The referenced paper cost $33 to download and it is pretty much shit - there are good reasons why none of what it proposes will work. The abstract of the paper does not even hint and what the paper is about. Yes we should work on robo calling - follow the work of people like Professor Henning Schulzrinne at Columbia university.
There is not information here, no news, nothing funny just a blatant add for a company with a really expensive and really dubious sounding VPN. I view slashdot as my source of all news that is not fake. What went wrong here. @cowboy_neil - we need answers.
I think I can run an VPN head end on EC2 and I still seem to be able to pay for that with Visa. But who knows, I look forward to hearing more details about how widespread this is and what is going on. It is really really sad if any government is activity making it harder to use computers in a secure way.
This article was totally lacking in any useful facts about why CGN (Carrier Grade NAT) won't work just fine. As you can see today, lots of games and things like Skype manage just fine to talk to other devices that are also behind a NAT. One of the many ways they do it is ICE (http://tools.ietf.org/html/rfc5245). Most applications today are designed to work behind NATs, that is because most people are behind NATs. Sure, I wish I could wave a magic want and have everyone using v6 but articles like this that have no factual information on what the problem is or why don't help.
4k video has 4 times as many pixels as 1080 video. At the most, it will need 4x the bandwidth? Do you really think that your future internet connection is not going to be 4 times faster than what we have today? In practice the similarity between pixels on typical 4k footage has less variation than HD resulting in better compression ratio and thus the actually bandwidth needed is less than 4x with the same codec. Codecs are also improving H.265 is much better than H.264.
Now lets discuss the size of the screen - Check out the pixels per inch for what apple would call a "retina" display. 4k video will look better even on a TV much smaller than sizes mentioned here.
with any number of pixels. Color me a bit skeptical about this... often when one looks at the training data used to train it and the test data used to test it, much is revealed about how it works.
Ok, not really, even no news on slashdot is better than what they call news on some of those other sites. Seriously, credit to the Pia for making the point that saying nothing is better than just talking when you have nothing to say. Where was I again, yes, rambling on
I did the buy one, donate one to a 3rd world kid program with the first OLPC. I could not believe what a piece of crap the OLPC was when I got it. I could not even IM from it. I felt so bad that I had inflicted that on some poor child somewhere. If I could find the poor kid that ended up with the OLPC I paid for, I would happily send them a MacBook Air as a way of apologizing and showing that not all computers sucked.
I've been trying this but the problem is I don't end up with a reasonable data plan on the prepaid phones which turns out to be a drag. Anyone have ideas for good prepaid plans with data in the Canada? What about US?
I'm impressed that Comcast is talking about it trials publicly and engaging customers. Many service providers run stuff in private, don't tell their guinea pigs, I mean customers that they experiment on, and then just select whatever seemed convent for the service provider. Engaging people in a trials like this, seems win/win for the customers and service providers.
There is the question of what you should do, and what you can do.
Apple tries very hard to keep their iphone locked - it was designed for that. They failed. And continue to fail. The mac book was never designed to withstand the incredible hacking power of a team of grade 11 students. What makes you think you can lock them?
Given they are going to get unlocked, you might consider the most cost effective thing to do is just do the minimal thing to CYA and don't spend a lot of time trying to go beyond that. These students already have access to facebook, trying to stop them from using facebook is just going to make it worth doing.
I had a NSERC grant for my PhD work and faced a similar set of issues with some of the software.
You may find that University is fine to allow you to open source your software under a license that allows you, and others, to use it later. This may not be exactly what you want as it gives many people certain rights to the software but you might find it is a happy compromise that does not involve you hiring lawyers.
Some relevant factors to keep in mind... who owns the copyright is probably not what you care about because that has less bearing on who is allowed to use/sell the software. If you used any university equipment, computers, labs, networks etc to write the software - they many have some ownership of it regardless of if you were paid my NSERC or not.
The important thing to have cited is your results in your paper, not your software. Many academic institutions have been writing open source software for a long time, in fact many of the open source licensees that are used every day come from software that was developed in academic institutions. Things like MIT license, much of the motivation behind the GNU license, BSD, the list goes on. None of them require attribution.
Slashdot Mirror
The referenced paper cost $33 to download and it is pretty much shit - there are good reasons why none of what it proposes will work. The abstract of the paper does not even hint and what the paper is about. Yes we should work on robo calling - follow the work of people like Professor Henning Schulzrinne at Columbia university.
My thoughts exactly, can someone explain how this is even possible to do that many or how wikipedia counts "an edit"
(and congratulation to this guy, he probably does great stuff, but this number defies credibility )
Speaking of false news, could we at least get a few details correct. More about Mitchell at https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/...
I expect Cowboy Neil to keep everything on Slashdot 100% true news you can use.
There is not information here, no news, nothing funny just a blatant add for a company with a really expensive and really dubious sounding VPN. I view slashdot as my source of all news that is not fake. What went wrong here. @cowboy_neil - we need answers.
Statistically speaking, egyptian hieroglyphics carved in stone seem to be readable over long time periods.
I think I can run an VPN head end on EC2 and I still seem to be able to pay for that with Visa. But who knows, I look forward to hearing more details about how widespread this is and what is going on. It is really really sad if any government is activity making it harder to use computers in a secure way.
This article was totally lacking in any useful facts about why CGN (Carrier Grade NAT) won't work just fine. As you can see today, lots of games and things like Skype manage just fine to talk to other devices that are also behind a NAT. One of the many ways they do it is ICE (http://tools.ietf.org/html/rfc5245). Most applications today are designed to work behind NATs, that is because most people are behind NATs. Sure, I wish I could wave a magic want and have everyone using v6 but articles like this that have no factual information on what the problem is or why don't help.
4k video has 4 times as many pixels as 1080 video. At the most, it will need 4x the bandwidth? Do you really think that your future internet connection is not going to be 4 times faster than what we have today? In practice the similarity between pixels on typical 4k footage has less variation than HD resulting in better compression ratio and thus the actually bandwidth needed is less than 4x with the same codec. Codecs are also improving H.265 is much better than H.264.
Now lets discuss the size of the screen - Check out the pixels per inch for what apple would call a "retina" display. 4k video will look better even on a TV much smaller than sizes mentioned here.
Good analysis of this at
http://www.educatedguesswork.org/2011/10/ssltls_and_computational_dos.html
As far as I can tell, Rescorla is trying to polity say this attack is crap. Shocking, yet another low grade hack trying to up publicity.
with any number of pixels. Color me a bit skeptical about this ... often when one looks at the training data used to train it and the test data used to test it, much is revealed about how it works.
The references articles seemed more like fud than any reason to get worried.
Why would I care what the ITU thinks 4G is. 4G is whatever the market says it is and the ITU is spectacularly disconnected from the marker.
Ok, not really, even no news on slashdot is better than what they call news on some of those other sites. Seriously, credit to the Pia for making the point that saying nothing is better than just talking when you have nothing to say. Where was I again, yes, rambling on
On second thought, never mind.
I did the buy one, donate one to a 3rd world kid program with the first OLPC. I could not believe what a piece of crap the OLPC was when I got it. I could not even IM from it. I felt so bad that I had inflicted that on some poor child somewhere. If I could find the poor kid that ended up with the OLPC I paid for, I would happily send them a MacBook Air as a way of apologizing and showing that not all computers sucked.
I've been trying this but the problem is I don't end up with a reasonable data plan on the prepaid phones which turns out to be a drag. Anyone have ideas for good prepaid plans with data in the Canada? What about US?
I'm impressed that Comcast is talking about it trials publicly and engaging customers. Many service providers run stuff in private, don't tell their guinea pigs, I mean customers that they experiment on, and then just select whatever seemed convent for the service provider. Engaging people in a trials like this, seems win/win for the customers and service providers.
A good source of info about what this attack is and how serious it is can be found at
http://www.educatedguesswork.org/2009/11/understanding_the_tls_renegoti.html
It seems to me that it would not be that hard to just replace the code that is a problem
There is the question of what you should do, and what you can do.
Apple tries very hard to keep their iphone locked - it was designed for that. They failed. And continue to fail. The mac book was never designed to withstand the incredible hacking power of a team of grade 11 students. What makes you think you can lock them?
Given they are going to get unlocked, you might consider the most cost effective thing to do is just do the minimal thing to CYA and don't spend a lot of time trying to go beyond that. These students already have access to facebook, trying to stop them from using facebook is just going to make it worth doing.
I've seen bittorrent used for several business critical functions. One example is world of warcraft distributing updates using it.
I had a NSERC grant for my PhD work and faced a similar set of issues with some of the software.
You may find that University is fine to allow you to open source your software under a license that allows you, and others, to use it later. This may not be exactly what you want as it gives many people certain rights to the software but you might find it is a happy compromise that does not involve you hiring lawyers.
Some relevant factors to keep in mind ... who owns the copyright is probably not what you care about because that has less bearing on who is allowed to use/sell the software. If you used any university equipment, computers, labs, networks etc to write the software - they many have some ownership of it regardless of if you were paid my NSERC or not.
and I am reading the wrong site. The aliens can return the real slashdot now. Surely IETF would never choose to "Do Nothing" :-)
The important thing to have cited is your results in your paper, not your software. Many academic institutions have been writing open source software for a long time, in fact many of the open source licensees that are used every day come from software that was developed in academic institutions. Things like MIT license, much of the motivation behind the GNU license, BSD, the list goes on. None of them require attribution.
I wonder if someone already patented the business process of 'Free for open source, everyone else pays.'