Strong authentication is needed for this network. A VPN is a pretty good way to insure strong authentication. PPPoE is no easier to setup then a VPN really. PPP authentication has problems anyway. Besides I think people are warming up to the idea of protecting their privacy.
There is nothing invalid about my statement. A 44kHz mp3 is an audio signal sampled at 44ksamples/sec. As per Nyquist such an mp3 can (in theory) encode a 22kHz audio signal. My statement regarding 18kHz is refering to 18kHz audio. The dual use of kHz, audio/analog vs digital, is rather confusing.
Naturally you can hear the difference between a 22kHz digital signal and a 44kHz digital signal. You are looking at analog bandwidths of 11kHz and 22kHz respectively.
You are comparing analog to digital bandwidth. Two different things. As per Nyquist's theorem 44ksamples/sec digital can acurately reproduce a 22kHz analog signal and no more. So in theory a 44kHz mp3 is about equivalent to a 22kHz analog signal. In reality you can't get quite that good, but it dosen't matter as few can hear much past 18kHz anyway.
As discussed elsewhere an FM transmission has an audio bandwidth of about 17-18kHz, so yes in theory a 44kHz mp3 will be better. Although mp3's sound crappy so you probably won't notice. Nor can most cheap headphones acurately reproduce higher frequencies. So really you have bigger things to worry about then the few kHz of bandwidth you might lose by broadcasting on FM. Things such as the weak transmit power.
the L-R channel is broadcast on a 34 KHz subcarrier.
A slight correction: It is 38kHz, see second box down. But who is counting. This makes sense as it is pretty easy to frequency double the 19kHz pilot and demodulate the L-R subband.
The site also claims that the channels are only 15kHz. Elsewhere I have seen claims of 17, 18, and even 19 kHz.
if they can convince me that it is lots better than what I already have today.
MS might no convince you, but they have already convinced millions of people that they need XP. I think that is the piece you are missing. MS will stop selling Windows to Dell, Gateway, and the rest of us. If you want the latest and greatest Windows you will buy MS branded hardware. And don't think Xbox connected-to-a-tv hardware. Think MS brand PCs with duel 1600x1200 monitors. There is not much to stop MS doing this today. The original poster believes that MS is useing its experience with the Xbox to insure that they suceed.
Personally I don't believe that they will suceed. If MS starts to sell hardware and software as Apple does, they will probably lose MS's number one advantage: cheap commodity hardware. MS on its own will have to compete head to head with Apple and Sun as opposed to the MS/Dell/HP/Gateway/all-of-Taiwan "team."
You can buy a power meter if you want. Or you can use the power meter on the side of your house. Most power meters have a spinning wheel that turns X number of times per unit of energy. The rating should be listed on the power meter.
This is what you do: turn off all the PCs for just a few minutes. Useing a stop watch count the number of revolutions in a minute (or ten seconds, or whatever). Do the math and you will be able to get you baseline power consumtion. It is best to do this with as much as possible turned off. Now turn just the PCs on. Count the number of revolutions, do the math and you have your total power. Subtract your baseline power consumption and you have just the PC power consumption.
I have done this myself and compared the results with a decent power meter. I was only off by 10%.
And I thought that my OpenBSD 2.7 uptime of 320 days was good. I was going to upgrade at one point but then it occured to me: just how much horse power does a single user imap box really need?
In terms of secure authentication biometrics are only usefull as an enhancement to other authentication means such as passwords and physical tokens (keys, smart cards etc). Retina and Iris scans are good, but not proven to be absolutely unique and equipment is not cheap. DNA could be absolute (hmm what about twins??) but is easily spoofed. Think of collecting a few hairs from someones head. Watch Gattaga. It might be a movie but it presents enough senerios to bypass most forms of biometrics.
Finger print scans on the other hand are a poor form of authentication. Finger print scans suffer from a very high false negative rate. Back when American Biometric existed and were making the BioMouse they were talking about a high secure mode of 1 in 10000 unique fingerprints, and a more resonable operating mode 1 in 5000 or lower. What that is saying is that given 5000 random finger prints (only 500 people!) one finger print will authenticate to the system as a false positive for a specific user. This is a result of a person's finger print scan changeing day to day due to the temperature, the humidity, the person's health, stress, heart beat, etc. If the system was absolutely secure the user would rarely be able to authenticate.
Biometrics are good for some forms of authentication. Biometrics are great for quick and easy authentication where other access control features will mitigate some of the risk, or where strong authentication is overkill. Think of a door lock to a house. A finger print scan would be a quick and easy way for the owner to unlock the door. A burglar isen't going to try to bypass the finger print scan, they will throw a rock though the back window. Similarly for a private office finger prints can be used as other access control features such as a guard at the front gate will mitigate the risk of a couple hundred people walking up to a finger print scanner and trying to get in. When combined with a unique token such as smart card an attack against the biometric authenticator is harder as the attacker needs to steal the token (which should be reported by the owner so that the token is disabled) or the attacker needs to spoof the token which should be more effort then the gain of bypassing the authenticator.
Banks would love to add iris and retina scans to their bank machines. However the cost of the machines is expensive. More importantly the general public is not cool with the idea of lights shinning in their eys to take pictures. This is over and above the privacy freaks who don't want to be tracked everywhere they go. Iris scans are the better of the two by far as they don't involve any bright lights and can authenticate people from a few metres (yards) away. However rris scanners are still a tough sell to the general public.
Regarless of the type of biometrics used it still needs to be combined with a password for truely secure authentication. By today's standards strong authentication combines both "something your have" and "something you know." Biometrics, secure tokens, swipe cards, and cryptographinc keys are all something you have. A password is something you know. If you want the most secure authentication it will involve a password.
The bottom line to all of thins is that biometrics aren't the most secure form of authentication. Biometrics are very convinient. A lot of people would prefer to use biometrics as passwords get written down and forgotten, and physical tokens get lost and stolen.
One example that easily comes to mind is the huge number of police cameras in England. Closer to home look at drug use and the war on drugs. You can be locked away for life for simple possesion.
If the majority of society supports a removal of freedom, that freedom will be lost. Society, at least publically, supports harsh sentences for minor drug offences. The freedom to smoke up has been sucessfully eradicated.
Our little blip on the histroric radar can't be used as a guide to say "individual freedom always wins." In fact it is probably easier to support the hypothosis that individual freedoms are usually surpressed. We are the anomoly not the norm.
Dig around a bin of old computer books and you might find a copy of "Undocumented WIN32s" or something similar. There was a series of books probably published a decade ago. The author of those books had to do some reverse engineering to figure out how those "undocumented" APIs worked. At the time some people believed that MS was using these faster APIs to make their own software run faster. A classic case was MS WORD vs WordPerfect. Some of these undocumented APIs were much faster then the non optomised published equivalents.
regarding the MSDN stuff: I have noticed that too. I always get the impression that MS dosen't really want people to program for Windows. Rather they wourl prefer that "developers" embed Excel documents into Access forms. The trick here is that instead of writeing code that could possibly be ported to another platform the "developer" creates a custom app that can only ever run on windows. This is one of the reasons.NET gives me the creeps: MS has never liked the idea of code running on anything other then a platform MS controls.
There are two important restrictions that should be concidered. In North America you may not transmit in code. i.e you can't use crypto. The second restriction is a tough judgement call: you can't use the amature bands for commercial use. This may restrict you from shopping on line over an amature band WAN.
There are some other restrictions, but these are probably the two big ones that will affect the/. crowd.
Instead of your 'sticky window' hack[1] you can also bind a key to 'send window to workspace...' In my case I have ctrl-Fn bound to send a window to workspace n.
[1]don't get me wrong: that is a nice hack.
Re:A few words from the original author
on
Usenet Encoding: yEnc
·
· Score: 2, Insightful
Because Usenet works, and an "efficient P2P system" does not exist.
Man that guy is full of himself. His site was booted of the Internet by the "next generation DOS". He claims that the next generation of DOS is the Distributed Reflection DOS. Just because he hasn't seen one before doesen't make it new, or the next generation. It isen't even that great as the attackers needs almost as much bandwidth as the target.
Do a search for *os2* on NT or 2k and you will find os2.exe on 2k. I think you will find os2api.dll on NT. It is part of the OS2 compatibility layer. The claims aren't that extraordinary. MS and IBM really were working together on the next generation OS to replace DOS. There was a falling out for many reasons. One that comes to mind it that OS2 was taking too long for MS's tastes. (OS2 was taking too long for everyone's tastes.) If you look through the API functions for OS2 and old the Win32 api you will find many similarities from names right down to parameters. If you can program for OS2 you could switch to Win32 easily. As MS had access to much of the OS2 code large chunks of it ended up in NT 3.51.
You are making me feel old. This only happened 10 years ago.
The LCD on my nokia gets really slow at -20C. It is kinda cool to watch. I didn't bother to check the temperature specs on it. I figured a Scandinavian company would understand cold, and design their phones appropriately.
Warhammer Fantasy Roleplay is still the bar none best rpg out there fatntasy at least
Have a look at ArsMagica. I am most familliar with version 3 published by White Wolf. Once you get past (or discard) the idea of the 'troupe' and tone down the mages a bit you will find that it has some really nice game mechanics. For a little while my group used ArsMagica mechanics, in the lands of Greyhawk and ForgettenRealms. Ars Magica version 4 is now published by Atlas games.
I do agree that Warhammer FRP is one of the best. The mechanics were flexible and had a nice sense of realism without being overdone. I always found the career system a little odd, but loved its flexibility. Warhammer FRP is now published by Hogshead.
Slashdot Mirror
Strong authentication is needed for this network. A VPN is a pretty good way to insure strong authentication. PPPoE is no easier to setup then a VPN really. PPP authentication has problems anyway. Besides I think people are warming up to the idea of protecting their privacy.
There is nothing invalid about my statement. A 44kHz mp3 is an audio signal sampled at 44ksamples/sec. As per Nyquist such an mp3 can (in theory) encode a 22kHz audio signal. My statement regarding 18kHz is refering to 18kHz audio. The dual use of kHz, audio/analog vs digital, is rather confusing.
Naturally you can hear the difference between a 22kHz digital signal and a 44kHz digital signal. You are looking at analog bandwidths of 11kHz and 22kHz respectively.
You are comparing analog to digital bandwidth. Two different things. As per Nyquist's theorem 44ksamples/sec digital can acurately reproduce a 22kHz analog signal and no more. So in theory a 44kHz mp3 is about equivalent to a 22kHz analog signal. In reality you can't get quite that good, but it dosen't matter as few can hear much past 18kHz anyway.
As discussed elsewhere an FM transmission has an audio bandwidth of about 17-18kHz, so yes in theory a 44kHz mp3 will be better. Although mp3's sound crappy so you probably won't notice. Nor can most cheap headphones acurately reproduce higher frequencies. So really you have bigger things to worry about then the few kHz of bandwidth you might lose by broadcasting on FM. Things such as the weak transmit power.
the L-R channel is broadcast on a 34 KHz subcarrier.
A slight correction: It is 38kHz, see second box down. But who is counting. This makes sense as it is pretty easy to frequency double the 19kHz pilot and demodulate the L-R subband.
The site also claims that the channels are only 15kHz. Elsewhere I have seen claims of 17, 18, and even 19 kHz.
if they can convince me that it is lots better than what I already have today.
MS might no convince you, but they have already convinced millions of people that they need XP. I think that is the piece you are missing. MS will stop selling Windows to Dell, Gateway, and the rest of us. If you want the latest and greatest Windows you will buy MS branded hardware. And don't think Xbox connected-to-a-tv hardware. Think MS brand PCs with duel 1600x1200 monitors. There is not much to stop MS doing this today. The original poster believes that MS is useing its experience with the Xbox to insure that they suceed.
Personally I don't believe that they will suceed. If MS starts to sell hardware and software as Apple does, they will probably lose MS's number one advantage: cheap commodity hardware. MS on its own will have to compete head to head with Apple and Sun as opposed to the MS/Dell/HP/Gateway/all-of-Taiwan "team."
Yippy Skippy.
This isen't such a big deal. Bootable CDs aren't execatly hard to make. (hint: mkisofs -b floppy.img -c boot.cat)
At the time I had one p120 running 24/7 with a cable modem. It was a few years ago, but I think it was running at about 50-60 watts.
You can buy a power meter if you want. Or you can use the power meter on the side of your house. Most power meters have a spinning wheel that turns X number of times per unit of energy. The rating should be listed on the power meter.
This is what you do: turn off all the PCs for just a few minutes. Useing a stop watch count the number of revolutions in a minute (or ten seconds, or whatever). Do the math and you will be able to get you baseline power consumtion. It is best to do this with as much as possible turned off. Now turn just the PCs on. Count the number of revolutions, do the math and you have your total power. Subtract your baseline power consumption and you have just the PC power consumption.
I have done this myself and compared the results with a decent power meter. I was only off by 10%.
blow the whistle (2600mhz!)
:)
Me thinks you have an extra 'm' in there.
And I thought that my OpenBSD 2.7 uptime of 320 days was good. I was going to upgrade at one point but then it occured to me: just how much horse power does a single user imap box really need?
In terms of secure authentication biometrics are only usefull as an enhancement to other authentication means such as passwords and physical tokens (keys, smart cards etc). Retina and Iris scans are good, but not proven to be absolutely unique and equipment is not cheap. DNA could be absolute (hmm what about twins??) but is easily spoofed. Think of collecting a few hairs from someones head. Watch Gattaga. It might be a movie but it presents enough senerios to bypass most forms of biometrics.
Finger print scans on the other hand are a poor form of authentication. Finger print scans suffer from a very high false negative rate. Back when American Biometric existed and were making the BioMouse they were talking about a high secure mode of 1 in 10000 unique fingerprints, and a more resonable operating mode 1 in 5000 or lower. What that is saying is that given 5000 random finger prints (only 500 people!) one finger print will authenticate to the system as a false positive for a specific user. This is a result of a person's finger print scan changeing day to day due to the temperature, the humidity, the person's health, stress, heart beat, etc. If the system was absolutely secure the user would rarely be able to authenticate.
Biometrics are good for some forms of authentication. Biometrics are great for quick and easy authentication where other access control features will mitigate some of the risk, or where strong authentication is overkill. Think of a door lock to a house. A finger print scan would be a quick and easy way for the owner to unlock the door. A burglar isen't going to try to bypass the finger print scan, they will throw a rock though the back window. Similarly for a private office finger prints can be used as other access control features such as a guard at the front gate will mitigate the risk of a couple hundred people walking up to a finger print scanner and trying to get in. When combined with a unique token such as smart card an attack against the biometric authenticator is harder as the attacker needs to steal the token (which should be reported by the owner so that the token is disabled) or the attacker needs to spoof the token which should be more effort then the gain of bypassing the authenticator.
Banks would love to add iris and retina scans to their bank machines. However the cost of the machines is expensive. More importantly the general public is not cool with the idea of lights shinning in their eys to take pictures. This is over and above the privacy freaks who don't want to be tracked everywhere they go. Iris scans are the better of the two by far as they don't involve any bright lights and can authenticate people from a few metres (yards) away. However rris scanners are still a tough sell to the general public.
Regarless of the type of biometrics used it still needs to be combined with a password for truely secure authentication. By today's standards strong authentication combines both "something your have" and "something you know." Biometrics, secure tokens, swipe cards, and cryptographinc keys are all something you have. A password is something you know. If you want the most secure authentication it will involve a password.
The bottom line to all of thins is that biometrics aren't the most secure form of authentication. Biometrics are very convinient. A lot of people would prefer to use biometrics as passwords get written down and forgotten, and physical tokens get lost and stolen.
One example that easily comes to mind is the huge number of police cameras in England. Closer to home look at drug use and the war on drugs. You can be locked away for life for simple possesion.
If the majority of society supports a removal of freedom, that freedom will be lost. Society, at least publically, supports harsh sentences for minor drug offences. The freedom to smoke up has been sucessfully eradicated.
Our little blip on the histroric radar can't be used as a guide to say "individual freedom always wins." In fact it is probably easier to support the hypothosis that individual freedoms are usually surpressed. We are the anomoly not the norm.
Dig around a bin of old computer books and you might find a copy of "Undocumented WIN32s" or something similar. There was a series of books probably published a decade ago. The author of those books had to do some reverse engineering to figure out how those "undocumented" APIs worked. At the time some people believed that MS was using these faster APIs to make their own software run faster. A classic case was MS WORD vs WordPerfect. Some of these undocumented APIs were much faster then the non optomised published equivalents.
regarding the MSDN stuff: I have noticed that too. I always get the impression that MS dosen't really want people to program for Windows. Rather they wourl prefer that "developers" embed Excel documents into Access forms. The trick here is that instead of writeing code that could possibly be ported to another platform the "developer" creates a custom app that can only ever run on windows. This is one of the reasons .NET gives me the creeps: MS has never liked the idea of code running on anything other then a platform MS controls.
but you can use it [autopatch] to order a pizza on your way home
That varies region to region. Ordering pizza over the autopatch would be a sure fire way to get blacklisted by the locals in my area.
There are two important restrictions that should be concidered. In North America you may not transmit in code. i.e you can't use crypto. The second restriction is a tough judgement call: you can't use the amature bands for commercial use. This may restrict you from shopping on line over an amature band WAN.
There are some other restrictions, but these are probably the two big ones that will affect the /. crowd.
Instead of your 'sticky window' hack[1] you can also bind a key to 'send window to workspace...' In my case I have ctrl-Fn bound to send a window to workspace n.
[1]don't get me wrong: that is a nice hack.
Because Usenet works, and an "efficient P2P system" does not exist.
Man that guy is full of himself. His site was booted of the Internet by the "next generation DOS". He claims that the next generation of DOS is the Distributed Reflection DOS. Just because he hasn't seen one before doesen't make it new, or the next generation. It isen't even that great as the attackers needs almost as much bandwidth as the target.
$cientology is much bigger in terms of raw "legal firepower." Worst is that $cientology knows and is really good at legal dirty tricks.
Do a search for *os2* on NT or 2k and you will find os2.exe on 2k. I think you will find os2api.dll on NT. It is part of the OS2 compatibility layer. The claims aren't that extraordinary. MS and IBM really were working together on the next generation OS to replace DOS. There was a falling out for many reasons. One that comes to mind it that OS2 was taking too long for MS's tastes. (OS2 was taking too long for everyone's tastes.) If you look through the API functions for OS2 and old the Win32 api you will find many similarities from names right down to parameters. If you can program for OS2 you could switch to Win32 easily. As MS had access to much of the OS2 code large chunks of it ended up in NT 3.51.
You are making me feel old. This only happened 10 years ago.
The LCD on my nokia gets really slow at -20C. It is kinda cool to watch. I didn't bother to check the temperature specs on it. I figured a Scandinavian company would understand cold, and design their phones appropriately.
This thing looked alright until I found this little spec:
So it is basically useless anywhere with a season called winter.Warhammer Fantasy Roleplay is still the bar none best rpg out there fatntasy at least
Have a look at ArsMagica. I am most familliar with version 3 published by White Wolf. Once you get past (or discard) the idea of the 'troupe' and tone down the mages a bit you will find that it has some really nice game mechanics. For a little while my group used ArsMagica mechanics, in the lands of Greyhawk and ForgettenRealms. Ars Magica version 4 is now published by Atlas games.
I do agree that Warhammer FRP is one of the best. The mechanics were flexible and had a nice sense of realism without being overdone. I always found the career system a little odd, but loved its flexibility. Warhammer FRP is now published by Hogshead.
Agreed. Saying IBM is monopolistic, is just like saying IBM's favorite colour is blue.