2- The AMD motherboards are cheaper, you can easily save at least $100 on that.
The chepest AM3 socket board I could find here in Norway including 25% VAT was 403,- NOK ($68). The cheapest LGA1156 socket board (what you need for a Core i7-860, confusing I know) was 599,- NOK ($101) and looks quite comparable. Of course it wouldn't make any sense to pair a high end processor with a low-end mobo, but the difference is not $100. Maybe $50 if you spend $100 on the AMD and $150 on the Intel board.
But AMD provides the best performance for value. If you buy a 200euro amd you get the best bang for your buck. If you buy a 800 euro Intel you get more bang but pay more bucks per bang.
The Core i7-860 spanks everything AMD has at $280 @ newegg, there's only a few odd benchmarks AMDs $300 top six-core CPU wins. Then entire market from $250+ and up is Intel, Intel, Intel. The $100 market AMD wins, but their value gets worse the closer you come to the high end. You make it sounds like Intel only owns the Ferrari market, when in reality they own the whole $50,000+ car market.
Actually theft has more like brackets - pretty theft, grand theft etc. with various sub-varieties of their own, also if you do two petty thefts of 50 bars each you're likely to be charged with two counts instead of one. If you download ten songs one by one over time it's fairly analogous to the latter, I would say. Not that I agree with the law at all, but legally that does seem consistent.
The amounts have been adjusted several times but the structure of this section has been the same for a long time, long before P2P or even casual Internet piracy. You may notice it says works not copies - I could make 1000 copies and they still couldn't sue me for more than $150,000, unless they went for actual damages or pursued it under criminal law which must be proven beyond reasonable doubt among other things. What's beautiful for the MafiAA is that before where one person would create 1000 copies, now 1000 people make one copy each via P2P. The result is a thousand infringements and a thousand-fold increase in damages, even if the total number of copies stays at 1000.
I would imagine that the "all parts" only applies if you distribute it as one and it is their compilation, not your "my favorite songs". If you share a dozen songs, 12 infringements. If you share a zipped album, one infringement. Imagine a photo book, if you share the book that is one infringement. But sharing each photo would be one infringement each, as long as they're separate. That at least seem logical, as far as anything about copyright law is logical.
Least of all I liked the logic they seemed to use which was an awfully lot like "you should know nothing is free to share". It's like the MafiAA was handed a big "only CDs and DVDs and BluRays you buy in a store (or online store) is legal, everything you download for free is likely illegal" baseball bat to beat the market with. I hope the Supreme Court can see how incredibly destructive that logic would be.
Almost, actually. The reason is that BluRay actually has far more bandwidth than you need for full hd, as people have been investigating the relationship between resolution and bit rates and they've found that the ideal is around 0.2 bits/pixel.
Now a 2 hour movie = 120*60 in seconds * 24 fps * 1920*1080 pixels * 0.2 bits per pixel / 8 bits to a byte = ~9GB. To get the most out of BluRay you should actually have a 36GB 2160p video stream. They just increase the bitrate, fill up the disc and the picture becomes a little clearer but in a very inefficient way.
I haven't tested much the sreaming services (torrents FTW) but it certainly should be possible to stream HD at much less than 30Mbit/s. Good enough that you really have to look for the artifacts to notice.
Or you expect me to believe that the game you bought (dubious claim) ten years ago (WIN 98) actually plays on your Win 7 machine, provided you still have the CD for it?
Dude, you're just being an ass. The oldest game I've played in the last year is a buddy of mine who has a working original Commodore 64 where we played Bubble Bobble from cassette that came out in 1986. Hell yes you can make 10 year old games work, and it's a lot more likely that a game I buy today is playable in 2020 than it was looking backwards.
And the revolution already came and is called the Internet. I've started to not care about ACTA and how it'll mandate capital punishment for file sharers. The bird has flown, the horse has left the barn, the cat is out of the bag, time can not be turned back. They can just make copyright infinity - 1 day already and I still won't care. I still won't think it's wrong. So they can shut down Wikileaks, will it really matter? I mean seriously, in how many kazillion copies is the HDCP master key now? We could do the same with anything wikileaks wanted to publish, there's no way they can win over a huge number of people spreading it over a huge number of channels. They can try legislating away reality and reality will laugh at them.
Their copyright == theft campaign is a huge failure. Despite the Pirate Party not making a good election, the percentage of Swedes who think so is down to 30%, down from 38% last year. They've lost 8% of the public opinion in one year. There's not been a single round of mass copyright lawsuits, nobody wants to take another shot at taking down The Pirate Bay, they get services like free Voddler that is very close to a giveaway. They're not even in fight mode anymore, they're in damage control mode so it doesn't spark the copyright revolution and they can keep making money in the rest of the world. It's really too bad that the Swedes don't have a public referendum system like in Switzerland, or it would already have happened.
Desktop users: Do the boring, non-innovative but important things stable and robust. Desktop developers: We want to do the innovative, flashy prototype code which looks cool.
Sometimes I'm really, really glad Linux has its roots in the server world. Everything from X and up seems to be written to a much lower bar of quality, if it had been the same all the way down I'm not sure I'd be using it.
Funny, I've used both sqlite and postgres extensively but I certainly don't look down on sqlite. I might look down on the DBA who tried using it where it really doesn't fit and you want the full workhorse database, but for being a single-threaded (sqlite does multi-threading but there's some huge locks), low-complexity database (= need for triggers and language bindings) embedded in an application then sqlite wins with flying colors.
If they took down the public torrent sites, the next step would be putting the search and magnet links on TOR, I2P or something like that. It's not ready for carrying the bulk downloads, but it would suffice to bootstrap the process. Besides, Google with "filetype:torrent" would also need to be shut down...
Well, as this demonstrates only 0.7% of Swedish people (the land of pirates) think copyright infringement should be lawful. The rest 99.3% think it should stay illegal.
Good troll, down boy. The actual number is 30% (swedish source) who think it should be illegal last year, down from 38% in 2008. The majority has wanted to legalize it since 2006 or so. It's simply just not a big enough part of ordinary teenager's lives, there has not been the kind of mass copyright lawsuits you've seen in the US. If they tried, copyright law in Sweden would change so fast the copyright industry wouldn't know what hit them.
I think he was talking about the Pirate Party's own effort, in his own words from the Swedish newsletter:
Så sett var det mycket enklare 2009, när allt vi behövde göra var att sitta still i båten och riskminimera; då kom valet direkt på debatter om FRA, Ipred och The Pirate Bay-rättegången som avlöst varandra, och med mätningar som låg konstant över 6% var det bara att hålla rodret stilla.
"In that respect it was much easier in 2009, when all we needed to do was keep the boat steady and risk minimize; Then the election came directly on debates about FRA, Ipred and The Pirate Bay trial that took turns, and with polls that were constantly above 6% it was just to keep the rudder quiet."
They did put in more effort than in the 2009 EU elections, they just got a fraction of a fraction of the attention compared to last year. They had more press releases, gave more interviews, did more election gigs but was given much, much less space in dark corners of the politics section. And the only time they did manage to get press attention was not in a good way due to a poorly worded election manifest.
They'll say it as an election promise, then throw it on the junk heap when negotiating with the rest of the red block. They might be a source of drift voters if the Pirate Party gets close to 4% but nothing will happen on its own.
Just because the arguments have been repeated a thousand times, does not make the voters convinced. In fact, I think some of the more embarrassing moments have been when PP have been asked about their policy on something and pulled some really stretch logic to somehow connect one argument to their principles, because really they have no policy in that area. The party has been highly focused on causes and haven't really wanted a deeper ideology because they fear many would disagree with it.
Maybe some thing like "the digital party" or "the free information party" or maybe pull a trick out of the other side's hat and choose something like "the information protection party" or "cultural preservation party."
"The digital party" would make the party sound even narrower than they are. They may not have been heard, but they have a broader idea of civil rights and freedoms outside the Internet. "The free information party" only sounds like a watered down politically correct version of the pirate party. "The information protection party" sounds just wrong, because they're more an information liberation party. "Cultural preservation party" sounds like a spin-off of the racist SD. "Preserve Swedish culture".
The problem is not the name, the challenge is that they have a very limited program and is hoping to pull voters from both sides of the politics. They are trying the "red or blue is equal, vote for us" tactic but it's not really succeeding. Particularly in this election where there's been a huge "SD (nationalistic right-wing party) vs everyone" debate that has stolen the attention. However, if they go broader they risk alienating people that won't agree with the broadening. Not to mention that if they "sell" themselves to one side they have much less bargaining power. Still, they do have to rethink their strategy now. I doubt the name will change though.
or sudo, but you'll have to all the way down to the description:
DESCRIPTION
sudo allows a permitted user to execute a command as the superuser or another user
Outside geek circles "root" doesn't mean anything, but superuser is at least somewhat meaningful. Though most don't actually deal with it at all anymore, they're in a sudo group so they only ever user their account and some applications ask them to reenter their password to become administrators. To most people "root" is more like "system" than "superuser" to most people these days.
Well, the problem is that it doesn't really apply to compressed data. Compression schemes try packing things as efficiently as possible, so there's relatively little you can add without making it obvious the compression is tampered with. You could try embedding it as some sort of watermark into the photo/video before compression, but that too is difficult and won't hide very much. And most people don't carry tons of BMPs, WAVs and uncompressed AVIs..
So far it seems most people agree the best way to hide encrypted data is within other encrypted data. You don't have to be super-paranoid to use encryption, my last workplace used full disk encryption and I don't think anyone can seriously accuse you of anything if you just say that "I feared by computer would get stolen, and I could be exposed to identity theft or have my family photos posted online" or something like that.
The best solutions I have seen work like this: 1) If you enter both your "normal" password and your "secret password" => access to the normal disk and it'll seamlessly move around any secret data as long as there is room. 2) If you enter only your "secret" password => access to your secret data. 3) If you're under duress, you give just the "normal" password and you get just the normal disk. Your hidden data can get overwritten since the encryption software doesn't know about it, but there's no way to prove that there is a secret container or a secret password.
Actually for something emulating a block device you would not use a CBC mode since you need to decrypt the entire chain from the beginning to get to a piece of data. Usually you use some kind of block offset mixed into the IV so the same data stored in block 12543 and block 46424 look different. But yes I agree that post was inaccurate, if you use ECB mode then there's plenty patterns.
As far as I know finding patterns in the output is tightly linked to reducing the number of possible keys, so good encryption algorithms should not create patterns. Of course if your encryption software writes some kind of header - which wouldn't affect the security of the encrypted contents - then it will be obvious to anyone looking that you have an encrypted container. So this is 99% about implementation and 1% about encryption algorithms.
Slashdot Mirror
2- The AMD motherboards are cheaper, you can easily save at least $100 on that.
The chepest AM3 socket board I could find here in Norway including 25% VAT was 403,- NOK ($68). The cheapest LGA1156 socket board (what you need for a Core i7-860, confusing I know) was 599,- NOK ($101) and looks quite comparable. Of course it wouldn't make any sense to pair a high end processor with a low-end mobo, but the difference is not $100. Maybe $50 if you spend $100 on the AMD and $150 on the Intel board.
But AMD provides the best performance for value. If you buy a 200euro amd you get the best bang for your buck. If you buy a 800 euro Intel you get more bang but pay more bucks per bang.
The Core i7-860 spanks everything AMD has at $280 @ newegg, there's only a few odd benchmarks AMDs $300 top six-core CPU wins. Then entire market from $250+ and up is Intel, Intel, Intel. The $100 market AMD wins, but their value gets worse the closer you come to the high end. You make it sounds like Intel only owns the Ferrari market, when in reality they own the whole $50,000+ car market.
Actually theft has more like brackets - pretty theft, grand theft etc. with various sub-varieties of their own, also if you do two petty thefts of 50 bars each you're likely to be charged with two counts instead of one. If you download ten songs one by one over time it's fairly analogous to the latter, I would say. Not that I agree with the law at all, but legally that does seem consistent.
Meh, if I was a parent then "no download new music for your iPod" would be way down on that list of things to teach.
Unfortunately idiots carry a natural immunity to it. Oh you might strike them with it, but they don't even realize they've been hit.
The amounts have been adjusted several times but the structure of this section has been the same for a long time, long before P2P or even casual Internet piracy. You may notice it says works not copies - I could make 1000 copies and they still couldn't sue me for more than $150,000, unless they went for actual damages or pursued it under criminal law which must be proven beyond reasonable doubt among other things. What's beautiful for the MafiAA is that before where one person would create 1000 copies, now 1000 people make one copy each via P2P. The result is a thousand infringements and a thousand-fold increase in damages, even if the total number of copies stays at 1000.
I would imagine that the "all parts" only applies if you distribute it as one and it is their compilation, not your "my favorite songs". If you share a dozen songs, 12 infringements. If you share a zipped album, one infringement. Imagine a photo book, if you share the book that is one infringement. But sharing each photo would be one infringement each, as long as they're separate. That at least seem logical, as far as anything about copyright law is logical.
Least of all I liked the logic they seemed to use which was an awfully lot like "you should know nothing is free to share". It's like the MafiAA was handed a big "only CDs and DVDs and BluRays you buy in a store (or online store) is legal, everything you download for free is likely illegal" baseball bat to beat the market with. I hope the Supreme Court can see how incredibly destructive that logic would be.
Almost, actually. The reason is that BluRay actually has far more bandwidth than you need for full hd, as people have been investigating the relationship between resolution and bit rates and they've found that the ideal is around 0.2 bits/pixel.
Now a 2 hour movie = 120*60 in seconds * 24 fps * 1920*1080 pixels * 0.2 bits per pixel / 8 bits to a byte = ~9GB. To get the most out of BluRay you should actually have a 36GB 2160p video stream. They just increase the bitrate, fill up the disc and the picture becomes a little clearer but in a very inefficient way.
I haven't tested much the sreaming services (torrents FTW) but it certainly should be possible to stream HD at much less than 30Mbit/s. Good enough that you really have to look for the artifacts to notice.
Or you expect me to believe that the game you bought (dubious claim) ten years ago (WIN 98) actually plays on your Win 7 machine, provided you still have the CD for it?
Dude, you're just being an ass. The oldest game I've played in the last year is a buddy of mine who has a working original Commodore 64 where we played Bubble Bobble from cassette that came out in 1986. Hell yes you can make 10 year old games work, and it's a lot more likely that a game I buy today is playable in 2020 than it was looking backwards.
And the revolution already came and is called the Internet. I've started to not care about ACTA and how it'll mandate capital punishment for file sharers. The bird has flown, the horse has left the barn, the cat is out of the bag, time can not be turned back. They can just make copyright infinity - 1 day already and I still won't care. I still won't think it's wrong. So they can shut down Wikileaks, will it really matter? I mean seriously, in how many kazillion copies is the HDCP master key now? We could do the same with anything wikileaks wanted to publish, there's no way they can win over a huge number of people spreading it over a huge number of channels. They can try legislating away reality and reality will laugh at them.
Their copyright == theft campaign is a huge failure. Despite the Pirate Party not making a good election, the percentage of Swedes who think so is down to 30%, down from 38% last year. They've lost 8% of the public opinion in one year. There's not been a single round of mass copyright lawsuits, nobody wants to take another shot at taking down The Pirate Bay, they get services like free Voddler that is very close to a giveaway. They're not even in fight mode anymore, they're in damage control mode so it doesn't spark the copyright revolution and they can keep making money in the rest of the world. It's really too bad that the Swedes don't have a public referendum system like in Switzerland, or it would already have happened.
So on a scale of 90-100, how many percent of this article is bullshit?
Desktop users: Do the boring, non-innovative but important things stable and robust.
Desktop developers: We want to do the innovative, flashy prototype code which looks cool.
Sometimes I'm really, really glad Linux has its roots in the server world. Everything from X and up seems to be written to a much lower bar of quality, if it had been the same all the way down I'm not sure I'd be using it.
Funny, I've used both sqlite and postgres extensively but I certainly don't look down on sqlite. I might look down on the DBA who tried using it where it really doesn't fit and you want the full workhorse database, but for being a single-threaded (sqlite does multi-threading but there's some huge locks), low-complexity database (= need for triggers and language bindings) embedded in an application then sqlite wins with flying colors.
If they took down the public torrent sites, the next step would be putting the search and magnet links on TOR, I2P or something like that. It's not ready for carrying the bulk downloads, but it would suffice to bootstrap the process. Besides, Google with "filetype:torrent" would also need to be shut down...
Given a free enough market, corporations won't become tyrannical because of the fact that the market balances itself out.
Please don't spread ideological fanaticism as fact. It's getting rather hard for you to see the world with those blinds on.
Well, as this demonstrates only 0.7% of Swedish people (the land of pirates) think copyright infringement should be lawful. The rest 99.3% think it should stay illegal.
Good troll, down boy. The actual number is 30% (swedish source) who think it should be illegal last year, down from 38% in 2008. The majority has wanted to legalize it since 2006 or so. It's simply just not a big enough part of ordinary teenager's lives, there has not been the kind of mass copyright lawsuits you've seen in the US. If they tried, copyright law in Sweden would change so fast the copyright industry wouldn't know what hit them.
I think he was talking about the Pirate Party's own effort, in his own words from the Swedish newsletter:
Så sett var det mycket enklare 2009, när allt vi behövde göra var att sitta still i båten och riskminimera; då kom valet direkt på debatter om FRA, Ipred och The Pirate Bay-rättegången som avlöst varandra, och med mätningar som låg konstant över 6% var det bara att hålla rodret stilla.
"In that respect it was much easier in 2009, when all we needed to do was keep the boat steady and risk minimize; Then the election came directly on debates about FRA, Ipred and The Pirate Bay trial that took turns, and with polls that were constantly above 6% it was just to keep the rudder quiet."
They did put in more effort than in the 2009 EU elections, they just got a fraction of a fraction of the attention compared to last year. They had more press releases, gave more interviews, did more election gigs but was given much, much less space in dark corners of the politics section. And the only time they did manage to get press attention was not in a good way due to a poorly worded election manifest.
They'll say it as an election promise, then throw it on the junk heap when negotiating with the rest of the red block. They might be a source of drift voters if the Pirate Party gets close to 4% but nothing will happen on its own.
Just because the arguments have been repeated a thousand times, does not make the voters convinced. In fact, I think some of the more embarrassing moments have been when PP have been asked about their policy on something and pulled some really stretch logic to somehow connect one argument to their principles, because really they have no policy in that area. The party has been highly focused on causes and haven't really wanted a deeper ideology because they fear many would disagree with it.
Maybe some thing like "the digital party" or "the free information party" or maybe pull a trick out of the other side's hat and choose something like "the information protection party" or "cultural preservation party."
"The digital party" would make the party sound even narrower than they are. They may not have been heard, but they have a broader idea of civil rights and freedoms outside the Internet.
"The free information party" only sounds like a watered down politically correct version of the pirate party.
"The information protection party" sounds just wrong, because they're more an information liberation party.
"Cultural preservation party" sounds like a spin-off of the racist SD. "Preserve Swedish culture".
The problem is not the name, the challenge is that they have a very limited program and is hoping to pull voters from both sides of the politics. They are trying the "red or blue is equal, vote for us" tactic but it's not really succeeding. Particularly in this election where there's been a huge "SD (nationalistic right-wing party) vs everyone" debate that has stolen the attention. However, if they go broader they risk alienating people that won't agree with the broadening. Not to mention that if they "sell" themselves to one side they have much less bargaining power. Still, they do have to rethink their strategy now. I doubt the name will change though.
sounds like a plan to me, burning record stores, MPAA/RIAA executives crusified or burned at the stake.. where do i sign up?
I think you've misidentified who the establishment was and who died. It's far more likely you'll be burned as a copywitch than the other way around.
try for example "man su":
NAME
su - change user ID or become superuser
or sudo, but you'll have to all the way down to the description:
DESCRIPTION
sudo allows a permitted user to execute a command as the superuser or another user
Outside geek circles "root" doesn't mean anything, but superuser is at least somewhat meaningful. Though most don't actually deal with it at all anymore, they're in a sudo group so they only ever user their account and some applications ask them to reenter their password to become administrators. To most people "root" is more like "system" than "superuser" to most people these days.
Well, the problem is that it doesn't really apply to compressed data. Compression schemes try packing things as efficiently as possible, so there's relatively little you can add without making it obvious the compression is tampered with. You could try embedding it as some sort of watermark into the photo/video before compression, but that too is difficult and won't hide very much. And most people don't carry tons of BMPs, WAVs and uncompressed AVIs..
So far it seems most people agree the best way to hide encrypted data is within other encrypted data. You don't have to be super-paranoid to use encryption, my last workplace used full disk encryption and I don't think anyone can seriously accuse you of anything if you just say that "I feared by computer would get stolen, and I could be exposed to identity theft or have my family photos posted online" or something like that.
The best solutions I have seen work like this:
1) If you enter both your "normal" password and your "secret password" => access to the normal disk and it'll seamlessly move around any secret data as long as there is room.
2) If you enter only your "secret" password => access to your secret data.
3) If you're under duress, you give just the "normal" password and you get just the normal disk. Your hidden data can get overwritten since the encryption software doesn't know about it, but there's no way to prove that there is a secret container or a secret password.
Actually for something emulating a block device you would not use a CBC mode since you need to decrypt the entire chain from the beginning to get to a piece of data. Usually you use some kind of block offset mixed into the IV so the same data stored in block 12543 and block 46424 look different. But yes I agree that post was inaccurate, if you use ECB mode then there's plenty patterns.
As far as I know finding patterns in the output is tightly linked to reducing the number of possible keys, so good encryption algorithms should not create patterns. Of course if your encryption software writes some kind of header - which wouldn't affect the security of the encrypted contents - then it will be obvious to anyone looking that you have an encrypted container. So this is 99% about implementation and 1% about encryption algorithms.