TASERs are useless as long-range weapons, though - and you don't want to risk getting the drone down low. I can imagine some sort of minature guided missile carrying an irritant like pepper spray, but it'd be very expensive for a one-shot.
Interesting concept. It's far from optimal, but... it could function as a workaround. It's still ugly though, and a far cleaner solution would be getting the buffers on the network gear to a more reasonable size. But if you can't do that, your idea is better than nothing.
Why would any company want to encrypt the display of a video game?
Camcording the screen is actually an interesting idea. The quality would suck, yes, but if you were to take multible runs with a syncronised camera and then combine them with the right math, you could get very near perfect. It'd be too time-consuming, expensive and skilled for the everyday internet pirate, but I imagine the organised crime street pirate gangs would have no problem with paying someone $8,000 to break a film.
Except that the CPU can't hold anywhere near enough memory for video decoding on it's own, and accessing main memory would largely defeat the purpose. No, I think you are half-way there, but to complete it you need to take hardware video decoding into account as well. Then the graphics processor can take the encrypted stream in, decrypt it, decode it, and output to HDMI... all without unencrypted video ever leaving the graphics hardware.
Until the successor to HDCP comes out. I imagine that will be broken too eventually, but users shouldn't have to take part in an eternal arms race just to retain control of their own computers.
It's not, really. There are many buffers involved. Some of them will be in the network infrastructure - routers, firewalls - that users have no control over. A lot more are in devices they control, but that don't allow configuration of such low-level parameters. Cable modems, home routers, access points.
Impractical on the internet: Everyone would decide their traffic must be top priority. Then someone would wrote 'Windows Internet Accelerator Pro' and sell it for £8.99, so every idiot could do so.
Wondershaper is able to apply a partial fix, but only to the upstream. Given that most traffic on a domestic connection is incoming, that doesn't help much.
This has grown beyond Wakefield now. It's become a self-sustaining conspiracy theory, independant of it's source, and no mere facts are going to even slow it down. Parents want to worry, it's in their instincts to protect their children - if they can find no real dangers, they'll inflate anything that looks remotely threatening regardless of true risk.
You can do it. Most people struggle to comprehend what an ethernet cable is. In order to participate, you need to have both the inclination and the skill. In order for the project to succeed, people of those conditions need to have some critical density such that most of them are able to find another interested and capable person within wireless or cable-laying range. This density is not yet met. Note that cable range is very short - about one house - and wireless scarcely any longer.
Because I don't like a 100%+ overhead. OFF System is built around trying to use a mathematical trick to avoid copyright infringement - the type of thing that isn't likely to stand up in court. It's trick comes with a heavy cost. It's an interesting idea, certainly - but not what is needed here. I still think a better idea would be to use it as a sort of suppliment to bittorrent.
Tradition says that technical terms be based in ancient greek or latin. Thus television, for example. Just about no-one spoke latin when the word was coined, but it's just tradition.
That's nothing like what I described, except in so far as they both rely on nodes caching content passing through (As does Freenet). OFF System runs over the existing internet, I was thinking something that uses wireless exchanges between physically proximal nodes.
HAM wouldn't offer much bandwidth in the analog sense, and little bandwidth in the analog sense means little in the digital sense too - Shannon said so. It's an interesting idea, but getting enough to send anything more them dialup-like performance needs higher frequencies. Perhaps something using the same hardware as 11g (As it's dirt-cheap) would be an idea. It'd still be tight, but no longer completly impractical.
I hate to start a new thread when there are so many already, but this idea doesn't seem to have been suggested yet. What about rethinking this under the conditions of latency not being an issue? I'm thinking of distribution of large, never-updated files. Games, movie downloads (Both legal and otherwise), linux distros, images, etc. Just about anything over a few meg or so. It's not a replacement for the internet, but it would take a lot of the strain off it. Here's me idea:
1. Anyone who wants to join needs a computer with a wireless interface, some software, and a really big hard drive. A terabyte, more if possible. Storage is really cheap these days. Two terabytes is easily affordable.
2. Content is identified by a hash, or a hash of hashes for a large file. Think of the old ed2k hashes, though updated to use something more secure than md4. Same princible.
3. You tell your node you want file 0x1234....cdef (Actual hash 128 bits). You can get this hash off of a conventional internet site, via IM, email, etc. It's only 128 bits, it doesn't matter how much your connection is throttled.
4. Your node broadcasts out a message: 'Anyone got file 0x1234...cdef?' Nearby nodes (This would use plain old 802.11g, though probably not TCP/IP on top of it) check their database on their big drives. If they have the file (or file part), they offer to send it. If not, they wait a second or so, listening for any other node that has it. If none replies, they rebroadcast with a decrimented hop count. If they file has to go through them to get to the original requester, they can store a cache of it too.
5. Requester hopefully gets the file part. And caches it should anyone else in the vicinity want it.
Nodes may also connect via conventional internet to improve long-range transmission. I'd suggest making it function as an extension to bittorrent, at least at first. A mobile client would also be desireable.
Star Wars does have science... it is just incredibly *bad* science. Midichlorians come to mind. It isn't real science so much as the abstract idea of science, used to lend a serious tone to otherwise fantastic situations.
Slashdot Mirror
Also, octopusses are short-lived creatures. They just don't live long enough to accumulate a great deal of information.
That is something that this technology cannot help with.
Police vary greatly depending on where you live.
TASERs are useless as long-range weapons, though - and you don't want to risk getting the drone down low. I can imagine some sort of minature guided missile carrying an irritant like pepper spray, but it'd be very expensive for a one-shot.
Interesting concept. It's far from optimal, but... it could function as a workaround. It's still ugly though, and a far cleaner solution would be getting the buffers on the network gear to a more reasonable size. But if you can't do that, your idea is better than nothing.
Why would any company want to encrypt the display of a video game?
Camcording the screen is actually an interesting idea. The quality would suck, yes, but if you were to take multible runs with a syncronised camera and then combine them with the right math, you could get very near perfect. It'd be too time-consuming, expensive and skilled for the everyday internet pirate, but I imagine the organised crime street pirate gangs would have no problem with paying someone $8,000 to break a film.
Except that the CPU can't hold anywhere near enough memory for video decoding on it's own, and accessing main memory would largely defeat the purpose. No, I think you are half-way there, but to complete it you need to take hardware video decoding into account as well. Then the graphics processor can take the encrypted stream in, decrypt it, decode it, and output to HDMI... all without unencrypted video ever leaving the graphics hardware.
Until the successor to HDCP comes out. I imagine that will be broken too eventually, but users shouldn't have to take part in an eternal arms race just to retain control of their own computers.
It's not, really. There are many buffers involved. Some of them will be in the network infrastructure - routers, firewalls - that users have no control over. A lot more are in devices they control, but that don't allow configuration of such low-level parameters. Cable modems, home routers, access points.
You just perfectly described the procedure for shapeing upstream traffic. We appear to be sitting at different ends of the wire.
Different buffer, different level. Same word, but entirely different thing.
"that's what happens when your pipe is full and the packets have to wait in the queue to be transmitted."
And his point is that said queue is so excessively long, it's screwing up TCP's congestion avoidance. Those queues mean delay. Serious delay.
Impractical on the internet: Everyone would decide their traffic must be top priority. Then someone would wrote 'Windows Internet Accelerator Pro' and sell it for £8.99, so every idiot could do so.
Wondershaper is able to apply a partial fix, but only to the upstream. Given that most traffic on a domestic connection is incoming, that doesn't help much.
Packets.
There's also a TV series and a series of books called Alone In The Dark.
This has grown beyond Wakefield now. It's become a self-sustaining conspiracy theory, independant of it's source, and no mere facts are going to even slow it down. Parents want to worry, it's in their instincts to protect their children - if they can find no real dangers, they'll inflate anything that looks remotely threatening regardless of true risk.
You can do it. Most people struggle to comprehend what an ethernet cable is. In order to participate, you need to have both the inclination and the skill. In order for the project to succeed, people of those conditions need to have some critical density such that most of them are able to find another interested and capable person within wireless or cable-laying range. This density is not yet met. Note that cable range is very short - about one house - and wireless scarcely any longer.
Because I don't like a 100%+ overhead. OFF System is built around trying to use a mathematical trick to avoid copyright infringement - the type of thing that isn't likely to stand up in court. It's trick comes with a heavy cost. It's an interesting idea, certainly - but not what is needed here. I still think a better idea would be to use it as a sort of suppliment to bittorrent.
Tradition says that technical terms be based in ancient greek or latin. Thus television, for example. Just about no-one spoke latin when the word was coined, but it's just tradition.
That's nothing like what I described, except in so far as they both rely on nodes caching content passing through (As does Freenet). OFF System runs over the existing internet, I was thinking something that uses wireless exchanges between physically proximal nodes.
HAM wouldn't offer much bandwidth in the analog sense, and little bandwidth in the analog sense means little in the digital sense too - Shannon said so. It's an interesting idea, but getting enough to send anything more them dialup-like performance needs higher frequencies. Perhaps something using the same hardware as 11g (As it's dirt-cheap) would be an idea. It'd still be tight, but no longer completly impractical.
I hate to start a new thread when there are so many already, but this idea doesn't seem to have been suggested yet. What about rethinking this under the conditions of latency not being an issue? I'm thinking of distribution of large, never-updated files. Games, movie downloads (Both legal and otherwise), linux distros, images, etc. Just about anything over a few meg or so. It's not a replacement for the internet, but it would take a lot of the strain off it. Here's me idea:
1. Anyone who wants to join needs a computer with a wireless interface, some software, and a really big hard drive. A terabyte, more if possible. Storage is really cheap these days. Two terabytes is easily affordable.
2. Content is identified by a hash, or a hash of hashes for a large file. Think of the old ed2k hashes, though updated to use something more secure than md4. Same princible.
3. You tell your node you want file 0x1234....cdef (Actual hash 128 bits). You can get this hash off of a conventional internet site, via IM, email, etc. It's only 128 bits, it doesn't matter how much your connection is throttled.
4. Your node broadcasts out a message: 'Anyone got file 0x1234...cdef?' Nearby nodes (This would use plain old 802.11g, though probably not TCP/IP on top of it) check their database on their big drives. If they have the file (or file part), they offer to send it. If not, they wait a second or so, listening for any other node that has it. If none replies, they rebroadcast with a decrimented hop count. If they file has to go through them to get to the original requester, they can store a cache of it too.
5. Requester hopefully gets the file part. And caches it should anyone else in the vicinity want it.
Nodes may also connect via conventional internet to improve long-range transmission. I'd suggest making it function as an extension to bittorrent, at least at first. A mobile client would also be desireable.
Which is why you don't say 'hello' to people you don't already know.
Star Wars does have science... it is just incredibly *bad* science. Midichlorians come to mind. It isn't real science so much as the abstract idea of science, used to lend a serious tone to otherwise fantastic situations.