The computer aided design databases for an automobile, when you have 3D models for the parts, the tooling, plant layout, etc. is in the
low terabyte range. As another example, Boeing dedicates about 14 terabytes to commercial airplane geometry data storage.
Or Astronomy. A planning document talks about a project generating 300 terabytes per year.
Microsoft can price their product however they please. When they start causing problems, by restricting the platforms their codec performs on, or restricting the performance on other platforms, or if they wait 'til MPEG is dead and then raise their rates, THEN you can slam them for monopolistic practices.
Once a buddy of mine was working for a short time in an office close to where I was working. One morning I called him and suggested we have lunch. He said "No, I've got a bug, I have to work through lunch."
The next day I called again to suggest we go out to lunch. He said he still hadn't fixed the bug, and couldn't go to lunch. I asked, "Did you fix the bug by working through lunch yesterday?" After a long silence, I asked when I should pick him up. He fixed the bug thirty minutes after he got back from lunch.
According to the article they were looking for the possibility of Earth-like planets in indendent orbits around stars. They weren't looking at the possibility of planets (moons) in orbit around gas giants. There is speculation
reported here that Jupiter's moons Callisto, Ganymede and Europa have subsurface oceans which could support life.
Adding moons of gas giants could raise the percentage of systems with Earth-like planets to higher than the 25 percent reported.
If the requirement is that there be a "region" around the star where a planet could have water in liquid state all-year-round, wouldn't almost every star satisfy this?
From the article:
The first thing they looked for in each system was whether a small terrestrial planet could exist in a stable orbit. The gravitational tugs exerted by gas giants can force smaller planets into unstable orbits or eject them from a system altogether.
So the requirement is that there be a stable orbit within the distance range where water would be liquid.
Hon Hai replaces LG as sole supplier of Apple's iMac/eMac PCs - report
TAIPEI (AFX-ASIA) - Hon Hai Precision Industry Co Ltd (2317.TW) has replaced
LG Electronics Co as the sole supplier of Apple Computer Inc's iMac/eMac desktop
PCs, with 2003 shipments estimated at up to 1.0 mln units, the Economic Daily
News reported without citing a source.
While Chunghwa Picture Tubes Ltd (2475.TW) will provide 17-inch monitors for
the eMac machines, AU Optronics Corp (2409.TW) has been certified as a TFT-LCD
panel supplier to Apple Computer, it said.
There is no such thing as a crypto key that is impossibile to crack. What it comes down to is how improbably it is to crack it. In this example, it took 10,000 computers 549 days to crack it and it's only 109 bits. At 163 bits, that's a doubling in difficulty for ever (sic) additional bit.
Just add a bit, and suddenly you've pushed off the efficiencies gained by moore's law for another 18 months. By going to 163 bits, you've got a good 80 years before the that key can be broken in the same time as this 109 bit key. Frankly I wouldn't be too worried about that problem.
As long as your crypto is good enough to make it too expensive to crack for those who might want to crack it, you've got no worries. And I don't see a lot of people out there able to throw together the 10K computers to crack a key who also don't mind wasting almost two years on the effort.
There are lots of organizations with 10,000 computers, or more. There are distributed systems like SETI which could put a million computers on this problem. People can improve the algorithms used to attack the problem.
I doubt it'll be 80 years before 163 bit is brute forced.
When you use OSS you don't need to wonder how the software works. Everything it does is spelled out in the source for you. Even with poor or no documentation a good coder can still review the code and understand how it works. That same good coder can then add any features you might need.
Yeah, right.
Everything it does is spelled out in the (possibly uncommented, often cryptic) source for you.
Have you ever actually tried to reverse engineer code with poor or no documentation and then add any features you might need? I have, many times. It's always time consuming (read expensive). The last time I ran into this we ended up replacing the whole system, because it was cheaper. I made a lot of money on that job, so I guess I'm not complaining. But just because you have Open Source Software doesn't mean the source is a thing of beauty and easy to modify.
What is more interesting is that Washington Democrat Senator Maria Cantwell was elected -- "winning" by a red cunt hair against Slade Gordon -- after spending all the fake only-exists-on-paper money she "earned" from being CEO of Real Media.
Get your facts right - she wasn't CEO, just an exec.
"The telecommunications industry is rapidly converging on Windows NT/2000 for all telephony and voice-related needs."
Perhaps for customer offices, but not for their own switches. I worked for a cell phone company a couple years ago and part of my job involved getting data off their central switches. All of the Lucent and Nortel switches were running UNIX - their own, but UNIX nevertheless.
[Airlines] are jumpy enough that my friend, when he joked that he had "Yeah, and a big brick of C4" in his bag to a National Guard soldier, they detained him for 6 hours and -- I exaggerate not -- gave him a full cavity search, tore open his shoes, and destroyed his laptop looking for bombs.
Your friend was incredibly stupid to joke about C4 and got exactly what he deserved.
I don't understand the poster's assertion that one time pads (OTP) are vulnerable to "known-plaintext attacks".
The classic OTP was a pad of sheets with keys for character by character substititutions. Once a sheet is used for one message it is destroyed. See a more complete definition of OTP for more details. Since a given key is only used once, known-plaintext attacks can't compromise multiple messages.
For even more info see Why Are One-Time Pads Perfectly Secure? where it says that OTP is "perfectly secure, as long as the key is random and is not compromised".
So is poster claiming to have found a flaw in OTP?
The GNU project was supposed to do an OS. It didn't. It wrote a bunch of tools that have been useful on various OSes. To claim naming rights on an OS because your tools have been ported to it is infantile.
It is the business of the future to be dangerous. - A. N. Whitehead
So AFAICT, the trojan would have to identify itself by looking at the structure or semantics of the source file.
Yes, he did, in very clever way, which he explains. And his trick recognizes both the compiler and login command.
After descibing the trick, he goes on to say, "First we compile the modified source with the normal C compiler to produce a bugged binary. We install this binary as the official C. We can now remove the bugs from the source of the compiler and the new binary will reinsert the bugs whenever it is compiled. Of course, the login command will remain bugged with no trace in source anywhere."
Whether one could get away with this in gcc (or whatever is questionable, but at some point every compile must be done with a binary. So if the first binary on a system was trojaned, it is possible that future ones could inherit the bug.
The problem with using an equation that works on ecological systems to model human
social systems is in the assumptions of ecological models.
One of the assumptions that doesn't hold is the speed of adaptation. In ecology adaptation
is based on evolution, which can take multiple reproductive cycles of the species. In
human social systems the speed of adaptation is closer to the speed of information diffusion
in the system, which on the internet is hours or days.
Another assumption is that the disruptive force is stronger than the species being disrupted.
While humans have the technology to destroy fish, the idea that record companies
have advantages over file sharers is almost silly. Sue them? Lawyers only work 9 to 5,
19 year olds pull all nighters. Better technology? Same argument.
It's nice to see this brought to a wider readership, but don't take the paper
of a couple of college kids too seriously. They have lots of peers with lots
of ideas to get around the problems they raise.
Great programming environment
on
Newton Won't Die
·
· Score: 2, Informative
I
played with Newton development and it was a truly great development environment. The NewtonScript Programming Language, influenced by Self,
is a a beautiful, elegant language based on prototypes. The view system, which runs the display, makes it really easy to to customize user interfaces. The Newton Toolkit in it's day was a ground breaking IDE. Newton supported persistant objects.
The Newton group actually thought about and did user testing on their interface, then published interface standards. Unlike most OSes
Sigh. I spend so much of my professional life dealing with poorly thought out languages/systems that I look back very fondly on the Newton.
Actually I still use two of them. One is in the kitchen - I use it to keep track of groceries I need. The other sits by my desktop machine for taking notes.
Slashdot Mirror
The bus hub upstream from my house is here.
It tells whether a bus is on time, late, or already departed, refreshing once per minute.
This lets me read one more /. posting before heading to the bus stop.
they won't need a spray can to tag a wall.
Rather than write a Perl script to access this, why not use an HTML form?
The computer aided design databases for an automobile, when you have 3D models for the parts, the tooling, plant layout, etc. is in the low terabyte range. As another example, Boeing dedicates about 14 terabytes to commercial airplane geometry data storage.
Or Astronomy. A planning document talks about a project generating 300 terabytes per year.
THEN it will be too late.
The next day I called again to suggest we go out to lunch. He said he still hadn't fixed the bug, and couldn't go to lunch. I asked, "Did you fix the bug by working through lunch yesterday?" After a long silence, I asked when I should pick him up. He fixed the bug thirty minutes after he got back from lunch.
According to the article they were looking for the possibility of Earth-like planets in indendent orbits around stars. They weren't looking at the possibility of planets (moons) in orbit around gas giants. There is speculation reported here that Jupiter's moons Callisto, Ganymede and Europa have subsurface oceans which could support life.
Adding moons of gas giants could raise the percentage of systems with Earth-like planets to higher than the 25 percent reported.
If the requirement is that there be a "region" around the star where a planet could have water in liquid state all-year-round, wouldn't almost every star satisfy this?
From the article:So the requirement is that there be a stable orbit within the distance range where water would be liquid.
Hon Hai replaces LG as sole supplier of Apple's iMac/eMac PCs - report
TAIPEI (AFX-ASIA) - Hon Hai Precision Industry Co Ltd (2317.TW) has replaced LG Electronics Co as the sole supplier of Apple Computer Inc's iMac/eMac desktop PCs, with 2003 shipments estimated at up to 1.0 mln units, the Economic Daily News reported without citing a source. While Chunghwa Picture Tubes Ltd (2475.TW) will provide 17-inch monitors for the eMac machines, AU Optronics Corp (2409.TW) has been certified as a TFT-LCD panel supplier to Apple Computer, it said.
1800 years of posting to slahdot! kewl!
How many people will pay over 20 percent of their monthly wage for broadband?
There is no such thing as a crypto key that is impossibile to crack. What it comes down to is how improbably it is to crack it. In this example, it took 10,000 computers 549 days to crack it and it's only 109 bits. At 163 bits, that's a doubling in difficulty for ever (sic) additional bit.
Just add a bit, and suddenly you've pushed off the efficiencies gained by moore's law for another 18 months. By going to 163 bits, you've got a good 80 years before the that key can be broken in the same time as this 109 bit key. Frankly I wouldn't be too worried about that problem.
As long as your crypto is good enough to make it too expensive to crack for those who might want to crack it, you've got no worries. And I don't see a lot of people out there able to throw together the 10K computers to crack a key who also don't mind wasting almost two years on the effort.
There are lots of organizations with 10,000 computers, or more. There are distributed systems like SETI which could put a million computers on this problem. People can improve the algorithms used to attack the problem.
I doubt it'll be 80 years before 163 bit is brute forced.
Yeah, right.
Everything it does is spelled out in the (possibly uncommented, often cryptic) source for you.
Have you ever actually tried to reverse engineer code with poor or no documentation and then add any features you might need? I have, many times. It's always time consuming (read expensive). The last time I ran into this we ended up replacing the whole system, because it was cheaper. I made a lot of money on that job, so I guess I'm not complaining. But just because you have Open Source Software doesn't mean the source is a thing of beauty and easy to modify.
Didn't Microsoft say during the trial that they couldn't offer a stripped version? If they did offer one wouldn't that mean they'd lied?
Oh, wait...
All loopholes remain.
"Such an amendment would not appear to work a fundamental change to the parties' agreement" - Opinion on the State Settlement
Monopolies no longer need to fear the legal system
Get your facts right - she wasn't CEO, just an exec.
"The telecommunications industry is rapidly converging on Windows NT/2000 for all telephony and voice-related needs."
Perhaps for customer offices, but not for their own switches. I worked for a cell phone company a couple years ago and part of my job involved getting data off their central switches. All of the Lucent and Nortel switches were running UNIX - their own, but UNIX nevertheless.
Your friend was incredibly stupid to joke about C4 and got exactly what he deserved.
The classic OTP was a pad of sheets with keys for character by character substititutions. Once a sheet is used for one message it is destroyed. See a more complete definition of OTP for more details. Since a given key is only used once, known-plaintext attacks can't compromise multiple messages.
For even more info see Why Are One-Time Pads Perfectly Secure? where it says that OTP is "perfectly secure, as long as the key is random and is not compromised".
So is poster claiming to have found a flaw in OTP?
Neat trick, considering he died in 1963.
It is the business of the future to be dangerous. - A. N. Whitehead
This is a nifty concept, but I remain skeptical that it would ever work in practice, at least for an open-source produce such as gcc.
Before you dismiss the possibility, why not read Thompson's lecture?
So AFAICT, the trojan would have to identify itself by looking at the structure or semantics of the source file.
Yes, he did, in very clever way, which he explains. And his trick recognizes both the compiler and login command.
After descibing the trick, he goes on to say, "First we compile the modified source with the normal C compiler to produce a bugged binary. We install this binary as the official C. We can now remove the bugs from the source of the compiler and the new binary will reinsert the bugs whenever it is compiled. Of course, the login command will remain bugged with no trace in source anywhere."
Whether one could get away with this in gcc (or whatever is questionable, but at some point every compile must be done with a binary. So if the first binary on a system was trojaned, it is possible that future ones could inherit the bug.
One of the assumptions that doesn't hold is the speed of adaptation. In ecology adaptation is based on evolution, which can take multiple reproductive cycles of the species. In human social systems the speed of adaptation is closer to the speed of information diffusion in the system, which on the internet is hours or days.
Another assumption is that the disruptive force is stronger than the species being disrupted. While humans have the technology to destroy fish, the idea that record companies have advantages over file sharers is almost silly. Sue them? Lawyers only work 9 to 5, 19 year olds pull all nighters. Better technology? Same argument.
It's nice to see this brought to a wider readership, but don't take the paper of a couple of college kids too seriously. They have lots of peers with lots of ideas to get around the problems they raise.
The Newton group actually thought about and did user testing on their interface, then published interface standards. Unlike most OSes
Sigh. I spend so much of my professional life dealing with poorly thought out languages/systems that I look back very fondly on the Newton.
Actually I still use two of them. One is in the kitchen - I use it to keep track of groceries I need. The other sits by my desktop machine for taking notes.