Hmm. Well, the problem is that a network link is rather connection-oriented; it only encrypts stuff going from your machine to another specific one.
If you try to visit any other sites, as when web browsing, you're not using the secured link any more, so you have to negotiate a new one.
The main use for this type of technology is VPNs: two seperate buildings full of computers which want to be on the same network, but which want to use the internet (cheap) rather than a leased line (expensive). In that case, we simply plug one of these 7751 boards into the routers in each building, and tell the routers to encrypt when talking to each other. None of the users need know that they're being protected:).
Sure -- take a look at Hi/fn's customer lists (you might have to look into the press releases for info here, sorry); more and more of them are looking at and announcing DSL/cable scale routers.
This particular chip (Hi/fn 7751) was designed and tested to accelerate SSL, so I suspect it won't have a problem there. I've put a couple of million SSL packets through it (give or take a million, who's counting).
The sad part is, even in meta-moderation these mismoderated points won't be corrected. If they hate BSD while moderating, why would their friends who are meta-moderating be any different
Because metamoderation involves random selection rather than self-selection. Only people "interested" in BSD (or Hi/fn, or HW encryption) will be attracted to this story, and unfortunately there are simply more people negatively than positively interested right now. Hopefully, the random selection involved in metamoderation will result in a more "disinterested" (i.e. impartial) group of people.
3DES is not known to have exploitable weaknesses. If you have a choice between 3DES and anything else, the current choice is 3DES.
The problem is that nothing else is as well-explored; all of the "NSA-safe" algorithms are too new to have been properly dug through.
I personally like RC4 more than DES-type algorithms, but it's even less understood. Twofish is an impressive algorithm as well, but again, its review process has only started. When (if) it becomes AES, then it'll have enough attacks to make it worth considering.
Well, Hi/fn helped design Twofish (Doug Whiting is our CTO), one of the leading AES candidates, so although our current chips won't run AES:), there's no room for doubt that our future chips will be able to.
The chip they're using also accelerates DES, RC4, SHA-1, MD5, LZS, and MPPC. I wonder whether their driver handles all of that?
-Billy
P.S.: I'm not connected to any department at Hi/fn which would know these things for sure; I'm only using publicly available information, so your guess is as good as mine.
What do you mean, all my claims are factually incorrect? It's not April 1st anymore.
Every single thing I said was true. The Visor comes with 8M and an USB cradle; and companies have developed all of the things I listed. To deny this is to waste our time.
What do you _mean_ a IIIe offers the same stuff? It has six megs less memory -- two megs versus the Visor's eight.
And it's NOT true that nobody's developed anything for the port; they've developed Bluetooth, AirPort, modems, flash backup, general flash, a pager, two-way pagers, radio, a digital camera, MP3 players (one of which allows you to add up to 128M of RAM to the unit), and more.
These things have not only been developed, they've been demonstrated. It's true that they're not shipping, but claiming that they'll therefore never ship is royally stupid.
Oh, and you don't have to buy the cradle seperately; it comes with the unit. Always has. It uses USB, too, so it's a HECK of a lot faster than the Pilot's cradle.
Have you looked at the power requirements for even the weakest transmeta chip? It would burn through a battery in only a day. The Visor takes several days of continuous use to use up a pair of AAAs.
Transmeta is WAY cool, but it can't compete against the Palm yet.
Hey, this isn't right. "Starship Troopers" wasn't just about the fancy weaponry -- they should first establish a proposal investigating the social effects of limiting the franchise to veterans, or lashing as a replacement for imprisonment for certain offences.
Seriously, though, it IS funny to see that every single thing in that list came from Starship Troopers, and I don't think any suit-based thing mentioned in Starship Troopers was excluded. I really have to suspect that the whole idea for this particular suggestion originated from one person reading Starship Troopers for the first time.;-)
COOL.
-Billy
Um... Of course, I wonder what this will do to our warfare? It could make it worse... Or better. I'll have to ponder that. Of course, it wouldn't affect guerrila warfare.
I was expecting it to do what I had recalled it doing back when -- there used to be a Slashdot mode which would let you enter text without having to type all of the and
and so on, but would still let you enter formatting cues.
Anyhow, your reading can't possibly be correct -- "plain old text" is supposed to be the way to leave HTML tags as text.
I am an Atheist, but I suspect that this is the optimal religious view for many people.</i>
I am a Christian, and I think you're entirely right. Pardon my appeal to authority here;-), but: "True religion is this: to help the widow and orphan in their need." One very good definition of religion is "faith in action."
<i>There is actually an order of Anglican Priest who do not believe in God. They view religion as a social thing. I think we will find that religions like Judism which accept people being "cluturally Jewish but religiously Atheist/Agnostic" may have a real survival advnatage in the future. (Note: I am not Jewish, but I have many friends who it the above description)</i>
I don't think so, not really. Culture is fine, but as you yourself phrase it, different religions really are different. I admire a person who is unwilling to claim absolute truth; a creed which claims to be false, on the other hand, is not even worth looking at.
<i>"In this country, churches are the organizations that hold the community together"
This is just flat wrong. It is true in many places, but religion hardly provides the culture that many modern people need period.</i>
Correct. However, he wasn't talking about culture. Churches form a social fabric which serves two purposes: it provides a cultural philosophical basis and it defends against cultism.
The first purpose, providing a philosophical basis, allows even dissidents to express their views. Of course, this can be abused -- but so can any other construction involving people. the solution isn't to outlaw the construction (or kill the people), but rather for each and every one of us to continually work to make sure that the abuse is never, never repeated.
The second use, as a defence against cultism, is just as important: churches (of every kind) provide an open forum, where the views of a church can be openly discussed and debugged, and the views of individuals may be made clear (to themselves and others). Cultism occurs when a solitary group takes any philosophy and attempts to elaborate on it "secretly", without the peer review of the church. The result is most often obviously false, but is always socially false.
<i>Religion has not provided the "integrating" force needed to bond people of diffrent races and religions. Art, music, clubs, economics, food, sex, etc. provide far far more influence then religion.</i>
Don't know where you get that, quite simply. It's not true.
<i>scientists should realize that "religion has a much more important role in human destiny than science."
This is flat wrong too. The printing press has probable had more "tangible" influence then all of religious history combined, i.e. people who never invented religion would have used other social binding systems (as I mentioned before religion is justy one of many such systems), but without the printing press we would not have much of our current world.</i>
Including our current religions, of course. But that works both ways -- remember what the first book printed on the printing press was?
"People who had never invented religion," huh? Who would that be?
<i>BTW> [this is regarding my.sig] Russel was a mathematician and the quote below is a tautology (if you narow your definition of christian to include only people who do not believe moral progress is possible because God layed down all the rules). It is funny to see a mathematician make subtilly veiled tautological statments.:)</i>
Christian or not, I believe that no moral progress is possible (except as brought about by actual changes in people). No great moral teacher ever taught anything new; all they did was paraphrase and emphasise something we already knew. Anyone who taught "new" stuff was and remains a crackpot.
You actually can gen a system entirely from source using Debian. It's pretty cool -- and, of course, you get to choose from all of the nice Debian 'recommended' dependancies rather than just being restricted to the 'must-haves' which the other choices give you.
Not that BSD's system isn't cool. It's very much so.
Say, in BSD can you upgrade an entire system across versions while regenning it from source? That's not something I've ever been tempted to do in Debian (I'm happy with binaries when I'm doing full system upgrades), so I can't say that it matters;-), but I'm just curious.
I don't want to discourage or anything, but since court decisions are already open and capable of being modified by anyone with (a certain standard) education and experience, the law is already essentially open source. It's just that it takes a lot longer than a single case to fix -- a single court case is the equivalent of a single edit-compile-test-debug cycle, and nobody ever wrote a program with only one of those;-).
This digital millenium copyright act garbage really needs a good jury nullification, though. Now THAT would be quick.
Anyhow, I don't think a whole lot of unskilled but enthusiastic eyes are going to find anything worthwhile.
The Palm doesn't talk USB. The Visor, which is otherwise entirely Palm compatible, does talk USB, and has the hotsync speed to prove it.
The Visor definitely rocks, though. If only the company would commit to producing upgrades on the OS when the new color API comes out (shades of gray are fine).
Now, when are we going to get Fibrechannel (>1Gb) speeds on our hotsyncs?;-)
Corel is a b-grade company, that buys failed product lines from other b-grade companies.
An interesting point. I don't see them that way -- Wordperfect wasn't b-grade, merely late to support Windows. Corel Draw was excellent.
However, I certainly see your point -- whatever Corel's past products may have been, they certainly look like a bottomfeeder now. Perhaps that's because of their immense OEM distribution contracts, though.
Linux needs to fend these sorts of companies off vigorously.
I really have to disagree with that STRONGLY. Linux doesn't have to fend ANYONE off; Linux can't fend anyone off; and Linux shouldn't fend anyone off.
Linux doesn't have to fend them off because our reputation is in our coders and users.
Linux can't fend them off because Linux is free. They can use it if they want, and we'll even welcome them if they give back.
Linux shouldn't fend them off because they _are_ giving back.
Don't threaten, okay? Just ask. You had a good question, but this is just plain rude. An apology would serve you well.
Anyhow...
give us links for that stuff. I'm just a real programmer, not a CS wonk, and I haven't even heard of half of your buzzwords.
No problem.
RMMM doesn't matter (it's a detail of spiral development); look up Spiral Lifecycle Model in any decent SW engineering book. The closest one I have is "Rapid Development", and it does indeed discuss it.
Code Reviews are a formal SW engineering practice documented at Univ. Hawaii's page.
The Surgical Team model is one of the many memorable concepts discussed in Fred Brook's "Mythical Man Month". Read it. It's the #1 most recommended book by the Greats of CS and SW engineering.
Refactoring is part of XP, and is documented best in the book titled "Refactoring". I highly recommend it; serious programming stuff there, no fancy-pants process requirements.
XP is facinating because it tends to reduce the parasitic overhead of process. For example, no formal design documents are required with the exception of the user stories and the code.
No, these are not code reviews -- they don't produce the documentation which code reviews do, and the documentation they DO produce is intended to document the entire project, not only the code quality.
Code reviews are definitely cool, and with enough programmer mobility this would remove *some* of the need for code reviews. I would still want them, though; they provide another aspect of managability. I would also want to use RMMM reports with spiral lifecycle model. This also seems to combine nicely with a modified Surgical Team model.
Of course, all I've done is the Refactoring part of XP -- but it alone was enormously effective. I can't wait to start pulling in more and more pieces from XP, and eventually start combining it with other proven methodologies.
Slashdot Mirror
Hmm. Well, the problem is that a network link is rather connection-oriented; it only encrypts stuff going from your machine to another specific one.
:).
If you try to visit any other sites, as when web browsing, you're not using the secured link any more, so you have to negotiate a new one.
The main use for this type of technology is VPNs: two seperate buildings full of computers which want to be on the same network, but which want to use the internet (cheap) rather than a leased line (expensive). In that case, we simply plug one of these 7751 boards into the routers in each building, and tell the routers to encrypt when talking to each other. None of the users need know that they're being protected
-Billy
Sure -- take a look at Hi/fn's customer lists (you might have to look into the press releases for info here, sorry); more and more of them are looking at and announcing DSL/cable scale routers.
-Billy
This particular chip (Hi/fn 7751) was designed and tested to accelerate SSL, so I suspect it won't have a problem there. I've put a couple of million SSL packets through it (give or take a million, who's counting).
-Billy
The sad part is, even in meta-moderation these mismoderated points won't be corrected. If they hate BSD while moderating, why would their friends who are meta-moderating be any different
Because metamoderation involves random selection rather than self-selection. Only people "interested" in BSD (or Hi/fn, or HW encryption) will be attracted to this story, and unfortunately there are simply more people negatively than positively interested right now. Hopefully, the random selection involved in metamoderation will result in a more "disinterested" (i.e. impartial) group of people.
-Billy
3DES is not known to have exploitable weaknesses. If you have a choice between 3DES and anything else, the current choice is 3DES.
The problem is that nothing else is as well-explored; all of the "NSA-safe" algorithms are too new to have been properly dug through.
I personally like RC4 more than DES-type algorithms, but it's even less understood. Twofish is an impressive algorithm as well, but again, its review process has only started. When (if) it becomes AES, then it'll have enough attacks to make it worth considering.
-Billy
Well, Hi/fn helped design Twofish (Doug Whiting is our CTO), one of the leading AES candidates, so although our current chips won't run AES :), there's no room for doubt that our future chips will be able to.
The chip they're using also accelerates DES, RC4, SHA-1, MD5, LZS, and MPPC. I wonder whether their driver handles all of that?
-Billy
P.S.: I'm not connected to any department at Hi/fn which would know these things for sure; I'm only using publicly available information, so your guess is as good as mine.
What do you mean, all my claims are factually incorrect? It's not April 1st anymore.
Every single thing I said was true. The Visor comes with 8M and an USB cradle; and companies have developed all of the things I listed. To deny this is to waste our time.
-Billy
Good info. Also useful is the Palm Open Source area, att he Open Palm Group</a>; not many compilers, but a lot of good examples.
Also, Quartus Forth isn't open source, but there's a decent amount of open source stuff written for it, and it's easy to work with interactively.
-Billy
What do you _mean_ a IIIe offers the same stuff? It has six megs less memory -- two megs versus the Visor's eight.
And it's NOT true that nobody's developed anything for the port; they've developed Bluetooth, AirPort, modems, flash backup, general flash, a pager, two-way pagers, radio, a digital camera, MP3 players (one of which allows you to add up to 128M of RAM to the unit), and more.
These things have not only been developed, they've been demonstrated. It's true that they're not shipping, but claiming that they'll therefore never ship is royally stupid.
Oh, and you don't have to buy the cradle seperately; it comes with the unit. Always has. It uses USB, too, so it's a HECK of a lot faster than the Pilot's cradle.
-Billy
Have you looked at the power requirements for even the weakest transmeta chip? It would burn through a battery in only a day. The Visor takes several days of continuous use to use up a pair of AAAs.
Transmeta is WAY cool, but it can't compete against the Palm yet.
-Billy
I should post more often.
;-)
Naw.
Thanks for your help.
-Billy
Hey, this isn't right. "Starship Troopers" wasn't just about the fancy weaponry -- they should first establish a proposal investigating the social effects of limiting the franchise to veterans, or lashing as a replacement for imprisonment for certain offences.
;-)
Seriously, though, it IS funny to see that every single thing in that list came from Starship Troopers, and I don't think any suit-based thing mentioned in Starship Troopers was excluded. I really have to suspect that the whole idea for this particular suggestion originated from one person reading Starship Troopers for the first time.
COOL.
-Billy
Um... Of course, I wonder what this will do to our warfare? It could make it worse... Or better. I'll have to ponder that. Of course, it wouldn't affect guerrila warfare.
and
and so on, but would still let you enter formatting cues.
Anyhow, your reading can't possibly be correct -- "plain old text" is supposed to be the way to leave HTML tags as text.
Pardon the strange formatting above -- the extrans doesn't seem to be working anymore. Odd.
Well, memo to self: always preview before you post.
"To me, religion is a way of life, not a belief,"
;-), but: "True religion is this: to help the widow and orphan in their need." One very good definition of religion is "faith in action."
.sig] Russel was a mathematician and the quote below is a tautology (if you narow your definition of christian to include only people who do not believe moral progress is possible because God layed down all the rules). It is funny to see a mathematician make subtilly veiled tautological statments. :)</i>
I am an Atheist, but I suspect that this is the optimal religious view for many people.</i>
I am a Christian, and I think you're entirely right. Pardon my appeal to authority here
<i>There is actually an order of Anglican Priest who do not believe in God. They view religion as a social thing. I think we will find that religions like Judism which accept people being "cluturally Jewish but religiously Atheist/Agnostic" may have a real survival advnatage in the future. (Note: I am not Jewish, but I have many friends who it the above description)</i>
I don't think so, not really. Culture is fine, but as you yourself phrase it, different religions really are different. I admire a person who is unwilling to claim absolute truth; a creed which claims to be false, on the other hand, is not even worth looking at.
<i>"In this country, churches are the organizations that hold the community together"
This is just flat wrong. It is true in many places, but religion hardly provides the culture that many modern people need period.</i>
Correct. However, he wasn't talking about culture. Churches form a social fabric which serves two purposes: it provides a cultural philosophical basis and it defends against cultism.
The first purpose, providing a philosophical basis, allows even dissidents to express their views. Of course, this can be abused -- but so can any other construction involving people. the solution isn't to outlaw the construction (or kill the people), but rather for each and every one of us to continually work to make sure that the abuse is never, never repeated.
The second use, as a defence against cultism, is just as important: churches (of every kind) provide an open forum, where the views of a church can be openly discussed and debugged, and the views of individuals may be made clear (to themselves and others). Cultism occurs when a solitary group takes any philosophy and attempts to elaborate on it "secretly", without the peer review of the church. The result is most often obviously false, but is always socially false.
<i>Religion has not provided the "integrating" force needed to bond people of diffrent races and religions. Art, music, clubs, economics, food, sex, etc. provide far far more influence then religion.</i>
Don't know where you get that, quite simply. It's not true.
<i>scientists should realize that "religion has a much more important role in human destiny than science."
This is flat wrong too. The printing press has probable had more "tangible" influence then all of religious history combined, i.e. people who never invented religion would have used other social binding systems (as I mentioned before religion is justy one of many such systems), but without the printing press we would not have much of our current world.</i>
Including our current religions, of course. But that works both ways -- remember what the first book printed on the printing press was?
"People who had never invented religion," huh? Who would that be?
<i>BTW> [this is regarding my
Christian or not, I believe that no moral progress is possible (except as brought about by actual changes in people). No great moral teacher ever taught anything new; all they did was paraphrase and emphasise something we already knew. Anyone who taught "new" stuff was and remains a crackpot.
-Billy
No, the Athlon is NOT an implementation of the x86 hardware. Furthermore, neither is the x86 (at least anymore).
Ever since the K5 and Pentium Pro, the chips have shared nothing in common with the 8086 except the instruction set.
I agree with you otherwise, though. Code morphing and other hardware-assisted JIT techniques really do look like a major advantage.
-Billy
If you've ever found yourself wanting a third hand while soldering then you're probably not a hacker.
You know, that is a cool saying. Mainly because it's got SO many different interpretations, but also because almost all of them are SO false.
I'm sure you meant the last one I listed. I sorta like the other two.
-Billy
You actually can gen a system entirely from source using Debian. It's pretty cool -- and, of course, you get to choose from all of the nice Debian 'recommended' dependancies rather than just being restricted to the 'must-haves' which the other choices give you.
;-), but I'm just curious.
Not that BSD's system isn't cool. It's very much so.
Say, in BSD can you upgrade an entire system across versions while regenning it from source? That's not something I've ever been tempted to do in Debian (I'm happy with binaries when I'm doing full system upgrades), so I can't say that it matters
-Billy
I don't want to discourage or anything, but since court decisions are already open and capable of being modified by anyone with (a certain standard) education and experience, the law is already essentially open source. It's just that it takes a lot longer than a single case to fix -- a single court case is the equivalent of a single edit-compile-test-debug cycle, and nobody ever wrote a program with only one of those ;-).
This digital millenium copyright act garbage really needs a good jury nullification, though. Now THAT would be quick.
Anyhow, I don't think a whole lot of unskilled but enthusiastic eyes are going to find anything worthwhile.
-Billy
The Palm doesn't talk USB. The Visor, which is otherwise entirely Palm compatible, does talk USB, and has the hotsync speed to prove it.
;-)
The Visor definitely rocks, though. If only the company would commit to producing upgrades on the OS when the new color API comes out (shades of gray are fine).
Now, when are we going to get Fibrechannel (>1Gb) speeds on our hotsyncs?
-Billy
I'm glad to hear that -- I just noticed them as well, and suspect that they'll be my choice.
Can they handle direct deposit?
-Billy
Corel is a b-grade company, that buys failed product lines from other b-grade companies.
An interesting point. I don't see them that way -- Wordperfect wasn't b-grade, merely late to support Windows. Corel Draw was excellent.
However, I certainly see your point -- whatever Corel's past products may have been, they certainly look like a bottomfeeder now. Perhaps that's because of their immense OEM distribution contracts, though.
Linux needs to fend these sorts of companies off vigorously.
I really have to disagree with that STRONGLY. Linux doesn't have to fend ANYONE off; Linux can't fend anyone off; and Linux shouldn't fend anyone off.
Linux doesn't have to fend them off because our reputation is in our coders and users.
Linux can't fend them off because Linux is free. They can use it if they want, and we'll even welcome them if they give back.
Linux shouldn't fend them off because they _are_ giving back.
-Billy
If you don't want to be modded down, guy
Don't threaten, okay? Just ask. You had a good question, but this is just plain rude. An apology would serve you well.
Anyhow...
give us links for that stuff. I'm just a real programmer, not a CS wonk, and I haven't even heard of half of your buzzwords.
No problem.
RMMM doesn't matter (it's a detail of spiral development); look up Spiral Lifecycle Model in any decent SW engineering book. The closest one I have is "Rapid Development", and it does indeed discuss it.
Code Reviews are a formal SW engineering practice documented at Univ. Hawaii's page.
The Surgical Team model is one of the many memorable concepts discussed in Fred Brook's "Mythical Man Month". Read it. It's the #1 most recommended book by the Greats of CS and SW engineering.
Refactoring is part of XP, and is documented best in the book titled "Refactoring". I highly recommend it; serious programming stuff there, no fancy-pants process requirements.
XP is facinating because it tends to reduce the parasitic overhead of process. For example, no formal design documents are required with the exception of the user stories and the code.
-Billy
I'll vouch for BestBookBuys -- I generally use Amazon to look up reviews and do searches, then I copy the ISBN and paste it into bestbookbuys.
Saves money and time.
I'm not going to do any more reviews for Amazon, though; my reviews are now going to Fatbrain instead.
-Billy
No, these are not code reviews -- they don't produce the documentation which code reviews do, and the documentation they DO produce is intended to document the entire project, not only the code quality.
Code reviews are definitely cool, and with enough programmer mobility this would remove *some* of the need for code reviews. I would still want them, though; they provide another aspect of managability. I would also want to use RMMM reports with spiral lifecycle model. This also seems to combine nicely with a modified Surgical Team model.
Of course, all I've done is the Refactoring part of XP -- but it alone was enormously effective. I can't wait to start pulling in more and more pieces from XP, and eventually start combining it with other proven methodologies.
-Billy