Just because school districts are needy does not justify their violation of licenses. That they have other alternatives to piracy (such as installing GNU/Linux or talking to Microsoft themselves) makes me feel even less pity for them. Hungry people are not justified in robbing the shelves of Safeway, and neither are the teachers of this cash-starved district justified in "sharing" their Microsoft software.
Normally prime factorization is an exponential (or "hard") problem.
This is not correct. While prime factorization is "hard" in the sense that no one has found a polynomial time solution, it is not NP-hard. Thus, saying that prime factorization is an "exponential" problem, which implies that it is in NP, is incorrect.
Reference: http://citeseer.nj.nec.com/aharonov98quantum.html
Re:Tell me what THIS is good for?
on
Eco-Terrorism
·
· Score: 2
You didn't actually come out and say that, so I was jumping on your back a bit, but insinuated by the "golly, look how useless this thing is, it's just a cock-pleasing vanity booster" post is that people drive them only because they are not as enlightened as you are. Usually the following thought (that I accused you of, apparently wrongfully) is that we must create regulation to save these unenlightened folk from their own impulses.
Re:Stupidity is Self Curing
on
Eco-Terrorism
·
· Score: 1
I'll bite: yes, it is entirely unlike that event. If anything, these eco-terrorism events are like the attack on Rearden's metalyard (in Atlas Shrugged; as you note, the Fountainhead is harder material to pick from).
Re:2001 Excursion, 1997 Accord, which pollutes mor
on
Eco-Terrorism
·
· Score: 1
Another thing I have never understood is why the americans have never embraced diesels. Much better economy, and a _much_ higher tourque, especially nice for the big SUV's.
This one's easy: particulate emissions, at least until recently; also, the high-performance diesels that are released on foreign (to the US) shores are not suitable for use here, since we do not have the low-sulfur diesel fuel that these engines require.
Re:2001 Excursion, 1997 Accord, which pollutes mor
on
Eco-Terrorism
·
· Score: 1
Sounds reasonable enough, but what are you going to do when all the drunk drivers are careening around in enormous SUVs?
What are you going to do until then? Tool around in an electric golf cart, and hope everyone else follows your lead?
Re:Tell me what THIS is good for?
on
Eco-Terrorism
·
· Score: 1
Who are you to decide what we should drive? While I do not drive a pickup truck (and indeed commute to work by bicycle 4 days a week), I think you are barking up the wrong tree here. If people wish to buy a leather-clad Cadillac pickup truck, then so be it.
If you stand for social engineering through regulation of the vehicles that we are able to buy, then I sincerely hope you consider consequences your viewpoint may entail. I would rather be left to my own choices (see the above about my commute) than have some half-cocked self-righteous person on an environmental crusade (whether you fall under this category or not is not my judgement to make) dictate what kind of vehicle I may drive.
Re:Stupidity is Self Curing
on
Eco-Terrorism
·
· Score: 1
By the way, the appeal of casually destroying other people's work is indicative of how overrun Slashdot has become by people who have never created anything useful in their lives, but base their self-esteem on how much they can claim other people owe them. No one who has genuinely invested his or her life in creating -- art, software, a business, knowledge -- could be so blase about saying "Well, I think this is bad so I'm going to destroy it."
The abovementioned destructors are one and the same as the moochers of Ayn Rand's "Atlas Shrugged." Although she had nothing too specific to say about the environment, I dare say that this wanton destruction, and the accompanying sentiment that the ends justify the means, would be condemned by her, as it is by me.
How do you get UNIVAC from that? Hmm... is the V implied, or is it really UNIVersal Automatic Computer? Or UNIversal Vacuum-tubed Automatic Computer, or...
Re:super sounding gear that isn't that expensive
on
Insanely Audiophile
·
· Score: 1
all it takes is love of music
why not pick up an instrument and play some yourself, and enrich your own life while you're at it?
Re:Audiophiles are *worse* than drug addicts
on
Insanely Audiophile
·
· Score: 1
maybe i'm missing something in your comment, but DAGs are certainly not "nonsense buzzwords." for example, this lecture is about DAGs, and i'm sure similar things are taught in all university CS theory courses.
link for the paranoid: http://www.google.com/search?q=cache:6tW1VA1To9w:w ww.fas.harvard.edu/~libcs124/CS/lec3.pdf+directed+ acyclic+graphs&hl=en
My family lives in Moses Lake as well, but not within the proper city limits. This means that, although the fiber runs tantalizingly close, my parents are still stuck with sharing a 56kbps dialup connection between 2 computers; not quite the ideal situation, by any means. (I, on the other hand, have nice 100 mbps connectivity thanks to my school, but I digress...)
When the service reaches throughout Grant County, however, Seattle truly will have reason to be envious.
Side note, on actual speeds expected for end users: 200-650kbps, this info from a GCPUD employee.
Yet another advantage, and the biggest one in my eyes, is the lack of flickering. Although LCDs are maligned for their blurry game performance (due to pixels staying illuminated, iirc), they boast a 0 Hz refresh rate -- no flickering, and easier on the eyes because of that.
Instead of regulating common sense, why not just let the free market do its thing? If power prices were not artificially capped, perhaps the skyrocketing costs for electricity would make people and businesses realize on their own that building co-lo facilities (or any other power-hungry operation that demands a cold atmosphere) in California is a poor idea.
``At first blush it looks like ease and convenience and simplicity for the user, but in the long run it sets off alarm systems of stifling competition and higher prices,'' said Gene Kimmelman of the Consumers Union.
I don't follow the reasoning behind this. If Microsoft's products are functional, don't cause the user hassles, and don't prevent other competitors' products from being installed (and I don't see any allegations of that in this article; interestingly enough, last week there was a whine in the BBC about how AOL's software disabled competitors'), how is competition stifled? Rather, isn't this the measure of healthy competition? Forcing Microsoft to tie its shoelaces together, or hobbling it in some other way, won't help the marketplace. If anything, it will hurt competition, as Real's (as in RealPlayer) data points, er, customers, will be that much easier to come by, regardless of the quality of Real's software.
Somehow, this seems reminiscent of Atlas Shrugged.
Now, if the prof could somehow develop a 'fingerprint' technology...
I'm not sure if this is a joke, but the method that the prof used, judging from the few details in the washington post article, is actually called "fingerprinting," with 6 word shingles in this case. See this citeseer article for more about the technique: http://citeseer.nj.nec.com/mitzenmacher01estimatin g.html (sorry about the slash spaces)
(Incidentally, Mitzenmacher was my prof this semester, and he talked about fingerprinting a bit, as you might expect.)
Would they have to use a combination of 'rocks' and spaceborne infantry raids? Or, would the only reasonable deterent be total destruction? I think there's a sci-fi story in this here.
Read Red Star: A Utopia by A. Bogdanov (1908), in particular the character Sterni's reasoning over the feasibility of colonizing Earth (from Mars - Sterni is a Martian). If you're too lazy to read it, the summary: all humans would have to be exterminated, or else they would fight the Martians to the bitter end because of their nationalism (not quite the appropriate word, more like their shared bond as humans).
I have a few comments in response to Kevin Fox's assertions, which although highly moderated, are as "bogus" as he thinks Rabin's views are.
Kevin writes that an "arbitrarily large array of recording devices would be able to accomplish the task [of recording an arbitrarily high bandwidth datastream]." This is incorrect, although I don't blame him considering that his only exposure to the scheme is through the NYTimes. Why this incorrect:
Consider the state of recording technology at a given moment: one might be able to record X TB at a bandwidth of Y GB/sec on one recording unit. No matter how many of this units one strings together in a RAID array or any other configuration, it is not possible to store an infinite amount of data. But since the satellites/random data source constantly stream random data, the amount of information that must be stored is effectively infinite.
So there must be a limit on the amount of data that can be stored by an adversary. Call this amount of data that can be stored D. For any D, it is possible to have enough satellites streaming data that the amount of data streamed over the time that it takes to break the (normally encrypted) key saying where to start looking in this stream is greater than D.
So Kevin, are you saying that D can be increased arbitrarily without end? Because that is the only way your argument would make sense. Also, regarding your second argument, that the start key is vulnerable as it is encrypted conventionally: that is the whole point of this scheme, that the key could be broken in some amount of time, a time in which, unfortunately for the adversary, the amount of data streamed by is too great to be recorded.
My background as it relates to this scheme: Rabin gave a lecture on this last spring to a class I attended, and I talked with him afterwards, and he confirmed that I understood it properly. Also, two of my roommates took Rabin's cryptography class last semester, in which this scheme was covered.
for the record, the so-called bad guys don't kill anyone
That's funny, in the rescue of Morpheus alone, the agents were "killed" at least 5 times (all 3 when Neo is shooting from the helicopter, "dodge this" on the roof beforehand, and Agent Smith in the train station). And every time that the agents "die," they don't -- but the human that they had taken over does. Notice how the soldier has a hole in his forehead after "dodge this"?
Neo don't even questionate [sic] the reality of what is presented to him, after been explained that everything he knows is false.
Did you miss the whole initial Construct scene, where Neo freaks out and pukes, not wanting to believe?
Also, it is not fair to compare The Matrix with Pi; they are very different in character. And, fwiw, although I agree that Totall Recall was a good movie, I still enjoyed The Matrix more.
Seems to me that H1B visas would expose more foreign software developers to the "Advanced
Techniques" that the government seems to think that this country has.
I doubt that H1B visas are awarded to programmers from countries that have the serious restrictions on them (the Tier 4 countries). As for India and Pakistani H1B recipients, I hardly think that we should be worrying about their countries getting, say, nuclear weapons, anymore...
An interesting article, but a little light on the details. There is a really good piece on how space elevators work here.
The How Stuff Works link that Cheshire Cat provided is not that good -- it basically is a restatement of NASA's own page on their FD-02 Space Elevator concept, only with added ad banners. In addition, the How Stuff Works site attempted to set persistent cookies on my machine about 10 times before it gave up.
In short: visit NASA's page and avoid How Stuff Works.
Re:I know I'll be modded down, but bear with me he
on
Warez and Abandonware
·
· Score: 2
Anne Marie wrote:
By saying "we recognize that you used to have a right to your copyright but aren't still using it", you're saying that anyone anywhere can determine which property rights are valid and which aren't and which should be respected and which shouldn't. If I broke into your home and took things out of your attic or basement, then you'd be outraged. But somehow calling it "IP" makes the difference? Does it really?
IANAL, but I do know basic property law. And with that in mind, your analogy is flawed. Rather than having an expiration date for copyrights, after which redistribution is legal, be analogous to a burglar breaking into a hypothetical attic, copyright expiration is more akin to the following situation:
Say we have a Mr. Smith, who owns a house, and is a firm believer in private property rights. Let's imagine also that there is a small, neglected patch of land in the corner of his property. If someone comes along and maintains this patch of land (perhaps he builds a shack on it, or perhaps he hosts a website), and Smith doesn't object for a period of time, then the land, title notwithstanding, is not Smith's anymore.
While the analogy that I make is flawed as well, my point stands, that property law, even for physical property, is clearly not as unambiguous as your burglar in the attic example paints it as.
Slashdot Mirror
Just because school districts are needy does not justify their violation of licenses. That they have other alternatives to piracy (such as installing GNU/Linux or talking to Microsoft themselves) makes me feel even less pity for them. Hungry people are not justified in robbing the shelves of Safeway, and neither are the teachers of this cash-starved district justified in "sharing" their Microsoft software.
You didn't actually come out and say that, so I was jumping on your back a bit, but insinuated by the "golly, look how useless this thing is, it's just a cock-pleasing vanity booster" post is that people drive them only because they are not as enlightened as you are. Usually the following thought (that I accused you of, apparently wrongfully) is that we must create regulation to save these unenlightened folk from their own impulses.
I'll bite: yes, it is entirely unlike that event. If anything, these eco-terrorism events are like the attack on Rearden's metalyard (in Atlas Shrugged; as you note, the Fountainhead is harder material to pick from).
What are you going to do until then? Tool around in an electric golf cart, and hope everyone else follows your lead?
If you stand for social engineering through regulation of the vehicles that we are able to buy, then I sincerely hope you consider consequences your viewpoint may entail. I would rather be left to my own choices (see the above about my commute) than have some half-cocked self-righteous person on an environmental crusade (whether you fall under this category or not is not my judgement to make) dictate what kind of vehicle I may drive.
The abovementioned destructors are one and the same as the moochers of Ayn Rand's "Atlas Shrugged." Although she had nothing too specific to say about the environment, I dare say that this wanton destruction, and the accompanying sentiment that the ends justify the means, would be condemned by her, as it is by me.
How do you get UNIVAC from that? Hmm... is the V implied, or is it really UNIVersal Automatic Computer? Or UNIversal Vacuum-tubed Automatic Computer, or...
I think that was his point.
link for the paranoid: http://www.google.com/search?q=cache:6tW1VA1To9w:w ww.fas.harvard.edu/~libcs124/CS/lec3.pdf+directed+ acyclic+graphs&hl=en
When the service reaches throughout Grant County, however, Seattle truly will have reason to be envious.
Side note, on actual speeds expected for end users: 200-650kbps, this info from a GCPUD employee.
Yet another advantage, and the biggest one in my eyes, is the lack of flickering. Although LCDs are maligned for their blurry game performance (due to pixels staying illuminated, iirc), they boast a 0 Hz refresh rate -- no flickering, and easier on the eyes because of that.
Instead of regulating common sense, why not just let the free market do its thing? If power prices were not artificially capped, perhaps the skyrocketing costs for electricity would make people and businesses realize on their own that building co-lo facilities (or any other power-hungry operation that demands a cold atmosphere) in California is a poor idea.
from the article:
I don't follow the reasoning behind this. If Microsoft's products are functional, don't cause the user hassles, and don't prevent other competitors' products from being installed (and I don't see any allegations of that in this article; interestingly enough, last week there was a whine in the BBC about how AOL's software disabled competitors'), how is competition stifled? Rather, isn't this the measure of healthy competition? Forcing Microsoft to tie its shoelaces together, or hobbling it in some other way, won't help the marketplace. If anything, it will hurt competition, as Real's (as in RealPlayer) data points, er, customers, will be that much easier to come by, regardless of the quality of Real's software.
Somehow, this seems reminiscent of Atlas Shrugged.
I'm not sure if this is a joke, but the method that the prof used, judging from the few details in the washington post article, is actually called "fingerprinting," with 6 word shingles in this case. See this citeseer article for more about the technique: http://citeseer.nj.nec.com/mitzenmacher01estimatin g.html (sorry about the slash spaces)
(Incidentally, Mitzenmacher was my prof this semester, and he talked about fingerprinting a bit, as you might expect.)
And that's why you didn't pay $20 million for your last pair of socks, while Tito did for his journey.
Read Red Star: A Utopia by A. Bogdanov (1908), in particular the character Sterni's reasoning over the feasibility of colonizing Earth (from Mars - Sterni is a Martian). If you're too lazy to read it, the summary: all humans would have to be exterminated, or else they would fight the Martians to the bitter end because of their nationalism (not quite the appropriate word, more like their shared bond as humans).
Amazing economic performance, eh? How about the economy's (non)performance since the real estate bubble burst in the mid-80s?
I have a few comments in response to Kevin Fox's assertions, which although highly moderated, are as "bogus" as he thinks Rabin's views are.
Kevin writes that an "arbitrarily large array of recording devices would be able to accomplish the task [of recording an arbitrarily high bandwidth datastream]." This is incorrect, although I don't blame him considering that his only exposure to the scheme is through the NYTimes. Why this incorrect:
Consider the state of recording technology at a given moment: one might be able to record X TB at a bandwidth of Y GB/sec on one recording unit. No matter how many of this units one strings together in a RAID array or any other configuration, it is not possible to store an infinite amount of data. But since the satellites/random data source constantly stream random data, the amount of information that must be stored is effectively infinite.
So there must be a limit on the amount of data that can be stored by an adversary. Call this amount of data that can be stored D. For any D, it is possible to have enough satellites streaming data that the amount of data streamed over the time that it takes to break the (normally encrypted) key saying where to start looking in this stream is greater than D.
So Kevin, are you saying that D can be increased arbitrarily without end? Because that is the only way your argument would make sense. Also, regarding your second argument, that the start key is vulnerable as it is encrypted conventionally: that is the whole point of this scheme, that the key could be broken in some amount of time, a time in which, unfortunately for the adversary, the amount of data streamed by is too great to be recorded.
My background as it relates to this scheme: Rabin gave a lecture on this last spring to a class I attended, and I talked with him afterwards, and he confirmed that I understood it properly. Also, two of my roommates took Rabin's cryptography class last semester, in which this scheme was covered.
I have some points to pick:
That's funny, in the rescue of Morpheus alone, the agents were "killed" at least 5 times (all 3 when Neo is shooting from the helicopter, "dodge this" on the roof beforehand, and Agent Smith in the train station). And every time that the agents "die," they don't -- but the human that they had taken over does. Notice how the soldier has a hole in his forehead after "dodge this"?
Did you miss the whole initial Construct scene, where Neo freaks out and pukes, not wanting to believe?
Also, it is not fair to compare The Matrix with Pi; they are very different in character. And, fwiw, although I agree that Totall Recall was a good movie, I still enjoyed The Matrix more.
The Cheshire Cat wrote:
The How Stuff Works link that Cheshire Cat provided is not that good -- it basically is a restatement of NASA's own page on their FD-02 Space Elevator concept, only with added ad banners. In addition, the How Stuff Works site attempted to set persistent cookies on my machine about 10 times before it gave up.
In short: visit NASA's page and avoid How Stuff Works.
Anne Marie wrote:
IANAL, but I do know basic property law. And with that in mind, your analogy is flawed. Rather than having an expiration date for copyrights, after which redistribution is legal, be analogous to a burglar breaking into a hypothetical attic, copyright expiration is more akin to the following situation:
Say we have a Mr. Smith, who owns a house, and is a firm believer in private property rights. Let's imagine also that there is a small, neglected patch of land in the corner of his property. If someone comes along and maintains this patch of land (perhaps he builds a shack on it, or perhaps he hosts a website), and Smith doesn't object for a period of time, then the land, title notwithstanding, is not Smith's anymore.
While the analogy that I make is flawed as well, my point stands, that property law, even for physical property, is clearly not as unambiguous as your burglar in the attic example paints it as.