But all characters aren't equally likely. IIRC, each additional character only adds 1.5-2 bits of information to the password. If you want the information in passwords to track Moore's Law you'd need to increase the length by one character every two years or so.
You're right that this is not a new issue. It just keeps coming up. Some people are happy to assign their code as long as it will only be licensed as open source (e.g. FSF, ASF), and those people are whining about how they won't contribute to Evolution. I think Evolution can live without them.
In just a few years I'm sure Intel will be happy to sell you a Xeon that can address, say, 40 bits of RAM. Today they're selling you what you need today.
You make it sound like switching memory type is impossible, but Intel does it every two years or so. Intel already announced that they will switch to FB-DIMMs; it's just a matter of time.
Spring clips? What you say? My Opteron heatsink is bolted onto a metal plate on the back of the motherboard. There is no way that sucker is coming off.
FB-DIMMs can be farther away from the memory controller, so an Intel chip with a built-in FB-DIMM memory controller would probably work fine in a BTX case.
And everyone who can afford 2^36 bytes of RAM, raise your hand...
From what I gather from the limited technical details in the article, this protocol would require knowledge of the entire route at the initial node to handle the 'onion layer' encryption.
Correct. The sender wraps the whole onion, and each router removes one layer.
Is there some way of optimizing a path through a given number of nodes without keeping huge amounts of information about latency on every two nodes, or is this just bouncing the packet around for a while for anonymity and accepting the added latency?
It's more like the latter. Optimizing for performance tends to be at odds with anonymity.
Freenet doesn't use onion routing (last time I checked), but it does use the concept of sending messages through mutiple hops. But the main difference between Freenet and Tor is that Freenet is an anonymous publishing system and Tor is an anonymizing layer that can work with almost any application.
No, the broadcast flag says that it's illegal to sell unapproved equipment that records flagged content. So TiVo did have to ask for permission. And being compliant with the broadcast flag doesn't protect them from other kinds of lawsuits.
Obviously you aren't familar with the proposal. The tapping is done by VoIP service providers. They know what traffic is VoIP (basically all of it) and what is not.
As you said, the FCC regulates broadcasters, but TiVo boxes are not broadcasters. The FCC is trying to unilaterally expand their jurisdiction to cover receivers as well.
That is a contested issue. When the broadcast flag was first proposed, several groups protested that the FCC does not have proper jurisdiction. (Of course the FCC thinks that they do.) It won't be resolved until either someone sues the FCC or Congress specifically authorizes the broadcast flag.
DVD X Copy, DVD Decryptor, and DVD Shrink are all equally illegal under the DMCA.
The fact that 321 Studios tried to appease Hollywood by crippling their software and still went out of business shows that appeasement is not a good strategy. If you're going to write illegal software, you might as well write uncrippled illegal software (e.g. DVD Shrink).
LSB specifies the kernel/user API. LSB does not specify the kernel/driver API (which changes all the time). Nor does LSB specify that an LSB-compliant system must support all the devices that Linux supports.
The bottom line is that Solaris doesn't/can't/won't use Linux drivers.
IBM already released an open source JVM (Jikes RVM), but please let's keep it away from the Mozilla Foundation -- they're busy enough just mismanaging Mozilla.
1. Read the RFID on a cheap item. 2. Write that data onto the RFID on an expensive item. Notice how all your fancy signatures and checksums still match. 3. 4. Profit!
Slashdot Mirror
If your private key is stolen you can revoke it, but it's also a good idea to use a password.
But all characters aren't equally likely. IIRC, each additional character only adds 1.5-2 bits of information to the password. If you want the information in passwords to track Moore's Law you'd need to increase the length by one character every two years or so.
This article shows how the press only has a one-month attention span. In 1999 people were writing nearly identical articles about Salon's auction IPO.
You're right that this is not a new issue. It just keeps coming up. Some people are happy to assign their code as long as it will only be licensed as open source (e.g. FSF, ASF), and those people are whining about how they won't contribute to Evolution. I think Evolution can live without them.
In just a few years I'm sure Intel will be happy to sell you a Xeon that can address, say, 40 bits of RAM. Today they're selling you what you need today.
(I'm still an Opteron fan, though.)
You make it sound like switching memory type is impossible, but Intel does it every two years or so. Intel already announced that they will switch to FB-DIMMs; it's just a matter of time.
Spring clips? What you say? My Opteron heatsink is bolted onto a metal plate on the back of the motherboard. There is no way that sucker is coming off.
FB-DIMMs can be farther away from the memory controller, so an Intel chip with a built-in FB-DIMM memory controller would probably work fine in a BTX case.
And everyone who can afford 2^36 bytes of RAM, raise your hand...
From what I gather from the limited technical details in the article, this protocol would require knowledge of the entire route at the initial node to handle the 'onion layer' encryption.
Correct. The sender wraps the whole onion, and each router removes one layer.
Is there some way of optimizing a path through a given number of nodes without keeping huge amounts of information about latency on every two nodes, or is this just bouncing the packet around for a while for anonymity and accepting the added latency?
It's more like the latter. Optimizing for performance tends to be at odds with anonymity.
Freenet doesn't use onion routing (last time I checked), but it does use the concept of sending messages through mutiple hops. But the main difference between Freenet and Tor is that Freenet is an anonymous publishing system and Tor is an anonymizing layer that can work with almost any application.
Tor is low latency compared to Mixmaster, which has a latency of around 24 hours.
The new DRM is called AACS, but encrypted data doesn't require noticeably more space.
Blu-ray does not use cartridges any more. Future Blu-ray drives will also read DVDs and CDs.
If you want a P910a, buy one. For teenagers who can't afford a cell phone that costs as much as a computer, the Hiptop looks pretty good.
No, the broadcast flag says that it's illegal to sell unapproved equipment that records flagged content. So TiVo did have to ask for permission. And being compliant with the broadcast flag doesn't protect them from other kinds of lawsuits.
Obviously you aren't familar with the proposal. The tapping is done by VoIP service providers. They know what traffic is VoIP (basically all of it) and what is not.
All the primary sources refer to it as Carrier-Grade Voice over Packet (CGVoP). Only the news articles (and people who rely on them) are confused.
As you said, the FCC regulates broadcasters, but TiVo boxes are not broadcasters. The FCC is trying to unilaterally expand their jurisdiction to cover receivers as well.
That is a contested issue. When the broadcast flag was first proposed, several groups protested that the FCC does not have proper jurisdiction. (Of course the FCC thinks that they do.) It won't be resolved until either someone sues the FCC or Congress specifically authorizes the broadcast flag.
It's not at all the same concept. TiVo2Go is like iTunes; you can only share among computers registered with the same account.
DVD X Copy, DVD Decryptor, and DVD Shrink are all equally illegal under the DMCA.
The fact that 321 Studios tried to appease Hollywood by crippling their software and still went out of business shows that appeasement is not a good strategy. If you're going to write illegal software, you might as well write uncrippled illegal software (e.g. DVD Shrink).
LSB specifies the kernel/user API. LSB does not specify the kernel/driver API (which changes all the time). Nor does LSB specify that an LSB-compliant system must support all the devices that Linux supports.
The bottom line is that Solaris doesn't/can't/won't use Linux drivers.
IBM already released an open source JVM (Jikes RVM), but please let's keep it away from the Mozilla Foundation -- they're busy enough just mismanaging Mozilla.
1. Read the RFID on a cheap item.
2. Write that data onto the RFID on an expensive item. Notice how all your fancy signatures and checksums still match.
3.
4. Profit!
Thanks; that's actually a useful suggestion.