There's been a virus going around. If you see a post with the subject "Virus" instructing you to delete all your files and email it to everyone you know, DON'T do it! It will delete all your files. Thank you for your attention.
Its kind of like saying "that great little restaurant on the corner is going to take out McDonalds".
Actually, it reminds me a lot of that. I keep hearing people tell me "Why are you still eating there? Can't you see that the restaurant wars are over, and you've lost on the lunch? Stick to catering where you have a chance." And every day, I eat food that's immensely cheaper, healthier, and tastier than MSDonalds, and can't see why anyone else would willingly do any differently. Saying that Microsoft will win on the desktop is like saying that McDonalds is winning for lunch, and therefore all other restaurants should just give up.
Well, almost everything is anti-DRM, and for good reason. I really don't think it will turn out well, but to play Devil's advocate:
The real thing I see coming out of a DRM future is foo-on-demand. Think of a song? Type in the name and get an instant download, at high quality, high bandwidth, with the lyrics and all supplimental info, with all the ID3 tags intact and correct (a few cents for a single play, maybe a dollar for unlimited plays). Missed Enterprise? Download any episode of any tv show, again, fast, painless, legal. Maybe even free for the version with commercials embedded in it, a buck or so for a commericial-free version. Ditto for movies, books, games, software, or really just about anything that can be digitally transmitted. Pay a few dollars to watch some movie, widescreen, in DVD quality, and then if you want a few more to download the entire Collector's Edition DVD, so you can burn it yourself. Of course, all of this assumes that the FLAs are will ing to allow all this, but...
Actually, that does do the job. If $a == $b, then they either both represent the same number, or they are both NaN, and if they are both NaN, then $b is NaN.
A lot of sites really don't have anything to sell. Sure, the idea of Amazon or eBay having banner ads is a bit absurd, but news sites, opinion places, comic strips, or basically any place you go for information also needs to be able to support itself, and I really doubt/., for instance, could make a living of selling nifty t-shirts.
Didn't I even specifically address that? Public key encryption does not exchange everything over an insecure channel and remain secure. You can try using it that way, but you're fooling yourself. Ultimately, you're relying on the security of the channel over which you got the public key, or if you check signatures of the public key then security of the channel over which you got the keys with which it's signed. You can shuffle around what you trust, but either there is a secure channel involved at some point, or you're utterly hosed.
Same with steganography; somehow you have to get the message to your friends "Be sure to use the foo algorithm with this key on that image." or they won't know anything more than The Bad Guys.
All cryptography(/steganography/secret communications) requires a secure channel, at some point, somewhere. If you never have a secure channel, then there's no way to communicate with the person you want to without someone else observing. It's as simple as that.
The key to good cryptography is that you can time-shift the secure channel, ie, the secure channel might be my handing you a cdrom full of keys, which is pretty hard to break, but later I need to send you a message when it's inconvenient to meet you in person. You can't ever get rid of the secure channel (and no, public key encryption doesn't violate that, it just pushes the secure channel to getting the right public key, or the right signing key, or....).
That said, good crypto also lets you leverage a smaller secure channel into a larger datastream (1024 bits can buy you a lot of encrypted text), and having to prepare all the images ahead of time can be problematic, and impractical, but not impossible.
Somehow I can't see that being sufficiently hard to hack. How long before someone works out a way to tell the card that you deposited an extra $200 on it any time you want? It just seems infeasable to me without a central system of some sort.
Possibly even more off topic, but pretty funny. This happened to us crossing the border into Canada:
Customs official: Are you bringing anything with you into Canada?
Now what sort of question is that? How can you honestly answer that? All I know is, my friend's answer was not the one they were looking for.
My friend: Just what's in the car.
They searched us for hours. It really didn't help that my other friend had a really dull souvenir sword he'd gotten from the middle east in the back seat.
Customs officials: What is the sword's purpose?
Us: It's a souvenir, we're taking it to show people.
Customs official: What is the sword for?
Us: It's a souvenir, we're taking it to show people.
Customs offical: What is its purpose?
I swear I was really close to grabbing it, brandishing it about, and shouting "We're here to take over the country! Take us to your leader, eh?"
Try Galeon. In the Preferences you can disable popups and disable status bar rewrites. You can also turn on and off javascript from a menu option (and like all GTK menu options, you can bind any key you want to it). In the latest CVS, you can even disable/enable popups from a menu item. Useful.
Ok, how do you get code to actually paste right without/. messing up the formatting? Why can't I use <pre> tags? Argh...email me for the code. lopresto@writeme.com
Well, if you install SFU it'll define the attributes for you. You still need to fill them in, but you can do that by taking the existing information and creating a script to build an LDIF file out of it. Here's the populate script, just run it and it'll output the LDIF file. There's a windows command (sorry, can't remember it) that'll import that into Active Directory. HTH
#!/pkg/gnu/bin/perl -w
@ARGV = ("wuid");
while(){
chomp;
($wuid, $user) = split/:/;
$id{$user} = $wuid;
}
@ARGV = ("passwd");
while (){
chomp;
($name,undef,$uid,$gid,undef,$dir,$shell) = split ':';
$dn="cn=$name,cn=users,dc=cec,dc=wustl,dc=edu";
print EOF;
dn: $dn
changetype: modify
replace: syncNisDomain
syncNisDomain: cec
-
EOF
if (exists($id{$name})){
print BLAH;
replace: employeeID
employeeID: $id{$name}
-
BLAH
}
print FOO;
replace: msSFUName
msSFUName: $name
-
replace: uidNumber
uidNumber: $uid
-
replace: gidNumber
gidNumber: $gid
-
replace: msSFUHomeDirectory
msSFUHomeDirectory: $dir
-
replace: loginShell
loginShell: $shell
-
FOO
}
We did that where I work, under Solaris, last summer. What we did is use a perl script I wrote to create a passwd file out of Active Directory (with all the passwords set to NP), then did the authentication using pam_krb5. Set Kerberos up like normal, it it pretty much all falls into place. The only hard parts are programs that don't play nice with pam. I think I can find the Perl script if you'd like it. Email me at lopresto@writeme.com. Good luck!
Ahhh, but this will have handwriting recognition, so instead of writing things you can't read on a $1.50 legal tablet, you can write things neither you nor it can read on a $2000 laptop.
Reading the article (yes, some people actually do that now and then) it looks like the problem isn't with the PRNG, but rather with the idea of random increments. Most of this is conjecture, so take with a grain of salt, but it seems to fit a lot better than most comments here. The problem is that the ISN for each connection is the ISN for the last connection plus some random increment. Even if that increment is truly random, as long as its largest value isn't too large we can easily 1) establish one connection with the host 2) wait for the target connection we want to take over 3) establish a new connection. Now we have a reasonably small range of ISNs (between those of our first and second connection) to try. Even if each of those increments were truly random and we have no basis for prefering one to another, we've reduced the space of all possible ISNs to a much smaller space. The only solution is not to use a random increment, but to use an entirely random ISN in the first place.
You make very good points. CMGI is required to make money in every (legal) way it can. What we must do, then (in addition to making every attempt to reform the patent system) is to show CMGI that they will NOT maximize profits by persuing this course of action. That is, their losses due to boycotts, legal costs, and general bad PR will greatly exceed their gains from attempting to enforce this patent. The only reasonable way to convince them to stop is by convincing them it's not worth their while.
I may be way over my head here (forgive me if I am), but wouldn't having it dynamically linked make it easier for a user to modify? I guess the scenario I have in mind is 1) Big Commercial Company releases Neat Product with fltk (statically) linked to it. 2) You, someone else, or even the user himself modifies fltk to fix a bug, or whatever. Now if fltk were dynamically linked, the user could plug in the latest version, and there you go. But if it's statically linked, then the user is pretty much stuck with it until Big Commercial Company decides to release an "upgrade". It seems the static use is what defeats the advantage that you can change it.
Re:My Initial experiences - posted from .6
on
Mozilla .6 Released
·
· Score: 1
Define crawl. I'm using Netscape 4.75 under 32 M of ram on a 200 Mhz Pentium, and it's usable. It's obviously a bit slow, but it works. To me, part of the beauty of Linux is that I can run a tiny kernel, X, and a reasonably small window manager (fvwm2), and get decent performance out of truly obselete hardware. What I really don't understand is, why is every version of everything bigger and slower than the previous one? Shouldn't we be moving toward smaller/faster/lighter? I can understand that in the Windows world, where adding 30 megs of dancing paperclips is considered an improvement, but why here? Anyway, my experience is that, under 32 megs, Mozilla is MUCH slower than 4.75. Even galeon, as cool as it is, is worse.
Actually, very little content is stored directly under a named key. What happens is you store the data under a key whose name is a hash of the contents. Then in a seperate key with a real name you include a redirect to the hash key. So you would only have one copy of, say, the GPL, even if it has a dozen names. MP3s might have a lot more "duplicates", but none exact (ie, you'd have one at 128 bps, one at 112, another at 128 that wasn't quite ripped as well, etc). Nothing can be done about that (well, not easily).
Is it possible to completely do business with the USPTO over the internet?"
It would have been. Unfortunately for you all, I patented the process of applying for a patent over the Internet, so you must all pay me royaltees. Even more if you want to use my patented "1-Click Patent Application"
Re:There are no NP problems, only NP solutions.
on
Does P = NP?
·
· Score: 1
Actually, P is a subset of NP. NP is the set of problems that, given an answer, that answer can be verified in poly-time (very rough definition). Every member of P is also a member of NP. The question is whether there is any member of NP that is not in P. So the fact that we can't think of a poly-time soln doesn't put the problem in NP--it's the fact that we can produce a poly-time verification algorithm. Once something is proven to be in NP, you could later find a poly-time algorithm and show it's in P also, but that doesn't mean it isn't still in NP.
Slashdot Mirror
There's been a virus going around. If you see a post with the subject "Virus" instructing you to delete all your files and email it to everyone you know, DON'T do it! It will delete all your files. Thank you for your attention.
I use what works for me.
The real thing I see coming out of a DRM future is foo-on-demand. Think of a song? Type in the name and get an instant download, at high quality, high bandwidth, with the lyrics and all supplimental info, with all the ID3 tags intact and correct (a few cents for a single play, maybe a dollar for unlimited plays). Missed Enterprise? Download any episode of any tv show, again, fast, painless, legal. Maybe even free for the version with commercials embedded in it, a buck or so for a commericial-free version. Ditto for movies, books, games, software, or really just about anything that can be digitally transmitted. Pay a few dollars to watch some movie, widescreen, in DVD quality, and then if you want a few more to download the entire Collector's Edition DVD, so you can burn it yourself. Of course, all of this assumes that the FLAs are will ing to allow all this, but...
Actually, that does do the job. If $a == $b, then they either both represent the same number, or they are both NaN, and if they are both NaN, then $b is NaN.
A lot of sites really don't have anything to sell. Sure, the idea of Amazon or eBay having banner ads is a bit absurd, but news sites, opinion places, comic strips, or basically any place you go for information also needs to be able to support itself, and I really doubt /., for instance, could make a living of selling nifty t-shirts.
Same with steganography; somehow you have to get the message to your friends "Be sure to use the foo algorithm with this key on that image." or they won't know anything more than The Bad Guys.
The key to good cryptography is that you can time-shift the secure channel, ie, the secure channel might be my handing you a cdrom full of keys, which is pretty hard to break, but later I need to send you a message when it's inconvenient to meet you in person. You can't ever get rid of the secure channel (and no, public key encryption doesn't violate that, it just pushes the secure channel to getting the right public key, or the right signing key, or....).
That said, good crypto also lets you leverage a smaller secure channel into a larger datastream (1024 bits can buy you a lot of encrypted text), and having to prepare all the images ahead of time can be problematic, and impractical, but not impossible.
Somehow I can't see that being sufficiently hard to hack. How long before someone works out a way to tell the card that you deposited an extra $200 on it any time you want? It just seems infeasable to me without a central system of some sort.
Customs official: Are you bringing anything with you into Canada?
Now what sort of question is that? How can you honestly answer that? All I know is, my friend's answer was not the one they were looking for.
My friend: Just what's in the car.
They searched us for hours. It really didn't help that my other friend had a really dull souvenir sword he'd gotten from the middle east in the back seat.
Customs officials: What is the sword's purpose?
Us: It's a souvenir, we're taking it to show people.
Customs official: What is the sword for?
Us: It's a souvenir, we're taking it to show people.
Customs offical: What is its purpose?
I swear I was really close to grabbing it, brandishing it about, and shouting "We're here to take over the country! Take us to your leader, eh?"
Try Galeon. In the Preferences you can disable popups and disable status bar rewrites. You can also turn on and off javascript from a menu option (and like all GTK menu options, you can bind any key you want to it). In the latest CVS, you can even disable/enable popups from a menu item. Useful.
Tempting, but I block cookies whenever I can. If you bring some beer and steak, I'm there.
LDIFDE it is. Don't know anything about CSVDE, but it might work too.
Ok, how do you get code to actually paste right without /. messing up the formatting? Why can't I use <pre> tags? Argh...email me for the code. lopresto@writeme.com
Well, if you install SFU it'll define the attributes for you. You still need to fill them in, but you can do that by taking the existing information and creating a script to build an LDIF file out of it. Here's the populate script, just run it and it'll output the LDIF file. There's a windows command (sorry, can't remember it) that'll import that into Active Directory. HTH #! /pkg/gnu/bin/perl -w
@ARGV = ("wuid");
while(){
chomp;
($wuid, $user) = split /:/;
$id{$user} = $wuid;
}
@ARGV = ("passwd");
while (){
chomp;
($name,undef,$uid,$gid,undef,$dir,$shell) = split ':';
$dn="cn=$name,cn=users,dc=cec,dc=wustl,dc=edu";
print EOF;
dn: $dn
changetype: modify
replace: syncNisDomain
syncNisDomain: cec
-
EOF
if (exists($id{$name})){
print BLAH;
replace: employeeID
employeeID: $id{$name}
-
BLAH
}
print FOO;
replace: msSFUName
msSFUName: $name
-
replace: uidNumber
uidNumber: $uid
-
replace: gidNumber
gidNumber: $gid
-
replace: msSFUHomeDirectory
msSFUHomeDirectory: $dir
-
replace: loginShell
loginShell: $shell
-
FOO
}
We did that where I work, under Solaris, last summer. What we did is use a perl script I wrote to create a passwd file out of Active Directory (with all the passwords set to NP), then did the authentication using pam_krb5. Set Kerberos up like normal, it it pretty much all falls into place. The only hard parts are programs that don't play nice with pam. I think I can find the Perl script if you'd like it. Email me at lopresto@writeme.com. Good luck!
Ahhh, but this will have handwriting recognition, so instead of writing things you can't read on a $1.50 legal tablet, you can write things neither you nor it can read on a $2000 laptop.
Reading the article (yes, some people actually do that now and then) it looks like the problem isn't with the PRNG, but rather with the idea of random increments. Most of this is conjecture, so take with a grain of salt, but it seems to fit a lot better than most comments here. The problem is that the ISN for each connection is the ISN for the last connection plus some random increment. Even if that increment is truly random, as long as its largest value isn't too large we can easily 1) establish one connection with the host 2) wait for the target connection we want to take over 3) establish a new connection. Now we have a reasonably small range of ISNs (between those of our first and second connection) to try. Even if each of those increments were truly random and we have no basis for prefering one to another, we've reduced the space of all possible ISNs to a much smaller space. The only solution is not to use a random increment, but to use an entirely random ISN in the first place.
You make very good points. CMGI is required to make money in every (legal) way it can. What we must do, then (in addition to making every attempt to reform the patent system) is to show CMGI that they will NOT maximize profits by persuing this course of action. That is, their losses due to boycotts, legal costs, and general bad PR will greatly exceed their gains from attempting to enforce this patent. The only reasonable way to convince them to stop is by convincing them it's not worth their while.
Sell the rights to the Major Motion Picture. That's probably what they're planning on to pay back the 60 gigadollars.
I may be way over my head here (forgive me if I am), but wouldn't having it dynamically linked make it easier for a user to modify? I guess the scenario I have in mind is 1) Big Commercial Company releases Neat Product with fltk (statically) linked to it. 2) You, someone else, or even the user himself modifies fltk to fix a bug, or whatever. Now if fltk were dynamically linked, the user could plug in the latest version, and there you go. But if it's statically linked, then the user is pretty much stuck with it until Big Commercial Company decides to release an "upgrade". It seems the static use is what defeats the advantage that you can change it.
Define crawl. I'm using Netscape 4.75 under 32 M of ram on a 200 Mhz Pentium, and it's usable. It's obviously a bit slow, but it works. To me, part of the beauty of Linux is that I can run a tiny kernel, X, and a reasonably small window manager (fvwm2), and get decent performance out of truly obselete hardware. What I really don't understand is, why is every version of everything bigger and slower than the previous one? Shouldn't we be moving toward smaller/faster/lighter? I can understand that in the Windows world, where adding 30 megs of dancing paperclips is considered an improvement, but why here? Anyway, my experience is that, under 32 megs, Mozilla is MUCH slower than 4.75. Even galeon, as cool as it is, is worse.
Actually, very little content is stored directly under a named key. What happens is you store the data under a key whose name is a hash of the contents. Then in a seperate key with a real name you include a redirect to the hash key. So you would only have one copy of, say, the GPL, even if it has a dozen names. MP3s might have a lot more "duplicates", but none exact (ie, you'd have one at 128 bps, one at 112, another at 128 that wasn't quite ripped as well, etc). Nothing can be done about that (well, not easily).
It would have been. Unfortunately for you all, I patented the process of applying for a patent over the Internet, so you must all pay me royaltees. Even more if you want to use my patented "1-Click Patent Application"
Actually, P is a subset of NP. NP is the set of problems that, given an answer, that answer can be verified in poly-time (very rough definition). Every member of P is also a member of NP. The question is whether there is any member of NP that is not in P. So the fact that we can't think of a poly-time soln doesn't put the problem in NP--it's the fact that we can produce a poly-time verification algorithm. Once something is proven to be in NP, you could later find a poly-time algorithm and show it's in P also, but that doesn't mean it isn't still in NP.
Actually, the key is "eineew a si nnamremmiZ pilihP". Shhh, don't tell anyone!