Arbitrary perhaps, but not unmotivated. Big-endian of course has the obvious relation to how we write numbers. Little-endian has the advantage that if you are attempting to load a 1-byte value into a 2-byte register you can use the same offset (assuming the next byte is 0). This means casting an unsigned byte to a short to an int or back does not require any actual pointer fiddling.
1) There are only 3 non-overlapping channels in 802.11b.
This does seem particularly short-sighted. Why not 4? At least with 4 you can use the 4-colour theorem to guarantee lack of overlap on our approximately-planar surface of interest...
You should have no expectation of privacy in a public place.
Well, so much for stalking laws. Should the government be allowed to stalk anyone, just because it's technically feasible?
I maintain that you actually do have an expectation of privacy in a public place. It's obviously not the same sort of privacy as in your bedroom, but it doesn't mean you must expect to be intently stared at and those stares archived at all times either. Hell, people should not have to expect to have a secret text dossier listing their every move either; isn't that one of the criticisms mentioned over and over about totalitarian regimes?
Public/private is not a simple division any more than any other arbitrary pair of 'opposing' terms.
How did this post from an AC get elevated to +1 "interesting"? It's not interesting, it's a redundant troll.
That's it i'm sealing the windows, borrowing my 79 year old grandmothers oxygen tank, and filling the room with helium.
Feel free to patent this process. I think most people are unaware that oxygen tanks contain helium. You must've guessed from your grandmother's squeeky voice?
Only down-sides to this would be that helium doesn't conduct sound as well...
Yes, that's right, the only down-side is the change in sound quality. Well, at least once you've filled your sealed room with helium we won't see your stupid posts anymore.
Directionally finding a signal is trivial, and wireless pirating in public is going to be a blatant target for law enforcement.
Wire-full pirating is a blatant target for law enforcement now. Doesn't work when law enforcement has the crime accessible from their desk, certainly isn't going to work when they actually have to cruise the city looking for (very) local broadcasts...
All of these draconian rules will simply drive more and more people away from flying.
Yup. I recently started a job that requires some travel (at my option)----i've already decided that i will not be visiting the US. No, i am not a terrorist, though i have littered and jaywalked, so perhaps its just a matter of labelling.
Prior to America's "realisation" that they are the uber-country, i was already frequently targetted whenever crossing the border (guess i look different). The prospect of this harassment being amplified has essentially eliminated any desire i have to fly (particularly to the US).
The american obsession with making people naked for no reason and sticking their fingers in other peoples bum-holes can find other victims, thank you (just how many guns do they find in people's ani anyway?).
Realistically, these issues would never come about if the people making the laws had to actually live by them. But i suppose their tracking system will also be able to identify congresspeople as those above all suspicion.
I dont buy the economic theory either, its completely moral and social problem, otherwise the great depression would have been the most violent era in US history...
A mass economic downturn is a very different thing from a local economic disparity.
Nobody forced him to obtain the previous semester's solutions. He had to go to the trouble of finding someone who had taken the course from me before, and convincing them to let him have their copy of my solutions. [emphasis mine]
So, let me get this straight---you gave out solutions in one term. Next term you assigned the exact same question, and then you were surprised to find someone had found your old solutions? Is this your first year teaching?
Of course students will find your old solutions! You've put a jar of honey in front of winnie the pooh, and told him not to touch it---what do you think he'll do?
Unless you're out to make some sort of point, it sort of behooves you to make at least some effort to ensure that cheating is not utterly trivial. And finding notes/documents from the same course in the previous term is indeed trivial. If you insist on re-using a question, particularly after a short interval like one term, don't give out the answer. Better yet, make up new questions (surely you could come up with another order-of-magnitude estimation problem!)
BTW: Students i expect treat the text in your syllabus on this issue with the same sort of reverence with which everyone treats the FBI warnings on videos. You would need to be emphasizing your no-external-sources condition over and over during the term to have any hope of making it stick.
Dunno if it reduces your legal rights, but putting cameras in public places has more of an impact than just catching more criminals.
One-way observation is an expression of control; it is a social communication. People demonstrate dominion over others through observational dominance. Cameras in public places are continuous reminders that you are a subject of the state, and subservient to its whims. There's a reason why most people associate continuous surveillance with totalitarianism.
Most people do things they'd rather not have others see. Not all of these can be done in the home. Note that while it is possible that even without cameras you are observed at almost any point outside, it is less likely, and the audience is certain to be far smaller.
Beyond embarassing actions, it is difficult to live without breaking one law or another at some time. Surely you've jay-walked? Littered? Walked home intoxicated? Put our your garbage before 5pm? Expect a court summons in the mail...
Potential for abuse is great. Ever seen how security guards use the cameras at malls? Do you enjoy being stalked? Once you've scared away all the pickpockets and muggers, what 'criminals' do you target in order to justify your cameras?
Ever had a stranger stare at you for a significant length of time? Uncomfortable isn't it? Whether it affects their 'rights' or not, people do not like to be continually observed---it is fundamentally irritating and hostile.
These are all quality of life kinds of things. How regulated do you want your life to be?
On the bright side, perhaps they could identify police/government abuses, ala Rodney King --- oh, wait, guess who'll own the videotapes...
Re:A crutch for the weak-minded?
on
God's Debris
·
· Score: 1
Here are some of the more famous "weak minds" that believed in God:
It is indeed comforting to us lesser mortals to know that even the smartest minds have a little bit of stupid in them.
Why ? It make no sense to me. If Scarfo did the encryption/decryption while he was online the KeyLogger would be useless.
Actually, that's not the sense i got from it.
They certainly suggest that key logging doesn't occur when the modem is active, but then in section 7 (page 7) they also describe how an active modem doesn't necessarily imply communication is actually occurring, and how opportunites for key-collection might be missed if he's connected to AOL in one window and using PGP in another. Other components of the KLS were then used to "complement" the keystroke capturing part to "address potential passphrase collection shortfalls."
End result: most Phd students at this only had 1 or 2 publications before their thesis, whereas in neighboring labs they totalled 50 or more...
I suppose it depends on the field, but if you're churning out 50+ papers in the time it takes to do your PhD, you've either hit the motherlode of all research topics, you're Erdos, or more likely:
you're just rehashing the same thing over and over
you're name is on papers you had little to do with.
you've managed to find 50 journals that will publish just about anything
You mean as oppposed to having natural gas piped into their home that would fill the house with gas if the pilot light just happened to go out while you on vacation?
Most pilot lights on gas appliances have a thermocouple that will shut off the gas supply if the flame goes out.
Of course the last gas stove i used didn't seem to have this feature (though it was quite old)...
Hm... I thought there was already an international treaty [greaterearth.org] against putting commercial messages on the Moon.
Can you point out the exact article/paragraph forbidding commercial activity? The closest i can find is Article 7, paragraph 1, which talks about depositing garbage:
In exploring and using the moon, States Parties shall take measures to prevent the disruption of the existing balance of its environment, whether by introducing adverse changes in that environment, by its harmful contamination through the introduction of extra-environmental matter or otherwise. States Parties shall also take measures to avoid harmfully affecting the environment of the earth through the introduction of extraterrestrial matter or otherwise.
but whether business cards fall into that category is not clear...
I like the way everyone is trying to use the current situation to push their own agenda; it proves little has actually changed.
Since it apparently escaped you, let me point out the blatant flaw in your argument: encryption does not kill people. If an elementary school child steals your encryption technology they cannot use it to shoot their teachers or fellow classmates. If you forget to lock up your computer, your toddler will not accidentally blow a hole in themselves or you. No one will ever accost you in a public park wielding a copy of PGP demanding your money or they will encrypt you.
There is a distinction between that which can harm/kill immediately, and that which could, maybe indirectly assist in the planning. The latter are many and arbitrarily tenuous, while the former is direct and obvious.
There really wont be any impact on the animal life in the area if this site goes up. I have a relative that worked on the North Slope for
many years in the employ of the oil corp. While he was there he filmed the wild life and the effect that the oil facilitied had on them as
well as human presence.
Either you are very young(/naive), or this is a troll. I'll assume the former.
Just because there are a few hours of video showing caribou ignoring some unmoving pipes doesn't mean that there is no impact: some changes take longer to show up, and some changes depend on particular, perhaps unlikely but nevertheless not impossible circumstances (eg errors). Did your relative also film the wildlife happily enjoying an oil spill? What about the air pollution? Physical barriers? Note that 4 hooved limbs are not conducive to scaling fences or climbing over pipelines, nor do all creatures know enough to avoid vehicles/roads. They do not know to not eat that rusty nail, or that taking refuge near that pleasantly warm high-voltage transformer may not be a good idea, or that that coolant leak is not a tasty treat. Animals also do not complain that their children are getting more asthmatic, or that pollution has reduced their chances of conceiving, etc etc etc.
That may not be the best articulation of the idea, but you have a very important point:
What is ultimately needed is a PERSONAL INFORMATION BILL OF RIGHTS that essentially confers real property rights
upon the information about ME to ME. I then control transfer and possesion. I could even monetize it if I wished.
That idea has been swimming in my head for some time. Why do we not control our own information? In the electronic world i don't seem to 'own' anything, not even myself. Yet 'ownership' is key in almost every aspect of social interaction and regulation. We should all own our own information; it is then ours to do with as we see fit. The act of using or gathering information about you without your consent then constitutes 'theft',
The release of about 600 pages in early October revealed previously
unknown details about the system, including Carnivore's place in a trinity
of programs -- alongside "Packeteer" and "Coolminer" -- known
collectively as the "DragonWare suite."
The FBI is the first government organization to realize that PDF files with black bars overlaid on sensitive information isn't
effective.
Neither is ink on normal text; depending
on the resolution of the document they
actually have there's surely the possibility of some
vestigial remnant of the original text even
under the darkest blackout ink.
But i expect they've thought about that,
and these are faxes or photocopies of the
censored texts, diluting the resolution
beyond recovery....
there's an association of market research companies, here that will give
you a list of members
As far as i could tell their list is available to members only, and
membership is not free (and presumably only
for marketing research companies anyway).
You can complain about a company not upholding
their standards, but only if that company is
a member---i don't see anywhere on their site
where you can query whether a company is a
member or not.
Perhaps they are helpful via email, but their
website seems of little value.
Something like, the password for the Library computres was library. If the school really doesn't want kids getting into stuff,
then why not make the passwords harder? I know where I went to college a while ago, and had access to some system
administration things, the passwords were very eays. Why do school's not choose harder passwords? Do they not care about
security?
You've stumbled upon the weakest link in the
security chain. Doesn't matter how clever
the algorithm is,
the basic problem is that people are stupid.
They simply do not want to memorize passwords,
nor invest any effort in creating good ones.
Passwords are often one or more of:
ridiculously obvious
used extensively (so if you know one, you
know them all)
reused forever
written down
based on an obvious algorithm
Of course part of the problem is the solution:
cryptic passwords or requiring frequent changes
tends to cause people to write them down or
use an obvious algorithm since
they then have trouble remembering them. Shared
passwords have the added problem of having to
re-share each time it changes, and the
difficulty in trying to communicate uncommon
strings (which tends to result in them being
written down).
And no, this is not a "trust" issue. People
have a similar lackluster security attitude
with respect to their bank/credit card PIN numbers,
their housekeys, etc.
Thought i'd see how much Chapters was selling it
for (in impoverished CAD). Mysteriously, i find
under the description of that book a review
reportedly by one "Jeff Michaels from Markham, ON, Canada" which contains the verbatim text from the
second paragraph and a good chunk of the text from
the first paragraph under What's Good.
Here's the www.chapters.ca page. Scroll down a bit to see reader reviews.
Slashdot Mirror
It is indeed a bit misleading. I think i found the entire thing, and it's 81 pages long.
That is a masters dissertation? Fuck me, I wish I could have written my dissertation as a couple of pages of HTML.
You must've missed this sentence on their page:
The following are selected samples of my research results.
Byte ordering strikes me as rather arbitrary.
Arbitrary perhaps, but not unmotivated. Big-endian of course has the obvious relation to how we write numbers. Little-endian has the advantage that if you are attempting to load a 1-byte value into a 2-byte register you can use the same offset (assuming the next byte is 0). This means casting an unsigned byte to a short to an int or back does not require any actual pointer fiddling.
Now, back to your regular program...
1) There are only 3 non-overlapping channels in 802.11b.
This does seem particularly short-sighted. Why not 4? At least with 4 you can use the 4-colour theorem to guarantee lack of overlap on our approximately-planar surface of interest...
Seems a little odd to release a document of 'predictions', copyright 2002 yet containing 'predictions' for 2001.
Though it does seem like an excellent source of Weekly World News headlines...
You should have no expectation of privacy in a public place.
Well, so much for stalking laws. Should the government be allowed to stalk anyone, just because it's technically feasible?
I maintain that you actually do have an expectation of privacy in a public place. It's obviously not the same sort of privacy as in your bedroom, but it doesn't mean you must expect to be intently stared at and those stares archived at all times either. Hell, people should not have to expect to have a secret text dossier listing their every move either; isn't that one of the criticisms mentioned over and over about totalitarian regimes?
Public/private is not a simple division any more than any other arbitrary pair of 'opposing' terms.
How did this post from an AC get elevated to +1 "interesting"? It's not interesting, it's a redundant troll.
That's it i'm sealing the windows, borrowing my 79 year old grandmothers oxygen tank, and filling the room with helium.
Feel free to patent this process. I think most people are unaware that oxygen tanks contain helium. You must've guessed from your grandmother's squeeky voice?
Only down-sides to this would be that helium doesn't conduct sound as well...
Yes, that's right, the only down-side is the change in sound quality. Well, at least once you've filled your sealed room with helium we won't see your stupid posts anymore.
Directionally finding a signal is trivial, and wireless pirating in public is going to be a blatant target for law enforcement.
Wire-full pirating is a blatant target for law enforcement now. Doesn't work when law enforcement has the crime accessible from their desk, certainly isn't going to work when they actually have to cruise the city looking for (very) local broadcasts...
All of these draconian rules will simply drive more and more people away from flying.
Yup. I recently started a job that requires some travel (at my option)----i've already decided that i will not be visiting the US. No, i am not a terrorist, though i have littered and jaywalked, so perhaps its just a matter of labelling.
Prior to America's "realisation" that they are the uber-country, i was already frequently targetted whenever crossing the border (guess i look different). The prospect of this harassment being amplified has essentially eliminated any desire i have to fly (particularly to the US).
The american obsession with making people naked for no reason and sticking their fingers in other peoples bum-holes can find other victims, thank you (just how many guns do they find in people's ani anyway?).
Realistically, these issues would never come about if the people making the laws had to actually live by them. But i suppose their tracking system will also be able to identify congresspeople as those above all suspicion.
I dont buy the economic theory either, its completely moral and social problem, otherwise the great depression would have been the most violent era in US history...
A mass economic downturn is a very different thing from a local economic disparity.
So, let me get this straight---you gave out solutions in one term. Next term you assigned the exact same question, and then you were surprised to find someone had found your old solutions? Is this your first year teaching?
Of course students will find your old solutions! You've put a jar of honey in front of winnie the pooh, and told him not to touch it---what do you think he'll do?
Unless you're out to make some sort of point, it sort of behooves you to make at least some effort to ensure that cheating is not utterly trivial. And finding notes/documents from the same course in the previous term is indeed trivial. If you insist on re-using a question, particularly after a short interval like one term, don't give out the answer. Better yet, make up new questions (surely you could come up with another order-of-magnitude estimation problem!)
BTW: Students i expect treat the text in your syllabus on this issue with the same sort of reverence with which everyone treats the FBI warnings on videos. You would need to be emphasizing your no-external-sources condition over and over during the term to have any hope of making it stick.
Dunno if it reduces your legal rights, but putting cameras in public places has more of an impact than just catching more criminals.
One-way observation is an expression of control; it is a social communication. People demonstrate dominion over others through observational dominance. Cameras in public places are continuous reminders that you are a subject of the state, and subservient to its whims. There's a reason why most people associate continuous surveillance with totalitarianism.
Most people do things they'd rather not have others see. Not all of these can be done in the home. Note that while it is possible that even without cameras you are observed at almost any point outside, it is less likely, and the audience is certain to be far smaller.
Beyond embarassing actions, it is difficult to live without breaking one law or another at some time. Surely you've jay-walked? Littered? Walked home intoxicated? Put our your garbage before 5pm? Expect a court summons in the mail...
Potential for abuse is great. Ever seen how security guards use the cameras at malls? Do you enjoy being stalked? Once you've scared away all the pickpockets and muggers, what 'criminals' do you target in order to justify your cameras?
Ever had a stranger stare at you for a significant length of time? Uncomfortable isn't it? Whether it affects their 'rights' or not, people do not like to be continually observed---it is fundamentally irritating and hostile.
These are all quality of life kinds of things. How regulated do you want your life to be?
On the bright side, perhaps they could identify police/government abuses, ala Rodney King --- oh, wait, guess who'll own the videotapes...
Here are some of the more famous "weak minds" that believed in God:
It is indeed comforting to us lesser mortals to know that even the smartest minds have a little bit of stupid in them.
Why ? It make no sense to me. If Scarfo did the encryption/decryption while he was online the KeyLogger would be useless.
Actually, that's not the sense i got from it.
They certainly suggest that key logging doesn't occur when the modem is active, but then in section 7 (page 7) they also describe how an active modem doesn't necessarily imply communication is actually occurring, and how opportunites for key-collection might be missed if he's connected to AOL in one window and using PGP in another. Other components of the KLS were then used to "complement" the keystroke capturing part to "address potential passphrase collection shortfalls."
I suppose it depends on the field, but if you're churning out 50+ papers in the time it takes to do your PhD, you've either hit the motherlode of all research topics, you're Erdos, or more likely:
You mean as oppposed to having natural gas piped into their home that would fill the house with gas if the pilot light just happened to go out while you on vacation?
Most pilot lights on gas appliances have a thermocouple that will shut off the gas supply if the flame goes out.
Of course the last gas stove i used didn't seem to have this feature (though it was quite old)...
Can you point out the exact article/paragraph forbidding commercial activity? The closest i can find is Article 7, paragraph 1, which talks about depositing garbage:
but whether business cards fall into that category is not clear...
I like the way everyone is trying to use the current situation to push their own agenda; it proves little has actually changed.
Since it apparently escaped you, let me point out the blatant flaw in your argument: encryption does not kill people. If an elementary school child steals your encryption technology they cannot use it to shoot their teachers or fellow classmates. If you forget to lock up your computer, your toddler will not accidentally blow a hole in themselves or you. No one will ever accost you in a public park wielding a copy of PGP demanding your money or they will encrypt you.
There is a distinction between that which can harm/kill immediately, and that which could, maybe indirectly assist in the planning. The latter are many and arbitrarily tenuous, while the former is direct and obvious.
Either you are very young(/naive), or this is a troll. I'll assume the former.
Just because there are a few hours of video showing caribou ignoring some unmoving pipes doesn't mean that there is no impact: some changes take longer to show up, and some changes depend on particular, perhaps unlikely but nevertheless not impossible circumstances (eg errors). Did your relative also film the wildlife happily enjoying an oil spill? What about the air pollution? Physical barriers? Note that 4 hooved limbs are not conducive to scaling fences or climbing over pipelines, nor do all creatures know enough to avoid vehicles/roads. They do not know to not eat that rusty nail, or that taking refuge near that pleasantly warm high-voltage transformer may not be a good idea, or that that coolant leak is not a tasty treat. Animals also do not complain that their children are getting more asthmatic, or that pollution has reduced their chances of conceiving, etc etc etc.
Of course there's an impact.
What is ultimately needed is a PERSONAL INFORMATION BILL OF RIGHTS that essentially confers real property rights upon the information about ME to ME. I then control transfer and possesion. I could even monetize it if I wished.
That idea has been swimming in my head for some time. Why do we not control our own information? In the electronic world i don't seem to 'own' anything, not even myself. Yet 'ownership' is key in almost every aspect of social interaction and regulation. We should all own our own information; it is then ours to do with as we see fit. The act of using or gathering information about you without your consent then constitutes 'theft',
The release of about 600 pages in early October revealed previously unknown details about the system, including Carnivore's place in a trinity of programs -- alongside "Packeteer" and "Coolminer" -- known collectively as the "DragonWare suite."
Neither is ink on normal text; depending on the resolution of the document they actually have there's surely the possibility of some vestigial remnant of the original text even under the darkest blackout ink.
But i expect they've thought about that, and these are faxes or photocopies of the censored texts, diluting the resolution beyond recovery....
As far as i could tell their list is available to members only, and membership is not free (and presumably only for marketing research companies anyway). You can complain about a company not upholding their standards, but only if that company is a member---i don't see anywhere on their site where you can query whether a company is a member or not.
Perhaps they are helpful via email, but their website seems of little value.
You've stumbled upon the weakest link in the security chain. Doesn't matter how clever the algorithm is, the basic problem is that people are stupid. They simply do not want to memorize passwords, nor invest any effort in creating good ones. Passwords are often one or more of:
- ridiculously obvious
- used extensively (so if you know one, you
know them all)
- reused forever
- written down
- based on an obvious algorithm
Of course part of the problem is the solution: cryptic passwords or requiring frequent changes tends to cause people to write them down or use an obvious algorithm since they then have trouble remembering them. Shared passwords have the added problem of having to re-share each time it changes, and the difficulty in trying to communicate uncommon strings (which tends to result in them being written down).And no, this is not a "trust" issue. People have a similar lackluster security attitude with respect to their bank/credit card PIN numbers, their housekeys, etc.
Thought i'd see how much Chapters was selling it for (in impoverished CAD). Mysteriously, i find under the description of that book a review reportedly by one "Jeff Michaels from Markham, ON, Canada" which contains the verbatim text from the second paragraph and a good chunk of the text from the first paragraph under What's Good. Here's the www.chapters.ca page. Scroll down a bit to see reader reviews.