By mlong: I have used computers for um, ever and I have NEVER gotten a word virus from an email attachment
That's really inconsequential in regards to Word files having the potential to transmit/spread virii. I (like many others here at/.) have over 20 years experience with various computering platforms. In all those years, I have never had a single virus on any system for which I was the only user (home and work). Regardless, I still install anti-virus software on my wife's computer and tell everyone I know who gets a computer or asks advice about what they need for the computer to make sure to install anti-virus software.
I also tell them to get a personal firewall, even though I personally have never had a personal system compromised by an outsider.
Just because I don't have a problem doesn't mean the problem doesn't exist. And just because I don't have a problem doesn't mean I should ignore the potential problems others might face. The fact is,.doc files are a wonderfully easy path of infection, and for the average user, they are a huge, unnecessary risk. It isn't a scare tactic. It is a decent way to reduce the spread of idiotic worms/virii in a simple way, while at the same time benefiting the free software movement.
Sounds like you are reading their claim to say "We can compress random data roughly 100:1. However, this only works for random data. For any data with sufficient lack of randomness, we can't compress it." That's an interesting interpretation:
NEW COMPRESSION ALGORITHM ANNOUNCED
Give us a stream of random bits from a truly random source. We'll give it back to you, compressed to only 1% of it's original size.
Disclaimer: Our compression algorithm is incapable of compressing text, image, or machine executable content. Limited time offer, some restrictions apply. Not available for all random data streams.
Yes, very interesting.
My interpretation is that any file can achieve 100:1 compression ratios, even totally random data (for some definititions of random).
Quote from AC:
The games with 500 page design documents before any implementation are also kidding themselves, because you can't make all the detail decisions without actually experiencing a lot of the interactions."
Bullshit. Every adventure game or linear RPG ever made belies that argument.
Have you been reading anything about neverwinter nights (http://nwvault.ign.com/ is my preferred source)? Frequently, the people from Bioware have made reference to the fact that they have had to make numerous changes to their original design for the game. Most recently, they've had to totally change the entire single player campaign presentation, because the original design felt disjointed and awkward, IIRC. This isn't the first time a development team has had to change an RPG, either, I'm betting.
For an adventure or RPG, you certainly need a well detailed story line, but you absolutely cannot create a design document for the entire game and not change any of it during development. I'm pretty sure all Carmack is saying you'll find some things that sound great in a design document but don't pan out in actual play. When that happens, you can either stubbornly (and idiotically, I assert) stick to the design document, or tune the idea to something that is fun to play and then update the design document to reflect the change.
Could have used this info months ago. Asked on several forums if there was a quiet way to keep my system cool while allowing me to run at a good enough speed to run modern games. The answer was always something along the lines of "Go with watercooling, or suffer with the noise from a delta."
I ended up settling for a system with decent, but not cutting edge speed (1 Gig TBird when 1.2 was the standard), moderate noise levels (audible in the room, but not annoying from outside the room), and decent but warm temps (around 48 C at full load).
The original NeXT was indeed 2-bit color. When they were trying to sell to us, that was a feature they pushed - a system with 2-bit greyscale, and a system with 8-bit color. The reason for 2-bit greyscale? Because Jobs found going from 2-bit grey to 8-bit color less design intensive than going from 1-bit to 8-bit color.
My question is, why would anyone want this annoying feature? I checked out the screen shot, and all I could think was "Crap, I'd hate that after about 10 seconds."
...would I scrap it for a complete unknown overnight?
Why assume you have to scrap one to bring up another? Incremental change and test networks allow for moving from one to the other in managable steps for most systems. Instead of scrapping it, why not replace one single, small part that didn't work currently with one that might work. Test the new part. If it works, proceed with the next part. If it doesn't work, you are out nothing, because what you had before didn't work either. There are very few systems in place that I've worked with where you can not do piece-meal upgrades like this to bring in something new without disturbing what already works.
Perhaps you mis-read me. According to my site's thinking, NT 4.0 is secure because we paid for it, and Linux is not secure because we did not pay for it (or substitute IIS and Apache for NT and Linux). I'm not here to discuss whether or not one is or can be made more secure than the other. I'm just trying to figure out how cost=security is all. I'll save the insecurity of M$ products for another news item.
I'm having this problem with my site. They don't want to go Linux, because they can't blame someone if there is a problem since it isn't a commercial application. I don't understand this, because a)it isn't true (that's why you buy a distro and support package) and b)Microsoft sells commercial applications that have tons of problems, but their license agreement is such that you can't blame them if something goes wrong.
This brilliant company thinking has even extended to the security tools I use here. I can't use freely downloadable tools because someone might have trojaned them. Only if we can pay someone to ship us an install CD can we use it, because if we pay for it, *WE KNOW IT IS SECURE* or something like that. I mean, come on, Microsoft NT 4.0 is super secure, because we paid lots, right?
Let's just face it, techies don't run things, and non-techies are mostly idiots when dealing with this kind of stuff.
I haven't checked the article posted above, but I have done some reading on the algorithm (http://www.counterpane.com/crypto-gram-9901.html has some good info), and Ms. Flannery, in her book, admits that she has quit working on C-P, as there is no obvious way to fix the flaw. The algorithm apparently works great as a private key system, but is nearly worthless for public key.
Slashdot Mirror
That's really inconsequential in regards to Word files having the potential to transmit/spread virii. I (like many others here at
I also tell them to get a personal firewall, even though I personally have never had a personal system compromised by an outsider.
Just because I don't have a problem doesn't mean the problem doesn't exist. And just because I don't have a problem doesn't mean I should ignore the potential problems others might face. The fact is,
RagManX
NEW COMPRESSION ALGORITHM ANNOUNCED
Yes, very interesting.
My interpretation is that any file can achieve 100:1 compression ratios, even totally random data (for some definititions of random).
RagManX
Quote from AC:
The games with 500 page design documents before any implementation are also kidding themselves, because you can't make all the detail decisions without actually experiencing a lot of the interactions."
Bullshit. Every adventure game or linear RPG ever made belies that argument.
Have you been reading anything about neverwinter nights (http://nwvault.ign.com/ is my preferred source)? Frequently, the people from Bioware have made reference to the fact that they have had to make numerous changes to their original design for the game. Most recently, they've had to totally change the entire single player campaign presentation, because the original design felt disjointed and awkward, IIRC. This isn't the first time a development team has had to change an RPG, either, I'm betting.
For an adventure or RPG, you certainly need a well detailed story line, but you absolutely cannot create a design document for the entire game and not change any of it during development. I'm pretty sure all Carmack is saying you'll find some things that sound great in a design document but don't pan out in actual play. When that happens, you can either stubbornly (and idiotically, I assert) stick to the design document, or tune the idea to something that is fun to play and then update the design document to reflect the change.
RagManX
Could have used this info months ago. Asked on several forums if there was a quiet way to keep my system cool while allowing me to run at a good enough speed to run modern games. The answer was always something along the lines of "Go with watercooling, or suffer with the noise from a delta."
I ended up settling for a system with decent, but not cutting edge speed (1 Gig TBird when 1.2 was the standard), moderate noise levels (audible in the room, but not annoying from outside the room), and decent but warm temps (around 48 C at full load).
RagManX
The original NeXT was indeed 2-bit color. When they were trying to sell to us, that was a feature they pushed - a system with 2-bit greyscale, and a system with 8-bit color. The reason for 2-bit greyscale? Because Jobs found going from 2-bit grey to 8-bit color less design intensive than going from 1-bit to 8-bit color.
My question is, why would anyone want this annoying feature? I checked out the screen shot, and all I could think was "Crap, I'd hate that after about 10 seconds."
RagManX
...would I scrap it for a complete unknown overnight?
Why assume you have to scrap one to bring up another? Incremental change and test networks allow for moving from one to the other in managable steps for most systems. Instead of scrapping it, why not replace one single, small part that didn't work currently with one that might work. Test the new part. If it works, proceed with the next part. If it doesn't work, you are out nothing, because what you had before didn't work either. There are very few systems in place that I've worked with where you can not do piece-meal upgrades like this to bring in something new without disturbing what already works.
RagManX
Perhaps you mis-read me. According to my site's thinking, NT 4.0 is secure because we paid for it, and Linux is not secure because we did not pay for it (or substitute IIS and Apache for NT and Linux). I'm not here to discuss whether or not one is or can be made more secure than the other. I'm just trying to figure out how cost=security is all. I'll save the insecurity of M$ products for another news item.
RagManX
I'm having this problem with my site. They don't want to go Linux, because they can't blame someone if there is a problem since it isn't a commercial application. I don't understand this, because a)it isn't true (that's why you buy a distro and support package) and b)Microsoft sells commercial applications that have tons of problems, but their license agreement is such that you can't blame them if something goes wrong.
This brilliant company thinking has even extended to the security tools I use here. I can't use freely downloadable tools because someone might have trojaned them. Only if we can pay someone to ship us an install CD can we use it, because if we pay for it, *WE KNOW IT IS SECURE* or something like that. I mean, come on, Microsoft NT 4.0 is super secure, because we paid lots, right?
Let's just face it, techies don't run things, and non-techies are mostly idiots when dealing with this kind of stuff.
RagManX
I haven't checked the article posted above, but I have done some reading on the algorithm (http://www.counterpane.com/crypto-gram-9901.html has some good info), and Ms. Flannery, in her book, admits that she has quit working on C-P, as there is no obvious way to fix the flaw. The algorithm apparently works great as a private key system, but is nearly worthless for public key.
RagManX