Just about any protocol allows dictionary attacks. Whilst some techniques, like salt, help, ultimately they make the problem for the bad guys only slightly harder.
Only long passwords and encouraging the users to use good quality passwords/phrases really helps.
Ultimately though, these passphrases are flawed anyway- they are a form of shared password. History has shown this to be a thoroughly bad idea, one passphrase per user/machine is a far better idea; and even the user shouldn't know what it is (that way it can't get beaten out of them- black cosh crytography works pretty darn well.) These standards organisations aren't even trying.
If the poster had actually read the article he would know that the article talks about grafting, not gene splicing. Grafting is an ancient technique invented by the chinese and is used for those highly dangerous things like apple trees, roses and grapes. It involves sticking different roots on things, typically from the same or a related species/variety.
In this case he has grafted a tomato plant on a tobacco root.
He talked about some system to distill 50% peroxide into 90%. Didn't Carmack say that wasn't feasible to do in the volume he needed?
Carmack is going ~20x higher and hence needs a lot more peroxide. I think it's almost two orders of magnitude more- Walker's distillation system doesn't have the capacity- it would take a year or so to make one tankful for Carmack's needs IRC (Carmack needs to launch twice to win the X-prize).
So, if God is so powerful, omniscient, omnipresent etc. why does he always get disproved in tests like this one?
I mean every deity worth their salt could atleast make every experimental result ambiguous, randomly give the experimenters a bad head cold that only goes away when they stop the experiment, lose the paperwork etc. etc.
Why couldn't he just make it extremely debateable, put some spurious ideas into the experimenters heads that leads them down false trails etc. etc.?
I mean clear, unambiguous proof like this is a bit of a steep test for even the best believers isn't it?
During the 16th century the insurance companies wanted to know whether ships with priests or missionaries onboard were a better insurance bet; so they went through the record books looking to see if they sank less. I mean surely God wouldn't kill his own people spreading the word of God to heathens in storms would he?
Turns out it made no difference at all. Having a Holy Joe on board means you get no better chance of not swimming with the fishies.
So the logical conclusion is that obviously the Moslems or the Jews are right, and they just chose the wrong religion to test:-)
The difference is that the nuclear DNA of the donor egg is that of the infertile couple, not the egg donor.
The only genetic material from the donor is in the mitochondria; but that doesn't affect the appearance or personality of the baby, so the baby would be for all intents and purposes, that of the infertile couple.
It's not as if ceramic tiles are made of expensive raw materials, either.
That's not really the point though. It takes, on average, about a person-week to replace just one ceramic tile on the shuttle- they're that fiddly to install. In some cases you have to remove tiles from an entire section just to be able to replace one tile correctly.
Still, his replacement material doesn't sound very practical either; for different reasons however.
I'd argue that it's only now that it is making the slow climb to legitimacy, where one can argue with a straight face that it isn't just pirates using it.
Yeah? Well you'd be wrong.
USENET has been around for decades; and very definitely is peer-peer. In fact the internet itself is peer-peer. How do you think IP routing works?
First of all, it's not simply a matter of applying a 'big blowtorch' to the underside of the shuttle.
Too right, for one thing the reentry temperatures can be as high as 10000F (about 5500C)
That's much, much hotter than a blowtorch can provide (that's nearer to 1500C).
There's a lot of laminar flow that accompanies the heat and for something that can be 'washed' off, I'd be interested in both viscosity and lateral movement.
I'd be very concerned about it flat out melting and sloughing off. Basically almost nothing is solid at those temperatures, reusable reentry shields typically rely on sucking enough heat through the surface so that the surface is kept just below the melting point; and thus they are cooler than the white hot gas around it. On the Shuttle, Carbon-Carbon is used on the front edge and that's good for more than 3000C.
I think you should use anonymous ftp (your operator should be fairly happy with that, it's the one remaining, legitimate use of ftp there is), then log in securely using ssh and move it somewhere safe and run an md5 checksum on it to check that it made the trip without any modifications or corruption.
I don't see that you have much advantage from using a secured ftp in this case- 99.999% of the time you won't get hacked or anything and in this case the data you are hauling isn't sensitive anyway. Just don't use the anonymous ftp account for anything that needs the security.
No, they've made their own equipment, they had technical help from the Russians, and they've ended up with a vaguely similar design, but as far as I know it's purely Chinese manufactured.
Chess programs often express many aspects of a chess board in binary, with one bit per square. For example the attack pattern of a queen in the top left hand corner is:
$7fC0A09088848281 (I think I have that right, if you break that up into one byte per row on the chess board you can check it).
which neatly fits in one 64 bit word. It turns out that 64 bit processors are great for chess, significantly faster!
Yeah, but freedom *from* religion also means freedom from *coercion* to hold a particular religion. And I think that that is the more important meaning.
Who says they are pretending to offer the same quality as POTS? They certainly aren't offering connectivity in a power fail scenario and they certainly aren't (at the present time) offering the same QOS (1 broken call in 10 years).
No, they are offering lower quality at a zero price.
I've studied space for a long while, and one thing I've found out: it's not the technology- it's the economics. The more people go into space per year, the cheaper it gets to go; and very much so.
Forget reusable, nuclear rockets, space elevators; although all of these tricks work, and will help and doubtless will be used, but they are one-time tricks and the trick that has the biggest effect is simply to launch, and launch a lot. Economies of scale.
Now, NASA cannot and will not be allowed to launch a lot. NASA takes a small(ish), relatively constant chunk of the American tax each year, and launches some stuff with that. There's a limit to what they can do with the money they have; which they reached about 2 decades ago. NASA as a government department cannot sensibly take a profit, and has built the wrong rockets for making money with anyway. That means that, unlike a business, they won't grow exponentially. Even if NASA were to be given more money, they still can't grow manned space flight- it would be a flat one-time increase. Only continuous growth works, and NASA can't do it.
That means that they will only launch a fixed number of rockets per year, and hence the economies of scale cannot be utilised more than they are at the moment. Since economies of scale are the most powerful way of reducing the costs of spaceflight, this means that NASA cannot take us to space; it can only take a lucky few chosen by a bunch of bureaucrats to be termed 'elite'.
But the big problem with laser power beaming is stuff like clouds, and fog...
, people...
Nah, people are no problem. Cuts through them like a hot knife through butter. No problem at all.:-)
Actually you wouldn't want to be within a mile or two of a 100MW laser. It blinds just from diffusively scattered light at about that range- further than that if you use magnifying optics like binoculars.
The sun only has an intensity of about 1KW/m^2m, whereas lasers are up at ~100MW/m^2.
Also, solar panels are only about 5-15% efficient. That's because they only absorb certain frequencies of light, and the other frequencies that the Sun presents is wasted.
However, if you point a laser at one, they're much, much more efficient (>50%). That's because you can choose the laser to match the solar panel.
But the big problem with laser power beaming is stuff like clouds, and fog...
Yes, but that's data. With data it doesn't matter if 99.999% of the power gets lost- provided the remainder can be detected and demodulated. With power beaming if you lose 50% you start to get upset.
There's 3 sorts of UV radiation, UV-A UV-B and UV-C.
UV-C never makes it to ground level. Forget about that one unless you're an astronaut.
UV-B only makes it to ground level when the sun is high in the sky- it's linked to skin cancer, and deep tanning. That's the one that triggers production of melanin in the skin.
UV-A is the one that makes you look old. It makes it to the ground throughout the day, and ages your skin 50x quicker than UV-B. It doesn't trigger melanin production very well, but if you were already exposed to UV-B then it brings out the colour. It's linked to some forms of cancer, but is probably a little less harmful than UV-B.
Window glass blocks UV-B but lets most of the UV-A through.
Well, there's plenty of stories of people picking up radio stations on their fillings. So far as I know there has never been a definitive proof of this though.
Honestly, can you imagine what sort of virus protection scheme you would need
I think banning battery packs and power supplies would be the most effective:-)
Otherwise, a whole load of kids, some of which are that delicate age before they discover morals (if they ever do discover morals); and after that delicate age where they've discover root kits, trojans, worms and viruses. Hmm.
Yes, but you've missed my point, even if Linux is 10x better than Windows, Linux will still have as many subverts; because it's not the number of bugs, it's the number of virus writers. Only if Linux has massively less bugs than virus writers will the number of viruses be reduced because then the number of ways to stick exploits together will be restricted. But it doesn't have enough less bugs; it's better, but not enough to matter.
Slashdot Mirror
a) Microsoft buys some stock in the company
b) suddenly SCO starts making extreme anti-Linux propoganda
c) as if from nowhere it starts to flash cash around- "we'll pay you not to use Linux!"
d) ???
e) Make Money!!!!
Or something like that.
Of course Microsoft would never be behind something like this. Um. Because, uh, anyone?
Only long passwords and encouraging the users to use good quality passwords/phrases really helps.
Ultimately though, these passphrases are flawed anyway- they are a form of shared password. History has shown this to be a thoroughly bad idea, one passphrase per user/machine is a far better idea; and even the user shouldn't know what it is (that way it can't get beaten out of them- black cosh crytography works pretty darn well.) These standards organisations aren't even trying.
In this case he has grafted a tomato plant on a tobacco root.
Carmack is going ~20x higher and hence needs a lot more peroxide. I think it's almost two orders of magnitude more- Walker's distillation system doesn't have the capacity- it would take a year or so to make one tankful for Carmack's needs IRC (Carmack needs to launch twice to win the X-prize).
I mean every deity worth their salt could atleast make every experimental result ambiguous, randomly give the experimenters a bad head cold that only goes away when they stop the experiment, lose the paperwork etc. etc.
Why couldn't he just make it extremely debateable, put some spurious ideas into the experimenters heads that leads them down false trails etc. etc.?
I mean clear, unambiguous proof like this is a bit of a steep test for even the best believers isn't it?
Turns out it made no difference at all. Having a Holy Joe on board means you get no better chance of not swimming with the fishies.
So the logical conclusion is that obviously the Moslems or the Jews are right, and they just chose the wrong religion to test :-)
The only genetic material from the donor is in the mitochondria; but that doesn't affect the appearance or personality of the baby, so the baby would be for all intents and purposes, that of the infertile couple.
That's not really the point though. It takes, on average, about a person-week to replace just one ceramic tile on the shuttle- they're that fiddly to install. In some cases you have to remove tiles from an entire section just to be able to replace one tile correctly.
Still, his replacement material doesn't sound very practical either; for different reasons however.
Yeah? Well you'd be wrong.
USENET has been around for decades; and very definitely is peer-peer. In fact the internet itself is peer-peer. How do you think IP routing works?
Too right, for one thing the reentry temperatures can be as high as 10000F (about 5500C) That's much, much hotter than a blowtorch can provide (that's nearer to 1500C).
There's a lot of laminar flow that accompanies the heat and for something that can be 'washed' off, I'd be interested in both viscosity and lateral movement.
I'd be very concerned about it flat out melting and sloughing off. Basically almost nothing is solid at those temperatures, reusable reentry shields typically rely on sucking enough heat through the surface so that the surface is kept just below the melting point; and thus they are cooler than the white hot gas around it. On the Shuttle, Carbon-Carbon is used on the front edge and that's good for more than 3000C.
I don't see that you have much advantage from using a secured ftp in this case- 99.999% of the time you won't get hacked or anything and in this case the data you are hauling isn't sensitive anyway. Just don't use the anonymous ftp account for anything that needs the security.
No, they've made their own equipment, they had technical help from the Russians, and they've ended up with a vaguely similar design, but as far as I know it's purely Chinese manufactured.
$7fC0A09088848281 (I think I have that right, if you break that up into one byte per row on the chess board you can check it).
which neatly fits in one 64 bit word. It turns out that 64 bit processors are great for chess, significantly faster!
Yeah, but freedom *from* religion also means freedom from *coercion* to hold a particular religion. And I think that that is the more important meaning.
No, they are offering lower quality at a zero price.
Forget reusable, nuclear rockets, space elevators; although all of these tricks work, and will help and doubtless will be used, but they are one-time tricks and the trick that has the biggest effect is simply to launch, and launch a lot. Economies of scale.
Now, NASA cannot and will not be allowed to launch a lot. NASA takes a small(ish), relatively constant chunk of the American tax each year, and launches some stuff with that. There's a limit to what they can do with the money they have; which they reached about 2 decades ago. NASA as a government department cannot sensibly take a profit, and has built the wrong rockets for making money with anyway. That means that, unlike a business, they won't grow exponentially. Even if NASA were to be given more money, they still can't grow manned space flight- it would be a flat one-time increase. Only continuous growth works, and NASA can't do it.
That means that they will only launch a fixed number of rockets per year, and hence the economies of scale cannot be utilised more than they are at the moment. Since economies of scale are the most powerful way of reducing the costs of spaceflight, this means that NASA cannot take us to space; it can only take a lucky few chosen by a bunch of bureaucrats to be termed 'elite'.
, people...
Nah, people are no problem. Cuts through them like a hot knife through butter. No problem at all. :-)
Actually you wouldn't want to be within a mile or two of a 100MW laser. It blinds just from diffusively scattered light at about that range- further than that if you use magnifying optics like binoculars.
Also, solar panels are only about 5-15% efficient. That's because they only absorb certain frequencies of light, and the other frequencies that the Sun presents is wasted.
However, if you point a laser at one, they're much, much more efficient (>50%). That's because you can choose the laser to match the solar panel.
But the big problem with laser power beaming is stuff like clouds, and fog...
Yes, but that's data. With data it doesn't matter if 99.999% of the power gets lost- provided the remainder can be detected and demodulated. With power beaming if you lose 50% you start to get upset.
I live in England :-)
UV-C never makes it to ground level. Forget about that one unless you're an astronaut.
UV-B only makes it to ground level when the sun is high in the sky- it's linked to skin cancer, and deep tanning. That's the one that triggers production of melanin in the skin.
UV-A is the one that makes you look old. It makes it to the ground throughout the day, and ages your skin 50x quicker than UV-B. It doesn't trigger melanin production very well, but if you were already exposed to UV-B then it brings out the colour. It's linked to some forms of cancer, but is probably a little less harmful than UV-B.
Window glass blocks UV-B but lets most of the UV-A through.
Well, there's plenty of stories of people picking up radio stations on their fillings. So far as I know there has never been a definitive proof of this though.
I think banning battery packs and power supplies would be the most effective :-)
Otherwise, a whole load of kids, some of which are that delicate age before they discover morals (if they ever do discover morals); and after that delicate age where they've discover root kits, trojans, worms and viruses. Hmm.
Apparently now it's called 'Gordon Freeman Forever' :-)
Yes, but you've missed my point, even if Linux is 10x better than Windows, Linux will still have as many subverts; because it's not the number of bugs, it's the number of virus writers. Only if Linux has massively less bugs than virus writers will the number of viruses be reduced because then the number of ways to stick exploits together will be restricted. But it doesn't have enough less bugs; it's better, but not enough to matter.