A samrt Sysadmin knows to check slashdot.org once per day to see what irreposnible hints you are giving to script kiddies..
From The Art Of War by Sun Tzu: "The art of war teaches us to rely not on the likelihood of the enemy's not coming, but on our own readiness to receive him; not on the chance of his not attacking, but rather on the fact that we have made our position unassailable."
So a sysadmin relying on the attackers inability is if fact the irresponible one! neener neener:)
How can it be redundant? When i sort the page oldest first, flat, treshold -1. It's the first string mach on "linuxbox"(case insignificant). So how the hell can it be "redundant"?!
A fundamental building block for client-side content security is a secure operating system. If a computer can be booted only into an operating system that itself honors content rights, and allows only compliant applications to access rights-restricted data, then data integrity within the machine can be assured.
After that it continues by saying if it can boot any OS the security is compromized. So i guess no Linux/xBSD/BeOS/whatever on this box. Of course noone in their right mind is going to buy a computer that comes with restrictions on what they can run on it.
The ideas widespread adoptation of this technology might be the same as for windows. Ie, if you only sell palladium boxen then you get to sell cheap palladium boxen, otherwise you have to pay big bucks for the privilege of selling them. And of course, if you only sell palladium content in your little store you will get it cheaper than if you make it compete with alternatives. If it gets any initial success the big content providers can stop providing non palladium content completely. In short: dang!
>Higher frequency signals/noises travel easier and farther.
No the opposite actually. The paralell capacitance and the serial impedace together for a low pass filter. So it's harder to send a high frequency signal down a wire.(this is why thay must improve the cable to do so) The bandwidth(efectivly the highest frequency that can be sent) however is nessesery for sending at a high bitrate. Imagine sending 101010101010101010 down the line. That whould basically create a square wave. The fundamental(the lowest frequency in a signal) whould be half the bitrate, the first(3rd. actually) harmonic whould be 3 times the fundamental and 1.5 times the bitrate with one third the voltage of the fundamental (such is the tao of the square wave) and so on. But not all of the harmonics are needed to get the data across. So in the end you get approx. the bitrate of the bandwidth(often bw. is used to mean bitrate) but it depends on the encoding method. This is why cables that can handle higher frequencies are needed.
It's not like you think. There not trying to stop piracy. They are trying to make everyone used to their repetetetetetive music. Because it is cheaper to produce. Because when people start buying music that cost nothing to produce, on discs that cost nothing to produce, then the company execs can start making the really FAT$$.
If there are 100 operations then learning to use all of them the hard way is 100 steps not 1. The meny might have the shortcut printed in it so that everytime you invoke an operation then you are reminded of a faster way of doing it. You don't have to learn all 100 operations the hard way to use one of them.
>But the moment I see someone trying to do this in a car on the same road as me, I'm dialling the police and reporting dangerous driving.
You'r going to talk on the phone while driving? While trying too look at someones licence plate to see who they are? And looking at peoples dash boards to see what they are doing at the same time? Do you really not see the flaw in what your saing? Besides the "ripping" will probably be as easy as putting the CD in the drive and pushing the RIP button. How that whould be more distracting that playing a normal CD player is beond me.
The idea is that the inaccuracies go both ways. And for a whole lot of projects even out. If you get enough data then the low precision(* won't matter it the accuracy(* is good.(or was it the other way around)
*) Yes i'm using the math definitions of these words, not the dictionery ones. Because the dict. ones suck.
If the cheap line gives people all the bw in the world, nobody is going to buy the expensive one.(Compare to CPU's) If they can reach both the hi and low end markets with the same equipment(just diffirent terms of service) they can make more money. And yes, in theory capping the line is not going to save them bw. Because if someone loads a page or file, it's the same amount of data, regardles of how long it takes. And with several users that just means that the time windows(of when download occurs) are going to everlap more. So for them the same bw is neede anyway.
Companies that require high levels of computer security currently use either a DES (Data Encryption Standard) or a triple DES code, but the Kauffmans say both are breakable.
"The currently used DES encryption method, which is now being replaced by AES (Advanced Encryption Standard), was once thought unbreakable and can now be cracked in a matter of minutes to hours," said Robert Kauffman, who helped his son write parts of the computer program. "The AES also can be cracked in theory. These algorithms have computational security, which means they can be broken if enough time and computer power are used. AES would take hundreds of years to break with today's supercomputers.
Slashdot Mirror
A samrt Sysadmin knows to check slashdot.org once per day to see what irreposnible hints you are giving to script kiddies..
:)
From The Art Of War by Sun Tzu:
"The art of war teaches us to rely not on the likelihood of the enemy's not coming, but on our own readiness to receive him; not
on the chance of his not attacking, but rather on the fact that we have
made our position unassailable."
So a sysadmin relying on the attackers inability is if fact the irresponible one! neener neener
How can it be redundant? When i sort the page oldest first, flat, treshold -1. It's the first string mach on "linuxbox"(case insignificant). So how the hell can it be "redundant"?!
A fundamental building block for client-side content security is a secure operating system. If a computer can be booted only into an operating system that itself honors content rights, and allows only compliant applications to access rights-restricted data, then data integrity within the machine can be assured.
After that it continues by saying if it can boot any OS the security is compromized. So i guess no Linux/xBSD/BeOS/whatever on this box. Of course noone in their right mind is going to buy a computer that comes with restrictions on what they can run on it.
The ideas widespread adoptation of this technology might be the same as for windows. Ie, if you only sell palladium boxen then you get to sell cheap palladium boxen, otherwise you have to pay big bucks for the privilege of selling them. And of course, if you only sell palladium content in your little store you will get it cheaper than if you make it compete with alternatives. If it gets any initial success the big content providers can stop providing non palladium content completely. In short: dang!
Will they call it a LinuXbox now?
> Xboxes, like other disc based consoles, check the discs they run to make sure they aren't pirated copies.
That may be the official reason. But i think it has more to with making sure that everyone who makes games for your console pays a royalty.
the leftarrowSTDINrightarrow part is missing
for(;;){
$foo=;
print "What makes you say that?\n";
}
Perhaps the creator needs to head down to the nearest Starbucks and try some real-world conversation
Oh, shut up!
>I'm wondering, if other countries try to produce this new metal, if that will be an infringement on someone's intellectual property ?
No, not really. If some american company can licence it, so can some foreign one.(Duh!)
Btw. A figher plane's turn rate is mostly limited by the pilot already.
>This is more like infringement of copyright of the Harry Potter name
He he, you mean trademark.
>Higher frequency signals/noises travel easier and farther.
No the opposite actually. The paralell capacitance and the serial impedace together for a low pass filter. So it's harder to send a high frequency signal down a wire.(this is why thay must improve the cable to do so) The bandwidth(efectivly the highest frequency that can be sent) however is nessesery for sending at a high bitrate. Imagine sending 101010101010101010 down the line. That whould basically create a square wave. The fundamental(the lowest frequency in a signal) whould be half the bitrate, the first(3rd. actually) harmonic whould be 3 times the fundamental and 1.5 times the bitrate with one third the voltage of the fundamental (such is the tao of the square wave) and so on. But not all of the harmonics are needed to get the data across. So in the end you get approx. the bitrate of the bandwidth(often bw. is used to mean bitrate) but it depends on the encoding method. This is why cables that can handle higher frequencies are needed.
It's not like you think. There not trying to stop piracy. They are trying to make everyone used to their repetetetetetive music. Because it is cheaper to produce. Because when people start buying music that cost nothing to produce, on discs that cost nothing to produce, then the company execs can start making the really FAT$$.
If there are 100 operations then learning to use all of them the hard way is 100 steps not 1. The meny might have the shortcut printed in it so that everytime you invoke an operation then you are reminded of a faster way of doing it. You don't have to learn all 100 operations the hard way to use one of them.
And as little as vi should be changed so should blender. That whould be like putting shit on pizza to make a billion flies like it.
It's the usual Sony/RIAA "You can't, but we can!!"
>But the moment I see someone trying to do this in a car on the same road as me, I'm dialling the police and reporting dangerous driving.
You'r going to talk on the phone while driving? While trying too look at someones licence plate to see who they are? And looking at peoples dash boards to see what they are doing at the same time? Do you really not see the flaw in what your saing? Besides the "ripping" will probably be as easy as putting the CD in the drive and pushing the RIP button. How that whould be more distracting that playing a normal CD player is beond me.
No, it is not.
>If you can convince someone to pay $1,000,000 for linux, then it's worth $1,000,000. that's it
:)
I bet if it was an exlusive licence, M$ whould shell it up
The idea is that the inaccuracies go both ways. And for a whole lot of projects even out. If you get enough data then the low precision(* won't matter it the accuracy(* is good.(or was it the other way around)
*) Yes i'm using the math definitions of these words, not the dictionery ones. Because the dict. ones suck.
If the cheap line gives people all the bw in the world, nobody is going to buy the expensive one.(Compare to CPU's) If they can reach both the hi and low end markets with the same equipment(just diffirent terms of service) they can make more money. And yes, in theory capping the line is not going to save them bw. Because if someone loads a page or file, it's the same amount of data, regardles of how long it takes. And with several users that just means that the time windows(of when download occurs) are going to everlap more. So for them the same bw is neede anyway.
Considering how many CPU's you can get in a single box it's often not nessesery.
"Algorithm or product X is insecure"
From the other article:
Companies that require high levels of computer security currently use either a DES (Data Encryption Standard) or a triple DES code, but the Kauffmans say both are breakable.
"The currently used DES encryption method, which is now being replaced by AES (Advanced Encryption Standard), was once thought unbreakable and can now be cracked in a matter of minutes to hours," said Robert Kauffman, who helped his son write parts of the computer program. "The AES also can be cracked in theory. These algorithms have computational security, which means they can be broken if enough time and computer power are used. AES would take hundreds of years to break with today's supercomputers.
seed rand() from user input
while !EOF
read a char
print char ^ rand()
("^" is xor)
We all did this when we were kids.
You might also add a hash function like:
print char ^ rand() ^ (lastin * lastout + lastin *lastout >> 8)
( ">>" is bitshift)
There now it's data dependent, totally unbrakeable
A variation is using + instead of ^ but then you need a corresponding decryption algo with -
Suprisingly many people make the same algo(or similar variations of it) independently.
They smuggle a large BOMB into their booth.
You do realize that you can make your own round cables just by splitting one between the conductors and then using a little scoch tape?