Redundancy. Six people, one toilet: what if it breaks? Also to test different designs.
>...excercise equipment...
Redundancy (exercise is not optional in free fall), to test different kinds of equipment and to make sure everyone has a chance to work out (they spend hours exercising).
> I do have a little sympathy for the Russians though... they have been looking under > every rock they can turn for money to keep their space program going.
I guess you hadn't heard that Russia is now a major petroleum exporter.
No joke and no sarcasm: just honest puzzlement. If particles are observed to approach the event horizon asymptotically and never observed to cross it how can the event horizon be observed to grow? If it can never be observed to grow how can it ever be observed to come into existance? It seems to me that all we could ever see are concentrations of matter that look like they are going to become black holes real soon now but never quite do. Obviously, I'm wrong.
> I have to reply that black holes are never "seen naked".
> Besides that, I don't really understand why hard crypto hasn't already put a wall of > privacy between user and service provider, period. What needs to change?
A significant number of users need to care enough to act.
> Except it's not really like that at all because once they've had access to the document > they can make a copy of that version and staple it to a powerpole for all the control > you have of copies of your document.
Sometimes, when you ask someone not to make a copy of something, you can actually trust them not to do so. They may even be authorized and trusted to make copies and keep them confidential.
> Heck, maybe they have an eidetic memory. How are you expecting to expunge their > memorised copy ?
"Expunge"? The friend (or business associate) can be trusted with the contents of the document. It is the criminals who made off with his Google password that the secrets must be protected from by removing the friend's access.
...of a punch in the face the RIAA would have claimed they were "cooperating". Looks to me as if they are doing the minimum that their lawyers told them they were legally obligated to do.
> Eh, retaining access to a copy of the document after the original author revoked > permission is certainly not a security issue -- at least, not unless you believe in DRM.
This is similar to changing the lock on your apartment when a friend to whom you have given a key tells you that she has lost it. Example: You give someone access to your confidential document on Google. He later informs you that his account has been compromised but that the miscreants may not have had time to use the credentials yet. You revoke his access in hopes of protecting your secrets but the miscreants get at them anyway using this bug.
> Being able to read future versions, like a reverse of the first bug of the article, > would be bad, but the article doesn't suggest this is the case.
The article does not make it clear whether it is or not. I agree that the bug is much more serious if it is.
How long a period does your "all the time" cover? Decades? Centuries? We've had quite a cold winter here in Western Wisconsin, but twenty years ago it would have been average.
Global warming is not about your local weather over the past week.
> The shows popularity would have made people come too close so it > wouldn't be possible to perform the explosion.
So? It's up to the show organizers to choose a range such that they can exclude the public to a safe distance. Setting off the bomb in secret in the hope that no one will be close enough to be injured is not a reasonable alternative.
Slashdot Mirror
You don't have to sell through the Android App Store if you don't want to. You are free to distribute your Android software however you see fit.
> I'd still like to be able to watch /. for good info today.
Why should today be different?
> If that makes me an ugly American programmer, so be it.
You might want to read the book and find out who the Ugly American really was.
That's what Padalka said, in "diplomatic" language.
> Why do they have separate toilets...
Redundancy. Six people, one toilet: what if it breaks? Also to test different designs.
> ...excercise equipment...
Redundancy (exercise is not optional in free fall), to test different kinds of equipment and to make sure everyone has a chance to work out (they spend hours exercising).
> I do have a little sympathy for the Russians though... they have been looking under
> every rock they can turn for money to keep their space program going.
I guess you hadn't heard that Russia is now a major petroleum exporter.
No joke and no sarcasm: just honest puzzlement. If particles are observed to approach the event horizon asymptotically and never observed to cross it how can the event horizon be observed to grow? If it can never be observed to grow how can it ever be observed to come into existance? It seems to me that all we could ever see are concentrations of matter that look like they are going to become black holes real soon now but never quite do. Obviously, I'm wrong.
> I have to reply that black holes are never "seen naked".
Not about naked singularities.
> ...to an outside observer, an object never falls into a black hole, it only approaches
> the event horizon without ever quite reaching it.
This implies that a black hole can never be observed to come into existence.
> Besides that, I don't really understand why hard crypto hasn't already put a wall of
> privacy between user and service provider, period. What needs to change?
A significant number of users need to care enough to act.
> Except it's not really like that at all because once they've had access to the document
> they can make a copy of that version and staple it to a powerpole for all the control
> you have of copies of your document.
Sometimes, when you ask someone not to make a copy of something, you can actually trust them not to do so. They may even be authorized and trusted to make copies and keep them confidential.
> Heck, maybe they have an eidetic memory. How are you expecting to expunge their
> memorised copy ?
"Expunge"? The friend (or business associate) can be trusted with the contents of the document. It is the criminals who made off with his Google password that the secrets must be protected from by removing the friend's access.
...of a punch in the face the RIAA would have claimed they were "cooperating". Looks to me as if they are doing the minimum that their lawyers told them they were legally obligated to do.
> Eh, retaining access to a copy of the document after the original author revoked
> permission is certainly not a security issue -- at least, not unless you believe in DRM.
This is similar to changing the lock on your apartment when a friend to whom you have given a key tells you that she has lost it. Example: You give someone access to your confidential document on Google. He later informs you that his account has been compromised but that the miscreants may not have had time to use the credentials yet. You revoke his access in hopes of protecting your secrets but the miscreants get at them anyway using this bug.
> Being able to read future versions, like a reverse of the first bug of the article,
> would be bad, but the article doesn't suggest this is the case.
The article does not make it clear whether it is or not. I agree that the bug is much more serious if it is.
> In that case please email me your slashdot password.
Just grab it off the Slashdot site.
And what penalties does Google agree to pay when your data do not remain private?
> My submission is that Google should respond in a classic Linux/KDE/Gnome format... ...
>
> GNOME score: 121, KDE score: 43.
Where are your numbers for Linux?
You sure that isn't just an Excel compatibility feature?
Since nothing on the Web is secure anyway, what's the problem? If it's an important secret keep it off the Web.
> He's not a climatologist. He has never done research on global warming. He has
> absolutely no data of his own. He is not an expert in this field.
Whereas Al Gore is a ???
Is there some point you are trying to make?
How long a period does your "all the time" cover? Decades? Centuries? We've had quite a cold winter here in Western Wisconsin, but twenty years ago it would have been average.
Global warming is not about your local weather over the past week.
...and human-caused, Dyson has far more credibility with me than Gore does.
Make one of the airplanes a swept wing fighter, the other a biplane. Then ask the user to find the most similar object. Generalize that principle.
> The shows popularity would have made people come too close so it
> wouldn't be possible to perform the explosion.
So? It's up to the show organizers to choose a range such that they can exclude the public to a safe distance. Setting off the bomb in secret in the hope that no one will be close enough to be injured is not a reasonable alternative.
> ...considering the fact that F.M. Bill stepped into a tub of water
> and then touched two alligator-clips attached to a battery together...
So? Perfectly safe.
Where did you read that?
> If you're legally authorized to make that copy, you're authorized to make more copies.
That does not follow at all.
> Where do you see a potential copyright issue?
In practice there is none but not for the reason you give.