It works extremely well. Best part is that my box is *completely* quiet. It's like having a fanless box. I've almost started to get annoyed by the noise my monitor makes.:)
Contrary to what some people are saying, you can change resolutions on the fly. Just hit Alt-[+|-] and it will change amongst the resolutions you have set up. Quite simple. Just make sure you have the resolutions/depths set that you want when configuring.
What you dont mention is that this feature is next to worthless because it doesnt change the desktop size, merely the monitor resolution.
The only practical use for it is if you want to zoom in on a specific part of the screen.
I'm sorry, you misunderstood me. I meant backdoor in the sense that it (the phone) doesnt live up to it's claim of "128bit security". I also never claimed DES has a backdoor, only that this phone has one. (it was merely my own speculation that it might use DES)
But you're right. There's no publically known way of breaking DES that is better than bruteforce. Then again, with a 56bit keyspace it doesnt matter, because searching through 2^56 keys is practical. (TrippleDES is probably secure though, with a 112bit keyspace)
But then again, a pissing contest over keylengths is irrelevant. There are better ways of cracking encryption.
GSM Cell phones are already encrypted (although weakly) - and it's a worldwide standard, with hundreds of millions of users. Eavesdropping on that is a bit harder than casual scanning.
But you're right, even weakly obfuscating something stopps atleast 95% of all attackers. Not everything needs to have military grade encryption..
U.S. trade groups, which argued that many of the alleged health risks weren't proven.
Yeah, lets prove it's bad for you before we do anything. Doing anything before there are thousands of dead people to back up the "alleged health risks" would be bad for big business and we cant have any of that, now can we?
No siree..
Quote 1:...use[s] a 128 bit key to encrypt the channel.
Quote 2:...A thousand pentium computers would need over 10 years to decrypt a 10 minute phone-call.
1) A 128 bit string has roughly 10^38 possible combinations (keys)
2) Assuming a pentium chip can perform 1 million decryptions per second of the algorithm 1000 pentiums working for 10 years would try roughly 10^17 keys - which is equivalent with a 58 bit real key length. (suspiciosly similar to DESes 56bit, maybe they use DES with some custom key magic to be able print "128bit keys" on the box)
This means there's a better than bruteforce way of cracking the algorithm used and this phone probably shouldnt be used for anything important (as we all know, des can be cracked in hours by d.net, probably in minutes or seconds by intelligence agencies)
Also, even if it isnt DES.10000 pentiums (1yr) - or more likely, a custom chip (much less), is not outside the reach of intelligence agencies or even large companies.
It's as good or possibly better tha Mozilla and IE and was developed in a true OSS fashion with no commercial backing in less than two years (i think - anyone know when konq. dev started?).
Interested in security? KiT is yet another IM system but with built in encryption.. supports it's own protocol, aim, icq and soon jabber (as soon as i get around to implementing it:)
It's still very alpha and a lot of features aren't implemented, but KiT works reasonably well.
The attraction force between two bodies is given by F=G(m1*m2)/(d^2) (G=6,672*10^-11 N m^2/kg^2)- everything in SI of course.
The mass of earth is 5,977*10^25 kg and the mass of the elevator could be something like 1*10^4 kg. Reasonable estimate, maybe a bit on the short side - but they dont need to be that big.
Say things are lifted to 5*10^5 meters (you dont need to lift things to a 36 000 km orbit) you get..
F=G*(M[earth]*M[elevator])/(distance^2)
F=6.672*10^-11*5,977*10^25*1*10^4/(distance^2)
At ground level, the distance is 6000 km - giving F=1.1MN. At orbit (distance 6500km), the force is 9.4MN. The difference is just 15% - which can be easily taken care of by motors or even just by dropping parts of the counterweight/elevator as you go higher.
No, it just teaches us that choosing a window manager isn't a life altering decision. Use the best app for the job, and don't discard one set of apps just because it's written using the wrong widgetset. No one is going to come and arrest you if you use Konqueror and KMail together with the Gimp and abiword.
aD was the kind of company that gave me a "i'd do anything to work there, it seems like an awesome place" feeling when i discovered them a year or so ago. They really got what was needed for a good programmer to be productive.
Then VCs got hold of the company and look at it now.. they simply dont understand what made the company successful.
In fact, the poster is absolutly correct- Kmail did have exactly the kind of bug he's talking about - a one billion second buffer overrun bug. They issued a patch a few weeks ago.
It's *common* to write programs that are part C and part C++.
You seem to fail to realize how insightful the question really is and get bogged into trivial details. Why doesn't QT allow me to compile GTK apps against it, or vice versa? is a very good question. There are C bindings for Qt and C++ for GTK. Making those bindings emulate the interface of the other lib is a large amount of work, but it's not impossibly big.
Here's the kicker: It would allow the programmer to use what language/interface she prefers (GTK/C or Qt/C++) and the user to decide how he wants the apps to look and feel (Qtish or GTKish). Something like this would go a *long* way to unifying Gnome and KDE without sacrificing one codebase. The user can then decide if he wants the Qt or the GTK libs installed, but all apps will run with either one.
-henrik
Re:A brief explanation of how libraries work
on
QT Mozilla Port
·
· Score: 2
It's not hard to call C++ code from C. You just need to do a bit of wrapping..
Just do something like this to avoid name mangling.. But to get back on the topic - what the hell are you talking about? It's true that c++ code needs to be linked against the c++ std lib, and equally true that the c code needs that too - but there's absolutly nothing stopping an app from linking both (there nothing stopping an app from linking both Qt and GTK+ either).
I the idea given in this thread is certainly feasable - to write a GTK+ API like wrapper in C for Qt and a Qt like wrapper in C++ for GTK+ - just wrapping native calls to a new API so Qt programs could be written using the GTK+ api. It certanly isnt *easy*, but it's possible.
In other words, TheKompany sells shareware/crippleware/demoware.
Eh? their products are either fully commercial, closed source, etc or totally open (gpled, bsded, or what license they use). For the most cases their commercial and open software is separate and have little to do with each other. Some of it is open-source but addons cost money - somewhat more questionable but still ok with me- usually the added features are stuff not that many need.
I just dont see their free projects as their evil plan to lure customers into feeling all warm and fuzzy then totally ripping them off. In my opinion the free stuff is their main thing, and the proprietary stuff is just to keep the food on the table. How else could they spend most of the day writing free stuff?
Now, that's a totally legitimate business plan, of course, but TheKompany isn't a free software company any more than Microsoft is. They're just selling proprietary software for an otherwise Free platform.
But please remember that they've released a lot more Free code than proprietary. Comparing them to microsoft is insulting. It's true though that they're not a *pure* free software company. They mix from both worlds. The "feel" i get is that they are a bunch of guys that wants to write free code, but still eat so they do the best they can.
So don't claim that they "Get it." And why are you knocking Ximian? It's fine to praise TheKompany in this forum, but will you (and TheKompany's prez!) quit it with the "t-shirt and monkey" crap?
I have nothing against Ximian and eazel and i truly hope they make it - but i just cant see how where they'll get the revenue. Hopefully it's just me being stupid.
Instead of depending on selling products that are far from their core product (think stuffed animals and t-shirts) theKompany doeswhat a software company should and make money from software - while at the same time releasing huge amounts of totally Free (RMS sense) code.
I have absolutly no problems buying products from theKompany - because I know I sponsor their free work by doing so (that their products are excellent may have something to do with it too:)
All people need food on the table, and selling some proprietary applications to be able to develop free stuff seems like a reasonable tradeoff. I'm afraid some linux companies will just disappear once they've burned through the VC money simply because they have no plans on how to make money.:(
Sorry FSF(Free Software Fanatics?:) but i feel that in some cases proprietary software might be a Good Thing. This could be one of them. The net effect of theKompany releasing some closed source products will be *more* Free software, not less.
Also: If you think their products could be useful: *please* buy them! It'll keep the free stuff coming.
A good assumption to make is that the NSA and it's likes can read *any* message it wants no matter how it was encrypted but they probably can't read *all* the messages they would want.
Another good assumption is that the intelligence services prefer breaking fingers to keys. Why waste a billion dollars in computing power when you can simply crack the guys fingers unless they give you the key?
A third one is that they aren't usually that interested in your pr0n collection.
(Yes, it're stolen from applied crypto. But it's good advice.)
I've tried convincing Americans about this too. Give it a break, most Amerians just dont get it. Their cultural biases sit too deep. McCarthyism is one of the most successful PR campaigns ever.
I just don't see any compelling reason to change from KDE 2 to Gnome/Natilus. The KDE desktop is clearly more advanced, and i can always keep the GTK+ libs installed to run usefull gtk programs. But Konqueror is clearly the killer app. It's somewhere between IE 4 and IE5 now, without the backing of the worlds largest software company. And that they've mananged to write a webbrowser that beats everything out there (for linux) without any webdeveloper support (how many people test their pages for konq. compability?) is just amazing.
We're talking about the ESA here, not NASA. There are only two countries out there that have manned spaceflight programs, and PRC is much closer to being number 3 than any European nation or group. In my opinion, the Japanese will have manned space flight before the Europeans.
A large reason for that being that Europe totally lacks suitable launch grounds(you need lots of empty ground east of your launch spot to let the various stages of the rockets fall down) If Europe tried launching rockets the parts would fall down somewhere near Moscow. I dont think the Russians would be to happy with that.
Europe certantly have the economical and technical means of manned spaceflight. It's a political problem, like much else..
Slashdot Mirror
It works extremely well. Best part is that my box is *completely* quiet. It's like having a fanless box. I've almost started to get annoyed by the noise my monitor makes. :)
It looks pretty cool too.
-henrik
The only practical use for it is if you want to zoom in on a specific part of the screen.
-henrik
But you're right. There's no publically known way of breaking DES that is better than bruteforce. Then again, with a 56bit keyspace it doesnt matter, because searching through 2^56 keys is practical. (TrippleDES is probably secure though, with a 112bit keyspace)
But then again, a pissing contest over keylengths is irrelevant. There are better ways of cracking encryption.
-henrik
But you're right, even weakly obfuscating something stopps atleast 95% of all attackers. Not everything needs to have military grade encryption..
-henrik
Yeah, lets prove it's bad for you before we do anything. Doing anything before there are thousands of dead people to back up the "alleged health risks" would be bad for big business and we cant have any of that, now can we?
No siree..
-henrik
Quote 2:
1) A 128 bit string has roughly 10^38 possible combinations (keys)
2) Assuming a pentium chip can perform 1 million decryptions per second of the algorithm 1000 pentiums working for 10 years would try roughly 10^17 keys - which is equivalent with a 58 bit real key length. (suspiciosly similar to DESes 56bit, maybe they use DES with some custom key magic to be able print "128bit keys" on the box)
This means there's a better than bruteforce way of cracking the algorithm used and this phone probably shouldnt be used for anything important (as we all know, des can be cracked in hours by d.net, probably in minutes or seconds by intelligence agencies)
Also, even if it isnt DES.10000 pentiums (1yr) - or more likely, a custom chip (much less), is not outside the reach of intelligence agencies or even large companies.
-henrik
Konqueror.
It's as good or possibly better tha Mozilla and IE and was developed in a true OSS fashion with no commercial backing in less than two years (i think - anyone know when konq. dev started?).
-henrik
Pretty funny acctually.. A game console called cheese. :)
-henrik
It's still very alpha and a lot of features aren't implemented, but KiT works reasonably well.
Feel free to try it out.. :)
-henrik
The attraction force between two bodies is given by F=G(m1*m2)/(d^2) (G=6,672*10^-11 N m^2/kg^2)- everything in SI of course.
The mass of earth is 5,977*10^25 kg and the mass of the elevator could be something like 1*10^4 kg. Reasonable estimate, maybe a bit on the short side - but they dont need to be that big.
Say things are lifted to 5*10^5 meters (you dont need to lift things to a 36 000 km orbit) you get..
F=G*(M[earth]*M[elevator])/(distance^2)
F=6.672*10^-11*5,977*10^25*1*10^4/(distance^2)
At ground level, the distance is 6000 km - giving F=1.1MN. At orbit (distance 6500km), the force is 9.4MN. The difference is just 15% - which can be easily taken care of by motors or even just by dropping parts of the counterweight/elevator as you go higher.
Or am i missing something obvious?
-henrik
-henrik
Then VCs got hold of the company and look at it now.. they simply dont understand what made the company successful.
I'm sorry Philip. :(
-henrik
In fact, the poster is absolutly correct- Kmail did have exactly the kind of bug he's talking about - a one billion second buffer overrun bug. They issued a patch a few weeks ago.
read about it here
-henrik
You seem to fail to realize how insightful the question really is and get bogged into trivial details. Why doesn't QT allow me to compile GTK apps against it, or vice versa? is a very good question. There are C bindings for Qt and C++ for GTK. Making those bindings emulate the interface of the other lib is a large amount of work, but it's not impossibly big.
Here's the kicker: It would allow the programmer to use what language/interface she prefers (GTK/C or Qt/C++) and the user to decide how he wants the apps to look and feel (Qtish or GTKish). Something like this would go a *long* way to unifying Gnome and KDE without sacrificing one codebase. The user can then decide if he wants the Qt or the GTK libs installed, but all apps will run with either one.
-henrik
It's not hard to call C++ code from C. You just need to do a bit of wrapping..
Just do something like this to avoid name mangling.. But to get back on the topic - what the hell are you talking about? It's true that c++ code needs to be linked against the c++ std lib, and equally true that the c code needs that too - but there's absolutly nothing stopping an app from linking both (there nothing stopping an app from linking both Qt and GTK+ either).
I the idea given in this thread is certainly feasable - to write a GTK+ API like wrapper in C for Qt and a Qt like wrapper in C++ for GTK+ - just wrapping native calls to a new API so Qt programs could be written using the GTK+ api. It certanly isnt *easy*, but it's possible.
class foo {
public:
void hi() { cout << "hi";};
};
extern "C"
{
void *makeFoo() { return new foo;}
hi(void *this) { foo *f=static_cast<foo*>(this); f->hi(); };
}
Calling C from C++ is even easier.
just extern "C" {} the C code.
-henrik
Eh? their products are either fully commercial, closed source, etc or totally open (gpled, bsded, or what license they use). For the most cases their commercial and open software is separate and have little to do with each other. Some of it is open-source but addons cost money - somewhat more questionable but still ok with me- usually the added features are stuff not that many need.
I just dont see their free projects as their evil plan to lure customers into feeling all warm and fuzzy then totally ripping them off. In my opinion the free stuff is their main thing, and the proprietary stuff is just to keep the food on the table. How else could they spend most of the day writing free stuff?
Now, that's a totally legitimate business plan, of course, but TheKompany isn't a free software company any more than Microsoft is. They're just selling proprietary software for an otherwise Free platform.
But please remember that they've released a lot more Free code than proprietary. Comparing them to microsoft is insulting. It's true though that they're not a *pure* free software company. They mix from both worlds. The "feel" i get is that they are a bunch of guys that wants to write free code, but still eat so they do the best they can.
So don't claim that they "Get it." And why are you knocking Ximian? It's fine to praise TheKompany in this forum, but will you (and TheKompany's prez!) quit it with the "t-shirt and monkey" crap?
I have nothing against Ximian and eazel and i truly hope they make it - but i just cant see how where they'll get the revenue. Hopefully it's just me being stupid.
-henrik
I have absolutly no problems buying products from theKompany - because I know I sponsor their free work by doing so (that their products are excellent may have something to do with it too :)
All people need food on the table, and selling some proprietary applications to be able to develop free stuff seems like a reasonable tradeoff. I'm afraid some linux companies will just disappear once they've burned through the VC money simply because they have no plans on how to make money. :(
Sorry FSF(Free Software Fanatics? :) but i feel that in some cases proprietary software might be a Good Thing. This could be one of them. The net effect of theKompany releasing some closed source products will be *more* Free software, not less.
Also: If you think their products could be useful: *please* buy them! It'll keep the free stuff coming.
Kudos to all @ theKompany.
-henrik (no, i dont work there :)
Another good assumption is that the intelligence services prefer breaking fingers to keys. Why waste a billion dollars in computing power when you can simply crack the guys fingers unless they give you the key?
A third one is that they aren't usually that interested in your pr0n collection.
(Yes, it're stolen from applied crypto. But it's good advice.)
-henrik
Give me a break..
-henrik
-henrik
-henrik
-henrik
-henrik
I just don't see any compelling reason to change from KDE 2 to Gnome/Natilus. The KDE desktop is clearly more advanced, and i can always keep the GTK+ libs installed to run usefull gtk programs. But Konqueror is clearly the killer app. It's somewhere between IE 4 and IE5 now, without the backing of the worlds largest software company. And that they've mananged to write a webbrowser that beats everything out there (for linux) without any webdeveloper support (how many people test their pages for konq. compability?) is just amazing.
-henrik
A large reason for that being that Europe totally lacks suitable launch grounds(you need lots of empty ground east of your launch spot to let the various stages of the rockets fall down) If Europe tried launching rockets the parts would fall down somewhere near Moscow. I dont think the Russians would be to happy with that.
Europe certantly have the economical and technical means of manned spaceflight. It's a political problem, like much else..
-henrik