Re:The key problem with this ruling...
on
Anonymity
·
· Score: 2
It's illegal to exact retribution against whistleblowers.
When have Scientologists singled out people for individual retaliation based on protected speech? The only cases I've heard of involved unprotected speech.
Re:Supreme Court Precedent
on
Anonymity
·
· Score: 2
The Federalist and Anti-Federalist Papers weren't printed under British Law. I really don't think the environment at the time was harshly against such speech.
I didn't realize the amount you pay in taxes was the most important indication of freedom.
In any case, from what I can tell, the income taxes I would pay in Taiwan would be about $18,000 a year as compared to the $21,000 I pay here. That's hardly "almost no taxes".
And in return for that saving of $3,000 a year I get to move to a country that only four years ago instituted real democratic elections and has just this year dropped almost 20 places (down to 51st) on the Economic Freedom index.
And why would you complain about government control of health care and then move to Taiwan?
And don't they include your fingerprint on the National ID card they issue in Taiwan?
Wasn't it just last year that the Publication Law, the one that required all publications to be registered and approved by the government, was annulled?
I've read that Taiwan they can impose the death penalty for illegal ownership of guns and that gun control is stricter than in Japan.
Wasn't there a government report about rapant abuse of wiretaps by law enforcement agencies in Taiwan?
I mean, not to say that Taiwan is a horrible place or anything, but it was only in 1987 that martial law finally ended. I don't think they are quite the utopia you think they are.
What, exactly is the compiler not compatible with? I give it C++ source code and it compiles it for me.
It generates perfectly ISO compatible code. It's not RedHat's fault the ISO spec is vague and underdefined. Expecting different versions of a C++ compiler (or different C++ compilers for that matter) to emit compatible code is a blatant misfeature.
First of all, the Declaration of Independence has absolutely zero legal standing in this country. That was a CONSCIOUS DECISION by the Founding Fathers. It may make nice rhetoric but it really has very little bearing on the day to day in America.
Now, did we give any consent to have the DMCA passed into law?
You really just completely and utterly fail to understand how a republic works, don't you?
It's hardly Red Hat's fault that ISO C++ doesn't specify an ABI. Expecting any two C++ compilers to generate the same binary layout, even if they are the same compiler at the same version, isn't right IMHO. Fix the standard, rather than rely on compiler specific "features", I'd say.
Rijndael is just as secure as the other finalists. Every other finalist also had published attacks versus reduced round versions. The paper you refer to talks about attacks on reduced round variants. In particular, the 9 round attack on Rijndael requires not only encryption of chosen plaintexts, but also encryptions under 255 other keys related to the secret key in a manner chosen by the adversary.
However, the AES paper talks about these reduced round variants saying,
It is difficult, however, to extrapolate the data for reduced-round variants to the actual algorithms. The attacks on reduced round variants are generally not even practical at this time...As noted earlier, no general attacks against any of the finalists is known. Hence, the determination of the level of security provided by the finalists is largely guesswork.
They also note that since Rijndael had one of the simplest structures that it received a disproportionate amount of review downward biasing its security relative to other contenders. Twofish, for instance, on the other hand is very complicated, making analysis difficult during the timeframe of the AES development process.
Do you have any rational reason for preferring an algorithm that received very little cryptanalysis over one that received tons of it and was found that nothing short of a brute force search over its keyspace would suffice?
Government agencies and contracts are going to require AES. Large businesses are going to use AES. Everyone will use AES. That is why the AES panel had a vested interest in choosing the best algorithm. And they picked Rijndael. Having read their final report, unless you're a competent cryptanalyst (I don't know about you, but I'm not) I don't see any reason to doubt the competence of the AES selection panel or their final selection.
Sure I can use it in Smalltalk. Most Smalltalk implementations provide ways to talk to C libraries. And I would hesitate to suggest that Objective C captures most of the benefits of Smalltalk, but feel free to disagree:-)
Application configuration files and resources all get bundled into one place for each App.
You mean they do it properly rather than the brain dead traditional unix way of putting everything in the same directory just so I don't have to add something my PATH? I can see people might not like that.
And odd directories...very scary. Kinda like/proc. A very odd directory, indeed. Almost as odd as/dev with devfs mounted on it.
bAR and Bar would be the same files. You couldn't have both in the same directory anymore than "/dev/foo" and "/dev/foo" could point to two different files under case sensitive file systems.
However, judging by the amount of screaming and crying followed up by an utter lack of action, geeks are much better at whining than agitating.
Besides, if the company goes down the drain then the universities build up the infrastructure on their own, just like you seem to be suggesting they do without this company. I fail to see a difference.
For shame, for shame, bringing commercialism into the sacred grove of academe...Thankfully, there was nothing like this when I matriculated.
When did you matriculate? Most every research university has something like MIT's Technology Licensing Office which "brings commercialism into the sacred grove of academe". MIT's TLO has been around for over 20 years.
Slashdot Mirror
Never heard of javadoc, huh?
It's illegal to exact retribution against whistleblowers.
When have Scientologists singled out people for individual retaliation based on protected speech? The only cases I've heard of involved unprotected speech.
The Federalist and Anti-Federalist Papers weren't printed under British Law. I really don't think the environment at the time was harshly against such speech.
I didn't realize the amount you pay in taxes was the most important indication of freedom.
In any case, from what I can tell, the income taxes I would pay in Taiwan would be about $18,000 a year as compared to the $21,000 I pay here. That's hardly "almost no taxes".
And in return for that saving of $3,000 a year I get to move to a country that only four years ago instituted real democratic elections and has just this year dropped almost 20 places (down to 51st) on the Economic Freedom index.
And why would you complain about government control of health care and then move to Taiwan?
And don't they include your fingerprint on the National ID card they issue in Taiwan?
Wasn't it just last year that the Publication Law, the one that required all publications to be registered and approved by the government, was annulled?
I've read that Taiwan they can impose the death penalty for illegal ownership of guns and that gun control is stricter than in Japan.
Wasn't there a government report about rapant abuse of wiretaps by law enforcement agencies in Taiwan?
I mean, not to say that Taiwan is a horrible place or anything, but it was only in 1987 that martial law finally ended. I don't think they are quite the utopia you think they are.
Which country are you going to move to?
What, exactly is the compiler not compatible with? I give it C++ source code and it compiles it for me.
It generates perfectly ISO compatible code. It's not RedHat's fault the ISO spec is vague and underdefined. Expecting different versions of a C++ compiler (or different C++ compilers for that matter) to emit compatible code is a blatant misfeature.
First of all, the Declaration of Independence has absolutely zero legal standing in this country. That was a CONSCIOUS DECISION by the Founding Fathers. It may make nice rhetoric but it really has very little bearing on the day to day in America.
Now, did we give any consent to have the DMCA passed into law?
You really just completely and utterly fail to understand how a republic works, don't you?
It's hardly Red Hat's fault that ISO C++ doesn't specify an ABI. Expecting any two C++ compilers to generate the same binary layout, even if they are the same compiler at the same version, isn't right IMHO. Fix the standard, rather than rely on compiler specific "features", I'd say.
You just now figured this out?
Many corporations pay very little in income tax.
Dan Bernstein (the guy who wrote qmail) has an interesting commentary on struggling to implement a secure replacement for BIND.
namedroppers
However, the AES paper talks about these reduced round variants saying,
They also note that since Rijndael had one of the simplest structures that it received a disproportionate amount of review downward biasing its security relative to other contenders. Twofish, for instance, on the other hand is very complicated, making analysis difficult during the timeframe of the AES development process.
Do you have any rational reason for preferring an algorithm that received very little cryptanalysis over one that received tons of it and was found that nothing short of a brute force search over its keyspace would suffice?
Government agencies and contracts are going to require AES. Large businesses are going to use AES. Everyone will use AES. That is why the AES panel had a vested interest in choosing the best algorithm. And they picked Rijndael. Having read their final report, unless you're a competent cryptanalyst (I don't know about you, but I'm not) I don't see any reason to doubt the competence of the AES selection panel or their final selection.
Rijndael IS the better encryption algorithm.
The compile and make available a release for sparc. That's not exactly the same thing as "supporting" it.
You seem to misunderstand what has happened. This case is simply going through the NORMAL judicial path rather than a speeded up one.
Really? Maybe we're using different definitions of proprietary, but I was pretty sure that Adobe owned both PDF and Postscript.
I'm curious, what app were you going to write that Apple is now going to miss out on?
Have you ever tried running X without a window manager? I'd hardly call that usable.
Say you want to cut and paste an image under X. Oh, wait. You can't. Not very usable, IMHO.
(I also think you overstate the typing abilities of the average user.)
Sure I can use it in Smalltalk. Most Smalltalk implementations provide ways to talk to C libraries. And I would hesitate to suggest that Objective C captures most of the benefits of Smalltalk, but feel free to disagree :-)
But why look at Objective-C rather than Smalltalk?
Application configuration files and resources all get bundled into one place for each App.
/proc. A very odd directory, indeed. Almost as odd as /dev with devfs mounted on it.
You mean they do it properly rather than the brain dead traditional unix way of putting everything in the same directory just so I don't have to add something my PATH? I can see people might not like that.
And odd directories...very scary. Kinda like
bAR and Bar would be the same files. You couldn't have both in the same directory anymore than "/dev/foo" and "/dev/foo" could point to two different files under case sensitive file systems.
Pretty sure that the FHS mentions /opt as a perfectly jim dandy place to put stuff, so I'm not sure what you mean?
Wow...$5 per flight. I can't imagine why the airlines aren't tripping over themselves to offer such a great service for $5 per person per flight.
However, judging by the amount of screaming and crying followed up by an utter lack of action, geeks are much better at whining than agitating.
Besides, if the company goes down the drain then the universities build up the infrastructure on their own, just like you seem to be suggesting they do without this company. I fail to see a difference.
For shame, for shame, bringing commercialism into the sacred grove of academe...Thankfully, there was nothing like this when I matriculated.
When did you matriculate? Most every research university has something like MIT's Technology Licensing Office which "brings commercialism into the sacred grove of academe". MIT's TLO has been around for over 20 years.