Before everyone gets their panties in a knot I though I would paste a link to the definition of defamation since a few of the comments suggested many don't know the actual definition. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/D...
That's not the point. The point is, do we want criminals to have the ability to hide information that can protect them from incarceration? What about crime prevention?
I see two recurring expectations on Slashdot 1. Privacy for the little guy 2. Corporate / Government Transparency
Whenever I read topics that involve POWER I always hear about one of these. When the big guy screws up the community expects transparency but when the little guy is attacked by the big guy, the community expects privacy for the little guy.
Why do we create such a big distinction between the small guy and the big guy?
So your telling me that if I know the exact location of some of the underlying data that is doesn't make brute force more predictable and quicker to get results from?
I guess what I was getting at is that the users who comment in a non constructive manner such as the parent comment should not be modded up. Instead, we the readers should be able to mod down the writer of the article. If a writer is bad enough they will disappear off/.
As long has he generates hits and comments he will be featured. You'd be better just ignoring his articles.
As for the content control, I suggest they use a system like LoL. It works for them I'm sure it would work for Twitter. The only thing I'm not sure of is how they would reward the contributors.
Why is this flame bait? It's putting someone into circumstance. Not everybody agrees with the constitution and this is just one event in a person's life that could completely change their perspective.
$500. I doubt any decryption would be anything lower than $10 000. It's a premium service like getting the data off a drive that was damaged in a fire.
Decryption is possible and demand will create expertise. Keep in mind that once you have the information about the inner working of an encryption and how the device stores data, it allows for pattern detection which can shorten the length of a brute force significantly. To brute force a "state of the art" encryption is silly UNLESS you know about some of the data stored. This is where the manufacturer comes in and provides that information so that the expert can make quick work of it.
My whole life I've seen people who said: You can't do this, you can't do that. It's too hard... Those people are still exactly where they were 10 years ago.
Which is ok. Once the data is in front of you decrypting it is just a matter of finding an expert that can. As we move into this new age of encryption you will see new businesses spawn (like locksmiths) to reverse said encryptions. I'm sure there already are some out there.
As far as I'm concerned he's not in the category you claim he's in. If anything you are in that category as you've done nothing to improve the discussion. He provided links to what I consider relevant articles. All you've done is flame him for it.
All this is going to do is shift the issue. If the manufacturer won't do it then you'll see businesses spawn who will do it for a large cash grab. This is no different than the locksmith. At the end of the day it can be broken with the right amount of time and expertise. I don't care if it's one way encryption or not, it can still be broken.
Called it what you want but when your children are killed by a predator and the only way to put him in jail is to have the contents of his phone decrypted, you'll say fuck the amendments!
Third, in case you haven't notice, it is now more than a century we haven't discovered something that revolutionized the physics like relativity and quantum mechanics. Scientists these days are working on decimals and number of significant digits trying to discriminate between two equally valuable models.
Many theories in the last decade have been concluded and research extended. The one that comes to mind is neutrinos. Although we knew about them 74 years ago we didn't have the ability to prove it. I'm sure plenty of people felt it would never be proven and that it would require too much energy to prove but yet in year 2000 they did it. Do you think our ability to harness power isn't going to evolve as well? Our science is slow moving but this same science enables many inventions which eventually enables further research whether it be physics or biology.
Fact is that not as many life changing discoveries will be made but there will be more BIG FINDINGS such as the higgs boson. Will they take longer to be discovered but their value to science will big larger and larger.
It's relative to a field obviously. Since 1900: Our ability to process data alone is probably 1 000 000 000 fold (I think I'm underestimating this one). Our ability to communicate is at least 1 000 000 fold (Probably underestimating this one too) Our ability to travel is at least 100 000 fold Our life span is at least 1.5 fold
Question is here, how does one put a number on the progression of science?
I'm not wrong or right because nobody on this earth can prove me right or wrong. As an example, fact is that we still haven't concluded how gravity works. We have theories, constants and mathematical solutions around gravity but we don't understand it. As another example, it's only recently (in 2000) that the existence of neutrinos was confirmed. It took 70 years to get from theory to conclusion. Since then with new technology many more experiments surrounding neutrinos have been made and offered more insight on their behavior.
We just don't know what we don't know and you claiming to know is BS.
I see 1000 obstacles preventing us from travelling outside our solar system but that doesn't mean it's impossible to eventually overcome all 1000 of these obstacles.
That's just your opinion built on limited knowledge of physics. Our progression in the last 100 years is more than 1000 fold all previous years combined so imagine what we can do in the next 1000 years.
Slashdot Mirror
Before everyone gets their panties in a knot I though I would paste a link to the definition of defamation since a few of the comments suggested many don't know the actual definition.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/D...
That's not the point. The point is, do we want criminals to have the ability to hide information that can protect them from incarceration? What about crime prevention?
I see two recurring expectations on Slashdot
1. Privacy for the little guy
2. Corporate / Government Transparency
Whenever I read topics that involve POWER I always hear about one of these. When the big guy screws up the community expects transparency but when the little guy is attacked by the big guy, the community expects privacy for the little guy.
Why do we create such a big distinction between the small guy and the big guy?
Let the moders mark this flamebait. I don't care.
So your telling me that if I know the exact location of some of the underlying data that is doesn't make brute force more predictable and quicker to get results from?
I guess what I was getting at is that the users who comment in a non constructive manner such as the parent comment should not be modded up. Instead, we the readers should be able to mod down the writer of the article. If a writer is bad enough they will disappear off /.
As long has he generates hits and comments he will be featured. You'd be better just ignoring his articles.
As for the content control, I suggest they use a system like LoL. It works for them I'm sure it would work for Twitter. The only thing I'm not sure of is how they would reward the contributors.
Why is this flame bait? It's putting someone into circumstance. Not everybody agrees with the constitution and this is just one event in a person's life that could completely change their perspective.
$500. I doubt any decryption would be anything lower than $10 000. It's a premium service like getting the data off a drive that was damaged in a fire.
Decryption is possible and demand will create expertise. Keep in mind that once you have the information about the inner working of an encryption and how the device stores data, it allows for pattern detection which can shorten the length of a brute force significantly. To brute force a "state of the art" encryption is silly UNLESS you know about some of the data stored. This is where the manufacturer comes in and provides that information so that the expert can make quick work of it.
My whole life I've seen people who said: You can't do this, you can't do that. It's too hard... Those people are still exactly where they were 10 years ago.
Yeah. like the many parents that happened to before. I doubt you'll be the exception.
And that's not already happening. Come on!!
Which is ok. Once the data is in front of you decrypting it is just a matter of finding an expert that can. As we move into this new age of encryption you will see new businesses spawn (like locksmiths) to reverse said encryptions. I'm sure there already are some out there.
As far as I'm concerned he's not in the category you claim he's in. If anything you are in that category as you've done nothing to improve the discussion. He provided links to what I consider relevant articles. All you've done is flame him for it.
All this is going to do is shift the issue. If the manufacturer won't do it then you'll see businesses spawn who will do it for a large cash grab. This is no different than the locksmith. At the end of the day it can be broken with the right amount of time and expertise. I don't care if it's one way encryption or not, it can still be broken.
Called it what you want but when your children are killed by a predator and the only way to put him in jail is to have the contents of his phone decrypted, you'll say fuck the amendments!
I present to you: A FAT TROLL.
No matter what form we take, we will still call ourselves humans.
I was responding to:
Will there even be an organism recognizable as human in another 1000 years? There's more than one way for humanity to cease to exist.
Third, in case you haven't notice, it is now more than a century we haven't discovered something that revolutionized the physics like relativity and quantum mechanics. Scientists these days are working on decimals and number of significant digits trying to discriminate between two equally valuable models.
Many theories in the last decade have been concluded and research extended. The one that comes to mind is neutrinos. Although we knew about them 74 years ago we didn't have the ability to prove it. I'm sure plenty of people felt it would never be proven and that it would require too much energy to prove but yet in year 2000 they did it. Do you think our ability to harness power isn't going to evolve as well? Our science is slow moving but this same science enables many inventions which eventually enables further research whether it be physics or biology.
Fact is that not as many life changing discoveries will be made but there will be more BIG FINDINGS such as the higgs boson. Will they take longer to be discovered but their value to science will big larger and larger.
It's relative to a field obviously. Since 1900:
Our ability to process data alone is probably 1 000 000 000 fold (I think I'm underestimating this one).
Our ability to communicate is at least 1 000 000 fold (Probably underestimating this one too)
Our ability to travel is at least 100 000 fold
Our life span is at least 1.5 fold
Question is here, how does one put a number on the progression of science?
Tangent!
I'm not wrong or right because nobody on this earth can prove me right or wrong. As an example, fact is that we still haven't concluded how gravity works. We have theories, constants and mathematical solutions around gravity but we don't understand it. As another example, it's only recently (in 2000) that the existence of neutrinos was confirmed. It took 70 years to get from theory to conclusion. Since then with new technology many more experiments surrounding neutrinos have been made and offered more insight on their behavior.
We just don't know what we don't know and you claiming to know is BS.
.
I think we are past flying cars. Everybody knows it's about flying anything. Forget the car parts.
We have been this way for 200 000 years.
We have looked the way we do for about 200 000 years. 1000 years is a drop in the bucket. Just saying!
Who said you had to get there quickly?
I see 1000 obstacles preventing us from travelling outside our solar system but that doesn't mean it's impossible to eventually overcome all 1000 of these obstacles.
That's just your opinion built on limited knowledge of physics. Our progression in the last 100 years is more than 1000 fold all previous years combined so imagine what we can do in the next 1000 years.