Too small search space ??? since when a game-tree complexity of at least 10^123 is too small ? If the estimated number of atoms in the Universe (10^81) is close to true we can't even store the whole tree in a machine for later search ! the computer would have to calculate and heavily prune every single move (excluding the end game)
Well, I understand the VCR clock issue, but, do you really need 10 accuratelly set clocks around your house ? Whats the problem with an microwave oven loosing its time ? Or an stereo ?
> In other words, we have to choose crippled window managers with a reduced featureset?
So, you assume that the full set of features of OS X will be ported to this tiny machine ? No comments here.
> Yeah, "some years ago" Linux was pretty speedy. It also could barely do much.
Can you please point (in terms of text reading/editing, internet browsing, e-mail and other common tasks, from a user point of view) what Linux 2.6.x can do that 2.2.x can't ? and what XFree 4.x can that 3.x can't ?
I've been using Linux since 2.0.x, and I was able to do the above tasks since them. Sure, the UI and features improved, but for such a small machine as the $100 laptop, any Linux version from 2.0.x will fit
> Oh, yeah, because every kid in the world is a goddamned kernel systems engineer.
You conveniently ommited my quote, where I was talking about the engineers behind this project, that will for sure customize the chosen Linux version to suit the said $100 machine.
For them (the engineers), it is very important an OS that you can trully 100% customize and modify to suit their needs.
Besides, why are you underestimating these kids ? Can't they be, in the future, a kernel hacker ? Or contribute for an project ? With bug fixes, new features, etc. With these tools in hands (the laptop and the whole free system) the chances that a percentage of them turn into programmers, etc is higher.
> Guess you missed the part where Steve Jobs was offering OS X for free.
Free beer ? No thanks. So, what happens when 100 million units have been distributed and they need a bug fix, a new feature not anticipated, a security fix, etc ??
Are you sure Apple will happily donate their software and workforce forever without expecting anything back ? Last time I checked they were a for profit company, interested in boosting their sales. Nothing wrong with that, but maybe OS X is not the best option in this case, in a world that have Linux, FreeBSD, X, and thounsands free softwares, complete, with source code and a license that will allow them forever to modify it at their will (the engineers and, hopefully in the future, the kids).
You assume that Gnome/KDE is the only choice in the Linux world.
Have you ever heard of xfce, blackbox, windowmaker ?
I remember that some years ago I managed to get Linux/Windowmaker running smoothly on a old 486DX2 66Mhz, 32Mb RAM.
Can you really do this with Mac OS X under a similar machine ?
And, besides, with a 100% free software Linux distro, you can thinker with every bit of code (and I mean the WHOLE system AND apps) to make it faster (I'm sure any engineer, including the ones from MIT, love this aspect of free software), and with Apple you have to file a bug report/feature request and wait until they make (or not) the changes for you.
Modern P2P applications (eMule, BT...) divide the shared file in several small, fixed length pieces an generate a hash for every piece, as well as for the whole file.
As soon as a piece arrive, its hash is checked, if the known hash doesnt match with the calculated one, the piece is discarded and, at least in BT, the peer that sent the bogus piece can be blacklisted.
So, assuming that the claim that they broke MD5,SHA1, etc.. all at once (they claim "100% effectiveness!"), is bogus, I see no real world impact on current P2P technology.
You're assuming that their claims are valid: being able to generate a file that match the size and hash of another file, even though that a typical hash algorithm - SHA1 - relies on a space of 2^256 bytes, wich cannot be computed in a reasonable amount of time (read: less than a million years) or stored, even if you use all the computational power of the universe ?
I don't believe them and will wait until they show a working implementation or return to their insignificancy.
well, if you know a way to generate a bogus packet with the same size and the same hash within a 2^256 bytes space (SHA1), please call NSA.
As said in a previous post, there isn't enough matter in the universe to store 2^256 bytes of data and no computers in the known universe can calculate that amount of information in a reasonable time frame.
You're assuming that the "From" field can be trusted. This is false and can be easily demonstrated with the recent generetation of worms, wich spoof the header with the address of a friend of you !
Well, i think that the "weekend drivers" are more dangerous than the rest of us. Good driving is an ability developed while driving ! Like any other physical activity, the more you practice the better you get.
Well, right now I have a Web Cam in my desk that doesnt work under Windows XP or 2000, only works under Windows 9x. The manufacturer is out of bussines an said that no driver will be written for XP or any future version of Windows...
I know many similar cases, where the company sink and the specs of the hardware are kept closed, so nobody can update the driver.
But, this same camera works great under Linux using an free software driver.
So, when youre talking about your preference for an binary only driver supported by the manufacturer remember that by not being free/open your hardware can cease to function in a new version of your favorite OS if the company disapear.
I still prefer not to buy the hardware if I can only get a binary only version without free alternatives.
Well, as mentioned before, anybody can use stenography and hide any kind of data (including the encrypted one) inside image files, for example, in a way that these "trojaned" pictures will be indistiguishable from "normal" ones, even for powerfull computers...
The question is... We'll be allowed to make copies ? Probably someone will crack any copy protection scheme, but I'm talking about making legal backup copies, or borrowing it legaly from a friend (as we do with the printed ones)...
...soon or later they will see the problems related with a single solution (e. g. being forced to "upgrade" every year because the latest file format is incompatible with the earlier version, large delays between bug fixes and bug fixes being labeled as "upgrade" so you have to pay for it, etc)...
Slashdot Mirror
You realize that the single screen multiplayer on modern consoles is optional, and you can play regular networked multiplayer if you wish, right ?
Baseball bat ?
Too small search space ??? since when a game-tree complexity of at least 10^123 is too small ? If the estimated number of atoms in the Universe (10^81) is close to true we can't even store the whole tree in a machine for later search ! the computer would have to calculate and heavily prune every single move (excluding the end game)
Well, I understand the VCR clock issue, but, do you really need 10 accuratelly set clocks around your house ? Whats the problem with an microwave oven loosing its time ? Or an stereo ?
> In other words, we have to choose crippled window managers with a reduced featureset?
So, you assume that the full set of features of OS X will be ported to this tiny machine ? No comments here.
> Yeah, "some years ago" Linux was pretty speedy. It also could barely do much.
Can you please point (in terms of text reading/editing, internet browsing, e-mail and other common tasks, from a user point of view) what Linux 2.6.x can do that 2.2.x can't ? and what XFree 4.x can that 3.x can't ?
I've been using Linux since 2.0.x, and I was able to do the above tasks since them. Sure, the UI and features improved, but for such a small machine as the $100 laptop, any Linux version from 2.0.x will fit
> Oh, yeah, because every kid in the world is a goddamned kernel systems engineer.
You conveniently ommited my quote, where I was talking about the engineers behind this project, that will for sure customize the chosen Linux version to suit the said $100 machine.
For them (the engineers), it is very important an OS that you can trully 100% customize and modify to suit their needs.
Besides, why are you underestimating these kids ? Can't they be, in the future, a kernel hacker ? Or contribute for an project ? With bug fixes, new features, etc. With these tools in hands (the laptop and the whole free system) the chances that a percentage of them turn into programmers, etc is higher.
> Guess you missed the part where Steve Jobs was offering OS X for free.
Free beer ? No thanks. So, what happens when 100 million units have been distributed and they need a bug fix, a new feature not anticipated, a security fix, etc ??
Are you sure Apple will happily donate their software and workforce forever without expecting anything back ? Last time I checked they were a for profit company, interested in boosting their sales. Nothing wrong with that, but maybe OS X is not the best option in this case, in a world that have Linux, FreeBSD, X, and thounsands free softwares, complete, with source code and a license that will allow them forever to modify it at their will (the engineers and, hopefully in the future, the kids).
You assume that Gnome/KDE is the only choice in the Linux world.
...
Have you ever heard of xfce, blackbox, windowmaker ?
I remember that some years ago I managed to get Linux/Windowmaker running smoothly on a old 486DX2 66Mhz, 32Mb RAM.
Can you really do this with Mac OS X under a similar machine ?
And, besides, with a 100% free software Linux distro, you can thinker with every bit of code (and I mean the WHOLE system AND apps) to make it faster (I'm sure any engineer, including the ones from MIT, love this aspect of free software), and with Apple you have to file a bug report/feature request and wait until they make (or not) the changes for you.
Let alone future (free) upgrades
Modern P2P applications (eMule, BT...) divide the shared file in several small, fixed length pieces an generate a hash for every piece, as well as for the whole file.
As soon as a piece arrive, its hash is checked, if the known hash doesnt match with the calculated one, the piece is discarded and, at least in BT, the peer that sent the bogus piece can be blacklisted.
So, assuming that the claim that they broke MD5,SHA1, etc.. all at once (they claim "100% effectiveness!"), is bogus, I see no real world impact on current P2P technology.
You're assuming that their claims are valid: being able to generate a file that match the size and hash of another file, even though that a typical hash algorithm - SHA1 - relies on a space of 2^256 bytes, wich cannot be computed in a reasonable amount of time (read: less than a million years) or stored, even if you use all the computational power of the universe ?
I don't believe them and will wait until they show a working implementation or return to their insignificancy.
well, if you know a way to generate a bogus packet with the same size and the same hash within a 2^256 bytes space (SHA1), please call NSA.
As said in a previous post, there isn't enough matter in the universe to store 2^256 bytes of data and no computers in the known universe can calculate that amount of information in a reasonable time frame.
> If you're at work and not using your own laptop or
> a Knoppix disk, make sure you only use a corporate
> credit card when ordering online.
And how can you stop this ?
> v) The service checks the DRM in your browser. If
...
> it isn't approved you don't get to use the
> service.
VI) Your hacked version of the browser will inform google that the DRM is ok. Please, proceed sending the data
Remember: NEVER trust the client !
You're assuming that the "From" field can be trusted. This is false and can be easily demonstrated with the recent generetation of worms, wich spoof the header with the address of a friend of you !
This is not so dificult, as you imply ...
Just take a look at the "litigious bastards" "protest":
http://www.google.com/search?hl=en&ie=UTF-8&q=liti gious+bastards&btnG=Google+Search/
Well, i think that the "weekend drivers" are more dangerous than the rest of us. Good driving is an ability developed while driving ! Like any other physical activity, the more you practice the better you get.
In Soviet Russia ... never mind !
... is that some sites are managing to defeat the google ranking system, by building very long URL's with all possible keywords for a given subject.
Try searching "ringtones downloads", as an example.
Kvirc is your friend...
Well, right now I have a Web Cam in my desk that doesnt work under Windows XP or 2000, only works under Windows 9x. The manufacturer is out of bussines an said that no driver will be written for XP or any future version of Windows...
I know many similar cases, where the company sink and the specs of the hardware are kept closed, so nobody can update the driver.
But, this same camera works great under Linux using an free software driver.
So, when youre talking about your preference for an binary only driver supported by the manufacturer remember that by not being free/open your hardware can cease to function in a new version of your favorite OS if the company disapear.
I still prefer not to buy the hardware if I can only get a binary only version without free alternatives.
> If anyone has a solution to this very
> interesting problem, I'd love to hear it.
Just ask for some additional information in a way that makes him feel obligated to answer...
Did you see a black cat passing twice ? Never mind...
Most distributions use the .rpm package format.
The rpm utils are the same for each distribution (back-end), just the interfaces are diffrent, like GNORPM, Mandrake Control Center, etc (front-end).
How this is different from your Windows example ?
- Cristiano
Well, as mentioned before, anybody can use stenography and hide any kind of data (including the encrypted one) inside image files, for example, in a way that these "trojaned" pictures will be indistiguishable from "normal" ones, even for powerfull computers...
The question is... We'll be allowed to make copies ? Probably someone will crack any copy protection scheme, but I'm talking about making legal backup copies, or borrowing it legaly from a friend (as we do with the printed ones)...
People, this is a joke !
How can a joke (and this is not a funny one) be marked as "insightful" ???
...soon or later they will see the problems related with a single solution (e. g. being forced to "upgrade" every year because the latest file format is incompatible with the earlier version, large delays between bug fixes and bug fixes being labeled as "upgrade" so you have to pay for it, etc)...