Yes, they have to trust too much the CA, and there are some other flaws.
Fisrt A can't choose the key she send either to CA and B, she sent the fotons, her peer read them, and, based on the random data read, the key is stablished.
Second, if C owns B's computer he can pretend he is both A and the CA. With classical assimetric keys, C cannot yet read the data A send to B to confirm her identeity, but with this algoritm, he can.
So, there is no advantege in having the CA here.
Yes, but with traditional assimetric criptography, A can know the key of a trusted database that stores B's public key. That is not entirely immune to a man-in-the-middle attack, but just on the time that A and B get the database key (one time oly, and they can get if fisically).
The problem with the algoritm presented id that it can be broken with a man-in-the-middle attack any time that A and B exchange keys, what is far less secure.
Basically, this system will stagnate the music industry as it will lock it into a very narrow form of music and it will not be allowed to grow. People will get even more bored which will lead to decreases sales.
Well, seems completely useless. That will make no change at all.
Well, skins aren't much of a problem, because the user must change it, and if he changes, he must be able to know how to use it (or undo the change). The other problems you are addressing are very M$ centric, and just makes one think that M$ usability is shrinking toghether with their security (I didn't realised that before).
As far as I know, Mozilla suite and Firefox are different scripts running on the same engine (as thunderbird). So, bugs on the engine are corrected on the same time for both, but bugs ont he scripts (inteface) are unique for each one. Yes, the app competes, isn't it good?
Fortunately, there are still people like this. But the great majority of decision makers (to add some more buzzwords) don't think like that. That is why there still buzzword marketing and false advertyzing that let nobody compete by real features.
Gzip the XML document and it will be even smaller than the original notation.
Gzip removes the extra verbosity of the tags and of your data, and you gain standard data representation for free (accounting only storage space).
No, but I'm wondering won something happening on Earth can change it's rotation axis. Without external influence there is simply no way. Now, what really happened?
Well, from my experience (not that big) ERP clients aren't that informed. Informed busnesspeople tend to make gradual adjustment on corporations, one step after the other and don't changing what is good. There little someone can do with ERP packages while doing that.
In a sense, don't asking the user numerical kernel parameter is simplifying it's instalation. So, i does make the kernel bigger (not very big, ineed), but simpler to tune.
But I also prefer the hill climbing for that, it is hard to trust a genetic algorithm at run time.
Well, if I give my code for free for you, and you improve it, I don't want to have to pay for your improvement (did you pay for the code?). Also, I dont want you taking my application and releasing a closed one with a single feature added and shrink my user base.
That's why I like GPL. And you are not forced to redistribute your code, you can keep it in secret if it's too important.
It may be a long time ago... I never used Firefox or Thunderbird with suid, but never had permission to modify it's instalation directory and it always worked fine (talking about 2002 to now).
I don't want to denny mathemetics value, but it's up to discussion if mathematics is or is not science. If you remember your high scool classes you will se that despite math, every science is headed into undertanding something.
Math, otherwise, is headed into creating models (not necessary real) and validanting them, more like a language than a kind of science.
but at some gut level I'm just not sensing the long-term head of steam and ecomonic viability of the approach
Not to convert you, but I'll say something about the long-term head of steam and economic viability of free software. Fist, how free software tend to be better than closed one: On free software, there are plenty of projects trying to do the same stuf. On closed software, this is very hard because no project can be forked, but on the free sofware word, a single project tends to be a colections of forks, each one slightly different, and a lot of users have their own fork, also different. This create a "feature testing space" much larger than closed source projects. Also, free software help putting all the features togheter, it's not as simple as cut-an-paste, but it's simpler than closed software.
Now the economic analisys: No population becames rich by doing superfulous work. On the case of sotware, replicanting it is wasting money (I'm not talking about replicating sotware with R&D objectives, that generate features). So, once everybody uses the same software, everybody gains reusing it.
Now, if you are talking about companies and money, they are not essencial elementes of capitalism. Even if the companies doesn't survive (very unlikely) free software, society will adapt.
Google IS paying it safe. It waits a lot of time before releasing anything, test stuff a lot and create several products before one of them is sucessfull, just like any serious big compani do.
Slashdot Mirror
Yes, they have to trust too much the CA, and there are some other flaws.
Fisrt A can't choose the key she send either to CA and B, she sent the fotons, her peer read them, and, based on the random data read, the key is stablished.
Second, if C owns B's computer he can pretend he is both A and the CA. With classical assimetric keys, C cannot yet read the data A send to B to confirm her identeity, but with this algoritm, he can.
So, there is no advantege in having the CA here.
Yes, but with traditional assimetric criptography, A can know the key of a trusted database that stores B's public key. That is not entirely immune to a man-in-the-middle attack, but just on the time that A and B get the database key (one time oly, and they can get if fisically).
The problem with the algoritm presented id that it can be broken with a man-in-the-middle attack any time that A and B exchange keys, what is far less secure.
Considering that 5 years is almost the developing time of CPU, yes, maybe Intel releases something before that.
Basically, this system will stagnate the music industry as it will lock it into a very narrow form of music and it will not be allowed to grow. People will get even more bored which will lead to decreases sales.
Well, seems completely useless. That will make no change at all.
Well, skins aren't much of a problem, because the user must change it, and if he changes, he must be able to know how to use it (or undo the change). The other problems you are addressing are very M$ centric, and just makes one think that M$ usability is shrinking toghether with their security (I didn't realised that before).
As far as I know, Mozilla suite and Firefox are different scripts running on the same engine (as thunderbird). So, bugs on the engine are corrected on the same time for both, but bugs ont he scripts (inteface) are unique for each one. Yes, the app competes, isn't it good?
Fortunately, there are still people like this. But the great majority of decision makers (to add some more buzzwords) don't think like that. That is why there still buzzword marketing and false advertyzing that let nobody compete by real features.
This is not irony, it is just that lots of bugs have self defense behaviours.
Sorry, I really expected the comment to be funny. Bad choice.
Gzip the XML document and it will be even smaller than the original notation. Gzip removes the extra verbosity of the tags and of your data, and you gain standard data representation for free (accounting only storage space).
What do you want to do in a debian repositore using windows? Just slashdot it?
Politics is all about short term gain.
No, but I'm wondering won something happening on Earth can change it's rotation axis. Without external influence there is simply no way. Now, what really happened?
Well, from my experience (not that big) ERP clients aren't that informed. Informed busnesspeople tend to make gradual adjustment on corporations, one step after the other and don't changing what is good. There little someone can do with ERP packages while doing that.
Don't forget that IBM is one of the dominant companies in the Linux market.
Personaly, I think that US software patents only use is to sue FOSS projects. So, yes, IBM doing that will make software patents completely useless.
In case your math is correct, it weights much more than that. Remember that the biggest part is bellow water.
Now it's on sourceforge. It's a truly free (as in speech) software that will stay on the net despite of the creators will.
In a sense, don't asking the user numerical kernel parameter is simplifying it's instalation. So, i does make the kernel bigger (not very big, ineed), but simpler to tune.
But I also prefer the hill climbing for that, it is hard to trust a genetic algorithm at run time.
Well, if I give my code for free for you, and you improve it, I don't want to have to pay for your improvement (did you pay for the code?). Also, I dont want you taking my application and releasing a closed one with a single feature added and shrink my user base.
That's why I like GPL. And you are not forced to redistribute your code, you can keep it in secret if it's too important.
Because there is no hope
It may be a long time ago... I never used Firefox or Thunderbird with suid, but never had permission to modify it's instalation directory and it always worked fine (talking about 2002 to now).
I don't want to denny mathemetics value, but it's up to discussion if mathematics is or is not science. If you remember your high scool classes you will se that despite math, every science is headed into undertanding something.
Math, otherwise, is headed into creating models (not necessary real) and validanting them, more like a language than a kind of science.
but at some gut level I'm just not sensing the long-term head of steam and ecomonic viability of the approach
Not to convert you, but I'll say something about the long-term head of steam and economic viability of free software. Fist, how free software tend to be better than closed one: On free software, there are plenty of projects trying to do the same stuf. On closed software, this is very hard because no project can be forked, but on the free sofware word, a single project tends to be a colections of forks, each one slightly different, and a lot of users have their own fork, also different. This create a "feature testing space" much larger than closed source projects. Also, free software help putting all the features togheter, it's not as simple as cut-an-paste, but it's simpler than closed software.
Now the economic analisys: No population becames rich by doing superfulous work. On the case of sotware, replicanting it is wasting money (I'm not talking about replicating sotware with R&D objectives, that generate features). So, once everybody uses the same software, everybody gains reusing it.
Now, if you are talking about companies and money, they are not essencial elementes of capitalism. Even if the companies doesn't survive (very unlikely) free software, society will adapt.
Google IS paying it safe. It waits a lot of time before releasing anything, test stuff a lot and create several products before one of them is sucessfull, just like any serious big compani do.