Ok, do this over IRC, and you're a criminal - do it with a website, spyware, or spam, and you're a business.
Of course, given that the current definition of criminal is "one who does not make campaign contributions."
Re:And a 4th dimension
on
Quark Stars
·
· Score: 2
Physicians say they can't account for all the enrgy and mass that are beeing sucked into a black hole.
Perhaps not, but physicists can. Because a black hole exhibits gravitational effects, you know that the mass and energy it contains are still there. Also, given time, a black hole will radiate energy away in what's dubbed Hawking radiation, and eventually burst in a radid outflow of this radiation, returning the energy to the universe for more diverse purposes.
Researchers at Purdue University are conducting a study by placing Sony Aibo robots in a Lafayette, IN nursing home.
In a related study, researchers at Purdue University were examining the health consequences that can occur when a large number of old people trip over small Aibo robots roaming around their otherwise peaceful nursing home.
Re:How does this fit in with String theory?
on
Quark Stars
·
· Score: 3, Informative
I had read once that black holes could be regarded as super-large elementary particles
Actually it's that statement you just made that doesn't fit with String theory. String theory predicts that black holes can retain information about the structure of objects that are sucked into them. If this turns out to be true, then they can't be regarded as large elementary particles, since elementary particles must be indistinguishable from each other.
density is basically irrelevant as gravity is a point source
That simplification only applies to the mass within a sphere with a radius equal to your distance from the center. For example, if you dig a hole 1 mile into the Earth, and go down this hole, you are no longer subject to the gravitational effects of the outer 1 mile worth of Earth's crust.
This is why density is important in black holes. As a simple way of thinking about it, you need the mass to be in a small enough space such that when you use the simplified center field model, enough mass will be inside the radius for that mass in order to pull light in. If the mass is too spread out, light at the radius for that mass would have some mass closer to the center pulling it down and some mass above it pulling it back up, and there would be no black hole.
Re:"Up" quarks and "down" quarks.
on
Quark Stars
·
· Score: 5, Informative
Does anyone know if all up quarks are the same as all other up quarks...
Well the up quark, like any quark, is not as cleanly defined as the word "particle" might indicate. The up quark and the properties associated are not just a measure of how much "mass" or "spin" has been shoved into a sphere called the quark. The properties of quarks actually come from an extremely complex cloud of virtual particles that pop into and out of existence in close proximity to the area we call the quark. There seem to only be a few stable configurations of energy, spin, and charge that can result in a quark. The properties of the quarks seem to result from some intrinsic properties defining the way these virtual particles can interact, so you can't just put a little more of something into a quark, because that would require changing the rules of the interactions. Unfortunately, the precise details of all of the above is still a subject of some speculation, since no one quite knows for sure all the virtual particles that can pop in and out and all of their properties.
Precisely. I contemplated which games I really wanted to play, saw that they were all on PS2, and then went out and bought a PS2. That's all it really comes down to for a game system.
You know, I used Debian for several years. I was drawn to it for ideological reasons. ... The problem with Debian is in the maintenance and upgrading.
I've also used Debian for many years. I was drawn to it initially in the pre apt days for its stronger security reputation, but I stuck with it due to its strength at the very thing you quote as its weakness. Debian is extremely easy to maintain and upgrade for lengthy periods of time. A Debian system can be kept up-to-date for many years without having to reinstall, or even having to dig out the installation cd.
Most experienced Linux admins can secure any reasonable Linux distribution. Given that, the primary thing a distribution needs to do to be of worth is allow one to easily add new packages with complex dependencies (apt) and to upgrade packages for the entire the system and easily obtain security updates (apt).
# Storm tried and failed. # Progeny tried and failed. # Corel tried and failed.
So many companies try because there is clearly a market for an easy debian installer. The benefits and power of debian are wanted by many, but inaccessible to a large crowd who just can't grasp the current installation system. These companies are systematically failing because the existing debian community really doesn't want a proprietary solution, and doesn't want to commit to a solution not controlled by the community.
This will continue until a [Ff]ree installer that assumes less system knowledge is integrated into mainstream debian.
I launched my web browser today to read Slashdot's April Fools articles. Welcome to the community, we like it.
Now the more important question is: Will this post be deleted or simply moderated down?
The subversiveness of your comment is sufficient to get it moderated up.
You, unfortunately, missed the thing that's good about Slashdot. Despite the function of organizing stories of interest to an entire community, Slashdot also lets you post the most random drivel, even if it opposes them (as you demonstrated). There's no sense in protesting a site that gives you full freedom to read and post for free. It only leaves two choices. One, Slashdot's content is not of interest to you, so you find a different news portal. Two, Slashdot's content is of interest to you, so you read it.
I have yet to find any case, anywhere, where bubble sort is the right choice.
That's because of your definition of "right choice". Bubble sort is complete crap, of course. But let's say hypothetically you are writing a program in some obscure scripting language that you just learned an hour ago, you want to sort less than a thousand elements, and you want to write the program in a few seconds. Do you implement an efficient sorting algorithm? No. You type in the quickest thing possible to get the job done. For an administrator, the most common programming is probably quick hack jobs to get something done with very little invested programming time. For software development, sorts should be modular, and bubble sort can be thrown in for a prototype since it's so quick to type up, then replaced with something useful later. It's often easier to develop a program by getting it to do SOMETHING as early as possible, and then incrementally modifying it to be efficient, extensible, and adhere to specifications. The crap algorithms are useful for this intermediate step.
Sorry, I fail to see how this is news (block sizes and slack space have been well known for years) or a useful technique
Remove yourself from that high equine animal you are saddled upon. Yes, to many of us here, the idea of storing data in unused sections of a drive is old hat, and many of us have even used such a technique before for various purposes such as for copy protection flags, or for hiding information where people wouldn't think to look, etc. (which are examples of where it would be useful) The "news" in this post is not that you can hide data in the unused portions of blocks, but that a new article overviewing this technique was recently posted, so that those who are not familiar with the concept can go read it and learn about it. These are important concepts that system administrators should know about, so that they know when they can and cannot trust what the tools at their disposal (such as ls, for example) tell them about the contents of their system.
By itself, hiding something in a system doesn't provide a very good amount of security, but in combination with other things, it can be the best form of security possible. Never underestimate the value of other people not even knowing there is a secret they need to look for.
some things I've seen seem to contradict the basic logic it takes to operate a toaster or use a telephone.
The mistake you are making is to give people credit for logic because they appear able to operate toasters and telephones. Operating an appliance is something people learn how to do by repetition, not logic. Many people are severely lacking in the logic department.
Well, you are correct it's a hoax, but they didn't actually say "random". It was something like "essentially random" and they probably left a few other weasel words in there.
Given that a huge string of 0's is bound to come up in a random number stream, I'm quite certain I could come up with a 100,000 to 1 compression rate for "essentially random" data given sufficient funding.
Why not just store each line in a file named with the line's number and let the filesystem do all that ugly work for you? Oh, wait, I guess reiserfs [namesys.com] isn't that ubiquitous yet.
And when someone rm's line 213?
I'm all for integrating things into the filesystem, but this is more useful in the case of enabling interaction between the user and the program, or between that program and other programs. There's nothing wrong with a program-specific single-file format for internal state data. This makes it easier to design intelligent caching algorithms, because it can be assumed that if a file is being accessed, more of that file will probably be wanted. If a directory is accessed, in the common case it is unlikely that most of the files will be accessed, so no caching algorithm could ever predictively load data.
The whole point of quantum encryption (which is completely a different process than quantum computing) is that observing the quantum causes the quantum to change. Therefore, the man in the middle will disrupt the transmission and be detected instantly.
I suggest checking the literature a little more closely. A man in the middle will not disrupt the transmission, because a man in the middle is not an eavesdropper, he's pretending to be both ends of the link at once. Person A tries to communicate with person B, and establishes a secure link, but really, the secure uncrackable link is with person C standing in the middle, and person C then establishes a secure uncrackable link with person B. The problem then becomes, how does person A know that it's REALLY person B that a secure communication has been established with, and vice versa.
Preventing a man-in-the-middle attack requires authentication, not secure communication. And when it comes down to it, encryption without authentication is almost useless, because man-in-the-middle attacks are not really that difficult to pull off. Classically, authentication is typically done with the existence of some sort of one-way hash function. I don't know if any hash functions are going to survive the dawn of the quantum computing age.
Slashdot Mirror
Why does "easy to use" seem to translate, almost precisely "looks exactly like windows"?
I'd like to see you try to sell a car that has a joystick instead of a steering wheel.
When people say "easy," they mean, "what is already familiar."
Ok, do this over IRC, and you're a criminal - do it with a website, spyware, or spam, and you're a business.
Of course, given that the current definition of criminal is "one who does not make campaign contributions."
Physicians say they can't account for all the enrgy and mass that are beeing sucked into a black hole.
Perhaps not, but physicists can. Because a black hole exhibits gravitational effects, you know that the mass and energy it contains are still there. Also, given time, a black hole will radiate energy away in what's dubbed Hawking radiation, and eventually burst in a radid outflow of this radiation, returning the energy to the universe for more diverse purposes.
Researchers at Purdue University are conducting a study by placing Sony Aibo robots in a Lafayette, IN nursing home.
In a related study, researchers at Purdue University were examining the health consequences that can occur when a large number of old people trip over small Aibo robots roaming around their otherwise peaceful nursing home.
I had read once that black holes could be regarded as super-large elementary particles
Actually it's that statement you just made that doesn't fit with String theory. String theory predicts that black holes can retain information about the structure of objects that are sucked into them. If this turns out to be true, then they can't be regarded as large elementary particles, since elementary particles must be indistinguishable from each other.
density is basically irrelevant as gravity is a point source
That simplification only applies to the mass within a sphere with a radius equal to your distance from the center. For example, if you dig a hole 1 mile into the Earth, and go down this hole, you are no longer subject to the gravitational effects of the outer 1 mile worth of Earth's crust.
This is why density is important in black holes. As a simple way of thinking about it, you need the mass to be in a small enough space such that when you use the simplified center field model, enough mass will be inside the radius for that mass in order to pull light in. If the mass is too spread out, light at the radius for that mass would have some mass closer to the center pulling it down and some mass above it pulling it back up, and there would be no black hole.
Does anyone know if all up quarks are the same as all other up quarks...
Well the up quark, like any quark, is not as cleanly defined as the word "particle" might indicate. The up quark and the properties associated are not just a measure of how much "mass" or "spin" has been shoved into a sphere called the quark. The properties of quarks actually come from an extremely complex cloud of virtual particles that pop into and out of existence in close proximity to the area we call the quark. There seem to only be a few stable configurations of energy, spin, and charge that can result in a quark. The properties of the quarks seem to result from some intrinsic properties defining the way these virtual particles can interact, so you can't just put a little more of something into a quark, because that would require changing the rules of the interactions. Unfortunately, the precise details of all of the above is still a subject of some speculation, since no one quite knows for sure all the virtual particles that can pop in and out and all of their properties.
Precisely. I contemplated which games I really wanted to play, saw that they were all on PS2, and then went out and bought a PS2. That's all it really comes down to for a game system.
voice recognition software is where i see major strides coming from... i've heard that most people talk at 100 wpm
k -back-back-back-back"
;)
Until we completely foul up a phrase. Then it's, "back-back-back-back-back-back-back-back-back-bac
Try to say that faster than a keyboard.
You know, I used Debian for several years. I was drawn to it for ideological reasons.
...
The problem with Debian is in the maintenance and upgrading.
I've also used Debian for many years. I was drawn to it initially in the pre apt days for its stronger security reputation, but I stuck with it due to its strength at the very thing you quote as its weakness. Debian is extremely easy to maintain and upgrade for lengthy periods of time. A Debian system can be kept up-to-date for many years without having to reinstall, or even having to dig out the installation cd.
Most experienced Linux admins can secure any reasonable Linux distribution. Given that, the primary thing a distribution needs to do to be of worth is allow one to easily add new packages with complex dependencies (apt) and to upgrade packages for the entire the system and easily obtain security updates (apt).
# Storm tried and failed.
# Progeny tried and failed.
# Corel tried and failed.
So many companies try because there is clearly a market for an easy debian installer. The benefits and power of debian are wanted by many, but inaccessible to a large crowd who just can't grasp the current installation system. These companies are systematically failing because the existing debian community really doesn't want a proprietary solution, and doesn't want to commit to a solution not controlled by the community.
This will continue until a [Ff]ree installer that assumes less system knowledge is integrated into mainstream debian.
Slashdot has gone way overboard today.
I launched my web browser today to read Slashdot's April Fools articles. Welcome to the community, we like it.
Now the more important question is: Will this post be deleted or simply moderated down?
The subversiveness of your comment is sufficient to get it moderated up.
You, unfortunately, missed the thing that's good about Slashdot. Despite the function of organizing stories of interest to an entire community, Slashdot also lets you post the most random drivel, even if it opposes them (as you demonstrated). There's no sense in protesting a site that gives you full freedom to read and post for free. It only leaves two choices. One, Slashdot's content is not of interest to you, so you find a different news portal. Two, Slashdot's content is of interest to you, so you read it.
I have yet to find any case, anywhere, where bubble sort is the right choice.
That's because of your definition of "right choice". Bubble sort is complete crap, of course. But let's say hypothetically you are writing a program in some obscure scripting language that you just learned an hour ago, you want to sort less than a thousand elements, and you want to write the program in a few seconds. Do you implement an efficient sorting algorithm? No. You type in the quickest thing possible to get the job done. For an administrator, the most common programming is probably quick hack jobs to get something done with very little invested programming time. For software development, sorts should be modular, and bubble sort can be thrown in for a prototype since it's so quick to type up, then replaced with something useful later. It's often easier to develop a program by getting it to do SOMETHING as early as possible, and then incrementally modifying it to be efficient, extensible, and adhere to specifications. The crap algorithms are useful for this intermediate step.
Sorry, I fail to see how this is news (block sizes and slack space have been well known for years) or a useful technique
Remove yourself from that high equine animal you are saddled upon. Yes, to many of us here, the idea of storing data in unused sections of a drive is old hat, and many of us have even used such a technique before for various purposes such as for copy protection flags, or for hiding information where people wouldn't think to look, etc. (which are examples of where it would be useful) The "news" in this post is not that you can hide data in the unused portions of blocks, but that a new article overviewing this technique was recently posted, so that those who are not familiar with the concept can go read it and learn about it. These are important concepts that system administrators should know about, so that they know when they can and cannot trust what the tools at their disposal (such as ls, for example) tell them about the contents of their system.
By itself, hiding something in a system doesn't provide a very good amount of security, but in combination with other things, it can be the best form of security possible. Never underestimate the value of other people not even knowing there is a secret they need to look for.
France isn't on the list because of their fine wines and cuisine.
A good call. Only the Germans with their equally excellent... taste... for fine wine saw fit to invade France...
some things I've seen seem to contradict the basic logic it takes to operate a toaster or use a telephone.
The mistake you are making is to give people credit for logic because they appear able to operate toasters and telephones. Operating an appliance is something people learn how to do by repetition, not logic. Many people are severely lacking in the logic department.
any method whatsoever to bypass ads ... might be enough for you to become a "circumvention device".
Have you heard of VCR's?
Check out richdate.com
Its where you can win 3 dates and money! its pretty cool
I have 4 mod-points left to spend, but I searched, and sadly there is no +1 Pathetic.
That argument makes as much logical sense as saying that a country that purchases 120,000 TV's is going to be the next Hollywood.
Well, you are correct it's a hoax, but they didn't actually say "random". It was something like "essentially random" and they probably left a few other weasel words in there.
Given that a huge string of 0's is bound to come up in a random number stream, I'm quite certain I could come up with a 100,000 to 1 compression rate for "essentially random" data given sufficient funding.
Any buyers?
really, whats the worst that could happen?
Some advanced alien species takes it as a biological warfare invasion and returns to kill us all.
only MS Notepad seems to follow the Unix philosophy.
I'm sure somewhere in the Unix philosophy handbook there must be something about text editors knowing how to display Unix textfiles...
Why not just store each line in a file named with the line's number and let the filesystem do all that ugly work for you? Oh, wait, I guess reiserfs [namesys.com] isn't that ubiquitous yet.
And when someone rm's line 213?
I'm all for integrating things into the filesystem, but this is more useful in the case of enabling interaction between the user and the program, or between that program and other programs. There's nothing wrong with a program-specific single-file format for internal state data. This makes it easier to design intelligent caching algorithms, because it can be assumed that if a file is being accessed, more of that file will probably be wanted. If a directory is accessed, in the common case it is unlikely that most of the files will be accessed, so no caching algorithm could ever predictively load data.
The whole point of quantum encryption (which is completely a different process than quantum computing) is that observing the quantum causes the quantum to change. Therefore, the man in the middle will disrupt the transmission and be detected instantly.
I suggest checking the literature a little more closely. A man in the middle will not disrupt the transmission, because a man in the middle is not an eavesdropper, he's pretending to be both ends of the link at once. Person A tries to communicate with person B, and establishes a secure link, but really, the secure uncrackable link is with person C standing in the middle, and person C then establishes a secure uncrackable link with person B. The problem then becomes, how does person A know that it's REALLY person B that a secure communication has been established with, and vice versa.
Preventing a man-in-the-middle attack requires authentication, not secure communication. And when it comes down to it, encryption without authentication is almost useless, because man-in-the-middle attacks are not really that difficult to pull off. Classically, authentication is typically done with the existence of some sort of one-way hash function. I don't know if any hash functions are going to survive the dawn of the quantum computing age.
a crypto key that is totally unbreakable. Untappable, unbreakable, impervious.
And how exactly is it that quantum key distribution is supposed to protect us from the classic and proven man-in-the-middle attack?