but they don't fail. First of all, if you want to remove the restriction for a VoIP phone to only call other VoIP phones in and of itself you have to wire and pay for a phone line in parallel to your Ethernet/IP Networking tech thats already in place. This virtually undermines the idea and benifits of VoIP in the first place. Instead, what we do at Stanford in one of the networking buildings is have a Cisco VoIP system installed thats routed in parallel (read same physical networks, different subnet) to the IP system. Anyone that wants to call inter-system or to previously defined VoIP phones can do so for free (speech). This doesn't prevent the same people from calling other locations, but this is accomplished by a on site server connected to the phone system which routes any off site numbers to the standard phone system. This way only a limited number of phone lines are needed for the entire system, the PABX infrastructure that would be the alternative to VoIP isn't needed, and costs are saved on any calls to offsite VoIP phones. I suspect that the VoIP phones we are speaking of could use the same time of system; however, regarding the VoIP phones in and of themselves, only VoIP-VoIP connections can be made
Two words: Portability; Standards
on
FCC Goes WiFi
·
· Score: 2, Informative
Why release the document in PDF if it is meant for the internet? How about because the PDF ensures true to original formatting and text? Just because something is electronic doesn't mean that it can't be a document, and thats where PDF comes in; PDF bridges the gap between the printed and electronic document worlds, because it renders irrelent where, when or by whom the electronic doc is printed, or if it is printed at all. It doesn't matter whether you want to read the document on your *nix/OSX/Win/Palm/JVM, you can get a supported app that will render it appropriately and clearly for your device, regardless of resolution. Don't even get me started on Word documents being distributed instead of PDF. Additionally, PDF allows for revision history, you know exactly what document you are discussing, without the need for cross checking access dates on a webpage (which I assume would be the alternative). Especially with my background in graphics and design work, PDFs are a godsend when exporting vector work or text. This is especially true when Joe Average decides to print something off www/email. PDF = perfect print, txt/html/rtf = same print, plus the wonderful bonus of having whatever mutilations Mr. Average's printer settings and margins decide to make /rant
Well although the parent is quick to point out the $200m cost of the Hubble Space Telescope (HST) in comparison to the $400m shuttle launch cost thats just plain incorrect.
The correct figures are as follows (taken from http://hubble.nasa.gov/faq.html + NASA STS-82 docs):
Initial Cost: $1.5 Billion Yearly Cost: $230-250 Million STS-82 Repair:
Parts: $387 Million
Flight: $430 Million
So if we tally the costs over the first 15 years of operation (up to say ~2000) we come to: $5.3 Billion
So getting back to the topic. From the comments that are here so far it seems that the article and conclusions are of questionable origin and merits, so in an effort to give all the/. crowd a useful source of information on the entire subject of time (so that this article isn't entirely pointless), I would like to point out the Scientific American issue entirely devoted to the subject. Specifically, the September 2002 Special Issue _A Matter Of Time_ was excellent, and I would highly recommend reading the same to anyone interested in the scientific, or physilogical basis of time. For those of you that have a subscription to the Scientific American Archive (either personal or through your college) heres the direct link to that issue.
Ok well for some reason the parent got moderated "Insightful" so I guess I have to go ahead in anti-troll mode.
Why not go ahead and try the core unix filesharing methods? NFS, AFS, SFTP, SCP; all supported on both UNIX and OS X. In fact, if theres another method that works on *nix and is portable then why not just bring it along! The BSD subsystem of OS X isn't just there for show you know.
I am curious as to whether there are any projects to port Reiser4 to *BSD, particularly FreeBSD 5.x. Does anyone have any thoughts on how difficult a port might be? Can somone more versed in filesystems on *nix enlighten me as to the implimentation differences?
After looking at the article and TDRL's website, the more interesting side of the story seems to come from the USA Today article, specifically IBM's new goal to make computing power a utility such that on demand computing can be purchased just like the power/water/gas utilities of today. The animation stills from TDRL are ok, but nothing spectacular. I've seen more realistic stills come out of a skilled single artist with Maya (see here). The incredible results that Pixar has been able to achieve through their research into rendering technology (ie. RenderMan) combined with artistic prowess have brought them success, and I fail to see how the Terminator 2 producer merely acquiring processor power brings TDRL into a position to challenge the best in the field.
But those girls arn't about to be nude sunbathing except in the perverted dreams of/. geeks. If you've ever been to a UC school (particularly UCSB) you'll realize why the running joke exists among students at Stanford that we happen to have the lowest demographic of hot chics in Cali. And yes, its a running joke.
Uhm...
you do realize this is Stanford University right? Most of the chics that would be sunbathing nude would cause whoever downloaded the pictures to go a) blind b) insane c) celebate
As with many file based cracks, it is at very least debatable over the need for Administrator access on the box itself. One method that I used to see in the L0phtCrack days was to boot the machine using a black box distribution on a floppy (compressed minimal *nix kernel with ntfs support) then grab the.sam file from the hard drive itself. From there, you can take your time cracking the Administrator password, and then with that access you can remotely dump the registry database on the server from any box on the network. Then all thats needed is the time to crack away at leisure. Note that the domain controller registry contains user/password hash for all users on the domain, while the.sam file only contains the local admin password hash (and possibly a few others... its been a while).
On a small aside, this can also be handy as hell when your a computer store looking at a perfectly good server box that the admin (and I use the term lightly) has forgotten the password to. Rather than reinstall the entire box, pull the.sam file off of the hdd and run good ole L0pht... bang! 15 seconds later (if of course the dictionary attack works) and you have the password.
Oh and as a counter to the comment about the security of unix passwords being only 4096 times greater, I have two words: md5 hash.
Remember that as soon as you censor one thing, you must censor everything. If the system has the ability to say restirct kiddie porn then it must have the ability to arbitrairly restrict anything, therefore undermining the system in its entirety. Also, remember that freenet functions to keep alive items that are most frequently accessed, so if the world were free of perverts we wouldn't have the problem in the first place;)
Possibly the fact that over the 10-15 years of the Apollo program we spent the equivalent of $3.96 Trillion in 2000 dollars. Yep, thats over $300 Billion a year. whats the current budget? $12B?
Thats whats wrong. If we spent even a semblance of what we were spending then great things would be accomplished, but without the challange of our Cold War enemy well we just don't seem up to the task. Shame really:(
We're not committed to spending what it will really take to do what we want NASA to do.
Exactly! I've been reading a few of the posts which dispute the parent and all of them are ludicrously incorrect. By no means could Apollo have been done on anything close to today's NASA budget, nor could many of the other great steps in space flight. For a little reality check, over the course of about a decade, the Apollo program cost the US the equivalent in circa 2000 dollars of $3.96 Trillion. Yes I didn't misspeak, Trillion. Now how exactly does that justify claiming that the Apollo project could be run on the shuttle budget of a few billion a year? The entire NASA budget of what was it? 8? We're talking of almost $40 Billion a year. How the hell are we supposed to fund the physics, material science, engineering and development work necessary for a new generation of vehicle with such measily funds?
And one last comment to those that say that the silly notion of space flight is beyond us. Its not. The space shuttle runs on 1970s technology. The fastest plane is still the SR-71 created back in the 50s. If we were to throw even a semblance of the funds we used on those programs at NASA they would do amazing things. With the loss of the Cold War we lost the justification for spending silly sums of money on great causes, and furthermore the problem greatens when most of the technological advances of such programs are taken for granted by people. Velcro (a crappy example I know), advanced plastics, composite, and countless other advances are all due soley to the amount we expended on NASA in the early days.
One of the principle uses of GPS which I have seen in farming is doing year to year yield mapping. Thats where you have sophisticated equipment on your harvester that does realtime yield analysis (ie. figures out how much corn/soy/etc. you are pulling off the specific patch of land you are harvesting) and associates that number with the GPS coordinates the harvester is currently at. That way not only does a farmer know their per acre yield but knows where each of their good/bad yield spots are quantitatively and can either cross reference that with soil maps or other data to determine the reason for the different yields and if possible increase yeilds.
for quite some time now and I mean I've sure found the same thing. I can't seem to hear the difference between audio out and the rest of the hardware plugged into my stereo. Seems like 5.1 onboard is coming of age being analog^W digital and all... erm...
Comment, Mod, ARRGGH its so hard!:P but I'll bite...
The recording of broadcast material (read news/live/tv/movies) by the home/consumer market is explicitly permitted* by the Sony v. Universal ruling [464 US 417 (1984)]. Therefore the MPAA doesn't have a foot to stand on if they attack PVR's which carry features qualitatively equivalent to that available on the VHS platform.
The issue with PVR's which go a step further to redistribute content to other users on the network is that in redistributing the content in a non-physical form to persons with whom you have loose if any affiliations opens up the end user for copyright infringement proceedings. Burning a DVD and redistributing the content doesn't carry the same issues or implecations as such use is effectively legalized by the Audio Home Recording Act of 1992 and Sony v. Universal as this is seen as private non-commercial redistribution (such as sharing an Audio Tape or CD among friends).
Again, regarding adding features such as commercial skipping and burning commercial skipped shows to dvd (as the parent post requested), I highly doubt the addition of these features due to the chance, and high incentive, of advertisers then challenging whether or not the device is covered by Sony v. Universal or the AHRA of 1992. No longer is the device merely time-shifting or media-shifting the content, it is altering the content which is not explicitly covered (As far as I know).
* Note: Ok technically an action is not permitted or legalized by a court ruling, but such wording prevented me from saying: as is established as precedent by the case...
Ummm, exactly WHY do you think the NSA seems to have suddenly stopped contributing code to the NSA security enhanced linux project?
I suppose the NSA stopping all development on SE Linux is the reason that they just posted updates one week ago to SE Linux, as well as in January 2003, December 2002, and October 2002, all of which took place after this article reported them dropping the project (August 2002).
Not to flame, but just check your sources first next time;)
There are at least half a dozen filesystem encryption programs that function on OpenBSD
Well, yes and no.
CFS - Weak (DES) encryption
TCFS - Slow (3DES) encryption
cryptfs - Blowfish (good) encryption, but the system relies on mounting loopback / stacked devices, which although being the best option available, is still slower than crypto integrated straight into the disk structure itself.
In fact all the fs-crypto mechanisms that I know of that work on OpenBSD either are slow due to the loopback method of mounting the drive, are based on weak encryption, or are just made as proof-of-concept rather than DOD-standard encryption implementations.
Although OpenBSD has recently gotten a reputition for being ubersecure, and thus this article about how it has been getting funds from DARPA, it is by no means unique. It seems that this perception of OBSD has come from its ability to do encrypted swap, and encryption in most faculties; however, it blatently neglects disk based security.
I'd like to point out that DARPA is also funding the FreeBSD project, specifically enabling the development of FBSD 5.0's geom/gbde functions, which enable a fully modular disk access system, and transparent drive encryption. Really cool features, and it looks like once the code gets a stronger review from the crypto community it should really open up the possibilites for securing FBSD.
First of all, theres no way that the structure could be supported solely from the ground, the bottom is anchored, but thats not why its rotates with the earth. Rather, the top is anchored to some heavy object (read asteroid or the like) that is (somehow) placed into a geosync orbit. The structure merely provides a way to efficiently travel from earth to the other object (as you have a solid medium to push against and facilitate the change in grav. potential).
P.S. Yes, technically the orbit of the top of the elevator/upper anchor is not geosync, but rather slightly above geosync to allow for the center of mass of the contraption to be geosync in its orbit, (and the bottom anchor then serves to maintain the proper orientation).
Slashdot Mirror
but they don't fail. First of all, if you want to remove the restriction for a VoIP phone to only call other VoIP phones in and of itself you have to wire and pay for a phone line in parallel to your Ethernet/IP Networking tech thats already in place. This virtually undermines the idea and benifits of VoIP in the first place. Instead, what we do at Stanford in one of the networking buildings is have a Cisco VoIP system installed thats routed in parallel (read same physical networks, different subnet) to the IP system. Anyone that wants to call inter-system or to previously defined VoIP phones can do so for free (speech). This doesn't prevent the same people from calling other locations, but this is accomplished by a on site server connected to the phone system which routes any off site numbers to the standard phone system. This way only a limited number of phone lines are needed for the entire system, the PABX infrastructure that would be the alternative to VoIP isn't needed, and costs are saved on any calls to offsite VoIP phones. I suspect that the VoIP phones we are speaking of could use the same time of system; however, regarding the VoIP phones in and of themselves, only VoIP-VoIP connections can be made
Why release the document in PDF if it is meant for the internet? How about because the PDF ensures true to original formatting and text? Just because something is electronic doesn't mean that it can't be a document, and thats where PDF comes in; PDF bridges the gap between the printed and electronic document worlds, because it renders irrelent where, when or by whom the electronic doc is printed, or if it is printed at all. It doesn't matter whether you want to read the document on your *nix/OSX/Win/Palm/JVM, you can get a supported app that will render it appropriately and clearly for your device, regardless of resolution. Don't even get me started on Word documents being distributed instead of PDF. Additionally, PDF allows for revision history, you know exactly what document you are discussing, without the need for cross checking access dates on a webpage (which I assume would be the alternative). Especially with my background in graphics and design work, PDFs are a godsend when exporting vector work or text. This is especially true when Joe Average decides to print something off www/email. PDF = perfect print, txt/html/rtf = same print, plus the wonderful bonus of having whatever mutilations Mr. Average's printer settings and margins decide to make
/rant
Well although the parent is quick to point out the $200m cost of the Hubble Space Telescope (HST) in comparison to the $400m shuttle launch cost thats just plain incorrect.
The correct figures are as follows (taken from http://hubble.nasa.gov/faq.html + NASA STS-82 docs):
Initial Cost: $1.5 Billion
Yearly Cost: $230-250 Million
STS-82 Repair:
Parts: $387 Million
Flight: $430 Million
So if we tally the costs over the first 15 years of operation (up to say ~2000) we come to: $5.3 Billion
But I have Karma to burn ;)
/. crowd a useful source of information on the entire subject of time (so that this article isn't entirely pointless), I would like to point out the Scientific American issue entirely devoted to the subject. Specifically, the September 2002 Special Issue _A Matter Of Time_ was excellent, and I would highly recommend reading the same to anyone interested in the scientific, or physilogical basis of time. For those of you that have a subscription to the Scientific American Archive (either personal or through your college) heres the direct link to that issue.
So getting back to the topic. From the comments that are here so far it seems that the article and conclusions are of questionable origin and merits, so in an effort to give all the
and that if this degree of lax accounting was taking place in a private corporation, the owners would face legal action.
So in other words the US Govt is significantly (Enron) better (Worldcom) than (Anderson) most (ImClone) companies... and (Martha Stewart) people.
Thats a relif.
Ok well for some reason the parent got moderated "Insightful" so I guess I have to go ahead in anti-troll mode.
Why not go ahead and try the core unix filesharing methods? NFS, AFS, SFTP, SCP; all supported on both UNIX and OS X. In fact, if theres another method that works on *nix and is portable then why not just bring it along! The BSD subsystem of OS X isn't just there for show you know.
I am curious as to whether there are any projects to port Reiser4 to *BSD, particularly FreeBSD 5.x. Does anyone have any thoughts on how difficult a port might be? Can somone more versed in filesystems on *nix enlighten me as to the implimentation differences?
After looking at the article and TDRL's website, the more interesting side of the story seems to come from the USA Today article, specifically IBM's new goal to make computing power a utility such that on demand computing can be purchased just like the power/water/gas utilities of today. The animation stills from TDRL are ok, but nothing spectacular. I've seen more realistic stills come out of a skilled single artist with Maya (see here). The incredible results that Pixar has been able to achieve through their research into rendering technology (ie. RenderMan) combined with artistic prowess have brought them success, and I fail to see how the Terminator 2 producer merely acquiring processor power brings TDRL into a position to challenge the best in the field.
But those girls arn't about to be nude sunbathing except in the perverted dreams of /. geeks. If you've ever been to a UC school (particularly UCSB) you'll realize why the running joke exists among students at Stanford that we happen to have the lowest demographic of hot chics in Cali. And yes, its a running joke.
Uhm ...
:P
you do realize this is Stanford University right? Most of the chics that would be sunbathing nude would cause whoever downloaded the pictures to go a) blind b) insane c) celebate
I should know, I go there
As with many file based cracks, it is at very least debatable over the need for Administrator access on the box itself. One method that I used to see in the L0phtCrack days was to boot the machine using a black box distribution on a floppy (compressed minimal *nix kernel with ntfs support) then grab the .sam file from the hard drive itself. From there, you can take your time cracking the Administrator password, and then with that access you can remotely dump the registry database on the server from any box on the network. Then all thats needed is the time to crack away at leisure. Note that the domain controller registry contains user/password hash for all users on the domain, while the .sam file only contains the local admin password hash (and possibly a few others ... its been a while).
.sam file off of the hdd and run good ole L0pht ... bang! 15 seconds later (if of course the dictionary attack works) and you have the password.
On a small aside, this can also be handy as hell when your a computer store looking at a perfectly good server box that the admin (and I use the term lightly) has forgotten the password to. Rather than reinstall the entire box, pull the
Oh and as a counter to the comment about the security of unix passwords being only 4096 times greater, I have two words: md5 hash.
Remember that as soon as you censor one thing, you must censor everything. If the system has the ability to say restirct kiddie porn then it must have the ability to arbitrairly restrict anything, therefore undermining the system in its entirety. Also, remember that freenet functions to keep alive items that are most frequently accessed, so if the world were free of perverts we wouldn't have the problem in the first place ;)
Possibly the fact that over the 10-15 years of the Apollo program we spent the equivalent of $3.96 Trillion in 2000 dollars. Yep, thats over $300 Billion a year. whats the current budget? $12B?
:(
Thats whats wrong. If we spent even a semblance of what we were spending then great things would be accomplished, but without the challange of our Cold War enemy well we just don't seem up to the task. Shame really
We're not committed to spending what it will really take to do what we want NASA to do.
Exactly! I've been reading a few of the posts which dispute the parent and all of them are ludicrously incorrect. By no means could Apollo have been done on anything close to today's NASA budget, nor could many of the other great steps in space flight. For a little reality check, over the course of about a decade, the Apollo program cost the US the equivalent in circa 2000 dollars of $3.96 Trillion. Yes I didn't misspeak, Trillion. Now how exactly does that justify claiming that the Apollo project could be run on the shuttle budget of a few billion a year? The entire NASA budget of what was it? 8? We're talking of almost $40 Billion a year. How the hell are we supposed to fund the physics, material science, engineering and development work necessary for a new generation of vehicle with such measily funds?
And one last comment to those that say that the silly notion of space flight is beyond us. Its not. The space shuttle runs on 1970s technology. The fastest plane is still the SR-71 created back in the 50s. If we were to throw even a semblance of the funds we used on those programs at NASA they would do amazing things. With the loss of the Cold War we lost the justification for spending silly sums of money on great causes, and furthermore the problem greatens when most of the technological advances of such programs are taken for granted by people. Velcro (a crappy example I know), advanced plastics, composite, and countless other advances are all due soley to the amount we expended on NASA in the early days.
I think they should try to concentrate on creating a solid, platform independent system.
... or wait; maybe all these PATRIOTesque laws are confusing me. I'm confused ....
Over here, we call them "ballot boxes".
Oh! I think we have those in the states as well but they're called gallows.
One of the principle uses of GPS which I have seen in farming is doing year to year yield mapping. Thats where you have sophisticated equipment on your harvester that does realtime yield analysis (ie. figures out how much corn/soy/etc. you are pulling off the specific patch of land you are harvesting) and associates that number with the GPS coordinates the harvester is currently at. That way not only does a farmer know their per acre yield but knows where each of their good/bad yield spots are quantitatively and can either cross reference that with soil maps or other data to determine the reason for the different yields and if possible increase yeilds.
for quite some time now and I mean I've sure found the same thing. I can't seem to hear the difference between audio out and the rest of the hardware plugged into my stereo. Seems like 5.1 onboard is coming of age being analog^W digital and all ... erm ...
... nevermind
*thud*
Comment, Mod, ARRGGH its so hard! :P but I'll bite ...
...
The recording of broadcast material (read news/live/tv/movies) by the home/consumer market is explicitly permitted* by the Sony v. Universal ruling [464 US 417 (1984)]. Therefore the MPAA doesn't have a foot to stand on if they attack PVR's which carry features qualitatively equivalent to that available on the VHS platform.
The issue with PVR's which go a step further to redistribute content to other users on the network is that in redistributing the content in a non-physical form to persons with whom you have loose if any affiliations opens up the end user for copyright infringement proceedings. Burning a DVD and redistributing the content doesn't carry the same issues or implecations as such use is effectively legalized by the Audio Home Recording Act of 1992 and Sony v. Universal as this is seen as private non-commercial redistribution (such as sharing an Audio Tape or CD among friends).
Again, regarding adding features such as commercial skipping and burning commercial skipped shows to dvd (as the parent post requested), I highly doubt the addition of these features due to the chance, and high incentive, of advertisers then challenging whether or not the device is covered by Sony v. Universal or the AHRA of 1992. No longer is the device merely time-shifting or media-shifting the content, it is altering the content which is not explicitly covered (As far as I know).
* Note: Ok technically an action is not permitted or legalized by a court ruling, but such wording prevented me from saying: as is established as precedent by the case
Ummm, exactly WHY do you think the NSA seems to have suddenly stopped contributing code to the NSA security enhanced linux project?
;)
I suppose the NSA stopping all development on SE Linux is the reason that they just posted updates one week ago to SE Linux, as well as in January 2003, December 2002, and October 2002, all of which took place after this article reported them dropping the project (August 2002).
Not to flame, but just check your sources first next time
"We're sorry. This Windows Media 9 Series content is only available to be viewed using Internet Explorer."
Microsoft Anticompetitive? Never!
*Randomize*
Antitrust case my ass.
I don't know you, but I'm still waiting for my Red Swingline. None of this new curved 747 crap, the true Classic Red Swingline qua Office Space.
There are at least half a dozen filesystem encryption programs that function on OpenBSD
Well, yes and no.
CFS - Weak (DES) encryption
TCFS - Slow (3DES) encryption
cryptfs - Blowfish (good) encryption, but the system relies on mounting loopback / stacked devices, which although being the best option available, is still slower than crypto integrated straight into the disk structure itself.
In fact all the fs-crypto mechanisms that I know of that work on OpenBSD either are slow due to the loopback method of mounting the drive, are based on weak encryption, or are just made as proof-of-concept rather than DOD-standard encryption implementations.
Although OpenBSD has recently gotten a reputition for being ubersecure, and thus this article about how it has been getting funds from DARPA, it is by no means unique. It seems that this perception of OBSD has come from its ability to do encrypted swap, and encryption in most faculties; however, it blatently neglects disk based security.
I'd like to point out that DARPA is also funding the FreeBSD project, specifically enabling the development of FBSD 5.0's geom/gbde functions, which enable a fully modular disk access system, and transparent drive encryption. Really cool features, and it looks like once the code gets a stronger review from the crypto community it should really open up the possibilites for securing FBSD.
Salt grain, Slashdot.
Slashdot, Salt grain.
First of all, theres no way that the structure could be supported solely from the ground, the bottom is anchored, but thats not why its rotates with the earth. Rather, the top is anchored to some heavy object (read asteroid or the like) that is (somehow) placed into a geosync orbit. The structure merely provides a way to efficiently travel from earth to the other object (as you have a solid medium to push against and facilitate the change in grav. potential).
P.S. Yes, technically the orbit of the top of the elevator/upper anchor is not geosync, but rather slightly above geosync to allow for the center of mass of the contraption to be geosync in its orbit, (and the bottom anchor then serves to maintain the proper orientation).