Intel's mammoth production capacity erases any supply worries.
Um, no.
Intel has been a constraint on supply to customers in the past, and will be again, because they're not clairvoyant, and maintaining enough capacity to handle 100% of the distribution of order-rate excursions is wasting money (for those who slept through Technology Policy of the Firm: it's like building an 80,000 seat stadium for a basketball team; sure, once every 30 years you'll fill it, but the rest of the time, you're eating your hat).
It may have mammoth production capacity (ever try to keep a mammoth down to class-1 cleanroom standards?) but that capacity is not monolithic nor is it readily fungible. It takes years to do some kinds of process changes, and most chip designs are tuned to a single process and could not be simply adapted to be fabricated on another process.
What this means, if Jobs is any kind of mogul with any sense of supply management, is that Intel will have to build capacity tailored Apple's needs.
Which is good++ for Intel, because their real business is building and filling fab lines; designing and marketing chips is a cost to them.
Then they put your broadcast stations on your "cable".
Now they want to put your cable on a broadcast channel, including the original broadcast stations, but not on their original broadcast channels......although it occurs to me that satellite broadcast has been doing this for decades...
America lost its internet economy when we realized we'd made it too easy to operate and it could be shipped anywhere people could put text into editboxes.
Now we're giving massages and filling out divorce forms for a living.
Of course. But evolutionarily, any small increase in the ability to evade, whether it's a hop, a skip, or a jump, increases the selective pressure towards flight. Once you randomly acquire the exact things you need to evolve flight (feathers or large, thin, leathery webs), they promote evolution of flight by reducing the rate of death in your breeding pool.
If you have feathers, and you jump, the feathers create an airfoil as they tail from your surfaces. They can be used to modulate drag and lift. Any animal possessing them would learn these skills as easily as walking. In several generations of natural selection, those who do it better and have more assist from the feathers would survive more often and increase their end of the breed.
Feathers promote flight much better than, say, scales or horns. And it's such a huge advantage that it would instantly increase survivability for any species that adopts it.
Once feathers evolved, it would be only a short time before their lifting qualities would enable the evolution of high-jumping then gliding then flying dinosaurs.
There should be a huge number of fossils of a huge number of species of dinosaur-era birdlike creatures. But we only see a few.
So these "feathers" couldn't have been very much like what we think of as feathers.
Or else something about being avian kept those creatures from becoming fossils. Which implies that there may be other entire swaths of the genetic diversity that were prevented from becoming fossils. Which mean the dinosaurs we're finding are only the animals that couldn't avoid the tar-pits and eruptions and mudslides. That is, the period may have been many times more diverse and interesting than we're being allowed to see.
You sound pretty sure that I don't know what I'm talking about, then prove you don't understand what you're talking about.
"Hard" and "strong" are relative terms, not absolute ones, for a reason. There's something harder and stronger.
Further, prime-factorization keys still need to be transmitted by some channel.
Their security is therefore less than or equal to OTP's.
And since BBS is based on the mathematics of factoring primes, which so far has been shown to be doable, and in every instance someone called that prime "unbreakable", it is less secure than OTP.
Saying "we have no reason to believe" something proves you're willing to rest on the assumption that its opposite is true.
That's how every now-denigrated encryption scheme stuck around long enough to be broken, costing more than it would have cost to just use OTP from the beginning.
But thanks for the laugh. Now put your ego back in its box and get back to studying. Some day you'll actually be as smart as you think you are.
(I wish/. was a little smarter and didn't chop the ends off of messages and then make you go through flood-prevention hoops just to post a correction...)
You sound pretty sure that I don't know what I'm talking about, then prove you don't understand what you're talking about.
"Hard" and "strong" are relative terms, not absolute ones, for a reason. There's something harder and stronger.
Further, prime-factorization keys still need to be transmitted by some channel.
Their security is therefore less than or equal to OTP's.
And since BBS is based on the mathematics of factoring primes, which so far has been shown to be doable, and in every instance someone called that prime "unbreakable", it is less secure than OTP.
Saying "we have no reason to believe" something proves you're willing to rest on the assumption that its opposite is true.
That's how every now-denigrated encryption scheme stuck around long enough to be broken, costing more than it would have cost to just use OTP from the beginning.
But thanks for the laugh. Now put your ego back in its box and get back to studying. Some day you'll actually be as smart as you t
They were using the same pad (literally a pad with key grids printed on each sheet, one sheet to be used per message) on Naval and Merchant vessels, presuming that nobody'd notice.
We got hold of a nearly complete version of the pad from a Merchant vessel and spent several decades cross-checking intercepted Naval traffic against it. It may have been a bigger deal than breaking the Japanese PURPLE code or stealing the ENIGMA.
The Space Race increased attention on math and science in primary schools.
If you did your homework, made it through calculus by Senior Year, and had a Physics class, you could do this easy.
Meaning, there are probably a quarter billion people on this planet with the mathematical acumen to figure out any trajectory from a thrown baseball to a Mars shot.
The thing about terrestrial ballistics is that it isn't "ballistic". The wind gets in the way and is a random input. So the important feature of a weapons system isn't the ballistic estimate of the trajectory, it's the control system that negates perturbative inputs. That is what's classified.
Slashdot Mirror
it'd have to be goosoft, because that's how their corprank sorts, now
China is "ready for democracy" now. With communism, things can only get worse, because you can never remove your despots.
Aren't these the same guys who think English is grammatically closer to German than it is to Swedish?
Wikipedia has plenty of misinformation, satire, and lies.
Why do you think they have to start the Lord of the Flies cycle over for every article?
Intel's mammoth production capacity erases any supply worries.
Um, no.
Intel has been a constraint on supply to customers in the past, and will be again, because they're not clairvoyant, and maintaining enough capacity to handle 100% of the distribution of order-rate excursions is wasting money (for those who slept through Technology Policy of the Firm: it's like building an 80,000 seat stadium for a basketball team; sure, once every 30 years you'll fill it, but the rest of the time, you're eating your hat).
It may have mammoth production capacity (ever try to keep a mammoth down to class-1 cleanroom standards?) but that capacity is not monolithic nor is it readily fungible. It takes years to do some kinds of process changes, and most chip designs are tuned to a single process and could not be simply adapted to be fabricated on another process.
What this means, if Jobs is any kind of mogul with any sense of supply management, is that Intel will have to build capacity tailored Apple's needs.
Which is good++ for Intel, because their real business is building and filling fab lines; designing and marketing chips is a cost to them.
Not even a troll, but try telling that to the karmically challenged...
Only 10 years behind DEC...
First they brought you "broadcast".
...although it occurs to me that satellite broadcast has been doing this for decades...
Then they put your broadcast stations on your "cable".
Now they want to put your cable on a broadcast channel, including the original broadcast stations, but not on their original broadcast channels...
They thought to moon could be a big ball of loose powder, too.
Neil Armstrong says he didn't know if they were going to land on the surface, or sink into it never to be seen again.
We're bored.
America lost its internet economy when we realized we'd made it too easy to operate and it could be shipped anywhere people could put text into editboxes.
Now we're giving massages and filling out divorce forms for a living.
This isn't the New World Order we paid for.
10 a.m., Poindexter,
It started out as a "once-over" meeting for coffee. Turned into coffee, lunch, and 4 hours of conversation.
She's nice. I might just keep her.
Sucks to be you, loser. Even if you bogarted your karma by posting anonymously.
Of course. But evolutionarily, any small increase in the ability to evade, whether it's a hop, a skip, or a jump, increases the selective pressure towards flight. Once you randomly acquire the exact things you need to evolve flight (feathers or large, thin, leathery webs), they promote evolution of flight by reducing the rate of death in your breeding pool.
If you have feathers, and you jump, the feathers create an airfoil as they tail from your surfaces. They can be used to modulate drag and lift. Any animal possessing them would learn these skills as easily as walking. In several generations of natural selection, those who do it better and have more assist from the feathers would survive more often and increase their end of the breed.
Feathers promote flight much better than, say, scales or horns. And it's such a huge advantage that it would instantly increase survivability for any species that adopts it.
This doesn't quite make sense.
Once feathers evolved, it would be only a short time before their lifting qualities would enable the evolution of high-jumping then gliding then flying dinosaurs.
There should be a huge number of fossils of a huge number of species of dinosaur-era birdlike creatures. But we only see a few.
So these "feathers" couldn't have been very much like what we think of as feathers.
Or else something about being avian kept those creatures from becoming fossils. Which implies that there may be other entire swaths of the genetic diversity that were prevented from becoming fossils. Which mean the dinosaurs we're finding are only the animals that couldn't avoid the tar-pits and eruptions and mudslides. That is, the period may have been many times more diverse and interesting than we're being allowed to see.
Speak for yourself. I had a date yesterday, and I have another date in 31 minutes.
3 trolls and an underrated?
I was dead serious.
Opera doesn't do anything I need that I can't get elsewhere.
It's fringe cruft.
I hope the metamods crap all over the troll mods.
Do those codes upgrade my copy of Firefox?
No?
Then what do I need them for?
Much of California drives right next to cliffs every day. Some of them die from it.
So while you get maybe 2% more insulating efficiency than a regular door when it's open, you get 500% less insulating efficiency when it's closed.
A doorway with hanging vinyl slats would work far better.
Oh wait. Those have been around for 30 years.
What in "physically access the encryption or decryption pads" is different from "intercept the transmission of the key"?
Wikipedia's smarter than you.
You sound pretty sure that I don't know what I'm talking about, then prove you don't understand what you're talking about.
/. was a little smarter and didn't chop the ends off of messages and then make you go through flood-prevention hoops just to post a correction...)
"Hard" and "strong" are relative terms, not absolute ones, for a reason. There's something harder and stronger.
Further, prime-factorization keys still need to be transmitted by some channel.
Their security is therefore less than or equal to OTP's.
And since BBS is based on the mathematics of factoring primes, which so far has been shown to be doable, and in every instance someone called that prime "unbreakable", it is less secure than OTP.
Saying "we have no reason to believe" something proves you're willing to rest on the assumption that its opposite is true.
That's how every now-denigrated encryption scheme stuck around long enough to be broken, costing more than it would have cost to just use OTP from the beginning.
But thanks for the laugh. Now put your ego back in its box and get back to studying. Some day you'll actually be as smart as you think you are.
(I wish
You sound pretty sure that I don't know what I'm talking about, then prove you don't understand what you're talking about.
"Hard" and "strong" are relative terms, not absolute ones, for a reason. There's something harder and stronger.
Further, prime-factorization keys still need to be transmitted by some channel.
Their security is therefore less than or equal to OTP's.
And since BBS is based on the mathematics of factoring primes, which so far has been shown to be doable, and in every instance someone called that prime "unbreakable", it is less secure than OTP.
Saying "we have no reason to believe" something proves you're willing to rest on the assumption that its opposite is true.
That's how every now-denigrated encryption scheme stuck around long enough to be broken, costing more than it would have cost to just use OTP from the beginning.
But thanks for the laugh. Now put your ego back in its box and get back to studying. Some day you'll actually be as smart as you t
That was VENONA.
They were using the same pad (literally a pad with key grids printed on each sheet, one sheet to be used per message) on Naval and Merchant vessels, presuming that nobody'd notice.
We got hold of a nearly complete version of the pad from a Merchant vessel and spent several decades cross-checking intercepted Naval traffic against it. It may have been a bigger deal than breaking the Japanese PURPLE code or stealing the ENIGMA.
This is why you were taught Physics, after all.
The Space Race increased attention on math and science in primary schools.
If you did your homework, made it through calculus by Senior Year, and had a Physics class, you could do this easy.
Meaning, there are probably a quarter billion people on this planet with the mathematical acumen to figure out any trajectory from a thrown baseball to a Mars shot.
The thing about terrestrial ballistics is that it isn't "ballistic". The wind gets in the way and is a random input. So the important feature of a weapons system isn't the ballistic estimate of the trajectory, it's the control system that negates perturbative inputs. That is what's classified.
You're both suckers to cultish nonsense.
Quit it and grow up.