You're telling me that it wouldn't be just as effective to drive a nuke into the middle of NY
with a car and set off a nuke then to go to NY harbor and to blow it off their. Both would produced a nuclear cloud. NY customs? Ha. Build it in the US and you don't have to go through customs or you could smuggle it through Mexico by paying off the guards to look the other way. They would be both pretty damn effective. If you go your way, now you have to worry about the coast guard. If you want the most people dead, you'll have to blow it up a few hundred stories in mid-air. That way it get a little more range.
You only loss about 250 customers(5% of 5000). Stop belly aching. People aren't going to stop buying Macintoshes because an Islamic Fanatic decides to aim a plane into the world trade center. The Mac community is too tight to let that happen.
Monopolies are more immune to recession then other companies. People still want their product and most are still willing to pay the ridiculous prices in order to get what they want. They will sell fewer but more then non-monopolies(it is just as easy to go to another company to get the price you want.)
PS: I know this is going to be modded down but it still won't stop me.
Steve Jobs will never run Linux or officially support it. It makes sense. Apple is a hardware company. They make most of their money on the hardware and not the software that comes with their product. So it is safe that if Apple went completely Linux, they would go out of business. Apple Hardware is generally expensive and has a lagging factor behind x86 chips. So if all Apple hardware runs Linux, it would be cheaper to buy an x86 Linux box then one that runs on PPC and you can get cheaper hardware that runs somewhat faster then that of the PPC(although you do pay for it in driver compatibility.) Because of this, they will never go completely Linux.
The question is, why don't they support Linux at all. If they supported Linux with their hardware but not as the primary OS they will sell more MACS. If people are in the macintosh market and they think they might want to run Linux later, they'll think twice before buying a new Mac. If it will support Linux, it might give some encouragement into buying the computer. I really don't care personally if Jobs run Linux or not but he should understand the thoughts of the consumer on whether they should be able to run Linux.
Maybe not twice as tall but regive it the glory of being the tallest building in the world. If we are going to rebuild it, we need a better evacuation plan.
You don't. If you play it, it should sound like an MP3 but it will have some unnoticeable bounces that contain the message. Decrypt it and you get the message. It is called information hiding.
Speaking as an American, it is an extremely stupid idea anyways. It leaves too many holes, too many possibilities, and no overseas gaps. Fear will lead people to do stupid things that they normally would not care or think about.
I don't know about you but compiling 50,000 different encryptions on top of each other is pretty damn hard to decrypt. Any good encryption you put without the original source file would take a long time to decrypt if you are creative and you multiple ideas upon a single encryption. The more non-linear(their are infinite ways but I really don't want to spew some of them I've came up with that would be nearly impossible to decrypt without a password on a public website) it is, the harder it is to decrypt. As soon as you plug an encryption on top of that one, you just made it exponentially harder because now you have to know what the encrypted file is suppose to look like. Keep plugging them on top of each other and it nearly becomes impossible. So, frankly, you don't what you are talking about.
They said Knife-like objects. They don't actually have to be knives or have to be metal(it is extremely hard to make a non-metallic knife but possible, none the less.) Metallic knive wouldn't be able to get through the metal detectors so unless their was an insider or they used the planes primarily dull steak knives, they would have some problems. The bottom line is that people will always find away around any problem.
Encryption for personal use is not currently a crime. If I write an encryption today and they make a law tomorrow making it illegal, I can't be arrested. Besides, I would use the back-web of private networks and information hiding. Plus, Congress can go F*CK themselves if they create this law because they would be illiterate B*ST*RDS who don't even understand the topic or know any better.
Crime rates is not actually that high. It's the price of freedom and I'm willing to pay that price. Anti-gun advocates, don't try to turn this to your cause. If it weren't for the people and their guns, we would have a completely different government then we see today. If the people don't have the ability to defend theirselves from their government, they can't protect their other freedoms.
Of course, you are right. No single person can think of everything or how other people might interpret it. You can make it harder by encrypting the encryption. Still, if someone cares enough, they will probe it at every possible angle until they figure it out. I know this. You have to start somewhere though. You can't make every encryption fool-proof but you can learn from your mistakes.
The general rule is, the more complex it is, the harder it is to decrypt but more things can go wrong. So it is a win-lose battle.
That's an old idea. It has already been overdone. I once had a program(I didn't write it) that could store a one line sentence in a JPEG and did not diminish the quality of the original picture noticably.
Your point is well taken. Terrorists will always find a way around and will only give us less freedom. Talk to your congressmen and tell them not to pass this bill.
It's not tough. Keep it in binary in a pattern that is not easy to decrypt without understanding mathematics or binary. Keep it non-linear encryption. Keep the binary heavily but not solely based on a password. Use a 128-256-bit number with only two prime factors required to decrypt it with with one person keeping on the receiving side keep one and the sending keep the other and use the multiplication of those two factors in addition to the password. Make sure the file has the ability to dynamically change size even a little bit(even if you occasionally add a few dummy bits.) Do not store the password within the encryption itself. If you need to verify it, store some verifying number in the file that could eliminate several billion cases but still maintain the possibility of several thousand cases. Be creative.
It really isn't that tough if you know what you are doing.
Assume 1 ns per tick. Their are 1000000000(1*10^-9) ticks in one second. Their are 60 seconds/minute, 60 minutes per hour, 24 hours per day, and ~365.24 days per year. Multiply those together you get 31556736000000000 ticks for every year. 2^64/ans = 584 years. 584,000 years for microseconds. The point is, if you assume an unsigned time stamp and microsecond/tick, it is more like five hundred thousand years and not 200 thousand years. Big difference. It really doesn't matter because we are not going to live that long to see it roll over but it is still interesting.
Gee, let me think, yes. Yes Victoria, their is a santa claus. When I take my time, I can write paragraphs and paragraphs of pages that are spelled correctly and have relatively few mistakes within their contents. Unfortunately, this is a public forum and I really don't care. I basically type it once, don't bother proofreading it, don't use the preview button, and just let it go, mistakes and all. If I cared, I would've corrected them. I don't. That is the difference.
I set up networks all the time. 3com cards work best but other brands will work if you play around with them. I have yet to see an ethernet card that I couldn't get working in Linux. 99% of all chipsets are supported.
Either that or I think faster then I can type and don't bother to proof read. I believe it is the second case. I don't proof read because I really don't care. Their are always two or more possibilities for every situation, consider them both.
I can understand why IBM and other companies are jumping on the band wagon, less depency on one company so that that company can't control the marketplace. As a consumer, that is not my reasonong. I just want something that won't crash and give me the stability that I want without being too bloated(if you configure LiNuX right, it won't be bloated.) It's a great idea and since no single company really owns Linux, it is extremely hard(not impossible) for one company to control the Linux marketplace. The more people we get to jump on the Band Wagon, the better we are off. More people will develop software for it which encourages growth by giving more of a reason to switch which increases demand and causes for software to be developed. If MSWord, Excel, etc. came onto Linux and had better printer support, more businesses would swith even if for the extra stability and better networked capabilities.
Their is actually one ongoing attempt. Check out 3dwm.org. I've never tried it myself or know anybody who has tried it. It is an interestring project though.
I will give you one thing, if it looks and feels realistic, via. I'm not scrolling with a mouse, it most likely would become popular. The question is, how do you fool the brain into thinking this thing is real and not a computer simulation. The general rule is, if it frustrates people, they will give up and not use it.
Slashdot Mirror
You're telling me that it wouldn't be just as effective to drive a nuke into the middle of NY
with a car and set off a nuke then to go to NY harbor and to blow it off their. Both would produced a nuclear cloud. NY customs? Ha. Build it in the US and you don't have to go through customs or you could smuggle it through Mexico by paying off the guards to look the other way. They would be both pretty damn effective. If you go your way, now you have to worry about the coast guard. If you want the most people dead, you'll have to blow it up a few hundred stories in mid-air. That way it get a little more range.
Why go in NY harbor when you can drive in the middle of New York in a pickup van and set it off their?
One good thing to come out of this tradgedy -- NO ONE will ever successfully hijaak a passenger airliner ever again.
Yeah right. Give it ten or so years and someone will hi-jack a plane. They will find away around. They always do.
You only loss about 250 customers(5% of 5000). Stop belly aching. People aren't going to stop buying Macintoshes because an Islamic Fanatic decides to aim a plane into the world trade center. The Mac community is too tight to let that happen.
Monopolies are more immune to recession then other companies. People still want their product and most are still willing to pay the ridiculous prices in order to get what they want. They will sell fewer but more then non-monopolies(it is just as easy to go to another company to get the price you want.)
PS: I know this is going to be modded down but it still won't stop me.
Steve Jobs will never run Linux or officially support it. It makes sense. Apple is a hardware company. They make most of their money on the hardware and not the software that comes with their product. So it is safe that if Apple went completely Linux, they would go out of business. Apple Hardware is generally expensive and has a lagging factor behind x86 chips. So if all Apple hardware runs Linux, it would be cheaper to buy an x86 Linux box then one that runs on PPC and you can get cheaper hardware that runs somewhat faster then that of the PPC(although you do pay for it in driver compatibility.) Because of this, they will never go completely Linux.
The question is, why don't they support Linux at all. If they supported Linux with their hardware but not as the primary OS they will sell more MACS. If people are in the macintosh market and they think they might want to run Linux later, they'll think twice before buying a new Mac. If it will support Linux, it might give some encouragement into buying the computer. I really don't care personally if Jobs run Linux or not but he should understand the thoughts of the consumer on whether they should be able to run Linux.
One for each person lost during the incident.
Maybe not twice as tall but regive it the glory of being the tallest building in the world. If we are going to rebuild it, we need a better evacuation plan.
You don't. If you play it, it should sound like an MP3 but it will have some unnoticeable bounces that contain the message. Decrypt it and you get the message. It is called information hiding.
Speaking as an American, it is an extremely stupid idea anyways. It leaves too many holes, too many possibilities, and no overseas gaps. Fear will lead people to do stupid things that they normally would not care or think about.
I don't know about you but compiling 50,000 different encryptions on top of each other is pretty damn hard to decrypt. Any good encryption you put without the original source file would take a long time to decrypt if you are creative and you multiple ideas upon a single encryption. The more non-linear(their are infinite ways but I really don't want to spew some of them I've came up with that would be nearly impossible to decrypt without a password on a public website) it is, the harder it is to decrypt. As soon as you plug an encryption on top of that one, you just made it exponentially harder because now you have to know what the encrypted file is suppose to look like. Keep plugging them on top of each other and it nearly becomes impossible. So, frankly, you don't what you are talking about.
They said Knife-like objects. They don't actually have to be knives or have to be metal(it is extremely hard to make a non-metallic knife but possible, none the less.) Metallic knive wouldn't be able to get through the metal detectors so unless their was an insider or they used the planes primarily dull steak knives, they would have some problems. The bottom line is that people will always find away around any problem.
Encryption for personal use is not currently a crime. If I write an encryption today and they make a law tomorrow making it illegal, I can't be arrested. Besides, I would use the back-web of private networks and information hiding. Plus, Congress can go F*CK themselves if they create this law because they would be illiterate B*ST*RDS who don't even understand the topic or know any better.
Crime rates is not actually that high. It's the price of freedom and I'm willing to pay that price. Anti-gun advocates, don't try to turn this to your cause. If it weren't for the people and their guns, we would have a completely different government then we see today. If the people don't have the ability to defend theirselves from their government, they can't protect their other freedoms.
It makes no difference. It applies either way. We will not give permeneant freedom for temporary security. End of sentence.
Of course, you are right. No single person can think of everything or how other people might interpret it. You can make it harder by encrypting the encryption. Still, if someone cares enough, they will probe it at every possible angle until they figure it out. I know this. You have to start somewhere though. You can't make every encryption fool-proof but you can learn from your mistakes.
The general rule is, the more complex it is, the harder it is to decrypt but more things can go wrong. So it is a win-lose battle.
That's an old idea. It has already been overdone. I once had a program(I didn't write it) that could store a one line sentence in a JPEG and did not diminish the quality of the original picture noticably.
Your point is well taken. Terrorists will always find a way around and will only give us less freedom. Talk to your congressmen and tell them not to pass this bill.
It's not tough. Keep it in binary in a pattern that is not easy to decrypt without understanding mathematics or binary. Keep it non-linear encryption. Keep the binary heavily but not solely based on a password. Use a 128-256-bit number with only two prime factors required to decrypt it with with one person keeping on the receiving side keep one and the sending keep the other and use the multiplication of those two factors in addition to the password. Make sure the file has the ability to dynamically change size even a little bit(even if you occasionally add a few dummy bits.) Do not store the password within the encryption itself. If you need to verify it, store some verifying number in the file that could eliminate several billion cases but still maintain the possibility of several thousand cases. Be creative.
It really isn't that tough if you know what you are doing.
2^64=18446744073709551616
Assume 1 ns per tick. Their are 1000000000(1*10^-9) ticks in one second. Their are 60 seconds/minute, 60 minutes per hour, 24 hours per day, and ~365.24 days per year. Multiply those together you get 31556736000000000 ticks for every year. 2^64/ans = 584 years. 584,000 years for microseconds. The point is, if you assume an unsigned time stamp and microsecond/tick, it is more like five hundred thousand years and not 200 thousand years. Big difference. It really doesn't matter because we are not going to live that long to see it roll over but it is still interesting.
You are not suppose to post on your own article under your own name. It's not kosher. Post as an AC and let the bodily threats come in.
Gee, let me think, yes. Yes Victoria, their is a santa claus. When I take my time, I can write paragraphs and paragraphs of pages that are spelled correctly and have relatively few mistakes within their contents. Unfortunately, this is a public forum and I really don't care. I basically type it once, don't bother proofreading it, don't use the preview button, and just let it go, mistakes and all. If I cared, I would've corrected them. I don't. That is the difference.
I set up networks all the time. 3com cards work best but other brands will work if you play around with them. I have yet to see an ethernet card that I couldn't get working in Linux. 99% of all chipsets are supported.
Either that or I think faster then I can type and don't bother to proof read. I believe it is the second case. I don't proof read because I really don't care. Their are always two or more possibilities for every situation, consider them both.
I can understand why IBM and other companies are jumping on the band wagon, less depency on one company so that that company can't control the marketplace. As a consumer, that is not my reasonong. I just want something that won't crash and give me the stability that I want without being too bloated(if you configure LiNuX right, it won't be bloated.) It's a great idea and since no single company really owns Linux, it is extremely hard(not impossible) for one company to control the Linux marketplace. The more people we get to jump on the Band Wagon, the better we are off. More people will develop software for it which encourages growth by giving more of a reason to switch which increases demand and causes for software to be developed. If MSWord, Excel, etc. came onto Linux and had better printer support, more businesses would swith even if for the extra stability and better networked capabilities.
Their is actually one ongoing attempt. Check out 3dwm.org. I've never tried it myself or know anybody who has tried it. It is an interestring project though.
I will give you one thing, if it looks and feels realistic, via. I'm not scrolling with a mouse, it most likely would become popular. The question is, how do you fool the brain into thinking this thing is real and not a computer simulation. The general rule is, if it frustrates people, they will give up and not use it.