When you consider the SET of mechanical engineering software, or the SET of architectural software, or the SET of electrical engineering software, it is annoying that lots of stuff available on Windows, and it a lot of case stuff that's available on Linux and Windows, is not available for OS X.
I don't know; I don't really know how people in challenging majors have time for games. Between class, work, my girlfriend, and a small amount of association with real people, I have 0 time for games. Okay, enough talk, back to one of the things looming over my head*.
* where things looming over my head, in no particular order, could be one of the following (in no particular order):
1) Numerical Analysis Homework 2) Implementation of AES algorithm with CBC mode in MATLAB 3) Giant Java software project 4) DFT and Wavelets exam 5) Wavelets project 6) Stupid need to post on Slashdot
In reply to the grandparent, I'm not sure about the middle of the road schools in the US, but the top schools are very good about having interesting material. Just like the parent, Rutgers offers a course on wavelets to undergraduates. It's invigorating to see practical tools that are only a couple of decades old being taught in an undergraduate setting. One could probably find a professor with which to do undergraduate research in the area without too much trouble. Certainly the case would be the same for graduates. The trick is to find a school with a big CS, EE, Math, or whatever department you're interested in; someone is probably doing research in your area of interest.
Not really. He's referring to abstract algebra. Things concerning groups, fields, and the like. Linear algebra is certainly useful, but not in the context he's describing. Linear algebra is a funny little guy who borders on pure math and applied math. Think of linear algebra having subdivisions like physics does: theoretical and experimental. The fact of the matter is, linear algebra in a symbolic sense becomes impossible for large matrices (just ask Google), so you end up using all sorts of numerical tricks to try to get "answers." So while all this sort of stuff is useful, it doesn't really help when you're talking about the abstract constructions of algebras.
Abstract algebra becomes very much an issue if you study things like cryptography, for instance. AES, or the closely related Rijndael algorithm, relies on arithmetic over a finite field that cannot be explained without some background in algebra.
Maybe so, but since I'm the one doing the management and the outsourcing the joke is on the techies.
Not really. An MBA does not a good manager make. The best managers are the ones with technical experience. Companies worth working for know this. Also, companies worth working for don't mind spending the extra money to have the best employees physically working in the United States. It's like every other industry, the lowest tier gets outsourced, while the real skill stays in house.
Computer Crime Investigation isn't really a graduate school kind of thing. It's kind of like if you went to graduate school and ended up with a degree in business. Oh, whoops. (Sorry MBAs, but you know your degree is a joke). What you want to learn is best learned by going in the field. I'll leave you with a quote from a professor of mine:
"Of course mathematics is wonderful and anyone who goes to graduate school in mathematics is much more brilliant than anyone who, say, chooses a starting salary of $100K on Wall Street instead."
So they stay in Canada and can do what every then need to do to keep OpenBSD, OpenSSH, OpenNTPD, OpenBGP & OpenCVS as secure as they can without worrying about politician whims on crypto export matters
Because Canada doesn't have politicians? In any event, not having any business organization surrounding OpenBSD is bad in my, and probably countless others, opinion. Can I ask (and be answered in the affirmative) to see Theo's personal financial records? Doubtful.
You're being very shortsighted. So Microsoft can purchase a license to use Eolas' patent. Who pays for that? The consumer. It's a lesser of two evils question. The Eolas CEO comes off kind of smug, so I'm glad they're not buying a license from them.
Very true. Anything else is a recipe for disaster. If it's on your free time and because of your good will that you're doing it, that's fine. But when it's a project that has a deadline and some sort of grade attached to it, I stay as a far away as possible from pairing with people that I know I have to hand hold. Case in point, my friend and I are taking a cryptography course and there are several non-trivial computer assignments for a large chunk of the grade. We had the opportunity to expand our group beyond two people, but we absolutely will not. There's too much risk that an added group member will just complicate matters. That same friend is also in a senior level design class in DSP. They're doing a project on license plate recognition. My friend's leading the project and got stuck with another kid being appended to their group halfway into the year. He tries to assign that kid work and finds out that the kid doesn't really program and especially doesn't have any MATLAB experience. How you get through 4 years of EE without knowing MATLAB is beyond me. My friend had to resort to basically telling him to sit in the corner and not do any work, because there's no hope for people like that in a short timeframe. The moral of the story is: only work with people of the same skill level! Consider it to be like impedance matching.
* Note: any spelling/grammar issues are the result of staying up to 0300 because I felt like implementing AES in MATLAB. Yay for finite fields!
Security is largely about keeping information secret from those who shouldn't have it. Yea, it's great if you can set up a firewall, you and 100 million other people. Frankly, I wouldn't hire a so called security expert if they couldn't explain to me what a Feistel round is or why RSA is hard to break. These are just a couple of examples of questions you might ask a security "professional," but they tend to distinguish people who claim to know about security from those who actually have a little bit of background in information security.
The description mentions a nominal dependence of 16 ohms. What is nominal dependence? I'm sure they mean nominal impedance, but this is an annoying screwup for supposedly good headphones.
Then he could have been able to argue "You can't have it - returning it to you would be self-incrimination."
People need to actually read the the Constitution rather than simply reason on what they think is in there. The part of the Fifth Amendment to the Constitution that you're thinking of is where it says, "No person... shall be compelled in any criminal case to be a witness against himself." It's about testifying against yourself, not handing over evidence.
Well, I understand your stance, but I must point out that you took Feynman's quote out of context. That said, yes I can still be wrong. My opinion stands as it is. I don't think you're playing with a full deck when you submit an article without mentioning that you wrote it yourself.
As another math major (well, engineering and math double major), I think it's fair to say that the backbone of databases is mathematics. One could argue you that the same sort of brain capacity that allows math types to think about sets and logic is very related to coaxing data out of a database. But, yea, it's probably a fluke you get all those DBA offers;-)
This is the worst article ever linked to on Slashdot. I'd tell you read it and see for yourself, but I really don't want to put anyone else through that experience. Can I have my five minutes back?
It uses the same algorithms in a slightly different way: instead of checking for the signs of forgery it finds the tell-tale signs of modification and then reverse-modifies them to "what-should-be-there" to make an "original" modified image.
What makes you think this is possible? Let's say I have a set of 15 numbers, {1, 2,..., 15}. Now suppose I consider each of those numbers modulo 3. I now have a much smaller set of unique numbers, but multiple numbers in the original set map to the same new number. I can't solve x (mod 3) = 2 uniquely for x. A whole bunch of numbers satisfy that equation. Taking this back the fraud detection standpoint, it's likely that while you might be able to algorithmically generate a fraud, it won't look anything legitimate to the human eye. Much as the collisions found in MD5 are not meaningful because there is no change of mistaking a real message with a fake one with the same hash. So, your thought about reverse modifying is probably unlikely. That's not to say that other weaknesses in the algorithms won't be found.
Since the judge found nothing unreasonable doesnt this disable your argument?
If so, wouldn't this mean that it "wasn't necessary" to obtain a warrant in the case of every single warrant that is issued? In which case, why bother with the whole system at all? You know what, forget the Constitution, it's an old document anyway.
Being a "Law and Order" addict, I question, doesn't investigators time to time search and request stuff by just sound of "warrent" to information holder threating to shutdown the place? But then again, I might be just circling around the edge of reality and fantasy.
No, it sounds like your circling around the edge of Engrish and English.
Her grand moral stand was to resist a criminal investigation. The agents knew they had cause. The judge agreed and awarded the warrant. She is being lauded for impeding an investigation and protecting the guilty.
No, her grand moral stand was to ask that the Constitution of the United States of America be upheld in connection with an investigation. Here's the fourth amendment to that document, in case it slipped your mind.
Amendment IV
The right of the people to be secure in their persons, houses, papers, and effects, against unreasonable searches and seizures, shall not be violated, and no warrants shall issue, but upon probable cause, supported by oath or affirmation, and particularly describing the place to be searched, and the persons or things to be seized.
Maybe you meant to say RAID 4 but what you typed was RAID 0
No. Do you know what parity is? RAID 0 has no parity. RAID 4 has parity data stored on a single disk. This is in contrast to RAID 5 where the parity information is written across all the disks.
Uhh. Yes. Then you can lose one disk in each side, and you have lost all your data.
Uhh. No. You'd need to lose two more disks to lose all your data. RAID 4 is striping with a dedicated parity drive. Losing one disk on each side means you're running in a degraded mode but still are keeping data. Losing a third disk means one array is shot but you still have your mirror. Only losing a forth drive would mean you'd lose everything. By then, I'd hope you'd have replaced some drives.
Slashdot Mirror
"The adhesive can withstand an enormous amount of stress, equal to the force felt by a quarter with more than three cars piled on top of it."
Never, ever, is Stress = Force. They're different units.
Stress = Force/Square Area
Force = Force
And this "stress" it can endure... is it shear stress or tensile stress or compressive stress? Horrible article.
When you consider the SET of mechanical engineering software, or the SET of architectural software, or the SET of electrical engineering software, it is annoying that lots of stuff available on Windows, and it a lot of case stuff that's available on Linux and Windows, is not available for OS X.
I don't know; I don't really know how people in challenging majors have time for games. Between class, work, my girlfriend, and a small amount of association with real people, I have 0 time for games. Okay, enough talk, back to one of the things looming over my head*.
* where things looming over my head, in no particular order, could be one of the following (in no particular order):
1) Numerical Analysis Homework
2) Implementation of AES algorithm with CBC mode in MATLAB
3) Giant Java software project
4) DFT and Wavelets exam
5) Wavelets project
6) Stupid need to post on Slashdot
In reply to the grandparent, I'm not sure about the middle of the road schools in the US, but the top schools are very good about having interesting material. Just like the parent, Rutgers offers a course on wavelets to undergraduates. It's invigorating to see practical tools that are only a couple of decades old being taught in an undergraduate setting. One could probably find a professor with which to do undergraduate research in the area without too much trouble. Certainly the case would be the same for graduates. The trick is to find a school with a big CS, EE, Math, or whatever department you're interested in; someone is probably doing research in your area of interest.
Not really. He's referring to abstract algebra. Things concerning groups, fields, and the like. Linear algebra is certainly useful, but not in the context he's describing. Linear algebra is a funny little guy who borders on pure math and applied math. Think of linear algebra having subdivisions like physics does: theoretical and experimental. The fact of the matter is, linear algebra in a symbolic sense becomes impossible for large matrices (just ask Google), so you end up using all sorts of numerical tricks to try to get "answers." So while all this sort of stuff is useful, it doesn't really help when you're talking about the abstract constructions of algebras.
Abstract algebra becomes very much an issue if you study things like cryptography, for instance. AES, or the closely related Rijndael algorithm, relies on arithmetic over a finite field that cannot be explained without some background in algebra.
Here's another link: http://dont.read.blogs.th.at/do-not-know-how-to-sp ell-your/
Would paying $300 for the full retail version of XP/Vista solve this problem?
No, but using the activation crack would.
Maybe so, but since I'm the one doing the management and the outsourcing the joke is on the techies.
Not really. An MBA does not a good manager make. The best managers are the ones with technical experience. Companies worth working for know this. Also, companies worth working for don't mind spending the extra money to have the best employees physically working in the United States. It's like every other industry, the lowest tier gets outsourced, while the real skill stays in house.
Computer Crime Investigation isn't really a graduate school kind of thing. It's kind of like if you went to graduate school and ended up with a degree in business. Oh, whoops. (Sorry MBAs, but you know your degree is a joke). What you want to learn is best learned by going in the field. I'll leave you with a quote from a professor of mine:
"Of course mathematics is wonderful and anyone who goes to graduate school in mathematics is much more brilliant than anyone who, say, chooses a starting salary of $100K on Wall Street instead."
So they stay in Canada and can do what every then need to do to keep OpenBSD, OpenSSH, OpenNTPD, OpenBGP & OpenCVS as secure as they can without worrying about politician whims on crypto export matters
Because Canada doesn't have politicians? In any event, not having any business organization surrounding OpenBSD is bad in my, and probably countless others, opinion. Can I ask (and be answered in the affirmative) to see Theo's personal financial records? Doubtful.
You're being very shortsighted. So Microsoft can purchase a license to use Eolas' patent. Who pays for that? The consumer. It's a lesser of two evils question. The Eolas CEO comes off kind of smug, so I'm glad they're not buying a license from them.
Very true. Anything else is a recipe for disaster. If it's on your free time and because of your good will that you're doing it, that's fine. But when it's a project that has a deadline and some sort of grade attached to it, I stay as a far away as possible from pairing with people that I know I have to hand hold. Case in point, my friend and I are taking a cryptography course and there are several non-trivial computer assignments for a large chunk of the grade. We had the opportunity to expand our group beyond two people, but we absolutely will not. There's too much risk that an added group member will just complicate matters. That same friend is also in a senior level design class in DSP. They're doing a project on license plate recognition. My friend's leading the project and got stuck with another kid being appended to their group halfway into the year. He tries to assign that kid work and finds out that the kid doesn't really program and especially doesn't have any MATLAB experience. How you get through 4 years of EE without knowing MATLAB is beyond me. My friend had to resort to basically telling him to sit in the corner and not do any work, because there's no hope for people like that in a short timeframe. The moral of the story is: only work with people of the same skill level! Consider it to be like impedance matching.
* Note: any spelling/grammar issues are the result of staying up to 0300 because I felt like implementing AES in MATLAB. Yay for finite fields!
Security is largely about keeping information secret from those who shouldn't have it. Yea, it's great if you can set up a firewall, you and 100 million other people. Frankly, I wouldn't hire a so called security expert if they couldn't explain to me what a Feistel round is or why RSA is hard to break. These are just a couple of examples of questions you might ask a security "professional," but they tend to distinguish people who claim to know about security from those who actually have a little bit of background in information security.
The description mentions a nominal dependence of 16 ohms. What is nominal dependence? I'm sure they mean nominal impedance, but this is an annoying screwup for supposedly good headphones.
Then he could have been able to argue "You can't have it - returning it to you would be self-incrimination."
... shall be compelled in any criminal case to be a witness against himself." It's about testifying against yourself, not handing over evidence.
People need to actually read the the Constitution rather than simply reason on what they think is in there. The part of the Fifth Amendment to the Constitution that you're thinking of is where it says, "No person
The default cc is gcc 4.0. Although this can be modified with gcc_select.
Well, I understand your stance, but I must point out that you took Feynman's quote out of context. That said, yes I can still be wrong. My opinion stands as it is. I don't think you're playing with a full deck when you submit an article without mentioning that you wrote it yourself.
As another math major (well, engineering and math double major), I think it's fair to say that the backbone of databases is mathematics. One could argue you that the same sort of brain capacity that allows math types to think about sets and logic is very related to coaxing data out of a database. But, yea, it's probably a fluke you get all those DBA offers ;-)
This is the worst article ever linked to on Slashdot. I'd tell you read it and see for yourself, but I really don't want to put anyone else through that experience. Can I have my five minutes back?
It uses the same algorithms in a slightly different way: instead of checking for the signs of forgery it finds the tell-tale signs of modification and then reverse-modifies them to "what-should-be-there" to make an "original" modified image.
What makes you think this is possible? Let's say I have a set of 15 numbers, {1, 2,
Since the judge found nothing unreasonable doesnt this disable your argument?
If so, wouldn't this mean that it "wasn't necessary" to obtain a warrant in the case of every single warrant that is issued? In which case, why bother with the whole system at all? You know what, forget the Constitution, it's an old document anyway.
Being a "Law and Order" addict, I question, doesn't investigators time to time search and request stuff by just sound of "warrent" to information holder threating to shutdown the place? But then again, I might be just circling around the edge of reality and fantasy.
No, it sounds like your circling around the edge of Engrish and English .
Her grand moral stand was to resist a criminal investigation. The agents knew they had cause. The judge agreed and awarded the warrant. She is being lauded for impeding an investigation and protecting the guilty.
No, her grand moral stand was to ask that the Constitution of the United States of America be upheld in connection with an investigation. Here's the fourth amendment to that document, in case it slipped your mind.
Amendment IV
The right of the people to be secure in their persons, houses, papers, and effects, against unreasonable searches and seizures, shall not be violated, and no warrants shall issue, but upon probable cause, supported by oath or affirmation, and particularly describing the place to be searched, and the persons or things to be seized.
Maybe you meant to say RAID 4 but what you typed was RAID 0
No. Do you know what parity is? RAID 0 has no parity. RAID 4 has parity data stored on a single disk. This is in contrast to RAID 5 where the parity information is written across all the disks.
Educate yourself.
Uhh. Yes. Then you can lose one disk in each side, and you have lost all your data.
Uhh. No. You'd need to lose two more disks to lose all your data. RAID 4 is striping with a dedicated parity drive. Losing one disk on each side means you're running in a degraded mode but still are keeping data. Losing a third disk means one array is shot but you still have your mirror. Only losing a forth drive would mean you'd lose everything. By then, I'd hope you'd have replaced some drives.