A friend of mine from the army told me that all you had to do was shave off the plastic protected coating and very carefully bend the fiber slightly. Small amounts of the data will then "leak" out of the sides, like a reflection off the top of a pond.
I was wrong about being able to send any information using quantum mechanics. The probability of being able to read any individual bit is 50%. So you can only ever read 50% of any message.
However, you can then contact the other person and tell them which photons you were able to read, and use those photons as the key.
I don't really understand your post. Albert Einstein made the "Spooky Action" thought experiment to show how ludicrous the Heisenberg Uncertainty principle is. He didn't believe it.
However, the experiment has since been done, and the uncertainty principle still holds. The "Spooky Action" is an observable event.
Now I don't understand exactly how, but they said that they can use this to create quantum relays in the transmission of the message.
But if you're going to use a random one-time-pad, where the key is the same size as the data you want to send, you might as well send the message instead.
No that doesn't work. Using the quantum technique does not prevent a third party from reading the information. So if I send a message to you using the quantum method you may recieve garbage, but the third party will have read the information fine and will know what I just sent. That kind of defeats the purpose of wanting to encrypt something.
Quantum encryption is a misleading name. You are not using quantum mechanics to encrypt anything, all you are doing is using quantum mechanics to send a key to the other person that you Know to be secure.
If you read the article it is right there on the first page: The direction in which the photons oscillated, their polarization, represented the 0s or 1s of a series of quantum bits, or qubits. The qubits constituted a cryptographic "key" that could be used to encrypt or decipher a message. What kept the key from prying eavesdroppers was Heisenberg's uncertainty principle--a foundation of quantum physics that dictates that the measurement of one property in a quantum state will perturb another. In a quantum cryptographic system, any interloper tapping into the stream of photons will alter them in a way that is detectable to the sender and the receiver. In principle, the technique provides the makings of an unbreakable cryptographic key.
Any public-private key encryption can be broken through brute force. What keeps them secure is that most of the time it takes a long time to break them.
With the development of quantum computers (which some people believe can be done within the next 20 years) it will only take a few seconds to break ANY public/private key encrypted message.
A message sent using quantum encryption cannot be broken by brute force.
I quote the apropriate part from the article for the lazy parent who has not RTFA.
Ultimately cryptographers want some form of quantum repeater--in essence, an elementary form of quantum computer that would overcome distance limitations. A repeater would work through what Albert Einstein famously called "spukhafte Fernwirkungen," spooky action at a distance. Anton Zeilinger and his colleagues at the Institute of Experimental Physics in Vienna, Austria, took an early step toward a repeater when they reported in the August 19, 2004, issue of Nature that their group had strung an optical-fiber cable in a sewer tunnel under the Danube River and stationed an "entangled" photon at each end. The measurement of the state of polarization in one photon (horizontal, vertical, and so on) establishes immediately an identical polarization that can be measured in the other.
And it continues on this page
http://www.sciam.com/article.cfm?chanID=sa006&arti cleID=000479CD-F58C-11BE-AD0683414B7F0000&pageNumb er=3&catID=2
You still encrypt the final message. All the quantum part does is tell you when a third party has intercepted your data stream. It does not prevent a person from reading it.
So what you do is you generate a random key and transmit that to the other person. The key is random junk that will be used to encrypt the final message. If a person reads this you can detect it and all you do is recreate the key and try again.
You just keep trying to send a new random key until it is sent without anyone reading it. Once it is sent successfully you encrypt your message using it, and transmit the newly encrypted message to the other person using traditional methods.
A person is free to intercept this message because it's not possible to brute force a message using a truly random key.
There is one encryption that has always stood and that is the one time pad.
A properly implimented one time pad using a truly random key is impossible to crack.
Quantum encryption is based on the one time pad, and it overcomes the weakness of how you guarantee your key has been transmitted to the other person without anyone else knowing it.
If you actually read the article you would see that they acknowledge that problem. But that is a problem that will always exist, and has always existed.
And an inside job will always prove unstoppable. "Treachery is the primary way," observes Seth Lloyd, an expert in quantum computation at the Massachusetts Institute of Technology. "There's nothing quantum mechanics can do about that."
It's a bit of a misleading name, but the actual encryption part of these techniques is the one time pad which has been a known technique for a long time now. It is mathmatically proven to be impossible to break a one time pad as long as you use a truely random key.
The quantum part of this new technique is just the method of transmitting the key to the other person. With it you can guarantee that no one else has listened in and knows what the key is.
Stars go supernova all the time. I saw a documentary with one person who has made it his hobby to observe them and does it with just a normal telescope.
Aparently he became quite skilled at it and was finding quite a few each year.
The reason we don't see them is they are too far away
One of their arguments seems to be that the researcher is making misleading statements about how the software works.
If that is the case then how can they be suing him for reverse engineering the software?
Reverse engineering is when a person analyses the product to determine how it works. Yet here they are saying that he didn't do this, but shall sue him anyway.
I agree that all the movies you mentioned are better than Escape from New York, but that's not what this list is about. This is a ranking on the quality of the DVD release. A rating based in the extra's you get with the movie.
I can go out and buy a 6600GT and it will run Everything at a very good frame rate.
In a year or two from now though it won't be as good, but I'll be able to go out and buy a second really cheap 6600GT and have a system that can run everything at a very good frame rate again.
That's what I see as the advantage of SLI. Whether I'll be able to do that I'll have to wait and see.
I remember going to one of my friends archaeology lectures on a whim and it turned out to be all about sex and archaeology.
I don't remember all the details but I do remember that they had dug up what were obviously wooden dildos. However, when they were discovered the attitude was that they just could not be dildos, so for a long time they were classified as 'arrow straighteners'.
I'll never forget the picture of the large double ended arrow straightener the lecturer showed us next.
Actually you might, I don't really know. But my point is why do you have to have the source sitting right in your backyard? Most people on this planet do not have direct access to an oil pump so they can fill their car up in the morning. It's extracted, refined, and then transported half way across the globe to the places where it's needed.
Exactly the same process can be done with hydrogen. Just set up a refinery on the coast extracting sea water, and then stick it in a tanker and drive it a fraction of the distance required to ship petrol everywhere.
Wouldn't that be why... "the GIMP team asked artists to submit their artwork to be used as the official splash screen for GIMP 2.2." instead of doing it themselves?
Slashdot Mirror
A friend of mine from the army told me that all you had to do was shave off the plastic protected coating and very carefully bend the fiber slightly. Small amounts of the data will then "leak" out of the sides, like a reflection off the top of a pond.
I was wrong about being able to send any information using quantum mechanics. The probability of being able to read any individual bit is 50%. So you can only ever read 50% of any message.
However, you can then contact the other person and tell them which photons you were able to read, and use those photons as the key.
Quantum entanglment cannot be used to send information faster than light, as explained here
However, the experiment has since been done, and the uncertainty principle still holds. The "Spooky Action" is an observable event.
Now I don't understand exactly how, but they said that they can use this to create quantum relays in the transmission of the message.
No that doesn't work. Using the quantum technique does not prevent a third party from reading the information. So if I send a message to you using the quantum method you may recieve garbage, but the third party will have read the information fine and will know what I just sent. That kind of defeats the purpose of wanting to encrypt something.
Quantum encryption is a misleading name. You are not using quantum mechanics to encrypt anything, all you are doing is using quantum mechanics to send a key to the other person that you Know to be secure.
If you read the article it is right there on the first page:
The direction in which the photons oscillated, their polarization, represented the 0s or 1s of a series of quantum bits, or qubits. The qubits constituted a cryptographic "key" that could be used to encrypt or decipher a message. What kept the key from prying eavesdroppers was Heisenberg's uncertainty principle--a foundation of quantum physics that dictates that the measurement of one property in a quantum state will perturb another. In a quantum cryptographic system, any interloper tapping into the stream of photons will alter them in a way that is detectable to the sender and the receiver. In principle, the technique provides the makings of an unbreakable cryptographic key.
Classical methods are not just as good.
Any public-private key encryption can be broken through brute force. What keeps them secure is that most of the time it takes a long time to break them.
With the development of quantum computers (which some people believe can be done within the next 20 years) it will only take a few seconds to break ANY public/private key encrypted message.
A message sent using quantum encryption cannot be broken by brute force.
Ultimately cryptographers want some form of quantum repeater--in essence, an elementary form of quantum computer that would overcome distance limitations. A repeater would work through what Albert Einstein famously called "spukhafte Fernwirkungen," spooky action at a distance. Anton Zeilinger and his colleagues at the Institute of Experimental Physics in Vienna, Austria, took an early step toward a repeater when they reported in the August 19, 2004, issue of Nature that their group had strung an optical-fiber cable in a sewer tunnel under the Danube River and stationed an "entangled" photon at each end. The measurement of the state of polarization in one photon (horizontal, vertical, and so on) establishes immediately an identical polarization that can be measured in the other.
And it continues on this page http://www.sciam.com/article.cfm?chanID=sa006&arti cleID=000479CD-F58C-11BE-AD0683414B7F0000&pageNumb er=3&catID=2
No that is not quite right.
You still encrypt the final message. All the quantum part does is tell you when a third party has intercepted your data stream. It does not prevent a person from reading it.
So what you do is you generate a random key and transmit that to the other person. The key is random junk that will be used to encrypt the final message. If a person reads this you can detect it and all you do is recreate the key and try again.
You just keep trying to send a new random key until it is sent without anyone reading it. Once it is sent successfully you encrypt your message using it, and transmit the newly encrypted message to the other person using traditional methods.
A person is free to intercept this message because it's not possible to brute force a message using a truly random key.
A properly implimented one time pad using a truly random key is impossible to crack.
Quantum encryption is based on the one time pad, and it overcomes the weakness of how you guarantee your key has been transmitted to the other person without anyone else knowing it.
And an inside job will always prove unstoppable. "Treachery is the primary way," observes Seth Lloyd, an expert in quantum computation at the Massachusetts Institute of Technology. "There's nothing quantum mechanics can do about that."
It is impossible to crack quantum encryption.
It's a bit of a misleading name, but the actual encryption part of these techniques is the one time pad which has been a known technique for a long time now. It is mathmatically proven to be impossible to break a one time pad as long as you use a truely random key.
The quantum part of this new technique is just the method of transmitting the key to the other person. With it you can guarantee that no one else has listened in and knows what the key is.
Are we allowed to wall them up in the middle of the garden?
internet pirates will be able to view it on the 13th.
Stars go supernova all the time. I saw a documentary with one person who has made it his hobby to observe them and does it with just a normal telescope.
Aparently he became quite skilled at it and was finding quite a few each year.
The reason we don't see them is they are too far away
One of their arguments seems to be that the researcher is making misleading statements about how the software works.
If that is the case then how can they be suing him for reverse engineering the software?
Reverse engineering is when a person analyses the product to determine how it works. Yet here they are saying that he didn't do this, but shall sue him anyway.
Am I allowed to push the antenna through the piece of paper?
Fight Club has 4 commentaries as well.
This is not a list of the best movies.
I agree that all the movies you mentioned are better than Escape from New York, but that's not what this list is about. This is a ranking on the quality of the DVD release. A rating based in the extra's you get with the movie.
The advantage of SLI isn't here right now.
I can go out and buy a 6600GT and it will run Everything at a very good frame rate.
In a year or two from now though it won't be as good, but I'll be able to go out and buy a second really cheap 6600GT and have a system that can run everything at a very good frame rate again.
That's what I see as the advantage of SLI. Whether I'll be able to do that I'll have to wait and see.
I remember going to one of my friends archaeology lectures on a whim and it turned out to be all about sex and archaeology.
I don't remember all the details but I do remember that they had dug up what were obviously wooden dildos. However, when they were discovered the attitude was that they just could not be dildos, so for a long time they were classified as 'arrow straighteners'.
I'll never forget the picture of the large double ended arrow straightener the lecturer showed us next.
Why would it be any harder than distributing Natural Gas?
Do you have any oil in the midwest?
Actually you might, I don't really know. But my point is why do you have to have the source sitting right in your backyard? Most people on this planet do not have direct access to an oil pump so they can fill their car up in the morning. It's extracted, refined, and then transported half way across the globe to the places where it's needed.
Exactly the same process can be done with hydrogen. Just set up a refinery on the coast extracting sea water, and then stick it in a tanker and drive it a fraction of the distance required to ship petrol everywhere.
Yes.
But once you discover the deception the guy who sold it to you has packed up and pissed off with your money never to be seen again.
It's still fraud. They are not what they advertise them to be, hence "fake".
Maybe it doesn't fit the exact definition of "counterfeit", but that doesn't make it any less wrong.
Wouldn't that be why...
"the GIMP team asked artists to submit their artwork to be used as the official splash screen for GIMP 2.2."
instead of doing it themselves?