"Murdered Japan"... I don't know where you get your news, but Japan is very much alive.
Also, please remember the current death tolls : -> the actual disaster : 12813 and counting -> the nuclear meltdown : 0 (1 badly burnt, and 2 people got smacked against the building by the tsunami, then died. They are not counted. Although around 2000 people are temporarily relocated, the large majority of them were relocated because of the tsunami when it destroyed their houses)
Frankly, I think that if you want to reduce deaths during quakes and tsunami's... you don't have to worry about nuclear plants. In fact, you could let them melt down entirely, and feed the local cooling water to the country's babies and you would still barely increase the death count.
Instead, worry about trains, cars, buildings,... Worry, even, about roof-mounted solar panels falling down and wind towers toppling. They cause more deaths than all damaged nuclear plants together.
Don't forget... sometimes systems fail. The high speed train to north Japan followed exact procedure after the quake. They stopped the train using the emergency brakes. They locked everything down, disconnected the power systems and evacuated the passengers, got the local police present and got medical aid. Every procedure (presumably) followed to the letter. Then the tsunami came. There were no survivors. Not one.
And this is exactly why radon exposure, unlike iodine and cesium exposure, will actually kill you. Iodine exposure will cause thyroid cancer. Survival rate > 99.9%. Cesium exposure can only kill through radiation sickness, which requires massive doses (you need > 10g in the lungs before levels get truly dangerous. Even smoking the stuff will not cause that).
Radon, on the other hand, will cause lung cancer. Survival rate ~ 30% (and that's 5 years after the diagnosis. 20 years after diagnosis we're not even talking 10%, but that's partly because people hardly ever get diagnosed with lung cancer before they're 55). Generally you will end up ingesting radon through drinking water, which is doubly bad. It's a naturally occuring element, that is linked to cancer increases where the natural exposure is higher than normal (ironically, fresh spring water is the main cause of increased radon exposure).
How can you think like that ? The uranium in those reactors... I guess that was made by the tooth fairy, right ? There was no dangerous uranium on this planet before the first nuclear reactor was discovered by that very evil Belgian...
Oh wait. He collected that reactor fuel in Belgian Congo, where it was lying on the ground in the form of green stones that glow in the dark ? Apparently these were made into statues and used as glow-in-the-dark room ornaments... Kids were playing with them (they still do)
Strangely cancer occurs somewhat more in that region in children than elsewhere. And... no nuclear reactor was involved... U-235, the dangerous kind, is a naturally occuring element (and so are the fission products, like cesium). Nuclear reactors actually lower the amount of dangerous nuclear waste on our planet.
What makes nuclear waste from reactors dangerous is, of course, it's concentration. If we were to spread it around, it's concentration would drop so significantly that it wouldn't be dangerous at all.
The real thing missing from the news is the deaths caused by solar and wind power. Both kill dozens of people each year, yet not a peep.
People don't even find this strange. Installing panels filled with toxic substances on slippery rooftops... surprise !... isn't the safest profession on this little blue rock. And huge metal plates swinging around in the air at speeds easily exceeding 300 km/h... sometimes break and crash into someone's roof, or car, or daughter. Again for some reason this comes as a shock to most people (if they're even willing to believe it at all).
When you actually count the deaths, it turns out that both in absolute and relative numbers, nuclear power has killed far fewer people than either solar or wind (though, it should be said that none of these technologies kills all that many people. But the numbers don't lie : nuclear is safer than solar, which is safer than wind. Each by at least a factor or 2. And coal, the most used energy source in the world, kills thousands of people yearly)
Even solar thermal kills. There is something terminally unsafe as huge chunks of several-thousand-degrees-hot metal hanging tens of meters above the ground, and engineers climbing into them.
Solar panels don’t come falling out of the sky – they have to be manufactured. Similar to computer chips, this is a dirty and energy-intensive process. First, raw materials have to be mined: quartz sand for silicon cells, metal ore for thin film cells. Next, these materials have to be treated, following different steps (in the case of silicon cells these are purification, crystallization and wafering). Finally, these upgraded materials have to be manufactured into solar cells, and assembled into modules. All these processes produce air pollution and heavy metal emissions, and they consume energy - which brings about more air pollution, heavy metal emissions and also greenhouse gases.
There's also another equally stupid point : nuclear reactors actually reduce the amount of radioactivity in the environment. They, of course, also concentrate it.
If we vaporized nuclear waste and dumped it into the athmosphere, to fall down whereever, it would actually be a lot less dangerous than the uranium ore that was removed.
That would be the mature way of thinking. Of course, it leads unequivocally to the obvious conclusion :
nuclear is the safest power (by far) we have. Accidents are high profile, but they hardly ever occur (and when they do occur, there are hardly any victims. Even chernobyl only killed around 50 people. Total death toll for the nuclear industry over 60 years is perhaps 100 people. Is anyone seriously going to claim that even producing solar panels killed less than 100 people by now in simple workplace accidents ?) solar is next, but the panels are toxic to just about everything, and you need large surfaces where nothing else will grow (and installing these panels is dangerous, just like placing a roof is dangerous) wind is next in the safety line, but is also dangerous (though most deaths result from the engineer in the generator room getting killed by flying metal, or sticking his hand into a rotating...) all fossil fuel based generation methods, of course, are not very safe at all. They are toxic, they blow up, and even when they don't directly leak, the gasses are dangerous, and carcinogen. And let's not forget oil spills. And the wars.
So you'd think that if a person were genuinly interested in lowering risk, they'd be pushing moving everything to nuclear. You have to admit that generating a gigawatt of power, reliably, on-demand and without releasing anything at all into the athmosphere, on an area 200 meters by 200 meters is pretty amazing.
Here's the question I have : given that the given arguments against nuclear power are bogus. The dangers of nuclear power, when evaluated as sum(chance_of_occurence * cost_of_occurence) for all occurances, is MUCH less than solar, and the positive payoff (ie. energy for billions of people) of nuclear power is much greater than solar or wind... why the hell would anyone oppose nuclear power ? I mean I realize pretty faces on the idiot tube are saying this, but have you ever thought about this for yourself ?
How about : "because there's nothing in the ASLv2 that states they must release any source code" ?
I mean, I don't want to rain on your conspiracy theorie(s) (they rarely come alone), but this is not the GPL (and even the GPL doesn't mandate a public source code release).
Don't worry. Bin Laden has been given all the weapons he always used : women and children hide behind, and babies to throw at the soldiers. Oh and you have to walk through the local kindergarten, which is booby-trapped. I don't mean an empty kindergarten, of course. And, of course, at the end of the level you get blamed for every kid that died by all lefties worldwide, as it's so obviously your fault that Bin Laden likes to bomb toddlers.
The problem is that parallelized encryption is not as secure as the other modes. Let me show you the difference between CBC, ECB and CTR ( block(i) means the i'th block of data)
1) CBC
CBC(pwd, block(i)) == encrypt(pwd, block(i)) xor block(i-1) * block(-1) = hash(pwd, 0) (sometimes half the password is used as block(-1))
2) ECB
ECB(block(i)) = encrypt(block(i))
3) CTR
CTR(block(i)) = encrypt(block(i)) xor i
I hope it's obvious why CBC and CTR are the only candidates for parallelization. CBC can only be done in sequence. But there's a huge issue. Ciphers have weak spots, and there are rainbow tables. So let's suppose you have an encrypted file in ECB mode.
encrypt(block(1)) : encrypt(block(2)) :... : encrypt(block(n)) * bing rainbow table hit ! (ie. somehow you're able to decrypt block(3))
now you have a combination block(n), encrypt(block(n)) and password. Well you've broken the encryption. The problem is the contents of blocks are quite predictable (e.g. you will pretty much know every bit in an ext3 superblock if you know the size of the volume, so you can generate targeted rainbow tables). The only thing you need to find is the password.
Now block(1) is still perfectly predictable, block(1) xor initializer, however, is not. You have to generate 2^(passwordlength + blocksize)/2 rainbow tables before you'd get a single hit. Also, just because you get one hit, doesn't mean it's the correct one (in ECB you know it's the correct one because the plaintext is meaningful. "Bob, I secretly loved your brother last night" is easily recognized as plaintext, while that same string xorred with a pseudorandom value doesn't make sense to anything). That means that you know have to find both the password and the plaintext. That generally, with a 256 bit password and 4 kb blocksize, that you effectively have a "password" that's 4.5 kb. This makes CBC orders of magnitude harder to crack.
It should be said that attacks on ECB or CTR, while a LOT easier, are only theoretical for recent algorithms (e.g. AES). However, CBC remains secure much longer than ECB, both using the same encryption algorithm. CBC 3DES encryption, for example, is considered safe (and it is very doubtful even the NSA or CIA has the resources even for CBC DES).
No actually, that is not a new concept at all. Besides if there truly are pre-existing black holes, the fact that they "suck void" is the only hope we have of detecting their presence. Given that all matter surrounding these black holes would have been removed during the singularity normal ways of detecting them, by their accretion discs, will fail.
I know, it's such a bunch of nonsense. For the clueless: a "certificate of death" is OBVIOUSLY NOT THE SAME as a "death certificate".
You must work for government. I've actually been told this about my birth certificate. Took a full month to get it in order, which translated in a month's pay missed.
Ex-lawyers who noticed that the job of undemocratic dictatorship lackey is a lot easier and pays a lot better.
Note that these people are not democratically elected. Why the hell are these idiots tolerated ? I mean they're no better than Saudi's woman decapitators, or Iran's "why would you think gays exist in Iran"-moronic government, which also "allow elections*".
Once your users attempt to get their bittorrent clients into the more preferential QoS classes (and they will generally easily succeed at this simply by changing a few parameters), you need DPI to be able to recognize the traffic as a source for QoS classifications.
Kazaa in particular was a bitch since it can easily run over port 80 and even send a few HTTP headers for kicks.
So please tell me how I block port-scanning filesharing clients (that don't use fixed ports or fixed ips) without DPI ? I'm pretty sure it's impossible, but hey, maybe I'm wrong.
I'd hope Google would sue them for copyright violation, changing their webpage in transit, and collect damages per changed page. Additionally they create confusion by diluting Google's trademarks (and those of anyone else whose page is changed). I mean this violates so many laws it isn't funny.
You could serve them with a DMCA cease and decist notice as a normal website author. Fight fire with fire.
DPI (deep packet inspection) is for filtering (at worst : censorship), not for wiretapping. It wouldn't even be that useful for it. It can be used to say things like "if you see a TCP connection pass, on any port, and you see the string "stoning women is evil" pass, kill the tcp connection". If you want to do this yourself, check this out [lowth.com]. If you're on a company network and you want to have a network performing okay while bittorrent clients are present on it, you'll need DPI.
And of course router makers have added DPI, half their customers want it, and all modern firewalls do. It's the only way you can still do things like blocking kazaa or bittorrent or ssh while leaving http and https open. It is, of course, not remotely accessible without the passwords to the device, so if the government wants to use it, they'll have to pass the NOC.
Yes I imagine you don't like what China, North Korea and muslim countries are using this for, but it's nothing like what you're describing.
Slashdot Mirror
"Murdered Japan" ... I don't know where you get your news, but Japan is very much alive.
Also, please remember the current death tolls :
-> the actual disaster : 12813 and counting
-> the nuclear meltdown : 0 (1 badly burnt, and 2 people got smacked against the building by the tsunami, then died. They are not counted. Although around 2000 people are temporarily relocated, the large majority of them were relocated because of the tsunami when it destroyed their houses)
Frankly, I think that if you want to reduce deaths during quakes and tsunami's ... you don't have to worry about nuclear plants. In fact, you could let them melt down entirely, and feed the local cooling water to the country's babies and you would still barely increase the death count.
Instead, worry about trains, cars, buildings, ... Worry, even, about roof-mounted solar panels falling down and wind towers toppling. They cause more deaths than all damaged nuclear plants together.
Don't forget ... sometimes systems fail. The high speed train to north Japan followed exact procedure after the quake. They stopped the train using the emergency brakes. They locked everything down, disconnected the power systems and evacuated the passengers, got the local police present and got medical aid. Every procedure (presumably) followed to the letter. Then the tsunami came. There were no survivors. Not one.
Sometimes, you're just fucked.
Also radon (and daughters) only last a few days.
And this is exactly why radon exposure, unlike iodine and cesium exposure, will actually kill you. Iodine exposure will cause thyroid cancer. Survival rate > 99.9%. Cesium exposure can only kill through radiation sickness, which requires massive doses (you need > 10g in the lungs before levels get truly dangerous. Even smoking the stuff will not cause that).
Radon, on the other hand, will cause lung cancer. Survival rate ~ 30% (and that's 5 years after the diagnosis. 20 years after diagnosis we're not even talking 10%, but that's partly because people hardly ever get diagnosed with lung cancer before they're 55). Generally you will end up ingesting radon through drinking water, which is doubly bad. It's a naturally occuring element, that is linked to cancer increases where the natural exposure is higher than normal (ironically, fresh spring water is the main cause of increased radon exposure).
According to the WHO, radon (the natural background level) is the leading cause of cancer after tobacco.
Same goes for the nat. IPv6 does do nat, these days. "Security benefits", in case you're wondering.
Microsoft is right here (for now). As to why anyone needs office applications ...
Had to be said.
How can you think like that ? The uranium in those reactors ... I guess that was made by the tooth fairy, right ? There was no dangerous uranium on this planet before the first nuclear reactor was discovered by that very evil Belgian ...
Oh wait. He collected that reactor fuel in Belgian Congo, where it was lying on the ground in the form of green stones that glow in the dark ? Apparently these were made into statues and used as glow-in-the-dark room ornaments ... Kids were playing with them (they still do)
Strangely cancer occurs somewhat more in that region in children than elsewhere. And ... no nuclear reactor was involved ... U-235, the dangerous kind, is a naturally occuring element (and so are the fission products, like cesium). Nuclear reactors actually lower the amount of dangerous nuclear waste on our planet.
What makes nuclear waste from reactors dangerous is, of course, it's concentration. If we were to spread it around, it's concentration would drop so significantly that it wouldn't be dangerous at all.
The real thing missing from the news is the deaths caused by solar and wind power. Both kill dozens of people each year, yet not a peep.
People don't even find this strange. Installing panels filled with toxic substances on slippery rooftops ... surprise ! ... isn't the safest profession on this little blue rock. And huge metal plates swinging around in the air at speeds easily exceeding 300 km/h ... sometimes break and crash into someone's roof, or car, or daughter. Again for some reason this comes as a shock to most people (if they're even willing to believe it at all).
When you actually count the deaths, it turns out that both in absolute and relative numbers, nuclear power has killed far fewer people than either solar or wind (though, it should be said that none of these technologies kills all that many people. But the numbers don't lie : nuclear is safer than solar, which is safer than wind. Each by at least a factor or 2. And coal, the most used energy source in the world, kills thousands of people yearly)
Even solar thermal kills. There is something terminally unsafe as huge chunks of several-thousand-degrees-hot metal hanging tens of meters above the ground, and engineers climbing into them.
People think nuclear power kills more people than wind power because the TV says so. I really wish there were more to it than that.
http://www.wind-works.org/articles/BreathLife.html
(of course, sky-scrapers also kill more engineers than wind turbines. But wind turbines kill far more engineers (and people) than nuclear power does)
http://www.lowtechmagazine.com/2008/03/the-ugly-side-o.html
Solar panels don’t come falling out of the sky – they have to be manufactured. Similar to computer chips, this is a dirty and energy-intensive process. First, raw materials have to be mined: quartz sand for silicon cells, metal ore for thin film cells. Next, these materials have to be treated, following different steps (in the case of silicon cells these are purification, crystallization and wafering). Finally, these upgraded materials have to be manufactured into solar cells, and assembled into modules. All these processes produce air pollution and heavy metal emissions, and they consume energy - which brings about more air pollution, heavy metal emissions and also greenhouse gases.
(from the linked article)
There's also another equally stupid point : nuclear reactors actually reduce the amount of radioactivity in the environment. They, of course, also concentrate it.
If we vaporized nuclear waste and dumped it into the athmosphere, to fall down whereever, it would actually be a lot less dangerous than the uranium ore that was removed.
That would be the mature way of thinking. Of course, it leads unequivocally to the obvious conclusion :
nuclear is the safest power (by far) we have. Accidents are high profile, but they hardly ever occur (and when they do occur, there are hardly any victims. Even chernobyl only killed around 50 people. Total death toll for the nuclear industry over 60 years is perhaps 100 people. Is anyone seriously going to claim that even producing solar panels killed less than 100 people by now in simple workplace accidents ?) ...)
solar is next, but the panels are toxic to just about everything, and you need large surfaces where nothing else will grow (and installing these panels is dangerous, just like placing a roof is dangerous)
wind is next in the safety line, but is also dangerous (though most deaths result from the engineer in the generator room getting killed by flying metal, or sticking his hand into a rotating
all fossil fuel based generation methods, of course, are not very safe at all. They are toxic, they blow up, and even when they don't directly leak, the gasses are dangerous, and carcinogen. And let's not forget oil spills. And the wars.
So you'd think that if a person were genuinly interested in lowering risk, they'd be pushing moving everything to nuclear. You have to admit that generating a gigawatt of power, reliably, on-demand and without releasing anything at all into the athmosphere, on an area 200 meters by 200 meters is pretty amazing.
Here's the question I have : given that the given arguments against nuclear power are bogus. The dangers of nuclear power, when evaluated as sum(chance_of_occurence * cost_of_occurence) for all occurances, is MUCH less than solar, and the positive payoff (ie. energy for billions of people) of nuclear power is much greater than solar or wind ... why the hell would anyone oppose nuclear power ? I mean I realize pretty faces on the idiot tube are saying this, but have you ever thought about this for yourself ?
How about : "because there's nothing in the ASLv2 that states they must release any source code" ?
I mean, I don't want to rain on your conspiracy theorie(s) (they rarely come alone), but this is not the GPL (and even the GPL doesn't mandate a public source code release).
Exactly. The internet is about the free and open exchange and sale of other people's ideas !
How dare anyone oppose these. Now where are the Lucy Liu assassin bots to protect us ?
Don't worry. Bin Laden has been given all the weapons he always used : women and children hide behind, and babies to throw at the soldiers. Oh and you have to walk through the local kindergarten, which is booby-trapped. I don't mean an empty kindergarten, of course. And, of course, at the end of the level you get blamed for every kid that died by all lefties worldwide, as it's so obviously your fault that Bin Laden likes to bomb toddlers.
Sounds like fun ?
The problem is that parallelized encryption is not as secure as the other modes. Let me show you the difference between CBC, ECB and CTR ( block(i) means the i'th block of data)
1) CBC
CBC(pwd, block(i)) == encrypt(pwd, block(i)) xor block(i-1)
* block(-1) = hash(pwd, 0) (sometimes half the password is used as block(-1))
2) ECB
ECB(block(i)) = encrypt(block(i))
3) CTR
CTR(block(i)) = encrypt(block(i)) xor i
I hope it's obvious why CBC and CTR are the only candidates for parallelization. CBC can only be done in sequence. But there's a huge issue. Ciphers have weak spots, and there are rainbow tables. So let's suppose you have an encrypted file in ECB mode.
encrypt(block(1)) : encrypt(block(2)) : ... : encrypt(block(n)) * bing rainbow table hit ! (ie. somehow you're able to decrypt block(3))
now you have a combination block(n), encrypt(block(n)) and password. Well you've broken the encryption. The problem is the contents of blocks are quite predictable (e.g. you will pretty much know every bit in an ext3 superblock if you know the size of the volume, so you can generate targeted rainbow tables). The only thing you need to find is the password.
Suppose the same happens in CBC mode
encrypt(block(1) xor initializer) : encrypt(block(2) xor encrypt(block(1) xor initializer) : encrypt(block(3) xor encrypt(block(2) xor encrypt(block(1) xor initializer)) ...
Now block(1) is still perfectly predictable, block(1) xor initializer, however, is not. You have to generate 2^(passwordlength + blocksize)/2 rainbow tables before you'd get a single hit. Also, just because you get one hit, doesn't mean it's the correct one (in ECB you know it's the correct one because the plaintext is meaningful. "Bob, I secretly loved your brother last night" is easily recognized as plaintext, while that same string xorred with a pseudorandom value doesn't make sense to anything). That means that you know have to find both the password and the plaintext. That generally, with a 256 bit password and 4 kb blocksize, that you effectively have a "password" that's 4.5 kb. This makes CBC orders of magnitude harder to crack.
It should be said that attacks on ECB or CTR, while a LOT easier, are only theoretical for recent algorithms (e.g. AES). However, CBC remains secure much longer than ECB, both using the same encryption algorithm. CBC 3DES encryption, for example, is considered safe (and it is very doubtful even the NSA or CIA has the resources even for CBC DES).
So, in short, NVIDIA cheated.
Blackhole sucking void? That is a new concept.
No actually, that is not a new concept at all. Besides if there truly are pre-existing black holes, the fact that they "suck void" is the only hope we have of detecting their presence. Given that all matter surrounding these black holes would have been removed during the singularity normal ways of detecting them, by their accretion discs, will fail.
And as for whether Saddam has WMD's, the answer is equally obvious
Halabja
And just for reference. If this is the sequence :
idiot fires guns, people dies
we attack idiot, find no guns
How in the name of the almighty Atheismo do you get to the conclusion that there were no guns in the first place ? WTF ?
(and this was not the only incident with these weapons)
I know, it's such a bunch of nonsense. For the clueless: a "certificate of death" is OBVIOUSLY NOT THE SAME as a "death certificate".
You must work for government. I've actually been told this about my birth certificate. Took a full month to get it in order, which translated in a month's pay missed.
*sigh*
Ex-lawyers who noticed that the job of undemocratic dictatorship lackey is a lot easier and pays a lot better.
Note that these people are not democratically elected. Why the hell are these idiots tolerated ? I mean they're no better than Saudi's woman decapitators, or Iran's "why would you think gays exist in Iran"-moronic government, which also "allow elections*".
Morons.
* only on local level
Once your users attempt to get their bittorrent clients into the more preferential QoS classes (and they will generally easily succeed at this simply by changing a few parameters), you need DPI to be able to recognize the traffic as a source for QoS classifications.
Kazaa in particular was a bitch since it can easily run over port 80 and even send a few HTTP headers for kicks.
e.g. read this thread : http://www.overclockers.com/forums/archive/index.php/t-232199.html
So please tell me how I block port-scanning filesharing clients (that don't use fixed ports or fixed ips) without DPI ? I'm pretty sure it's impossible, but hey, maybe I'm wrong.
I'd hope Google would sue them for copyright violation, changing their webpage in transit, and collect damages per changed page. Additionally they create confusion by diluting Google's trademarks (and those of anyone else whose page is changed). I mean this violates so many laws it isn't funny.
You could serve them with a DMCA cease and decist notice as a normal website author. Fight fire with fire.
DPI (deep packet inspection) is for filtering (at worst : censorship), not for wiretapping. It wouldn't even be that useful for it. It can be used to say things like "if you see a TCP connection pass, on any port, and you see the string "stoning women is evil" pass, kill the tcp connection". If you want to do this yourself, check this out [lowth.com]. If you're on a company network and you want to have a network performing okay while bittorrent clients are present on it, you'll need DPI.
And of course router makers have added DPI, half their customers want it, and all modern firewalls do. It's the only way you can still do things like blocking kazaa or bittorrent or ssh while leaving http and https open. It is, of course, not remotely accessible without the passwords to the device, so if the government wants to use it, they'll have to pass the NOC.
Yes I imagine you don't like what China, North Korea and muslim countries are using this for, but it's nothing like what you're describing.
I'm not missing it
So this is why google kicked psx4droid out of the android market
Of course, that just resulted in the application becoming free.