Thanks for your efforts. My question was discussed recently on a thread regarding the decision by Thawte to discontinue selling CodeSigning certificates to individuals.
What are the biggest obstacles to a public CA which is supported and funded by, say, the FSF? Is such a thing possible for the Free software community? I guess insurance and certification would be the biggest stumbling blocks. Are there other dimensions to such an undertaking which have not been considered?
The article claims that the meteor did completely disintigrate. In any case, I've never read or heard of even the smallest pock-marks indicating an explosion of solid matter. Not in the ground, not in the tree-trunks, and not on the heads of the poor farmers.
Completely disintegrated? One would think there would be at least a couple of small craters laying around. Its hard to imagine a fast-moving cloud of fine dust particles causing such damage.
Thank you for taking the time to "set me straight". I did not intend for my post to be FlameBait, although, as you point out, there is plenty of scientific refutation to my points.
But (you knew this was coming, right?), my points stand. Each of your refutations are legitimate, but each is also subject to the same bias which gives rise to their original claim. Namely, inference. (also the title of my posting)
The talk.origins faq especially, was interesting, in that it concludes that a sample taken from the top of a mountain is equivalent to one taken in the vacuum of space, and then goes on to say that the maximum amount of dust that could possibly have collected on the moon is some 64cm. Which is exactly 64 times the amount that I saw the lunar rover making tracks in. Perhaps a measure of collected dust on a satellite might be more realistic.
In any case, my point was not to start a creation/evolution debate, only to give my perspective on the inferential claims which have been made in the past, and wonder out loud, if such facts can ever be truth. (As opposed to faith)
When I read stuff like this, I really wonder about the reliability, feasibility, and especially the beleivability of inference based on observations (or inference from the lack of observation). Consider a couple more..
Wobbly suns mean planets are orbiting around them, even though they cant be seen. Maybe they just wobble once in awhile. I know I do.;)
The universe keeps getting older, because we know exactly how light behaves over time and space. What happens when we invent yet larger and/or more powerful telescopes? Will galaxies continue to be found which are further and further away?
The moon must only be about 5-10 thousand years old, since it only had a half-inch or so of dust on it, uniformly and consistently.
I'm no physicist, and probably should just be reading this thread from afar, but I cant help wondering about these "inconsistencies".
Please dont lecture me about the scientific process, I do respect the work and effort of those who would know answers to these sorts of questions, but once again they must revise their theories, it seems.
Checksumming a binary image may not be possible, although this works for other forms of expected output (like from printer drivers). But there must be some loss-analysis tools for images which could help you get a feel for the accuracy and deviation of any given device.
he (bin Laden) needn't have mentioned it before. Granted, the Israel/Palestinian conflict is good fodder, but it is certainly not the reason why Israel and the Jews, and therefore the USA, are hated by many Muslims (and others). My feeling is that it goes a bit deeper than that... and bin Laden is said to be a "deep" guy. (6 ft deep soon, heh)
Re:Actually...
on
Globalization
·
· Score: 3, Interesting
Everyone makes mistakes. And everyone has their own interests, which leads to different definitions of what actually was a mistake.
But make no mistake.. it's our love and support of Israel and the Jews which is the cornerstone of the hatred against us in the Muslim world (and other places). Not technology, not globalism, not some past aggression which we were percieved to be a part of.
Hell, Bin Laden said it himself.
Drop Israel, and everything will be fine. Or will it?
Isn't that an oxymoron? I mean, aren't lots of these folks now back in school, perhaps learning about what happens on the other 1023 priveleged ports?
I dont mean to slight anyone, but hasn't enough hype been published, fortunes lost, BMW's repo'd, and trees killed for this kind of thing to loose it's glitter yet? Sheesh, if not, drop by my house and I'll let you pick from my dusty, unused, and outdated-after-one-week library.
I forsee some problems... I mean, forget peanuts. Heres a single M&M. Chew fast. Seats wont recline anymore because of G-force issues. Tray tables will need magnetic underliners or lots of velcro. Not to mention other weightlessness issues...
Sir, could you please float back to your seat? We'll be reentering the atmosphere soon.
Cryptography technology that is available for free to the general public is very sophisticated. Weakening the cryptography available to shoppers on the Internet will not prevent the best and strongest software being used by "bad guys".
Who said anything about weakening cryptography? Thawte cannot weaken X.509. They only sell certificates. (or not)
Stunting the public's ability to encrypt will hurt everyone from dissedents in oppressive countries to Internet retail companies to international corporations.
Again, this is not what's happening here. Alarmist reactions will only serve to to add to the massive amount confusion surrounding crypto.
This is about a corporation protecting it's assets, and, quite likely, reducing it's insurance payment. Thats all.
I would like to see an Free Software authority, however.
Setting up a non-profit to issue certs sounds like a nice idea,
Yea, but who'd wanna run it? My PGP key got signed by USENIX years ago, but I doubt they do it anymore.
Its a big hassle, being an issuer of trust. Even when your corporation is located in South Africa, it seems.
I'd love to see FSF or one of the other big players try it, but everyone would still whine about the restricitions and policies, I bet. A CA by nature needs to make money to pay for it's insurance, otherwise no real corporation would trust it. But for Free Software, I'd probably trust FSF for my own machines.
I believe it was on Microsoft ME where we noticed this, but I got the report second-hand, and I dont have an installed copy to check it out.
In any case, this is not about SSL certs. Only codesigning. (And they cost more, if I recall) Thawte is certainly within reason to discontinue certifying individual codesigners in this day and age...
For Thawte to decide not to trust individual developers for code-signing makes sense, right now. Code-signing authority is possibly the strongest authority that can be purchased from a public CA. And just because a bit of code is signed by a certificate issued by Thawte, doesn't mean that I'm gonna run it anyways. Otoh, Thawte continues to issue code-signing certs to a companies, which is the context from where most signed code is downloaded/installed and run.
I really doubt that much signed code is distributed with authority from certificates issued to individuals. Chill out. They will lose some money, and I'm sure Thawte doesn't like that, but crypto is not going away.
Thawte, and others, pay a tremendous amount of money to M$ to get their root-certs installed with the OS (and updates). A non-player (or non-payer, more appropriately) CA must ask users to install their CA root-certs themselves. Even this ability (installing a "non-trusted" root) is also being restricted in some of the newer MS platforms, from what I understand.
AMD has been around awhile, why wouldn't they test this? The original article was pretty sensational... is this some kind of/. retraction? Anyways, I feel pretty sure that these chips are not a fire hazard, and I dont usually store anything flammable inside of my box. If I burned one, I'd call AMD, and they'd replace it, I guess.
Besides, alot can be forgiven of the company that gave me a real math co-processor and "fast" math toys on Hercules graphics for my 4/8 mhz(turbo!) 286.
I've been looking for a good excuse to take the dinosaur out for a walk. Patches may not be forthcoming, but maybe I can get a Windows build working, anyways.
Slashdot Mirror
I'd link the rotton.com pictures but that's probably just mean... besides, I don't particularly like looking at them.
Ouch. Look, I'm just as confused or more as anyone else. I'm also a newbie and trying to sound important. heh. No hard feelings, I hope.
Dont they have enough on their minds with the Euro coming out in 2 months?
Thanks for your efforts. My question was discussed recently on a thread regarding the decision by Thawte to discontinue selling CodeSigning certificates to individuals.
What are the biggest obstacles to a public CA which is supported and funded by, say, the FSF? Is such a thing possible for the Free software community? I guess insurance and certification would be the biggest stumbling blocks. Are there other dimensions to such an undertaking which have not been considered?
I'll take two, with the optional mild electrical stimulation/motivation modules, please. :-)
Still my favorite. And yes, the military is (still) pursuing this option... :-)
The article claims that the meteor did completely disintigrate. In any case, I've never read or heard of even the smallest pock-marks indicating an explosion of solid matter. Not in the ground, not in the tree-trunks, and not on the heads of the poor farmers.
Completely disintegrated? One would think there would be at least a couple of small craters laying around. Its hard to imagine a fast-moving cloud of fine dust particles causing such damage.
But (you knew this was coming, right?), my points stand. Each of your refutations are legitimate, but each is also subject to the same bias which gives rise to their original claim. Namely, inference. (also the title of my posting)
The talk.origins faq especially, was interesting, in that it concludes that a sample taken from the top of a mountain is equivalent to one taken in the vacuum of space, and then goes on to say that the maximum amount of dust that could possibly have collected on the moon is some 64cm. Which is exactly 64 times the amount that I saw the lunar rover making tracks in. Perhaps a measure of collected dust on a satellite might be more realistic.
In any case, my point was not to start a creation/evolution debate, only to give my perspective on the inferential claims which have been made in the past, and wonder out loud, if such facts can ever be truth. (As opposed to faith)
- Wobbly suns mean planets are orbiting around them, even though they cant be seen. Maybe they just wobble once in awhile. I know I do.
;)
-
The universe keeps getting older, because we know exactly how light behaves over time and space. What happens when we invent yet larger and/or more powerful telescopes? Will galaxies continue to be found which are further and further away?
- The moon must only be about 5-10 thousand years old, since it only had a half-inch or so of dust on it, uniformly and consistently.
I'm no physicist, and probably should just be reading this thread from afar, but I cant help wondering about these "inconsistencies".Please dont lecture me about the scientific process, I do respect the work and effort of those who would know answers to these sorts of questions, but once again they must revise their theories, it seems.
Perhaps cosmological inference is simply faith.
Checksumming a binary image may not be possible, although this works for other forms of expected output (like from printer drivers). But there must be some loss-analysis tools for images which could help you get a feel for the accuracy and deviation of any given device.
Keep that scanner glass clean and fresh!
he (bin Laden) needn't have mentioned it before. Granted, the Israel/Palestinian conflict is good fodder, but it is certainly not the reason why Israel and the Jews, and therefore the USA, are hated by many Muslims (and others). My feeling is that it goes a bit deeper than that... and bin Laden is said to be a "deep" guy. (6 ft deep soon, heh)
But make no mistake.. it's our love and support of Israel and the Jews which is the cornerstone of the hatred against us in the Muslim world (and other places). Not technology, not globalism, not some past aggression which we were percieved to be a part of.
Hell, Bin Laden said it himself.
Drop Israel, and everything will be fine. Or will it?
I dont mean to slight anyone, but hasn't enough hype been published, fortunes lost, BMW's repo'd, and trees killed for this kind of thing to loose it's glitter yet? Sheesh, if not, drop by my house and I'll let you pick from my dusty, unused, and outdated-after-one-week library.
Nobody has yet dared to speak of a Linux source fork, but this is dangerously close to one.
Is this truly dangerous? If so, why? Why not let the 2 VM's compete and the users will decide?
Better to split than stagnate.
Sir, could you please float back to your seat? We'll be reentering the atmosphere soon.
No, I think the Concorde is safe, for now.
I am humbled and awed. (Well, at least impressed...)
Thanks for sharing, Wil.
Who said anything about weakening cryptography? Thawte cannot weaken X.509. They only sell certificates. (or not)
Stunting the public's ability to encrypt will hurt everyone from dissedents in oppressive countries to Internet retail companies to international corporations.
Again, this is not what's happening here. Alarmist reactions will only serve to to add to the massive amount confusion surrounding crypto.
This is about a corporation protecting it's assets, and, quite likely, reducing it's insurance payment. Thats all.
I would like to see an Free Software authority, however.
Yea, but who'd wanna run it? My PGP key got signed by USENIX years ago, but I doubt they do it anymore.
Its a big hassle, being an issuer of trust. Even when your corporation is located in South Africa, it seems.
I'd love to see FSF or one of the other big players try it, but everyone would still whine about the restricitions and policies, I bet. A CA by nature needs to make money to pay for it's insurance, otherwise no real corporation would trust it. But for Free Software, I'd probably trust FSF for my own machines.
In any case, this is not about SSL certs. Only codesigning. (And they cost more, if I recall) Thawte is certainly within reason to discontinue certifying individual codesigners in this day and age...
I really doubt that much signed code is distributed with authority from certificates issued to individuals. Chill out. They will lose some money, and I'm sure Thawte doesn't like that, but crypto is not going away.
Thawte, and others, pay a tremendous amount of money to M$ to get their root-certs installed with the OS (and updates). A non-player (or non-payer, more appropriately) CA must ask users to install their CA root-certs themselves. Even this ability (installing a "non-trusted" root) is also being restricted in some of the newer MS platforms, from what I understand.
Besides, alot can be forgiven of the company that gave me a real math co-processor and "fast" math toys on Hercules graphics for my 4/8 mhz(turbo!) 286.
Sounds like fun, fun, fun!
I recall hearing Larry once allude that he did some work for the "Iowa Farm Boys", before (or sometime during?) his stint at JPL.
But that was also before Perl, at least as we know it, I guess.
Otoh, maybe he taught 'em a few tricks. :-)