so all those idiots who open exe attachments and get infected with klez or whatever and cause a degradation of mail service are now *criminaly* stupid?
Would you rather have a list of things you are allowed to do (US Constitution, Bill of Rights etc.) or a list of things you are not allowed to do (UK common law, various Acts etc)?
Surely the US consititution is not a (definitive - as you implied) list of things you can do, but a list of things the government is not allowed to make laws stopping you from doing. It still takes an additional law to stop you from doing things not mentioned in their constitution.
[Search Engine 7] Name=&New York Times URL=http://www.majcher.com/nytview.html? url=%s&submit Query= Key=n Is post=0 Has endseparator=0 Encoding=utf-8 Search Type=13
Most serious IT departments don't care about the "hot off the compiler" patches because of the lack of testing involved in said patches.
Most serious IT departments may not actually install available patches the very second they come out, but they sure as hell want the available options on the table as soon as possible. They need to make an assessment of the risks, both of the bug and the fix, and decide their own strategy and timescales. MS delaying release except to a privileged few *does* negatively impact the rest, by reducing their choices and forcing a minimum timescale where they may well have decided to patch more aggressively.
The ancient Greek messenger Pheidippides is said to have have run so fast to deliver a message of victory to Athens, that he died having delivered it. The message contained one bit: we won.
Their work *is* being taken seriously, that's the point!
(It may still turn out to be wrong. No-one denies that. In fact it's more likely than not to be wrong. But it's worth investigating just in case it isn't.)
So is this trick repeatable? I mean, if you would not double but quadruple the bits, would this mean even more energy savings?
Quite possibly, but eventually you get into the law of diminishing returns. The engineering effort required to design something twice as complicated, and make sure it actually works, together with the increased cost in silicon real-estate may make it difficult or uneconomical to increase the complexity beyond a certain limit. At least for the current generation.
ASCAP takes a 24-hour sample of each radio station's airplay.
Which has the problem that less played bands get a disproportionately small share of the pie, since they tend to miss sample periods. The system thus favours major label signees working with big corporations with huge marketing budgets, at the expense of smaller and unsigned artists.
The problem is much worse in the case you describe, since there is no possibility of anything not stored on a supernode from being counted, no matter how many downloads it's racking up otherwise.
the complexity of IRS tax forms with Brilliant's terms of use... guess which one is harder to read?
Hardly surprising if not pleasant. The tax office want you to pay the tax you owe, which you'll only do if you can understand how much tax you owe. Spyware people *don't* want you to understand what you getting yourself into, they want you to just ignore the terms and click I Agree.
What they gone do when use period takes a dive cause people get tired of gettin ganked every time they turn on they radio or they TV.
Assert that the fall in sales is surely due to a vast increase in piracy, and that the only solution is for the government to increase taxes and give the money directly to the big producers.
On the other hand, I have a much easier time thinking of everyday legitimate uses for knives (cutting food, opening packages, spreading butter) than I do for a machine that can only do exact CD duplication.
Given the quote is from a music industry guy, it seems reasonable to assume the figure given applies only to music. But since when has this sort of propaganda been reasonable.
Microsoft probebly just told Verio to move their site to a server
Yeah, they probably thought that having each page transcribed by a team of goblins from originals written on damp toilet paper was a less effective solution...
Ah well, I guess the marketing dept is just doing its job. They would be out in the street without you gullible people...
Actually, my Seagate 40GB benchmarks about 78MB/s peak, 42MB/s *sustained*. Real-world I/O hungry code backs this up. Now imagine RAID 0 striping a bunch of these. You could reasonably expect to get hundreds of MB/s at reasonable cost.
What I don't undrestand is why google removed the links to his site? I can understand having to remove the cached copies of his site but how is having a link pointing to pages on his site in violation at all?
Case law. Universal vs. 2600/DeCSS. See the order, bottom of page 2, item 1c.
You've been able to buy combined DVD and VHS decks for a while now.
I conjecture that the basic cost of a DVD transport and decoding CPU is lower than the difference between standard VHS and D-VHS heads/decoding circuits. Even if this isn't true, the additional flexibility that disc-based storage gives in terms of locate/searchability (which in turn enables a richer presentation system - ie the DVD menu systems) produces a much better price/performance value.
The only thing tape does better than current optical media is recording/editing. I believe the way forward on this is hard disk for temporary storage, followed by writing to optical media once you have a large chunk you want to keep forever.
Basically, for the vast majority of users, I think this is a dead duck. 100,000 players at 1400 UKP each? That's peanuts in terms of volume and never going to be enough to bring prices down out of the misguided hifi-nut range.
And as far as copy protection goes (which, no matter how retailers try to spin it to sound like an advantage (!?) is never a win for the consumer) there is just nothing they can do that can't be done on any other digital media. Given that and the sales volume I can't see what the publishers see in it either.
I recall it winning the AES contest, but then, not so long afterwards, was discovered to be breakable?
Do you have any information at all on this? I hadn't heard that one before, and I would have expected any significant weakness to have gained a lot of publicity within crypto fora. I've just done a search and can't find any discussion of any new weakness in Rijndael. As far as I can tell it is still considered as secure as any new cipher.
distributed.net is about keeping possible encryption-killers out in the open.
Is it? I thought it was about publicising the power of massively distributed networks for solving a variety of problems. Not specifically breaking crypto. Though brute-force attacks are one obvious problem that benefits from parallel approaches, there are many others.
Even the RSA challenges are not so much about discovering or publicising new techniques, but about exploring the power of existing techniques and showing how self-defeating legal restrictions on crypto use can be.
it's even worse than seeing what happens to the light in the refrigerator when you close it, at least in that situation you can close the fridge while you're in it.
Oh go on, upload your brain into your dual-Pentium 4 server then provoke it into blue-screening. Dare ya!
Slashdot Mirror
Mens rea, mate, mens rea.
Surely the US consititution is not a (definitive - as you implied) list of things you can do, but a list of things the government is not allowed to make laws stopping you from doing. It still takes an additional law to stop you from doing things not mentioned in their constitution.
You'll need to un-slashmangle the URL above.
In common with every single other network OS out there, it has several remote root holes. We just haven't figured out what they are yet.
Most serious IT departments may not actually install available patches the very second they come out, but they sure as hell want the available options on the table as soon as possible. They need to make an assessment of the risks, both of the bug and the fix, and decide their own strategy and timescales. MS delaying release except to a privileged few *does* negatively impact the rest, by reducing their choices and forcing a minimum timescale where they may well have decided to patch more aggressively.
The ancient Greek messenger Pheidippides is said to have have run so fast to deliver a message of victory to Athens, that he died having delivered it. The message contained one bit: we won.
They must've decided that time travel was the only way to top "the most complicated sequence ever made".
Their work *is* being taken seriously, that's the point!
(It may still turn out to be wrong. No-one denies that. In fact it's more likely than not to be wrong. But it's worth investigating just in case it isn't.)
Drink enough and you'll be able to spot the other 49 too!
http://web.amnesty.org/web/ar2002.nsf/mde/iran!Ope n
Quite possibly, but eventually you get into the law of diminishing returns. The engineering effort required to design something twice as complicated, and make sure it actually works, together with the increased cost in silicon real-estate may make it difficult or uneconomical to increase the complexity beyond a certain limit. At least for the current generation.
"kudos"
Obviously Halster is a functional programmer.
Which has the problem that less played bands get a disproportionately small share of the pie, since they tend to miss sample periods. The system thus favours major label signees working with big corporations with huge marketing budgets, at the expense of smaller and unsigned artists.
The problem is much worse in the case you describe, since there is no possibility of anything not stored on a supernode from being counted, no matter how many downloads it's racking up otherwise.
Hardly surprising if not pleasant. The tax office want you to pay the tax you owe, which you'll only do if you can understand how much tax you owe. Spyware people *don't* want you to understand what you getting yourself into, they want you to just ignore the terms and click I Agree.
Assert that the fall in sales is surely due to a vast increase in piracy, and that the only solution is for the government to increase taxes and give the money directly to the big producers.
Copies of PhotoCDs for friends and family?
Given the quote is from a music industry guy, it seems reasonable to assume the figure given applies only to music. But since when has this sort of propaganda been reasonable.
Indeed. I've had five versions of this scam over the past few weeks. Nasty.
Yeah, they probably thought that having each page transcribed by a team of goblins from originals written on damp toilet paper was a less effective solution...
Actually, my Seagate 40GB benchmarks about 78MB/s peak, 42MB/s *sustained*. Real-world I/O hungry code backs this up. Now imagine RAID 0 striping a bunch of these. You could reasonably expect to get hundreds of MB/s at reasonable cost.
Case law. Universal vs. 2600/DeCSS. See the order, bottom of page 2, item 1c.
You've been able to buy combined DVD and VHS decks for a while now.
I conjecture that the basic cost of a DVD transport and decoding CPU is lower than the difference between standard VHS and D-VHS heads/decoding circuits. Even if this isn't true, the additional flexibility that disc-based storage gives in terms of locate/searchability (which in turn enables a richer presentation system - ie the DVD menu systems) produces a much better price/performance value.
The only thing tape does better than current optical media is recording/editing. I believe the way forward on this is hard disk for temporary storage, followed by writing to optical media once you have a large chunk you want to keep forever.
Basically, for the vast majority of users, I think this is a dead duck. 100,000 players at 1400 UKP each? That's peanuts in terms of volume and never going to be enough to bring prices down out of the misguided hifi-nut range.
And as far as copy protection goes (which, no matter how retailers try to spin it to sound like an advantage (!?) is never a win for the consumer) there is just nothing they can do that can't be done on any other digital media. Given that and the sales volume I can't see what the publishers see in it either.
Rijndael.
Do you have any information at all on this? I hadn't heard that one before, and I would have expected any significant weakness to have gained a lot of publicity within crypto fora. I've just done a search and can't find any discussion of any new weakness in Rijndael. As far as I can tell it is still considered as secure as any new cipher.
Is it? I thought it was about publicising the power of massively distributed networks for solving a variety of problems. Not specifically breaking crypto. Though brute-force attacks are one obvious problem that benefits from parallel approaches, there are many others.
Even the RSA challenges are not so much about discovering or publicising new techniques, but about exploring the power of existing techniques and showing how self-defeating legal restrictions on crypto use can be.
Oh go on, upload your brain into your dual-Pentium 4 server then provoke it into blue-screening. Dare ya!