who's going to pay for the research to continue at such a break-neck pace?
Perhaps, I am being short-sighted, but I think we are starting to see a slowing of the demand for ever-faster technology.
Graphics-intensive games are staying on store shelves for years, instead of months. Even Microsoft is having a hard time making software that is bloated enough to demand the latest hardware.
Developing new processor technologies is horrendously expensive. Unless there is sufficient demand for faster processing speed, it will simply not be viable for companies to research the technology.
Okay, I spoke my mind. Flame on!
The movie was not consistent enough with *any* of the possible plot lines, much less all of them.
If Prot was an alien intelligence inhabiting Robert's body -- How did he have UV vision?
If he was just crazy -- explain the UV vision or talking to the dog.
If Prot was a completely separate body -- why did he react so emotionally under hypnosis? Why did he freak out about the sprinkler?
Don't get me wrong -- I really enjoyed the movie. I just wish it had been done with a little more thought to the different scenarios to make them all plausible -- or any of them plausible for that matter.
I think it could have had a truly great ending like Sixth Sense, where everything up to the end takes on a different meaning. I've seen it 4-5 times. I am amazed at how perfectly equivocal every scene is, while maintaining the appearance of a single plot line.
Thanks for opening up your skull and letting us peek at the cavern inside. I normally wouldn't reply to flamebait such as yours, but I'll make an exception in this case to try to stem the flow of ignorance that pours from your keyboard.
1)
Script kiddies do not break ciphers. They do not find exploits. They do not reverse engineer systems. If they could do any of these things, they would not fall under the derogatory category, "script kiddie".
2)
Pick any of the following algorithms and break it: IDEA, 3DES, RSA, DH. I guarantee you will be famous, at least within security/cryptography circles. These are algorithms that have been scrutinized for decades by professors and professionals. I don't think a 12 year old could break these, except in a movie.
3)
SDMI (I assume this is what you mean by SDMA), was a copyright protection system not an encryption system. Anyone who believes they can create a secure, stand-alone, software copyright protection scheme is either ignorant or a genius. Given the ratio of ignorance to genius in the world, I know how I'll bet.
4)
The reason so many crypto systems are broken usually falls into one of two categories
a) The developers think they can design a system just as strong as the professionals who have devoted their lives to making and breaking ciphers.
b) The designers were forced to use limited strength crippto due to stupid crypto laws.
Incidentally, the DVD CSS system was broken by the combination of government-mandated 40 bit key length, and a home-made algorithm that reduced the effective keylength to around 30 bits. This makes it possible for an attack to be completed in seconds. FWIW, a 40 bit key search takes 1024 times longer than a 30 bit key search.
.... half-decent steganography procedures... Perhaps using one-time-pads to conceal the data as noise.
Using a OTP would have absolutely no advantage over other ciphers in terms of detectability.
A OTP would make sure that if the message IS detected it could not be decoded. (Assuming its a true OTP -- not PRNG, and the pads are never found. )
You may not use this oxygen tank to breath disparaging statements about Bigbux HMO, speak swearwords, or say the word "zucchini". We just don't like that word.
Losers I liked to see you try and win this cases
Oh my god. We are in the presence of greatness. For those of you who do not recognize this grand master's work, let me enlighten you. This is the author of, "All your base are belong to us".
Truly a genius of absurdist prose.
The brutality with which he murders the English language while equivocating multiple meanings boggles the mind.
He starts out with what appears to be valid english . Then throws a plot twist at thte reader by using words and phrases in ways so vile, so twisted, so ludicrous; it would make Tarentino shiver.
Bravo on another work of linguistic horror! Bravo!
"By [...] keeping an internal log of tarpits, a virus could learn which IPs to avoid"
This makes no sense to me. Why would a worm ever revisit a previously attempted IP? Either the scan/exploit was successful or the tarpit trapped the connection. Either way, there is no reason to return.
So you don't care about how they managed the load? OK. Then don't read it.
However, I am interested. Slashdot's main focus is on technology. As far as technology subjects go, scalability of computer solutions is one of the more fascinating ones, IMO.
The overcoming of an interesting technological hurdle does not detract from the tragedy that occurred Tuesday. If you feel it does, then JUST DON'T READ IT.
Their study states "There was, however, a slight difference in movement times with the new design about 16 hundredths of a second slower. "
160 ms! Slight?
I just tested my stimulus-response time (visual cue until key press). In ten trials, my average reaction time was 261 ms. That 160 ms represents a very dramatic slowdown.
I doubt my r/t is very special. I imagine a die-hard gamer would be faster than me, either through training or innate ability.
If this mouse-stick really makes the user 160ms slower, it will be way too slow for many types of games, regardless of any ergonomic benefits it may have.
If he had bothered to read the context, the original poster would realize that the author of the quote was the author of the webpage. The point was to show how vague the prophecies are and how they are subject to ipso facto interperation:
here's the context from the webpage
If I make say a thousand prophecies that are fairly abstract for example:
In the City of God there will be a great thunder, Two brothers torn apart by Chaos, while the fortress endures, the great leader will succumb
Well let us analyse this.
[snip]
Note the 'I' in the first sentence.
The statement that X is an OS underscores the author's feeble grasp on the subject matter.
"Mathematicians have known for more than two centuries that the number is an infinite, non-repeating decimal. "
Why limit yourself to decimal? Base 10 was your grandmother's number system. Why not evolve and use binary or hexadecimal?
It seems to me that normality in one base would indicate normality in any other base. Anyone care to prove/disprove this?
At least the lowest 30 bits.
:)
(time_t)(0x3fffffff) = 2004/01/10 13:37:03 GMT
At which point we will be halfway to the 2038 bug.
Do you think light is limited to the three little bands you can detect with your eyes? (Or two if you're colorblind)
Visible light is electromagnetic radiation, same as x-rays, infrared, radio waves, and yes, microwaves. They could all be considered light.
The only noteworthy difference is the frequency. The fact that the experiments have not worked with visible light suggests attenuation at those frequencies. Not a fundamental difference.
"I think RMS more 'religious' about free software than most church-goers are about what they believe. "
Agreed, I wanted to run when I saw him put an old 12" disk platter on his head like a halo and talk about the church of emacs. *shiver*
Yes. It's true.
That and his discussion of free love (bad mental image) have given me nightmares.
Should/Would anyone have any confidence in this algo until it had been widely analyzed for many years? No.
It is the same with databases. You might test a huge PostGreSQL db for years and get some amount of confidence in its reliability and scalability. But until it has been tortured as much as Oracle, it won't be trusted as much.
Cautious DBAs will be slow to accept free databases, just as cautious cryptographers will be slow to accept AES (Rijndael). There are already more time-tested alternatives like IDEA(crypto) and Oracle(db). It is not that they distrust the newcomer, per se. It is just that the stakes are so high that the utmost caution is demanded.
In databases and cryptography, there is only black and shades of gray -- either proven unsuitable for a task; or so far, so good. It is almost impossible to prove stability or security.
"[Linux] still falls short when it comes to supporting workloads required by applications like ERP (enterprise resource planning), business intelligence, CRM (customer relationship management) and supply chain planning"
WTF are these things?
"business intelligence"? What the hell is that (besides an oxymoron)?
I have a good solution, but it would need to be driven by search engines.
Suppose google were to introduce a query option that excluded matching pages incompatible with the user's web browser. For example, if I am using Mozilla, then I won't get sites in my results that require IE widgets.
By making it a highly visible option, people (web designers, system architects, PHBs) would be forced to realize that not everyone uses (insert your browser here).
This increased awarenesss of browser-specificity would exert pressure on providers to create browser-neutral content.
LILO hasn't had the 1024 cyl limit for the better part of a year now.
Storing bits in order
....
7,6,5,..1,0,15,14,...,9,8,31,30,
Has got to be one of the ugliest hacks of all time.
Here's the idea. I believe it's provable given a few assumptions; like Einstein was right, f'rinstance.
A network of satellites constantly transmit time-coded challenges.
The land based receiver grabs at least three of these challenges at the same time, combines them, signs them with the user's private key and sends them back up to the sky. By using the time difference and the speed of light, the receiving satellite can verify that the private key is within a certain distance from the receiving satellite. Verifying that the private key is the same place as the user is a bit more difficult, but we have to start somewhere.
The actual precision with which this method could pinpoint the user would depend upon the speed of computation.
If specialized hardware could perform the capture, signing and transmission in 10 microseconds, then the position of the signer could be pinpointed to within 3e8 * 1e-5 / 2 = 1.5 kilometers. (Speed of light in m/s times the number of seconds equals the time it would take to transmit the signal to somewere else and back)
Assumptions:
* User alone maintains control of their private key. (This is a biggie. A user could give the signing device to an accomplice and send them off somewhere. )
* Tamper proof, time-synchronized satellites (this is fairly safe now, but for how long?).
* No information travels faster than the speed of light in a vacuum. (I believe work has been done with connected quantum spins that already threatens this assumption.)