No. There are fundamental limits based on the pidginhole princible. If your encryption takes n bits in, it must produce >=n bits out. Thus what you propose would require the encrypted data be at least as many bits as the sum of the real plaintext plus the false plaintext. This suspicious leftover information would raise suspicion. Truecrypt does something close, but there are limitations.
I don't know how fast the signal travels in a chip, but I recall it's around 0.66C for coaxial cable. Around, because it varies a bit with frequency. The individual electrons actually move very slowly
Overclockers have managed to go over 5GHz though, so the speed of light isn't (quite) a limit yet. There are a lot of factors - power being the main one, as 5GHz processors mean the use of at the very least watercooling systems. Then there is stability in the face of thermal noise and slew.
Can on my i3 desktop chip, or the Xeon in my other desktop. I don't see why a smartphone chip wouldn't be able to do so too, as they would be designed for extremally low power.
Sooner or later, someone is going to finally achieve the long-held dream of portable computing: A high-resolution display that can be worn like glasses, overlaying the image onto the user's vision.
Not at anywhere close to current population levels, anyway. In princible humans could survive in some climates - and even in much of the world, if you allowed for the use of fire and a few animal skins as clothing. But hunter-gatherer societies would be limited in size by available food, just like any other animal.
The US only has two significent political parties, and they both define the sides on every debate and are in turn defined by them. Over the decades it has to some extent split the country into two ideological camps, caught in mutual loathing.
Similar things can be said of dolphins or chimpanzees. Everyone loves them, for they are cute... but they have a level of sadistic viciousness to rival humans.
It needs to run silent or near-silent. Give it that, and this could be a viable HTPC. Compact, easily tucked into the space beneath the TV, and without the fiddley remotes or seperate keyboard.
Microsoft too - students can get dirt-cheap education licences of Office and Visual Studio. It's just a good business strategy - give them the software now, get a loyal customer for years to come.
And that is where the network effects come in. It's very difficult to use Gimp when everyone you are collaborating with uses Photoshop. Openoffice is a good suite, but when everyone else is using Office there will be compatibility issues. There is more software for Windows than any other OS because it's the OS most people use. Being popular is an advantage for software.
McCain wouldn't have been any differerent. Copyright is one of the issues on which both parties agree, and because they agree neither even feel any need to mention it in campaigning.
They do now. They used to have no use for non-lethal weapons, but now they have to do a lot of peacekeeping in places like Iraq and Afganistan, which involves angry mobs from turning into a full-blown riot. You can't easily kill them, because then everyone hates you more, so a nonlethal means of crowd dispersal would be useful.
You could skip the 'turn around and return' part. Head off as 99.99999C, very slowly circle around back to your point of origin. You'll be going too fast to stop, but hopefully in the intervening millenia someone will have worked out a way to decelerate you as a historical curiosity.
Christian 'tradition' is all - the serpent is never identified as Satan. It's just an assumption that Christians started to make because, well... it just seemed to make sense.
Er,,,, no. Nazi Germany was actually intensely religious. The state still holds the record for the highest-attendance Passion play, courted religious endorsement, proclaimed Christianity as the state religion... even the founding charter of what would be the Nazi party explicitly says as much: "The Party, as such, stands for positive Christianity, but does not bind itself in the matter of creed to any particular confession."
"Henry VIII killed his various wifes mostly because they wouldn't have male children, not as bad I know but still bad."
He only killed two of them. He tried to weasel his way out of marriage using every legal trick in the book first, but weaseling will only get you so far, so he had to have Anne executed on false charges. Catherine Howard even helped him out by actually having an affair - probably due to the incredibly unsexy nature of Henry at that time. Not only was he obese, but had an open sore on his thigh that constantly oozed foul-smelling pus.
The Catholic church claims to have been founded by Jesus himself, but it's real historical roots can be found in the Council of Nicaea, AD 325. Before then there were hundreds of Christian sects of wildly differing beliefs in constant (sometimes violent) conflict. The Council of Nicaea unified them (mostly) under one common theology and gave state endorsement to the heirachy of bishops, thus consolidating all those diverse groups into one Christian denomination that would become the Roman Catholic Church.
The date for the claimed birth of Jesus is also a little off. Tradition says it was in 0AD, and the definition of the year, but with so many lost records of the early church the dates are off. It certainly wasn't in 0AD, because the events of the story leading up to the birth include Herod the Great, a puppet-king appointed by Rome, and who died four years earlier.
Interestingly, the Massacre of the Innocents is only recorded in the Gospel of Matthew, and nowhere else. There are many documents describing other killings ordered by Herod - he was quite the nasty piece of work, even killing his own family to secure his hold in power - but any order for the indiscriminate murder of children is conspicuously absent from contemporary records.
Catholicism has a lot of theological elements they have decided to effectively ignore. The heirachy of angels, limbo, purgatory, posession. They can't actually revise theology because that would conflict with the claim of infallibility - if the church was wrong two hundred years ago, it could be wrong today. Instead they like to just quietly let some medieval ideas fade into obscurity.
Slashdot Mirror
Why would they need to compel you to give out your passwords? Easier to just compel the cloud operator to hand over the data.
I've no doubt they intercept it all, but it's far too much to store. They'd need to know in advance exactly what it is they want to sift out.
No. There are fundamental limits based on the pidginhole princible. If your encryption takes n bits in, it must produce >=n bits out. Thus what you propose would require the encrypted data be at least as many bits as the sum of the real plaintext plus the false plaintext. This suspicious leftover information would raise suspicion. Truecrypt does something close, but there are limitations.
I don't know how fast the signal travels in a chip, but I recall it's around 0.66C for coaxial cable. Around, because it varies a bit with frequency. The individual electrons actually move very slowly
Overclockers have managed to go over 5GHz though, so the speed of light isn't (quite) a limit yet. There are a lot of factors - power being the main one, as 5GHz processors mean the use of at the very least watercooling systems. Then there is stability in the face of thermal noise and slew.
Can on my i3 desktop chip, or the Xeon in my other desktop. I don't see why a smartphone chip wouldn't be able to do so too, as they would be designed for extremally low power.
Sooner or later, someone is going to finally achieve the long-held dream of portable computing: A high-resolution display that can be worn like glasses, overlaying the image onto the user's vision.
Not at anywhere close to current population levels, anyway. In princible humans could survive in some climates - and even in much of the world, if you allowed for the use of fire and a few animal skins as clothing. But hunter-gatherer societies would be limited in size by available food, just like any other animal.
The US only has two significent political parties, and they both define the sides on every debate and are in turn defined by them. Over the decades it has to some extent split the country into two ideological camps, caught in mutual loathing.
Or there is the coldly pragmatic approach: Calculate how much a life is worth, and just let anyone who would cost more die.
Similar things can be said of dolphins or chimpanzees. Everyone loves them, for they are cute... but they have a level of sadistic viciousness to rival humans.
It needs to run silent or near-silent. Give it that, and this could be a viable HTPC. Compact, easily tucked into the space beneath the TV, and without the fiddley remotes or seperate keyboard.
Evil M$ is brainwashing our kids! But, if I were running the company, I'd do the same. Their first duty is to the shareholders, after all.
Microsoft too - students can get dirt-cheap education licences of Office and Visual Studio. It's just a good business strategy - give them the software now, get a loyal customer for years to come.
And that is where the network effects come in. It's very difficult to use Gimp when everyone you are collaborating with uses Photoshop. Openoffice is a good suite, but when everyone else is using Office there will be compatibility issues. There is more software for Windows than any other OS because it's the OS most people use. Being popular is an advantage for software.
McCain wouldn't have been any differerent. Copyright is one of the issues on which both parties agree, and because they agree neither even feel any need to mention it in campaigning.
They do now. They used to have no use for non-lethal weapons, but now they have to do a lot of peacekeeping in places like Iraq and Afganistan, which involves angry mobs from turning into a full-blown riot. You can't easily kill them, because then everyone hates you more, so a nonlethal means of crowd dispersal would be useful.
But it's also long after the text was first written.
You could skip the 'turn around and return' part. Head off as 99.99999C, very slowly circle around back to your point of origin. You'll be going too fast to stop, but hopefully in the intervening millenia someone will have worked out a way to decelerate you as a historical curiosity.
Christian 'tradition' is all - the serpent is never identified as Satan. It's just an assumption that Christians started to make because, well... it just seemed to make sense.
"Nazi Germany was not religious."
Er,,,, no. Nazi Germany was actually intensely religious. The state still holds the record for the highest-attendance Passion play, courted religious endorsement, proclaimed Christianity as the state religion... even the founding charter of what would be the Nazi party explicitly says as much: "The Party, as such, stands for positive Christianity, but does not bind itself in the matter of creed to any particular confession."
You can have the USSR though.
If Satan were destined to lose, why would he even try? He should know more about the prophercies than any of the followers on either side.
"Henry VIII killed his various wifes mostly because they wouldn't have male children, not as bad I know but still bad."
He only killed two of them. He tried to weasel his way out of marriage using every legal trick in the book first, but weaseling will only get you so far, so he had to have Anne executed on false charges. Catherine Howard even helped him out by actually having an affair - probably due to the incredibly unsexy nature of Henry at that time. Not only was he obese, but had an open sore on his thigh that constantly oozed foul-smelling pus.
The Catholic church claims to have been founded by Jesus himself, but it's real historical roots can be found in the Council of Nicaea, AD 325. Before then there were hundreds of Christian sects of wildly differing beliefs in constant (sometimes violent) conflict. The Council of Nicaea unified them (mostly) under one common theology and gave state endorsement to the heirachy of bishops, thus consolidating all those diverse groups into one Christian denomination that would become the Roman Catholic Church.
The date for the claimed birth of Jesus is also a little off. Tradition says it was in 0AD, and the definition of the year, but with so many lost records of the early church the dates are off. It certainly wasn't in 0AD, because the events of the story leading up to the birth include Herod the Great, a puppet-king appointed by Rome, and who died four years earlier.
Interestingly, the Massacre of the Innocents is only recorded in the Gospel of Matthew, and nowhere else. There are many documents describing other killings ordered by Herod - he was quite the nasty piece of work, even killing his own family to secure his hold in power - but any order for the indiscriminate murder of children is conspicuously absent from contemporary records.
Catholicism has a lot of theological elements they have decided to effectively ignore. The heirachy of angels, limbo, purgatory, posession. They can't actually revise theology because that would conflict with the claim of infallibility - if the church was wrong two hundred years ago, it could be wrong today. Instead they like to just quietly let some medieval ideas fade into obscurity.