The difference being that no-one owns more that a tiny part of the network. If someone starts playing nasty, their neighbours can refuse to connect to them. Consequently the network will 'route around' greed and other such defects.
Re:Visible spectrum links through the air?
on
Saving the Net
·
· Score: 2, Interesting
Typically beams will be too high for people to reach.
The rate of variation in amplitude of sunlight is very low and PIN diodes are very linear over wide dynamic ranges. The frequency of amplitude variation for the data signal is very high (say > 1MHz) compared to sunlight. Combining all of the above, it is usually possible to highpass filter to remove the effects of sunlight.
In addition, the power spectral density of a laser compares welll with the sun.
Within urban areas, there is no need for a backbone (rely on the mesh).
Yes, the gaps between urban areas will be difficult. Even there,something might be possible. The specs I gave initially were for cheap equipment. For 'high value' links (such as between urban areas), more expensive equipment will allow longer links between fewer nodes.
International (across water) links will be most difficult. I've no reasonable answers here (anyone got some?), but given the size of the groups trying to connect, some 'extreme' measures could be justified.
As the number of nodes goes up, and the node density increases, more people will have line of sight to a node.
Yes, some people will find it tough to connect at first, when node densities are low, but pretty well everyone (in an urban environment) can see at least a couple of their neighbours.
Free Air Optical
on
Saving the Net
·
· Score: 5, Interesting
What about geeks connecting to each other, in a mesh, using through-the-air optical links, thus forming a 'private' internet?
Raw components (LEDs and LASERs) are cheap .
Bandwidth is high >100MHz with cheap laser + PIN diode
Visible spectrum is unlicensed (it's just light)
Spectrum reuse is very high.
Consequently it has a very high data density (bits per second per unit volume)
In many juridiction it falls outside telecommunications regulation, as such regulation only covers wires, fibres and radio (frequency less than light) signals
The only 'major' piece missing is a simple and cheap form of active aiming to keep the transmitter and receiver reliably pointing at each other. There's a project for someone.
Australian Law comes directly from British law (ex colony), though the constitution is written. In fact the Australian consitution is really just a British act of parliament granting Federation to Australia.
Off topic, but it seems strange that a British Labor Prime Minister sees eye to eye with an Australian Liberal (ie. Tory) PM. Then again, the right of Australian politics used to be to the left of left wing US politics. What a strange world we live in.
Also, the hardware of most WLAN cards is able to act as both a client and an access point. Having full specs means anyone can turn any WLAN card into an access point. People will then stop buying overpriced access points.
Former NCA member Greg Melick told the committee there was an easy way to eliminate the anonymity that protected criminals online.
"Do away with free internet (email) accounts," he said. "If they aren't free then people will pay by credit card and that gives law enforcement some starting point.
No. One of the officers wants free email to be abolished. That way users have to pay for access with a creit card, allowing them to be tracked.
Any user of Australian services should be aware that Australia doesn't have a bill of rights. The Government is controlled by the constitution, but not much else. The constitution basically controls 'administrative' stuff, such as voting and parliamentary procedure.
When it comes to such things as privacy, freedom of speech, and so on, all bets are off and you are at the whim of the government. Traditionally, Australian governments have respected such things, but the current government, in the name of anti-terror, is steamrolling tradition.
Agree. The next (distant?) step though will be to turn freenet into a GRID computing engine. One big global (anonymous) computer, on which the mother of all keyword search engines could be run.
As you have said, the GPL gives freedoms, an EULA takes away freedoms.
Consequently, if you invalidate the GPL, you end up with less freedoms (ie. 'standard' copyright which does NOT include a right to copy.)
If you invalidate an EULA, you end up with more freedoms (ie. 'standard' copyright which includes a right to reverse engineer.)
Okay, you can call the GPL an EULA, but the consequences of rejecting the GPL are more Draconian than the consequences of accepting the GPL! It's a bit like saying "No, you can keep that million dollars you are trying to give me."
But if MS don't want you reverse engineer word, all they have to do is encrypt it, and decrypt it on the fly. You are not allowed to break the encryption, so you are not able to reverse engineer it (even though you are allowed to).
Next step will be for Intel/AMD to move the decryption step to INSIDE THE PROCESSOR, where noone can get at the clear text.
There's no motivation for the store to zap tags. It just adds and extra step (read cost) to processing their transactions. All they do is list the unique ID of that tag as 'sold' in their database.
I wonder what happens when their sys-admin stuffs up and accidentally restores the database from yesterday's backup? Presumambly everyone who bought something yesterday gets flagged as a shoplifter next time they wear that article into the shop?
At least part of the motivation for this research is that Australia generally has the poorest soils in the world. The rocks and soil are so old here that for the most part, there just aren't many nutrients left, since they've been leeched out over the millennia. Consequently, soil degradation, salinity and erosion are big topics here. Slowly our argicultural industry is realising they need to address these issues (with things like GPS tractors) otherwise there wil be no soil left for them to farm.
Either Aadain needs a lesson on using a web browser, he is an industry plant, or he was just plain unlucky when he visited OpenCores.
Opencores project page has many original works on it, all written by opencores users, released under an open license and hosted on the opencores website.
That's just five. There are 79 more. Hopefully that will debunk Aadain's misinformation.
Accusing OpenCores of being a front is bit like accusing Debian of being a front. OpenCores is not a front.
In the interests of openness, I will point out that I am the maintainer of OpenCore's FAQ. The root page of OpenCores contains some links to case studies of some companies who have successfully used OpenCores in implementations. I will discuss with the rest if OpenCores whether these links are too prominant and are drawing attention away from the original work on the site.
* FTP, * CD-ROM driver software, * Floppy disk driver software, * Email servers, * FTP CLIENTS (after all, the bytes received from the server must be stored somewhere in memory/registers) * Email clients (using similar argument) * http servers * WWW browsers (they store content and also search servers on the Internet) * Anything which uses DNS * Windows * Netmeeting * Your keyboard driver. * MS word (what if a third party types something on the keyoard.) * Any login/password program. (Gotta store that 3rd party password data somewhere for processing.) *...
The English isn't even clear as to whether the data storage, or just the search, has to take place over the Internet.
Isn't that like requiring the railways to get every passenger to sign a consent form, before thay hop on the train, that they understand the train they are about to board on could fall off the rails and kill them?
Just as properly designed and maintained trains don't kill pasengers, properly designed and maintained P2P software doesn't create security and privacy risks.
If you've got bug free P2P software, aren't you lying if you say it causes problems that it doesn't? I guess "truth is outa style". So sue me if it's a line from a song.
True! Bridges/routers between ethernets could be replaced with freenet nodes. Ethernets could also be replaced by networks of point to point links connecting freenet nodes.
In my opinion, it's a little bit less anonymous, as one can just trace the 'bit of wire' connecting the systems. Not much less anonymous though, when one considers the exponential rise in 'suspects' as the number of hops increases (assuming no cross connections).
It's more a practical problem. Most people are connected to the Internet via a phone company, who is not going to rush out and replace their network with a freenet. Apart from those who can run a cable over their back fence, wireless solutions (not just WiFi though) seem to be the only solution which is currently practical.
is if they could figure out how to get the phone to actually measure field strength! (and compare the measurements with calculations).
It can be done using only software modifications! It's how some network operators measure their networks. I've seen a picture of around half a dozen mobile phones (each a different make) attached to a piece of wood, with cables plugged into the standard connector on the bottom, running back to a black box (think it was actually a laptop). The system then logs field strength for each phone as a function of position (GPS is also attached).
Slashdot Mirror
The difference being that no-one owns more that a tiny part of the network. If someone starts playing nasty, their neighbours can refuse to connect to them. Consequently the network will 'route around' greed and other such defects.
The rate of variation in amplitude of sunlight is very low and PIN diodes are very linear over wide dynamic ranges. The frequency of amplitude variation for the data signal is very high (say > 1MHz) compared to sunlight. Combining all of the above, it is usually possible to highpass filter to remove the effects of sunlight.
In addition, the power spectral density of a laser compares welll with the sun.
Yes, the gaps between urban areas will be difficult. Even there,something might be possible. The specs I gave initially were for cheap equipment. For 'high value' links (such as between urban areas), more expensive equipment will allow longer links between fewer nodes.
International (across water) links will be most difficult. I've no reasonable answers here (anyone got some?), but given the size of the groups trying to connect, some 'extreme' measures could be justified.
Yes, some people will find it tough to connect at first, when node densities are low, but pretty well everyone (in an urban environment) can see at least a couple of their neighbours.
The only 'major' piece missing is a simple and cheap form of active aiming to keep the transmitter and receiver reliably pointing at each other. There's a project for someone.
Ahh. But the real genius is that they replace the '0's with 'l's. Thus '11010110001' becomes '11l1l11lll1'. See, much smaller!
...or the HURD!
Seems fair, since the population is much more likely to die from the food in McDonalds than from an asteroid strike.
It's much more difficult to argue against a law along the lines of "all Government information must be stored in an ISO approved format."
Off topic, but it seems strange that a British Labor Prime Minister sees eye to eye with an Australian Liberal (ie. Tory) PM. Then again, the right of Australian politics used to be to the left of left wing US politics. What a strange world we live in.
Also, the hardware of most WLAN cards is able to act as both a client and an access point. Having full specs means anyone can turn any WLAN card into an access point. People will then stop buying overpriced access points.
No. One of the officers wants free email to be abolished. That way users have to pay for access with a creit card, allowing them to be tracked.
When it comes to such things as privacy, freedom of speech, and so on, all bets are off and you are at the whim of the government. Traditionally, Australian governments have respected such things, but the current government, in the name of anti-terror, is steamrolling tradition.
Agree. The next (distant?) step though will be to turn freenet into a GRID computing engine. One big global (anonymous) computer, on which the mother of all keyword search engines could be run.
Consequently, if you invalidate the GPL, you end up with less freedoms (ie. 'standard' copyright which does NOT include a right to copy.)
If you invalidate an EULA, you end up with more freedoms (ie. 'standard' copyright which includes a right to reverse engineer.)
Okay, you can call the GPL an EULA, but the consequences of rejecting the GPL are more Draconian than the consequences of accepting the GPL! It's a bit like saying "No, you can keep that million dollars you are trying to give me."
Next step will be for Intel/AMD to move the decryption step to INSIDE THE PROCESSOR, where noone can get at the clear text.
I wonder what happens when their sys-admin stuffs up and accidentally restores the database from yesterday's backup? Presumambly everyone who bought something yesterday gets flagged as a shoplifter next time they wear that article into the shop?
At least part of the motivation for this research is that Australia generally has the poorest soils in the world. The rocks and soil are so old here that for the most part, there just aren't many nutrients left, since they've been leeched out over the millennia. Consequently, soil degradation, salinity and erosion are big topics here. Slowly our argicultural industry is realising they need to address these issues (with things like GPS tractors) otherwise there wil be no soil left for them to farm.
Opencores project page has many original works on it, all written by opencores users, released under an open license and hosted on the opencores website.
Here are some examples:
That's just five. There are 79 more. Hopefully that will debunk Aadain's misinformation.
Accusing OpenCores of being a front is bit like accusing Debian of being a front. OpenCores is not a front.
In the interests of openness, I will point out that I am the maintainer of OpenCore's FAQ. The root page of OpenCores contains some links to case studies of some companies who have successfully used OpenCores in implementations. I will discuss with the rest if OpenCores whether these links are too prominant and are drawing attention away from the original work on the site.
I've just changed my name by deed poll!
Best wishes
Unavailable
* FTP, ...
* CD-ROM driver software,
* Floppy disk driver software,
* Email servers,
* FTP CLIENTS (after all, the bytes received from the server must be stored somewhere in memory/registers)
* Email clients (using similar argument)
* http servers
* WWW browsers (they store content and also search servers on the Internet)
* Anything which uses DNS
* Windows
* Netmeeting
* Your keyboard driver.
* MS word (what if a third party types something on the keyoard.)
* Any login/password program. (Gotta store that 3rd party password data somewhere for processing.)
*
The English isn't even clear as to whether the data storage, or just the search, has to take place over the Internet.
Fortunately we in Australia have fixed this problem. Our companies and wealthy people are so adept at tax avoidance that they don't pay any taxes.
Just as properly designed and maintained trains don't kill pasengers, properly designed and maintained P2P software doesn't create security and privacy risks.
If you've got bug free P2P software, aren't you lying if you say it causes problems that it doesn't? I guess "truth is outa style". So sue me if it's a line from a song.
In my opinion, it's a little bit less anonymous, as one can just trace the 'bit of wire' connecting the systems. Not much less anonymous though, when one considers the exponential rise in 'suspects' as the number of hops increases (assuming no cross connections).
It's more a practical problem. Most people are connected to the Internet via a phone company, who is not going to rush out and replace their network with a freenet. Apart from those who can run a cable over their back fence, wireless solutions (not just WiFi though) seem to be the only solution which is currently practical.
It can be done using only software modifications! It's how some network operators measure their networks. I've seen a picture of around half a dozen mobile phones (each a different make) attached to a piece of wood, with cables plugged into the standard connector on the bottom, running back to a black box (think it was actually a laptop). The system then logs field strength for each phone as a function of position (GPS is also attached).