So heavily that one quarter of respondents won't go more than two or three days without it. Of course, by those standards, most Americans must be addicted to work, sex, and TV as well.
Even if we were to assume 1cm^3 per neuron, that's a cube 60m on a side. If a signal needs to go from one side to the other, lightspeed is no object.
I was referring to the popular theory that the natural evolution of any intelligence that develops computational theory and spaceflight is to build a Matrioshka Brain; an MB is a series of computational shells deriving energy from thermal gradients (one side facing the sun, the other side facing interstellar space) such that the sun itself is not visible outside the system. Many claim that such a setup is inevitable as energy demands and computational needs of an interplanetary civilisation grow. The earth only gets a tiny portion of the energy that our sun outputs; when we need more than that the only way to get it is going to be space-based computational systems.
A lot of smart people now believe this is why SETI has failed to find signs of intelligent life; SETI observes visible stars, not "empty" space. Any Type-III civilisation would be "visible" only as a dim infrasun.
You can just as easily use the user name as the "salt" and get the same effect without the need of extra information stored for each user.
Depends on the particular hash algorithm you're using; Microsoft recommends that the salt size and the hash bit-length be the same for maximum obfuscation.
In addition, having the salt hidden adds a tiny bit of extra security in that it is much harder to just start running strings through the hash algorithm in a brute force attack.
But then again, in theory a brute force attack is supposed to take longer than the data has value anyways so if you've done your homework then bad people can mine your salt table all day and get no useful information (in theory)
That suggests a sort of bicone structure. At one peak, you have your simulator. At the circle around the center, you have your GPU. At the other peak, you have your viewing device.
Heh I was thinking too 2D... viewing device and simulator at the same location.
I like this setup better. But still for particle-accurate rendering of the earth you're looking at a HUGE lagtime.
Not that anyone would do particle accurate full earth renders. But when we move to a system mind setup we'll need to figure out how to handle the lightspeed propagation delays
For each user, generate a string of bits that is at least your cipher block length (160 bits for SHA1, IIRC)... save that string (cleartext) to the user profile. Then when you hash the password, add the "salt" to the end.
password + salt will always hash to the same value. And no two users with the same password will have the same hash. Problem solved.
Equip each calculation unit of the GPU with its own projector, and aim them all at your screen. If you shaped the GPU in a circular fashion, the light from each frame will reach your screen at the same time, or near enough for it to be unnoticable.
I'm not sure that would cut it or not; each partition would have to communicate with the others; meaning that the boundaries still have some sort of lightspeed propagation problem.
I guess you could have a central controller sending updates in all directions simultaneously. As you said, you would have a latency problem still...
By the way, when 2 cards are installed, the PCI express bus speed gets divided between the two.
BTW, PCI devices all share the same bus.
Same with ISA and VLB.
I guess that's why it's called a bus.
PCIe at least has the advantage of offering switching, meaning if you have multiple communications going on simultaneously, they're not necessarily all waiting on each other (though I don't think that's going to be very useful in a real world environment)
The only graphics interface format that ever dedicated bandwidth is AGP... but fun multi-GPU tricks aren't possible there.
Honestly, I don't think the bus speed is the bottleneck on PCIe... I think that a top of the line comp today has more graphics bus than it can use (which of course is exactly the condition you want)... I think the fundamental limiter is the CPU in a lot of titles... and the GPU in everything else.
heh I don't think string theory is in vogue any more...
And yeah I know you didn't want a real answer.
You're getting it anyways.
Simple fact of computation; in order to simulate anything in real time, you need to have more complexity than the elements you are simulating. This complexity directly correlates to component count.
Build a GPU the size of the solar system and it might be doable...
But then again a GPU the size of the solar system would have so many lightspeed delays that you couldn't get a decent framerate out of it.
You'd be better off taking the raw material and just building another earth....
Well the article stated that 10% of the IP space would never be hit by the RNG... so if you consider IP addresses to be distributed to computers uniformly across the entire range (they're not, but its close enough) then the chance of any one particular IP address not getting covered by the RNG is 10%.
If there was exactly ONE IP address that the RNG didn't cover, the chance of that one being the source would be 2^32... or about 1 in 4 billion.
I don't think it's as cut and dry as you make it out to be.
More likely I think there's a defect in the random number gnerator (RNG) it used. And the inital spread JUST HAPPENED to come from an address the RNG would never have generated, making it patient zero logically
Multiple firewalls don't help. Try one properly configured software firewall.
Or if it's that important to you I trust a NAT firewall a lot more than I trust a software firewall.
I specifically asked some Microsoft guys about the Windows Firewall. To paraphrase their answer "Don't you dare try to protect a sensitive system with it but for consumers and especially laptop users who just need a security layer between them and the big bad world it works pretty good"
My translation: Windows Firewall on the gaming machine on DMZ. Everything else hides behind the NATting firewall (or a real ISS)
Basic 1900+ XP computer w/low end Nvidia graphics card with TV Out, Apex 20" TV from Circuit City (holiday sale for $79), got all the controls from HappControls (2 joysticks, 12 buttons, 1-Up, 2-Up and two coin buttons), used the IPac to interface with the controls.
Built the cabinet itself out of MDF with the help of a friend. All in all it was a pretty satisfying experience...
You can hide it, you can encrypt it, or you can send it through a different medium.
Hiding it aka steganography is relatively easy to implement and easy to use. The problem is that all the dissidents have to agree on a protocol without the idea getting into the hands of the enemy. And if the enemy ever catches on everyone has to stop using it simultaneously and immediately.
Encryption is good. If its legal where you're from. And if you implement it right from secure environments. And you don't mind the idea that maybe someone might get suspicious at all these encrypted packets you spew out all the time.
Now a different medium... that's starting to sound pretty good, eh?
Satelite internet is pretty good these days if a little expensive. You might even be able to disguise it as a TV receiver dish. But you'll always have a nice big dish outside advertising that you are able to receive information from the outside world. May not be the best idea...
Various wireless options including cellular and wifi exist. But if you strongly suspect your home PC is not safe, these probably aren't safe either. Unless you're close enough to the border to get a signal from across the border. In oppressive regimes, noone gets to live comfortably close to a border, however, so I'd rule that out.
Alternative wired transport options don't have any advantage so...
What would I do?
Get AOL. It's ubiquitous and AFAIK they try to respect the privacy of their subscribers (though that doesn't mean you're not being watched... only that your ISP didn't make it easy)
Setup a server in an external country. Make ALL your traffic go through this server, encrypted. Use a PKI solution and either memorize your key or keep it on removeable media. Preferably the removeable media is hardware password protected and includes self destruct features. Run something that includes tons of traffic. If there are any legitimate P2P programs that only trade in legal files I'd pick that. Otherwise a ton of RSS readers or hell just a program to download and discard random images found through Google Images.
The key is to fill the channel with enough noise that traffic analysis trying to match encrypted packets coming from your computer to intercepted unencrypted traffic (that they got through whatever legitimate or illegitimate means) is doomed to failure.
Even then expect to get caught. Change your keys often. Change the location of the remote server often. Don't save files to your local hard drive. If you're paranoid enough boot from a LiveCD. You might also want to consider optical and em tempest defeating strategies... an LCD monitor will take care of optical tempest. em tempest can be defeated through a careful choice of fonts and colors.
A proxy is a packet forwarder; all of your packets outbound through the firewall head to the proxy, and from there are forwarded to their ultimate destination. A similar process happens for return packets.
So when the packets go through the firewall they appear to be heading for an innocuous (proxy) server and not the IP address of the server you're actually on...
AFAIK, SEH is a method for doing structured exception handling in any language.
C++, Java, whatever... they all have exceptions. How does the compiler actually HANDLE the exception? SEH is a patent for how to put that exception information on the stack in an x86 environment.
It's pretty specific and pretty proprietary; If you ask me this is an example of a good software patent for once. I'm sure SEH took a lot of work for the folks at Borland (and Microsoft?) to get working right. This isn't like Amazon's Oneclick patent; SEH is difficult and non-obvious.
The article says it took 55 CPU years to factor the number, though they did it in parallel for about a year and a half. I'd hate to imagine the teams that we don't hear about who are, say, 30 CPU years into the problem who just found out it's already been done.
Shutup. I hate you all.
Oh well guess it's time to start looking at RSA-768...
Except the OP was explicitly NOT interested in reconstructing CRT images, but rather images of the surrounding room.
That would require an image forming illumination.
Like, say, a CRT projector. Such as that mentioned in the article. Basically what they are doing is the same trick as optical tempest, but by using an image forming light source each "hit" represents color space at a particular location in the scene
How far could you get with all the information escaping the window in your direction?
It's called optical tempest. With a high enough sampling rate you can reconstruct what is being shown on the monitor/TV. Each pixel as it illuminates causes a brief spike in the ambient brightness; by measuring this spike one can reconstruct the pixels being shown. After that, it's pretty simple to find the horizontal and vertical retraces.
This is one area where cathedral development seems to be far superior to bazar development...
What, in issuing empty promises?
I was thinking more along the lines of setting stability goals and then providing real value incentive to meet those goals.
It's a simple fact of development; coders do not see the bugs that users do, because they have an intuitive understanding of what to avoid and how their UI is supposed to be used. Therefore it is quite difficult without paid staff to hunt down and fix all the bugs in an app...
I don't think I'm going to hold my breath waiting for this. This is one area where cathedral development seems to be far superior to bazar development...
Slashdot Mirror
So heavily that one quarter of respondents won't go more than two or three days without it. Of course, by those standards, most Americans must be addicted to work, sex, and TV as well.
Does that make my ex-girlfriend unamerican?
Even if we were to assume 1cm^3 per neuron, that's a cube 60m on a side. If a signal needs to go from one side to the other, lightspeed is no object.
I was referring to the popular theory that the natural evolution of any intelligence that develops computational theory and spaceflight is to build a Matrioshka Brain; an MB is a series of computational shells deriving energy from thermal gradients (one side facing the sun, the other side facing interstellar space) such that the sun itself is not visible outside the system. Many claim that such a setup is inevitable as energy demands and computational needs of an interplanetary civilisation grow. The earth only gets a tiny portion of the energy that our sun outputs; when we need more than that the only way to get it is going to be space-based computational systems.
A lot of smart people now believe this is why SETI has failed to find signs of intelligent life; SETI observes visible stars, not "empty" space. Any Type-III civilisation would be "visible" only as a dim infrasun.
A good paper on MBs can be found here
You can just as easily use the user name as the "salt" and get the same effect without the need of extra information stored for each user.
Depends on the particular hash algorithm you're using; Microsoft recommends that the salt size and the hash bit-length be the same for maximum obfuscation.
In addition, having the salt hidden adds a tiny bit of extra security in that it is much harder to just start running strings through the hash algorithm in a brute force attack.
But then again, in theory a brute force attack is supposed to take longer than the data has value anyways so if you've done your homework then bad people can mine your salt table all day and get no useful information (in theory)
But then the article itself says in the discussion that no one has ever observed non-linear exponential growth in real tumors anyways
Just a clarification; the article says they've never observed non-linear growth in solid tumors.
I think it has to do with attack surfaces; once a tumor has metastized it has a much larger attack surface in relation to it's volume.
That suggests a sort of bicone structure. At one peak, you have your simulator. At the circle around the center, you have your GPU. At the other peak, you have your viewing device.
Heh I was thinking too 2D... viewing device and simulator at the same location.
I like this setup better. But still for particle-accurate rendering of the earth you're looking at a HUGE lagtime.
Not that anyone would do particle accurate full earth renders. But when we move to a system mind setup we'll need to figure out how to handle the lightspeed propagation delays
is easy; salt your hashes.
For each user, generate a string of bits that is at least your cipher block length (160 bits for SHA1, IIRC)... save that string (cleartext) to the user profile. Then when you hash the password, add the "salt" to the end.
password + salt will always hash to the same value. And no two users with the same password will have the same hash. Problem solved.
Equip each calculation unit of the GPU with its own projector, and aim them all at your screen. If you shaped the GPU in a circular fashion, the light from each frame will reach your screen at the same time, or near enough for it to be unnoticable.
I'm not sure that would cut it or not; each partition would have to communicate with the others; meaning that the boundaries still have some sort of lightspeed propagation problem.
I guess you could have a central controller sending updates in all directions simultaneously. As you said, you would have a latency problem still...
By the way, when 2 cards are installed, the PCI express bus speed gets divided between the two.
BTW, PCI devices all share the same bus.
Same with ISA and VLB.
I guess that's why it's called a bus.
PCIe at least has the advantage of offering switching, meaning if you have multiple communications going on simultaneously, they're not necessarily all waiting on each other (though I don't think that's going to be very useful in a real world environment)
The only graphics interface format that ever dedicated bandwidth is AGP... but fun multi-GPU tricks aren't possible there.
Honestly, I don't think the bus speed is the bottleneck on PCIe... I think that a top of the line comp today has more graphics bus than it can use (which of course is exactly the condition you want)... I think the fundamental limiter is the CPU in a lot of titles... and the GPU in everything else.
heh I don't think string theory is in vogue any more...
And yeah I know you didn't want a real answer.
You're getting it anyways.
Simple fact of computation; in order to simulate anything in real time, you need to have more complexity than the elements you are simulating. This complexity directly correlates to component count.
Build a GPU the size of the solar system and it might be doable...
But then again a GPU the size of the solar system would have so many lightspeed delays that you couldn't get a decent framerate out of it.
You'd be better off taking the raw material and just building another earth....
Well the article stated that 10% of the IP space would never be hit by the RNG... so if you consider IP addresses to be distributed to computers uniformly across the entire range (they're not, but its close enough) then the chance of any one particular IP address not getting covered by the RNG is 10%.
If there was exactly ONE IP address that the RNG didn't cover, the chance of that one being the source would be 2^32... or about 1 in 4 billion.
I don't think it's as cut and dry as you make it out to be.
More likely I think there's a defect in the random number gnerator (RNG) it used. And the inital spread JUST HAPPENED to come from an address the RNG would never have generated, making it patient zero logically
Multiple firewalls don't help. Try one properly configured software firewall.
Or if it's that important to you I trust a NAT firewall a lot more than I trust a software firewall.
I specifically asked some Microsoft guys about the Windows Firewall. To paraphrase their answer "Don't you dare try to protect a sensitive system with it but for consumers and especially laptop users who just need a security layer between them and the big bad world it works pretty good"
My translation: Windows Firewall on the gaming machine on DMZ. Everything else hides behind the NATting firewall (or a real ISS)
Yes but the story poster referred to it in the past tense; "since the USSR got its internet connection"
At the time that the geographic region was hooked to the internet originally, it was called the USSR; this statement is technically correct.
Basic 1900+ XP computer w/low end Nvidia graphics card with TV Out, Apex 20" TV from Circuit City (holiday sale for $79), got all the controls from HappControls (2 joysticks, 12 buttons, 1-Up, 2-Up and two coin buttons), used the IPac to interface with the controls.
Built the cabinet itself out of MDF with the help of a friend. All in all it was a pretty satisfying experience...
I'm not saying the law is fair. All I'm saying is that the damages are only partly based on real value currently.
1. You have to take into account everyone that could have gotten the file from someone when talking about lost revenue
2. The purpose of the fine is a) to recoup lost revenues and b) to discourage people from breaking the law
While the value of 2a might have gone down, that doesn't really affect 2b.
You can hide it, you can encrypt it, or you can send it through a different medium.
Hiding it aka steganography is relatively easy to implement and easy to use. The problem is that all the dissidents have to agree on a protocol without the idea getting into the hands of the enemy. And if the enemy ever catches on everyone has to stop using it simultaneously and immediately.
Encryption is good. If its legal where you're from. And if you implement it right from secure environments. And you don't mind the idea that maybe someone might get suspicious at all these encrypted packets you spew out all the time.
Now a different medium... that's starting to sound pretty good, eh?
Satelite internet is pretty good these days if a little expensive. You might even be able to disguise it as a TV receiver dish. But you'll always have a nice big dish outside advertising that you are able to receive information from the outside world. May not be the best idea...
Various wireless options including cellular and wifi exist. But if you strongly suspect your home PC is not safe, these probably aren't safe either. Unless you're close enough to the border to get a signal from across the border. In oppressive regimes, noone gets to live comfortably close to a border, however, so I'd rule that out.
Alternative wired transport options don't have any advantage so...
What would I do?
Get AOL. It's ubiquitous and AFAIK they try to respect the privacy of their subscribers (though that doesn't mean you're not being watched... only that your ISP didn't make it easy)
Setup a server in an external country. Make ALL your traffic go through this server, encrypted. Use a PKI solution and either memorize your key or keep it on removeable media. Preferably the removeable media is hardware password protected and includes self destruct features. Run something that includes tons of traffic. If there are any legitimate P2P programs that only trade in legal files I'd pick that. Otherwise a ton of RSS readers or hell just a program to download and discard random images found through Google Images.
The key is to fill the channel with enough noise that traffic analysis trying to match encrypted packets coming from your computer to intercepted unencrypted traffic (that they got through whatever legitimate or illegitimate means) is doomed to failure.
Even then expect to get caught. Change your keys often. Change the location of the remote server often. Don't save files to your local hard drive. If you're paranoid enough boot from a LiveCD. You might also want to consider optical and em tempest defeating strategies... an LCD monitor will take care of optical tempest. em tempest can be defeated through a careful choice of fonts and colors.
if everyone is eventually dead and too afraid to say anything?
These states are mutually exclusive. Someone can be dead, and someone can be too afraid to say anything, but someone cannot be both.
A proxy is a packet forwarder; all of your packets outbound through the firewall head to the proxy, and from there are forwarded to their ultimate destination. A similar process happens for return packets.
So when the packets go through the firewall they appear to be heading for an innocuous (proxy) server and not the IP address of the server you're actually on...
AFAIK, SEH is a method for doing structured exception handling in any language.
C++, Java, whatever... they all have exceptions. How does the compiler actually HANDLE the exception? SEH is a patent for how to put that exception information on the stack in an x86 environment.
It's pretty specific and pretty proprietary; If you ask me this is an example of a good software patent for once. I'm sure SEH took a lot of work for the folks at Borland (and Microsoft?) to get working right. This isn't like Amazon's Oneclick patent; SEH is difficult and non-obvious.
The article says it took 55 CPU years to factor the number, though they did it in parallel for about a year and a half. I'd hate to imagine the teams that we don't hear about who are, say, 30 CPU years into the problem who just found out it's already been done.
Shutup. I hate you all.
Oh well guess it's time to start looking at RSA-768...
Except the OP was explicitly NOT interested in reconstructing CRT images, but rather images of the surrounding room.
That would require an image forming illumination.
Like, say, a CRT projector. Such as that mentioned in the article. Basically what they are doing is the same trick as optical tempest, but by using an image forming light source each "hit" represents color space at a particular location in the scene
How far could you get with all the information escaping the window in your direction?
It's called optical tempest. With a high enough sampling rate you can reconstruct what is being shown on the monitor/TV. Each pixel as it illuminates causes a brief spike in the ambient brightness; by measuring this spike one can reconstruct the pixels being shown. After that, it's pretty simple to find the horizontal and vertical retraces.
more info
This is one area where cathedral development seems to be far superior to bazar development...
What, in issuing empty promises?
I was thinking more along the lines of setting stability goals and then providing real value incentive to meet those goals.
It's a simple fact of development; coders do not see the bugs that users do, because they have an intuitive understanding of what to avoid and how their UI is supposed to be used. Therefore it is quite difficult without paid staff to hunt down and fix all the bugs in an app...
and when the kinks get worked out, step back!
Every FOSS project seems to have this hope.
OpenOffice has bene saying this for years, IIRC.
I don't think I'm going to hold my breath waiting for this. This is one area where cathedral development seems to be far superior to bazar development...