In my understanding he stated that if there is 3 possiple places with life in just one solar system then others star should develop life fairly easy. So I stated that maybe all 3, if in fact there is/were life in Mars and Europa, could have the same origin, so they dont cotribute to the easiness of life emerging from non-life.
Our solar system is not a good sample, simply because it already has a planet witch hold life. Its possible that life can/could contaminate other planets in the neighborhood, this would make planets near a planet that already has life more probable of holding life.
The fact that an option exists in a file format or a protocol, it dosent mean that the end user will have to deal with it. file formats and protocols are back end structures, the more options they have the more freedom the programer have by the time he creates the program or service to the end user. It is the developer who must choose witch features it will use and witch features he will give as an option to the end user.
Its just me, or this sound like a good idea? Just spread some rumors about dadly trees, that poison people when you cut them down and people will be afraid of cutng them.:-D
ohh wait a minute here, I agree with you 100%. I was in fact bebating with the original author of the trhead, that the two issues, spam and file sharing, are if fact two diferent things. In his opinion the two are the same, but with spam the user is anoyed and with file sharing the owner of the copyright is the one anoyed.
I must disagree the fact that someone is trading or even seling copyrighted material does not anoy anyone, ib fact the copywright owner must go throw a some work to find out that hes work is being traded or selled. Who is anoyed is the cartel of content providers who wants to control who, what and how content is traded and most important selled.
Morals aside, there is a big diference betwen the two, in one casse a person or group of people are trading information. In the other one person is pushing information down a very large group of people.
I realy found this point is well taken, it seems that anti-semitism is "more evil" then other "anti-" movements is the optic of the press. I do think that the fact that he is anti-semetic is important and should have been mentioned, but I do believe that anti-semetic have more emphasis in the press then other type of prejudices.
I like when some one open my eyes to something I havent noticed before, thanks.:-)
Shure you can do the same DOS atack now, better only registring one time. This DOS atack could be easily diminished by only accepting the second WU from a newly register acount after verification. There could even be a set of precalculated WU only for the first time. But my point is that the olnly reason people are cheating is to get high scores, if your acount is terminated after a few cheats you can never get a high score.
The problem with SETI@Home is that they must trust the client, and this will never, I repeat, never, be safe. I do believe that all WU should be identifyed with a hash that takes into acount the key for witch user it was destined, this would make it a peace of cake to verify if the WU was not from the original user.
And as for randomly checking WUs, as stated before you should choose this WUs biased, based on witch acounts and groups have a higer rate of finished WUs.
Public keys are generated by the client, since for every public key there is a secret one. The system would only have to check if there is already a user with the same public key. much like the same test that is made today for every register engine on the web does for logins.
Witch packets each user receives is compleatly out of control of the user, since it is the server who picks witch packet it will send to each user.
Also I am not aware of what exactly the SETI@Home client does with the data, but I am pretty shure that it process the data and reply with a packect of processed data and not just a bit of "interesting"/"not interesting".
Re:Wasn't cheating to be "impossible" ?
on
Cheating at Seti@home
·
· Score: 4, Interesting
In fact this is a hard problem to solve, since you have to trust the computations made on the client side. Every security protocol must not trust the client! The solution in this case would be punishing the guilt.
My opinion is that each login should have a key, this key would sign all the packects received from this particular login. Now for every X packects received from any client, you resend one of them to another user, of there is a mismatch in the packet You then redo the calculation with your trusted code, and checkout witch is cheating and then ban this user.
Since cheating is for achieving higher pontuation, no one would like to be banned, since this would mean that one would have to restart their statisics. Groups could also be punished if one of their members is cheating making them also responsible for their components. This would help to police the network.
The key I proposed is for guaranty that a good user could not be sobotaged by other people sending packets in his name. Also one couls adopt a policy of sending more test packects to user with higher, more suspicious, rates of delivery.
Re:Multiple universes?
on
One of Many
·
· Score: 3, Insightful
This definition was created when we discovered that they in fact could be divided. Words mean whatever you understand of them. Dictionary can, and will be, changed. Language is a changing beast, and you can screem all you want that "hacker" is not an evil computer genius, that people will continue to use the word as they learned. This is culture.:-)
I compleatly agree with you, games today have achieved a higher grade of tech advancement, but gameability is almost the same in all of them. If you do not like of first person shooters youre out of luck.:-)
The lack of DTS sound and super high speed 3d acceleration in old games made the creative team work extra hard to create a game that not only was playable but also fun. Ive shown my atary to a bunch of kid (from 9 to 12 years old), they all loved the games. They found they were much easier to start plaing and understand then the newer ones and also funnier.
If you are writing your music with a computer, the use of color is quite easy, but if you are used to write your music with your instrument and a pencil, this would actualy made things harder. People on slashdot, including me, are used to use the computer for much of their tasks. But don't forget that there are people who produce better withou a computer, there are acutualy people who preffer to strike out a text in the paper then just pressing del.:-)
Not being pedantic, but MD5 is diferent from a dignature, a signature is much more safe. It relies in a secret key that only the developer holds, this key is used to encript a MD5 sum. Only the public key from the original packager can decript the MD5 correctly. This allows you to be certain that the person who packaged the software is the holder of the secret key.
RPM suports MD5 and signatures, but not all packages out there are actualy signed, the one from the major distros (red hat, ximian, mandrake) are certainly signed.
I don't think the people that he talked about was the consumers, but the hardware vendors, why there is no motherboard with firewire? Why all the consumer eletronics are USB, since firewire is much better?
Re:Why can't we think for ourselves?
on
Ready, Steady, Evolve
·
· Score: 3, Interesting
The catolic church did murder in the medieval times and it was all right. The United States goverment do murder people (death penalty) and it is all right. what is moral and what is not is just a matter of culture and culture changes. The highjackers of 9/11 murdered thousands of people, and I have no doubt that they think that this move were rigth thing to do. Shure in my opinion all those are incredliby wrong and moraly inaceptable, and I am an atheist. I do not fear that a god will punish me if I kill a person, but I do believe it is wrong.
Just because I don't believe there is a "god" watching over me this does not mean that all those things my parents, my family, my teachers and my friends have tought me are sudenly invalid. Religions do impose a moral, but it is not the only way. If this were so people who are jews or budist should have a diferent law then cristians or muslins? After all the laws reflect, or at least should reflect the morals of a culture.
And you ask what is the utility of morals beside avoid being punished? Why do you think the world is not a chaotic place? If there were no morals, people would kill each other because they steped on your feet. Every society have a moral, and it is dinamic, the hole point is that it changes slowly, in terms of generations. Your morals are diferent from those of you father and even more then of your grandfather. why do you think it was all right to have slaves before and now it is a crime? If morals weren't dinamic, we would still be slavaring people and buring witches in public places (maybe live in CNN).
People are moral not to avoid punishment, but because they do believe that folowing those rules they are doing the right thing. And if the olnly reason a person don't kill others is because you believe there is a "supreme being" that will punish you if he did, I do hope never to meet with that person, because when he or she overcome the fear of this "punishment", then he or she would most likely become a serial killer.
Why don't make it water cooled, then you just put a paper filter and some coffer, and tada... your computer makes coffe. If want hotter coffe, just overclock it a litte.:-)
No the kernel could have hooks so that userspace apps and/or libraries could do the processing.
Re:may god forgive him for what he has unleashed
on
The First Smiley :-)
·
· Score: 2
I don't agree, writing a letter takes more time then answering in text chat or something like that. In the times when we didn't have email, a letter could take days or even weeks to arrive, this would make more then enougth time to ponder about what you would answer.
e-mails ususualy get to their destiny in seconds, ina bad day minutes. The sender expects to get an answer quickly, depending on the urgency, a few hours or days. Also the amount of email we receive and answer tend to make the time available for each email very small.
Slashdot Mirror
In my understanding he stated that if there is 3 possiple places with life in just one solar system then others star should develop life fairly easy. So I stated that maybe all 3, if in fact there is/were life in Mars and Europa, could have the same origin, so they dont cotribute to the easiness of life emerging from non-life.
Our solar system is not a good sample, simply because it already has a planet witch hold life. Its possible that life can/could contaminate other planets in the neighborhood, this would make planets near a planet that already has life more probable of holding life.
The fact that an option exists in a file format or a protocol, it dosent mean that the end user will have to deal with it. file formats and protocols are back end structures, the more options they have the more freedom the programer have by the time he creates the program or service to the end user. It is the developer who must choose witch features it will use and witch features he will give as an option to the end user.
Its just me, or this sound like a good idea? Just spread some rumors about dadly trees, that poison people when you cut them down and people will be afraid of cutng them. :-D
ohh wait a minute here, I agree with you 100%. I was in fact bebating with the original author of the trhead, that the two issues, spam and file sharing, are if fact two diferent things. In his opinion the two are the same, but with spam the user is anoyed and with file sharing the owner of the copyright is the one anoyed.
I must disagree the fact that someone is trading or even seling copyrighted material does not anoy anyone, ib fact the copywright owner must go throw a some work to find out that hes work is being traded or selled. Who is anoyed is the cartel of content providers who wants to control who, what and how content is traded and most important selled.
Morals aside, there is a big diference betwen the two, in one casse a person or group of people are trading information. In the other one person is pushing information down a very large group of people.
One could cheat adding a snifer on line and getting more info then they suposed to have. Not having touched theys boxes.
I realy found this point is well taken, it seems that anti-semitism is "more evil" then other "anti-" movements is the optic of the press. I do think that the fact that he is anti-semetic is important and should have been mentioned, but I do believe that anti-semetic have more emphasis in the press then other type of prejudices.
:-)
I like when some one open my eyes to something I havent noticed before, thanks.
Also gif are not as lossless as people think, people tend to forget that color resolution is very important and gif only have 256 of them.
Shure you can do the same DOS atack now, better only registring one time. This DOS atack could be easily diminished by only accepting the second WU from a newly register acount after verification. There could even be a set of precalculated WU only for the first time. But my point is that the olnly reason people are cheating is to get high scores, if your acount is terminated after a few cheats you can never get a high score.
The problem with SETI@Home is that they must trust the client, and this will never, I repeat, never, be safe. I do believe that all WU should be identifyed with a hash that takes into acount the key for witch user it was destined, this would make it a peace of cake to verify if the WU was not from the original user.
And as for randomly checking WUs, as stated before you should choose this WUs biased, based on witch acounts and groups have a higer rate of finished WUs.
Public keys are generated by the client, since for every public key there is a secret one. The system would only have to check if there is already a user with the same public key. much like the same test that is made today for every register engine on the web does for logins.
Witch packets each user receives is compleatly out of control of the user, since it is the server who picks witch packet it will send to each user.
Also I am not aware of what exactly the SETI@Home client does with the data, but I am pretty shure that it process the data and reply with a packect of processed data and not just a bit of "interesting"/"not interesting".
In fact this is a hard problem to solve, since you have to trust the computations made on the client side. Every security protocol must not trust the client! The solution in this case would be punishing the guilt.
My opinion is that each login should have a key, this key would sign all the packects received from this particular login. Now for every X packects received from any client, you resend one of them to another user, of there is a mismatch in the packet You then redo the calculation with your trusted code, and checkout witch is cheating and then ban this user.
Since cheating is for achieving higher pontuation, no one would like to be banned, since this would mean that one would have to restart their statisics. Groups could also be punished if one of their members is cheating making them also responsible for their components. This would help to police the network.
The key I proposed is for guaranty that a good user could not be sobotaged by other people sending packets in his name. Also one couls adopt a policy of sending more test packects to user with higher, more suspicious, rates of delivery.
This definition was created when we discovered that they in fact could be divided. Words mean whatever you understand of them. Dictionary can, and will be, changed. Language is a changing beast, and you can screem all you want that "hacker" is not an evil computer genius, that people will continue to use the word as they learned. This is culture. :-)
I compleatly agree with you, games today have achieved a higher grade of tech advancement, but gameability is almost the same in all of them. If you do not like of first person shooters youre out of luck. :-)
The lack of DTS sound and super high speed 3d acceleration in old games made the creative team work extra hard to create a game that not only was playable but also fun. Ive shown my atary to a bunch of kid (from 9 to 12 years old), they all loved the games. They found they were much easier to start plaing and understand then the newer ones and also funnier.
Does this answer that question?
dynamically updated ChangeLog for Xfree.
If you are writing your music with a computer, the use of color is quite easy, but if you are used to write your music with your instrument and a pencil, this would actualy made things harder. People on slashdot, including me, are used to use the computer for much of their tasks. But don't forget that there are people who produce better withou a computer, there are acutualy people who preffer to strike out a text in the paper then just pressing del. :-)
Not being pedantic, but MD5 is diferent from a dignature, a signature is much more safe. It relies in a secret key that only the developer holds, this key is used to encript a MD5 sum. Only the public key from the original packager can decript the MD5 correctly. This allows you to be certain that the person who packaged the software is the holder of the secret key.
RPM suports MD5 and signatures, but not all packages out there are actualy signed, the one from the major distros (red hat, ximian, mandrake) are certainly signed.
This $200 box does not have a NVidia GeForce4 bundled. I guess this is a very compealing reason to hack a XBox. :-)
The only problem for them is that people will someday realise that AMD is faster and cheaper. :-)
I don't think the people that he talked about was the consumers, but the hardware vendors, why there is no motherboard with firewire? Why all the consumer eletronics are USB, since firewire is much better?
The catolic church did murder in the medieval times and it was all right. The United States goverment do murder people (death penalty) and it is all right. what is moral and what is not is just a matter of culture and culture changes. The highjackers of 9/11 murdered thousands of people, and I have no doubt that they think that this move were rigth thing to do. Shure in my opinion all those are incredliby wrong and moraly inaceptable, and I am an atheist. I do not fear that a god will punish me if I kill a person, but I do believe it is wrong.
Just because I don't believe there is a "god" watching over me this does not mean that all those things my parents, my family, my teachers and my friends have tought me are sudenly invalid. Religions do impose a moral, but it is not the only way. If this were so people who are jews or budist should have a diferent law then cristians or muslins? After all the laws reflect, or at least should reflect the morals of a culture.
And you ask what is the utility of morals beside avoid being punished? Why do you think the world is not a chaotic place? If there were no morals, people would kill each other because they steped on your feet. Every society have a moral, and it is dinamic, the hole point is that it changes slowly, in terms of generations. Your morals are diferent from those of you father and even more then of your grandfather. why do you think it was all right to have slaves before and now it is a crime? If morals weren't dinamic, we would still be slavaring people and buring witches in public places (maybe live in CNN).
People are moral not to avoid punishment, but because they do believe that folowing those rules they are doing the right thing. And if the olnly reason a person don't kill others is because you believe there is a "supreme being" that will punish you if he did, I do hope never to meet with that person, because when he or she overcome the fear of this "punishment", then he or she would most likely become a serial killer.
Why don't make it water cooled, then you just put a paper filter and some coffer, and tada... your computer makes coffe. If want hotter coffe, just overclock it a litte. :-)
No the kernel could have hooks so that userspace apps and/or libraries could do the processing.
e-mails ususualy get to their destiny in seconds, ina bad day minutes. The sender expects to get an answer quickly, depending on the urgency, a few hours or days. Also the amount of email we receive and answer tend to make the time available for each email very small.