I remember reading Max Hastings memoirs of the falklands war, he writes about an Argentine 2,000lb bomb landing within 50 metres of him, and while he and the soldiers he was with were knocked off their feet no-one was seriously infured.
you'd be lucky to get 2,000lb of high explosives into a small plane, and while civilian GPS is accurate to within 50 metres my hypothecated "GPS/light aircraft" combo would have further margin of error on it's position at any given time.
dirty bomb or chemical/biological payload might get you a better return on the trouble I suppose.
no thats how fast/high *SOME* cruise missles can fly.
a V1 (generally considered the first cruise missile) had nothing like what you're talking about.
light aircraft have ranges heading into many hundreds of miles.
and if launched in time of peace (as per terrorist attack) and kept in unregulated airspace could get within seconds of it's target without radar being an issue.
New York and Washington in time of high alert might be able to respond in time, but off the top of my head i can't think of another city in the world (baghdad?) that would be protected.
the big "but" is the continuous drop in the price of RAM.
I've currently got a Gb of DDR RAM in an athlonXP linux desktop at work.
juggling really big files with all my apps running i occasionally go to swap and hate it.
yes there's still room to keep upping my RAM at the moment, but I can see a day when the price of RAM will drop to the point I'll need 64 Bits to address it.
Particularly with the opportunities Knoppix presents the small/medium sized corporate desktop.
Combine: A really big whack of fast RAM a USB memory stick (for settings) File server to keep work on. And bootable CD for the actual operating system.
Could be a lot easier to maintain and rollout updates than alternative systems.
So cheap RAM could drive 64 bit adoption ahead of application need.
Telstra are masters of doing things on the cheap. It's one of the reasons they generate billions (real billions) in profits.
But part of that is they don't leave a lot of spare capacity in their networks and the mimail and swen worms of recent times kicked the network over the cliff.
In terms of technical choices, after a brief, disastrous, dalliance with NT in their infrastructure they tend to make good choices, but their idea of "good" outcomes is a little different from a users.
This isn't about stopping spam, serious spammers don't use their own accounts, they relay off others.
What it will sneak through under the cover of Spam hysteria is the following.
1) It will force budget business users onto more expensive corporate accounts.
2) It will stop people batching their email correspondence to miminise online time which in turn will reduce peak load on telstra and also bring in more money.
3) Less nasty but equally beneficient to Telstra it will allow them to stop worm riddled machines bogging down their email servers (Telstra are facing massive damages over the near collapse of their email infrastructure and associated business losses).
I'm not so sure one time pads will hold up to quantum mathematics where state or position are the key elements.
as long as a solution exists. not matter how improbable, it can be arrived at, as the gates in superposition go through all the possibilities simultaneously.
so, to my admittedly limited understanding, where brute forcing means it's statistically likely you'll crack conventional encryption after a certain limited number of iterations, and a certainty once you exhaust all the possibilities, unless the chance of brute forcing an OTP is exactly infinite then it's still going to be a snap to a machine that evaluates all states simultaneously.
But i don't pretend to have a deep understanding of the field.
So I promise not to get upset if someone now brutally demolishes my thinking
Slashdot Mirror
ballistic missile then.
and modified v2's fired by the allies after the war came darn close.
first the threat has to be identified, then the f16 has to be scrambled,
this all takes time.
you've got them mixed up matey.
v1 = doodlebug - flying bomb
v2 = first ICBM
Have a look for pictures here
wikipedia has good stuff on it
for the V1 look here.
for the V2 look here.
Now normally I wouldn't mind but next time you cite military scholars please include a reference m'kay?
I remember reading Max Hastings memoirs of the falklands war, he writes about an Argentine 2,000lb bomb landing within 50 metres of him, and while he and the soldiers he was with were knocked off their feet no-one was seriously infured.
you'd be lucky to get 2,000lb of high explosives into a small plane, and while civilian GPS is accurate to within 50 metres my hypothecated "GPS/light aircraft" combo would have further margin of error on it's position at any given time.
dirty bomb or chemical/biological payload might get you a better return on the trouble I suppose.
agreed tho.
Much better than a V1
Most of those things comes with your light aircraft.
stay up in a normal altitude until final approach and it's too late to do anything.
we're not talking about building a cruise missile suitable for sale to the USN or to compete with the Tomahawk on the world market.
we're talking about the low end of the market, launch from your local airfield.
and there's plenty of mobile phone towers around almost any target worth hitting.
it was aimed and the fuel was calibrated to give range.
a cessna with gps, autopilot, and GPRS mobile phone data link would be far superior.
it's the accuracy that makes a good cruise missile better than a bad one.
If they were talking about "building a tomohawk missile" then you'd have a point.
but just "build a cruise missile" is much easier.
From the wikipedia: "A cruise missile is a guided missile which uses a lifting wing..."
Everything else is determining the quality of your missile, not its nature.
no thats how fast/high *SOME* cruise missles can fly.
a V1 (generally considered the first cruise missile) had nothing like what you're talking about.
light aircraft have ranges heading into many hundreds of miles.
and if launched in time of peace (as per terrorist attack) and kept in unregulated airspace could get within seconds of it's target without radar being an issue.
New York and Washington in time of high alert might be able to respond in time, but off the top of my head i can't think of another city in the world (baghdad?) that would be protected.
a light aircraft's auto pilot a GPS system and a weekends tinkering would get you something darn close to a cruise missile without all this fuss.
the big "but" is the continuous drop in the price of RAM.
I've currently got a Gb of DDR RAM in an athlonXP linux desktop at work.
juggling really big files with all my apps running i occasionally go to swap and hate it.
yes there's still room to keep upping my RAM at the moment, but I can see a day when the price of RAM will drop to the point I'll need 64 Bits to address it.
Particularly with the opportunities Knoppix presents the small/medium sized corporate desktop.
Combine:
A really big whack of fast RAM
a USB memory stick (for settings)
File server to keep work on.
And bootable CD for the actual operating system.
Could be a lot easier to maintain and rollout updates than alternative systems.
So cheap RAM could drive 64 bit adoption ahead of application need.
Telstra are masters of doing things on the cheap. It's one of the reasons they generate billions (real billions) in profits.
But part of that is they don't leave a lot of spare capacity in their networks and the mimail and swen worms of recent times kicked the network over the cliff.
In terms of technical choices, after a brief, disastrous, dalliance with NT in their infrastructure they tend to make good choices, but their idea of "good" outcomes is a little different from a users.
This isn't about stopping spam, serious spammers don't use their own accounts, they relay off others.
What it will sneak through under the cover of Spam hysteria is the following.
1) It will force budget business users onto more expensive corporate accounts.
2) It will stop people batching their email correspondence to miminise online time which in turn will reduce peak load on telstra and also bring in more money.
3) Less nasty but equally beneficient to Telstra it will allow them to stop worm riddled machines bogging down their email servers (Telstra are facing massive damages over the near collapse of their email infrastructure and associated business losses).
are you sure I didn't invoke it deliberately?
seriously?
that'd be bollocks for the hobbit and LOTR.
Guy Gavriel Kay did the heavy lifting for Silmarillion for that matter.
Also was Hitler's Favourite movie (according to my set of Trivial Pursuit)
hmmmm
I think you'll find it's easy enough to authenticate the glass.
a lot of roman gaming was done with knucklebones
with the rounded ends of the knuckles it was, effectively, four sided.
and you've never thought gaming with a crooked dice might get your head punched in or worse?
I'd lose that habit mate.
and it would've been post-apocalyptic to boot.
as the previous poster said, that's the scary thing about entanglment... it just knows, it looks like magic, it defies our rational little brains.
the kernel developers should really come up and implement a plan to maintain kernel "safety".
Well it got caught didn't it?
It's the quiet ones you've got to watch...
I'm not so sure one time pads will hold up to quantum mathematics where state or position are the key elements.
as long as a solution exists. not matter how improbable, it can be arrived at, as the gates in superposition go through all the possibilities simultaneously.
so, to my admittedly limited understanding, where brute forcing means it's statistically likely you'll crack conventional encryption after a certain limited number of iterations, and a certainty once you exhaust all the possibilities, unless the chance of brute forcing an OTP is exactly infinite then it's still going to be a snap to a machine that evaluates all states simultaneously.
But i don't pretend to have a deep understanding of the field.
So I promise not to get upset if someone now brutally demolishes my thinking
I think you van rest assured a quantum encryption method will be available.
for instance it's already possible to use quantum interference to determine if the signal has been observed in transit.
Exploration has almost never been done "because it's there".
Lets tweak that shall we?
How about
Exploration has almost never been FUNDED "because it's there".
If the barrier to entry is low then people will just wander off and do it.
But if you need ships and provisions and pay for hundreds of people then you need to show the investor a chance of getting something back.