Year One: - The open source project begins by a 0.1 version on a student web page deep in the unknown parts of the net. Only the writer know how to use it. - The closed source project begins by a 1.0ß version made by full-time professionals. Full functionalities, user-friendly, full of bugs.
Year Two: - The open source project evolves towards v 0.5. Main functionalities are there. The program is basic but rock-solid. A small community is growing. New comers write some doc, fix some bugs. New users write bug reports. Backward compatibility is broken every week. - The closed source project becomes v2.0 Special Edition. The overworked team does not fix any bug as it has no time left after 15h/day on the v2.0.
Year Three: - The open source project gets into Debian Unstable. Developpers are flooded by bug reports. Standards conformity is enforced. Version numbers reaches 0.9. - Close Source IV+ appears in the shelves, with new wizards, new shiny icons and DRM. Compatibility with 1.0 is there, at least in theory, not in practice, but ensures that the code is a mess. There is no developper left from the first team. Microsoft announces it will innovate by adding the features into the next Service Pack of Windows.
Years Four: - The Open Source project crosses the 1.0 line! The main developpers claim "Mission accomplished!" A few other projects gravitate around this one, mainly graphical interfaces to the command-line program. Only advanced Unix users will ever hear of this project anyway. - The Closed Source company files Chapter 11 after the CIO has flown to Mexico. Failure make the headlines. Code is lost.
- Release the Linux signed bootlader, see people running legally any software on the Xbox, including but not only pirated games, see the stock fall 5% after the press release and the ZDNet comments "MS switches to Linux for the XBox".
OR
- Not release the bootlader, hope the blackmailer is not bluffing (30% chances), see the exploit in the wild, put the guy in jail for DMCA violation (1), blackmail (2), copyright infringement (3), violation of trade secrets (4) and terrorism (5), deny that the hack works (Wall Street won't never hear of it this way), see it goes mainstream, lawyer-bomb any Linux distribution with an XBox version, suppress the exploit from next XBoxes or make it fry the box (6).
Yes, I'm sure they don't sleep anymore...
(1) Don't care if the blackmailers are not American. It did not protect Johanssen from Norway.
(2) Some say this is not strictly speaking blackmail. I wouldn't argue that with the lawyers who convinced the DOJ that MS was not a monopoly. Reason, law and justice lights before Microsoft.
(3) Again, see Johanssen
(4) MS technology is so complex that a single hacker can't have found the exploits without the source code, can he ? SCO would agree.
(5) Because these XBoxes could be used to build Beowulf superclusters to build atomic weapons!!!! In addition, the "terrorist" won't see a lawyer before long, which make the case easier for MS and saves legal costs.
(6) This will be in the EULA, page 856. If you complain, the hotline threatens to call the police (90% of the people will use the loader to pirate games anyway) but will settle if you buy another XBox.
Airbus (now EADS) will get military contracts soon (European transport aircraft).
Re:US vs French vacation packages
on
Working Hard?
·
· Score: 2, Informative
It was meant to be funny but all these jokes are quickly becoming boring:
From http://www.infoplease.com/ipa/A0004619.html
Casualties in World War II
Country Men in war Battle deaths Wounded France - 201,568 400,000 Germany 20,000,000 3,250,0004 7,250,000 U.S.S.R. - 6,115,0004 14,012,000 United Kingdom 5,896,000 357,1164 369,267 United States 16,112,566 291,557 670,846
So the French army fighted only a few months (mainly Spring 1940) but had 2/3 of the whole casualties of the US for the whole war (Pacific included).
The myth of French blind surrendering was a legend born from at end of the disaster, when fron lines collapsed, Germans were everywhere and everything was lost, and from the following pro-Germans government of Petain, who said that the causes of the disaster were lazyness and a lack of will.
The causes of the defeat (the worst in our history) are more in the way the Germans organized their army than everything else.
Although some coordination was achieved in the last 20 years, VAT is different in each EU country : 19,6% in France (20,6% was a few years back, Nicolas !), 16% in Germany, 25% in Denmark...
Details there: http://www.eurotax-vat.com/fiscaleurope.ht ml
>But if we abandoned GM completely and >directed all those resources to methodically >exploit random mutations, would it be that much >safer? That much better?
That would make the speed much slower! Especially when today's cultures are much more homogenous than in the past (which is itself another danger).
>More importantly, could we keep everyone in line?
We did agree to do something worldwide to preserve the ozone layer, we were not so far for the CO2. Why not for something else?
Economical power is another thing. When Europe refuses to import GM species, and expect to have traces and proof of the origin of each beef part, soja or corn seed, this puts the pressure on other countries NOT to grow GM just to avoid the problems of having GM and not-GM species separated.
BTW, the main reason that Europe is so conservative about GM species is that there were enough scandals like ESB (mad cows), were it was played with fire just for productivity reasons.
>It may be possible (yet not easy) to consider >stopping the improvement of other species when
I agree (although there is a gap between stopping overuse of GM and stopping improvement of species).
>But there are nations that still have starvation >problems, that still have ecosystems that are >inefficient for their human populations,...
I still don't believe this. Food supplys are enough, even in the Thirld World. Real reasons of starvation are more political (wars, corruption, bad transports, lack of education, few machines...) than linked to the quality of the species.
These countries have more to lose than to win from corporations'GM (you can't keep the seed for next year for some of them, remember...). WOuld you like to have your country's main food under total control of a foreign corporation? Bad relations with the US or Switzerland? -> No seeds anymore! And chemicals would only be available for GM-species who can resist them, all others would kill natural tomatoes/corn...
Still, that would not be a reason why GM should be blindly allowed in Europe, where we produce much more than necessary.
>This will not be prevented by stopping GM, it >will be prevented by sensible GM research.
I totally agree that research must never be stopped. Some GM species, for example for cheap production of drugs, could be very useful. Or if some genes, after long studies, are proved totally harmless and are not found back in wild species, or prove a real benefit (NO chemicals anymore in the fields).
What is dangerous is a 'laissez faire' attitude. I'd compare this with nuclear plants : if a mistake is made, you can't put the radioactivity/genes in the box. It is a duty to be paranoid in this case.
(BTW, we'll have this problem in a few years again with nanotechnologies if some of these nanorobots can reproduce in the wild...)
>When breeding animals, we wait for the genes we need >to appear by mutation. They are not necessarily the >same genes.
I don't think new genes appear when breeding animals, not on so small a timescale as a few human generations. Selection and breeding alone are already rather powerful. [Waiting for an answer on a.bio. newsgroup tout be sure though].
>Just don't pretend the tomatoes your grandparents >ate are "the way Nature intended",
No, they aren't, of course.
>and don't use that as an argument to stop millenia of >historical inertia, because it's not going to work.
Historical inertia ? We didn't use to throw new genes in the wild, at least not at the scale Monsanto & co would like to.
We always used to improve the species of course, but the "old fashioned" method is already powerful enough and safe (A small continent as Europe produces already too much for its dense population).
What scares me (and much Europeans), is the careless realease in the wild of genes that were never where, without really knowing if it is dangerous or not. GM species in laboratories, and free of "intellectual property", don't make me afraid.
Right. Don't know how many significant mutations there are on current vegetables, pets and humans since Homo Sapiens appeared, but no so much I think.
GE-species are like a super-mutation, very quick, always significant (no neutral change), and outside of natural selection.
Difference : when breeding animals, we don't add anything into the gene pool. Genes are the same as thousands of years ago, expression and selection is just different. We have adapted to them.
Genetically-engineered animals and plants include new genes that were not there before. They may spread to other species when used openly. Long-terme effects are totally unknown.
This can be useful technology (eg. cows which have new drugs in their milk), but PLEASE, not in the food I eat everyday. That's playing with fire. I want my tomatoes to be the same than the ones my great-grand-fathers grew. No chemicals, no new genes, no license on the seeds.
And no, I DO NOT TRUST the corporations that create them.
>You *do* realize that at-home voting compromises the >secret ballot, right?
Of course! I said I receive voting papers at home, but I vote in a special station (usually a school), where all papers are available in quantities too, where identity is checked, and where there is a small box with a curtain where I put what I want in the envelope that I'll put in the box.
>A five-year-old child *cannot* fully understand a voting >system, because a five-year-old child cannot grasp all >the security issues involved. A five-year-old child >should fully understand how to *use* the voting >system, but that's not the same thing.
I agree. A child must be able to understand how it is done. The justifications (why a two-rounds system and not the Condorcet rules, or whatever...) are something else, and some very bright people don't agree there. (There is no 'perfect' voting system).
The main debate for a voting system is usually there, in the 'right' way of choosing the leader after the vote. But the law set a rule, and a 'manual' vote ensures that everybody follows the law. And this is this last part which is (again...) in danger.
...and let's proclaim that the President is directly nominated by IBM, CGEY, or whatever IT corporation wrote the sofware.
It would be as in the XVIIth century with the King choosen by God. Easy and cheap!
Then we can proceed to the next logical step: the revolution.
We Frenchies are not so sophisticated. All voting papers are pre-printed, I receive them at home. I don't even have to know to read, as the joined political advertisements all have a picture of the politician. I put the paper in a box, and I can stay at night to see that all is well hand-counted. I don't want it to change.
A 5-years old child must fully understand a vote system.
I think the goal of MS are: 1) to make the current doubt on Linux future in PHB's heads stronger, and during much more time.
- Why would MS pay some money to SCO if there was nothing important to license ?
- It gives substance to the claim.
- SCO has some fundings (and the trial could last years...)
2) Have a valid license if IBM buys SCO to suppress the problem, reduce legal costs, and shorten the doubt on Linux's future (some people claim that SCO's goal is to be bought by IBM).
Some people explained the slow start of the Internet to the Minitel. I think it is true. Why would my grandmother want a computer if she can buys online with a minitel (we had one in 1986).
The real reasons my parents have a computer are: - I gave him free to them, - E-mail with friends all around the world for my dad.
It is still possible to have an e-mail address that you can read through a Minitel. For example Netcourrier.com : access through web, minitel, phone... (even POP3 if you pay:-)
AFAIK, the State didn't had any tax on the Minitel. But:
- there was the VAT (no idea how much it was)
- France Telecom (hence an administration) was known as a milk cow, with a few billions francs taken from the State each year.
You can have a free Minitel in France, you just have to ask for it, and be patient. I have one. At the beginning it was always free - France Telecom was thinking about public service at this time, not stocks and debts.
And any modem come with the software to access the Minitel network from your computer.
The most dangerous game I played was Half-Life. A few years ago I was working in a French dot-bomb, and we used to play Half-Life between us at noon. At one moment just after a game, my boss opened the door and came. I realised I had the automatic reflex to aim at him and shoot. Of course I had no gun but it scared me.
Sim City 2000 changed some of my thinking. While walking in a street, I often have the will to click on a dirty building or an ugly modern one to erase it.
Stay polite...
In France (and most Europe now I think): the credit card has a chip, which wants to PIN code to approve a transaction. The magnetic stripe is here only as a backup in case you go into another country which does not use this system, and you need to sign the bill.
Mod the parent up ! We had exactly the same problem in France with telephone-cards (you need one for years here for public phones): the old ones without any expiration date are now useless, and all the new ones will expire after a few months. I prefered France Telecom where they were NOT private.
Re:How am I suppose to put this...
on
Cashless Society
·
· Score: 1
See my other post on Serge Humpich and how banks didn't tolerate that he cracked the old PIN-code system... They won't let it happen on a field where Americans are now pretty weak.
( Seriously and OT : French didn't surrender so quickly during WWII. We had about 100 000 soldiers killed, because Germans were better organized and prepared. Our generals didn't understand it was not the same war as in 1914-18. Of course, after Paris was lost and the front had cracked everywhere, there was no hope left and many had no choice than surrender ).
> Hacking it may be possible, but is quite difficult. Reasonbly strong crypto is used in these card. The cards carry a smart card that is capable of doing arithmetic functions that are needed for doing the cryptographical computations.
There is someone in France called Serge Humpich who succeeded in cracking the credit cards, although they all need a PIN code for 15 years. He did not steal anything, just showed that he could get 'free' subway tickets from an ATM any day. He didn't say how he did, he just wanted some recognition and help securing it. He contacted the banks through his lawyers.
Banks took him to court in 1998, and he was sentenced to pay 12000F (now about 2000 , the same in US$), although we don't have something like the DMCA now (yet...), and that no dommage was done.
So if Moneo is cracked by a white-hat, be sure that he will never tell it openly.
Some links on the judgment (in French): http://parodie.com/monetique/commentaire .htm
Humpich wrote a book : "Le cerveau bleu".
Re:You keep all your money in cash?
on
Cashless Society
·
· Score: 1
This small card-reader exists in France too, I've seen an advertisement for it. This works with the Vitale card (social security) too.
> I seriously don't mind that but, then when the > population reaches the point that where earth >cannot anylonger sustain it, we are going to have > a problem)
The money spent to go to Mars and modify it to grow anything eatable would be huge. It could be better invested to improve agriculture in poor countries, help these countries to reduce population growth (education !) and improve their political system (no more war and corruption...). Population should reach a maximum at 10 or 11 billions in 50 or 100 years. Terraforming Mars : 1000 years (But i'd love to see it !)
Slashdot Mirror
Year One:
- The open source project begins by a 0.1 version on a student web page deep in the unknown parts of the net. Only the writer know how to use it.
- The closed source project begins by a 1.0ß version made by full-time professionals. Full functionalities, user-friendly, full of bugs.
Year Two:
- The open source project evolves towards v 0.5. Main functionalities are there. The program is basic but rock-solid. A small community is growing. New comers write some doc, fix some bugs. New users write bug reports. Backward compatibility is broken every week.
- The closed source project becomes v2.0 Special Edition. The overworked team does not fix any bug as it has no time left after 15h/day on the v2.0.
Year Three:
- The open source project gets into Debian Unstable. Developpers are flooded by bug reports. Standards conformity is enforced. Version numbers reaches 0.9.
- Close Source IV+ appears in the shelves, with new wizards, new shiny icons and DRM. Compatibility with 1.0 is there, at least in theory, not in practice, but ensures that the code is a mess. There is no developper left from the first team. Microsoft announces it will innovate by adding the features into the next Service Pack of Windows.
Years Four:
- The Open Source project crosses the 1.0 line! The main developpers claim "Mission accomplished!" A few other projects gravitate around this one, mainly graphical interfaces to the command-line program. Only advanced Unix users will ever hear of this project anyway.
- The Closed Source company files Chapter 11 after the CIO has flown to Mexico. Failure make the headlines. Code is lost.
I wonder how many seconds they have hesitated:
- Release the Linux signed bootlader, see people running legally any software on the Xbox, including but not only pirated games, see the stock fall 5% after the press release and the ZDNet comments "MS switches to Linux for the XBox".
OR
- Not release the bootlader, hope the blackmailer is not bluffing (30% chances), see the exploit in the wild, put the guy in jail for DMCA violation (1), blackmail (2), copyright infringement (3), violation of trade secrets (4) and terrorism (5), deny that the hack works (Wall Street won't never hear of it this way), see it goes mainstream, lawyer-bomb any Linux distribution with an XBox version, suppress the exploit from next XBoxes or make it fry the box (6).
Yes, I'm sure they don't sleep anymore...
(1) Don't care if the blackmailers are not American. It did not protect Johanssen from Norway.
(2) Some say this is not strictly speaking blackmail. I wouldn't argue that with the lawyers who convinced the DOJ that MS was not a monopoly. Reason, law and justice lights before Microsoft.
(3) Again, see Johanssen
(4) MS technology is so complex that a single hacker can't have found the exploits without the source code, can he ? SCO would agree.
(5) Because these XBoxes could be used to build Beowulf superclusters to build atomic weapons!!!! In addition, the "terrorist" won't see a lawyer before long, which make the case easier for MS and saves legal costs.
(6) This will be in the EULA, page 856. If you complain, the hotline threatens to call the police (90% of the people will use the loader to pirate games anyway) but will settle if you buy another XBox.
Airbus (now EADS) will get military contracts soon (European transport aircraft).
It was meant to be funny but all these jokes are quickly becoming boring:
From http://www.infoplease.com/ipa/A0004619.html
Casualties in World War II
Country Men in war Battle deaths Wounded
France - 201,568 400,000
Germany 20,000,000 3,250,0004 7,250,000
U.S.S.R. - 6,115,0004 14,012,000
United Kingdom 5,896,000 357,1164 369,267
United States 16,112,566 291,557 670,846
So the French army fighted only a few months (mainly Spring 1940) but had 2/3 of the whole casualties of the US for the whole war (Pacific included).
The myth of French blind surrendering was a legend born from at end of the disaster, when fron lines collapsed, Germans were everywhere and everything was lost, and from the following pro-Germans government of Petain, who said that the causes of the disaster were lazyness and a lack of will.
The causes of the defeat (the worst in our history) are more in the way the Germans organized their army than everything else.
Although some coordination was achieved in the last 20 years, VAT is different in each EU country : 19,6% in France (20,6% was a few years back, Nicolas !), 16% in Germany, 25% in Denmark...t ml
:-)
Details there:
http://www.eurotax-vat.com/fiscaleurope.h
Think of it next time you buy inline
>But if we abandoned GM completely and
...
>directed all those resources to methodically
>exploit random mutations, would it be that much
>safer? That much better?
That would make the speed much slower! Especially when today's cultures are much more homogenous than in the past (which is itself another danger).
>More importantly, could we keep everyone in line?
We did agree to do something worldwide to preserve the ozone layer, we were not so far for the CO2. Why not for something else?
Economical power is another thing. When Europe refuses to import GM species, and expect to have traces and proof of the origin of each beef part, soja or corn seed, this puts the pressure on other countries NOT to grow GM just to avoid the problems of having GM and not-GM species separated.
BTW, the main reason that Europe is so conservative about GM species is that there were enough scandals like ESB (mad cows), were it was played with fire just for productivity reasons.
>It may be possible (yet not easy) to consider
>stopping the improvement of other species when
I agree (although there is a gap between stopping overuse of GM and stopping improvement of species).
>But there are nations that still have starvation
>problems, that still have ecosystems that are
>inefficient for their human populations,
I still don't believe this. Food supplys are enough, even in the Thirld World. Real reasons of starvation are more political (wars, corruption, bad transports, lack of education, few machines...) than linked to the quality of the species.
These countries have more to lose than to win from corporations'GM (you can't keep the seed for next year for some of them, remember...). WOuld you like to have your country's main food under total control of a foreign corporation? Bad relations with the US or Switzerland? -> No seeds anymore! And chemicals would only be available for GM-species who can resist them, all others would kill natural tomatoes/corn...
Still, that would not be a reason why GM should be blindly allowed in Europe, where we produce much more than necessary.
>This will not be prevented by stopping GM, it
>will be prevented by sensible GM research.
I totally agree that research must never be stopped. Some GM species, for example for cheap production of drugs, could be very useful. Or if some genes, after long studies, are proved totally harmless and are not found back in wild species, or prove a real benefit (NO chemicals anymore in the fields).
What is dangerous is a 'laissez faire' attitude. I'd compare this with nuclear plants : if a mistake is made, you can't put the radioactivity/genes in the box. It is a duty to be paranoid in this case.
(BTW, we'll have this problem in a few years again with nanotechnologies if some of these nanorobots can reproduce in the wild...)
>When breeding animals, we wait for the genes we need >to appear by mutation. They are not necessarily the >same genes.
.bio. newsgroup tout be sure though].
I don't think new genes appear when breeding animals, not on so small a timescale as a few human generations. Selection and breeding alone are already rather powerful. [Waiting for an answer on a
>Just don't pretend the tomatoes your grandparents >ate are "the way Nature intended",
No, they aren't, of course.
>and don't use that as an argument to stop millenia of >historical inertia, because it's not going to work.
Historical inertia ? We didn't use to throw new genes in the wild, at least not at the scale Monsanto & co would like to.
We always used to improve the species of course, but the "old fashioned" method is already powerful enough and safe (A small continent as Europe produces already too much for its dense population).
What scares me (and much Europeans), is the careless realease in the wild of genes that were never where, without really knowing if it is dangerous or not. GM species in laboratories, and free of "intellectual property", don't make me afraid.
Right. Don't know how many significant mutations there are on current vegetables, pets and humans since Homo Sapiens appeared, but no so much I think.
GE-species are like a super-mutation, very quick, always significant (no neutral change), and outside of natural selection.
Difference : when breeding animals, we don't add anything into the gene pool. Genes are the same as thousands of years ago, expression and selection is just different. We have adapted to them.
Genetically-engineered animals and plants include new genes that were not there before. They may spread to other species when used openly. Long-terme effects are totally unknown.
This can be useful technology (eg. cows which have new drugs in their milk), but PLEASE, not in the food I eat everyday. That's playing with fire. I want my tomatoes to be the same than the ones my great-grand-fathers grew. No chemicals, no new genes, no license on the seeds.
And no, I DO NOT TRUST the corporations that create them.
>You *do* realize that at-home voting compromises the >secret ballot, right?
Of course! I said I receive voting papers at home, but I vote in a special station (usually a school), where all papers are available in quantities too, where identity is checked, and where there is a small box with a curtain where I put what I want in the envelope that I'll put in the box.
>A five-year-old child *cannot* fully understand a voting >system, because a five-year-old child cannot grasp all >the security issues involved. A five-year-old child >should fully understand how to *use* the voting >system, but that's not the same thing.
I agree. A child must be able to understand how it is done. The justifications (why a two-rounds system and not the Condorcet rules, or whatever...) are something else, and some very bright people don't agree there. (There is no 'perfect' voting system).
The main debate for a voting system is usually there, in the 'right' way of choosing the leader after the vote. But the law set a rule, and a 'manual' vote ensures that everybody follows the law. And this is this last part which is (again...) in danger.
...and let's proclaim that the President is directly nominated by IBM, CGEY, or whatever IT corporation wrote the sofware.
It would be as in the XVIIth century with the King choosen by God. Easy and cheap!
Then we can proceed to the next logical step: the revolution.
We Frenchies are not so sophisticated. All voting papers are pre-printed, I receive them at home. I don't even have to know to read, as the joined political advertisements all have a picture of the politician. I put the paper in a box, and I can stay at night to see that all is well hand-counted. I don't want it to change.
A 5-years old child must fully understand a vote system.
I think the goal of MS are :
1) to make the current doubt on Linux future in PHB's heads stronger, and during much more time.
- Why would MS pay some money to SCO if there was nothing important to license ?
- It gives substance to the claim.
- SCO has some fundings (and the trial could last years...)
2) Have a valid license if IBM buys SCO to suppress the problem, reduce legal costs, and shorten the doubt on Linux's future (some people claim that SCO's goal is to be bought by IBM).
>At the very beginning, it was even rented 70F per >month (about 11 euros), to become free in 1986. ;-)
I don't remember this far
>I guess than today the 1B, once connected, can >directly be used with Linux by just issuing a penable >tty0.
I've seen articles to make the bit of missing hardware to make a terminal from a Minitel.
Some people explained the slow start of the Internet to the Minitel. I think it is true. Why would my grandmother want a computer if she can buys online with a minitel (we had one in 1986). :
The real reasons my parents have a computer are
- I gave him free to them,
- E-mail with friends all around the world for my dad.
It is still possible to have an e-mail address that you can read through a Minitel. For example Netcourrier.com : access through web, minitel, phone... (even POP3 if you pay :-)
AFAIK, the State didn't had any tax on the Minitel. But :
- there was the VAT (no idea how much it was)
- France Telecom (hence an administration) was known as a milk cow, with a few billions francs taken from the State each year.
You can have a free Minitel in France, you just have to ask for it, and be patient. I have one. At the beginning it was always free - France Telecom was thinking about public service at this time, not stocks and debts.
And any modem come with the software to access the Minitel network from your computer.
The most dangerous game I played was Half-Life. A few years ago I was working in a French dot-bomb, and we used to play Half-Life between us at noon. At one moment just after a game, my boss opened the door and came. I realised I had the automatic reflex to aim at him and shoot. Of course
I had no gun but it scared me.
Sim City 2000 changed some of my thinking. While walking in a street, I often have the will to click on a dirty building or an ugly modern one to erase it.
Stay polite...
In France (and most Europe now I think): the credit card has a chip, which wants to PIN code to approve a transaction. The magnetic stripe is here only as a backup in case you go into another country which does not use this system, and you need to sign the bill.
Mod the parent up !
We had exactly the same problem in France with telephone-cards (you need one for years here for public phones): the old ones without any expiration date are now useless, and all the new ones will expire after a few months. I prefered France Telecom where they were NOT private.
See my other post on Serge Humpich and how banks didn't tolerate that he cracked the old PIN-code system... They won't let it happen on a field where Americans are now pretty weak.
( Seriously and OT : French didn't surrender so quickly during WWII. We had about 100 000 soldiers killed, because Germans were better organized and prepared. Our generals didn't understand it was not the same war as in 1914-18. Of course, after Paris was lost and the front had cracked everywhere, there was no hope left and many had no choice than surrender ).
> Hacking it may be possible, but is quite difficult. Reasonbly strong crypto is used in these card. The cards carry a smart card that is capable of doing arithmetic functions that are needed for doing the cryptographical computations.
e .htm
There is someone in France called Serge Humpich who succeeded in cracking the credit cards, although they all need a PIN code for 15 years. He did not steal anything, just showed that he could get 'free' subway tickets from an ATM any day. He didn't say how he did, he just wanted some recognition and help securing it. He contacted the banks through his lawyers.
Banks took him to court in 1998, and he was sentenced to pay 12000F (now about 2000 , the same in US$), although we don't have something like the DMCA now (yet...), and that no dommage was done.
So if Moneo is cracked by a white-hat, be sure that he will never tell it openly.
Some links on the judgment (in French):
http://parodie.com/monetique/commentair
Humpich wrote a book : "Le cerveau bleu".
This small card-reader exists in France too,
I've seen an advertisement for it. This works
with the Vitale card (social security) too.
> I seriously don't mind that but, then when the
> population reaches the point that where earth
>cannot anylonger sustain it, we are going to have
> a problem)
The money spent to go to Mars and modify it to grow anything eatable would be huge. It could be better invested to improve agriculture in poor countries, help these countries to reduce population growth (education !) and improve their political system (no more war and corruption...).
Population should reach a maximum at 10 or 11 billions in 50 or 100 years. Terraforming Mars : 1000 years (But i'd love to see it !)
Christophe - Strasbourg, France