Yep, but how do you decide that the cooling capacity is too low? Remember that it doesn't have a linear relationship with the temperature, and doesn't come on the manual.
You'll really have to test a batch of disks, correlate (cooling power, temperature) with longevity. And then, when your disks are already obsolete, you'll have enough data to gather conclusions from that test.
Well, if your bomb is strong enough, you can blow it enough for the center of mass to become irrelevant, as all debris will fly away from it. If it isn't that strong, you can still ensure you blow it into small enough pieces that it's surface to mass ratio is big enough for them to not survive reentry.
But the best option is probably just to propel the thing, you are right.
I don't know. If a receipt describing how to create the virus, and the knowledge that Nature does follow all those steps at random all the time isn't enough for you to belive that the virus could appear... Yeah, I can't think about anything that will convince you. You can repeat the experiment if you know how to handle such virus, that's the entire reason that "science" stuff works. Just make sure to not let it into the public.
Problem is, it never happened.
You also don't belive on your history books, do you?
That study comproves that there was a wolf there, and goes into details on what to look for on that wolf (so we can find it faster), and how to protect against it. Oh, and incidentaly, it comes with a receipt on how to create your own lethal wolf.
Alternatively, someone might want to design a new 8-bit CPU for certain embedded tasks where it's essential for there to be low power consumption and a high-end sophisticated OS.
The one thing you don't put in a system with a tight power envelope is an emulation layer. I doubt that has any practical application, but it is cool.
Since they are going to all this trouble it would seem that the prior collections of prints are useless in this encoding process, and a real finger is needed.
Quite likely. Also, no data is trusted above electoral data, thus the government can't use police's data for electoral porpouses.
Presumably the new finger printing is simply encoded and placed on some form of voter id card, which you must present when you want to vote.
Nope. The data is stored at the voting machine. There is a central database, but as you guessed, the voting machines are required to be able to work offline (they only connect into a network to send the results. Even then, it is just for antecipating things, the offline collected results are the ones that count).
It is anonymous if used correctly. The problem is that if you put people enforcing that each person gets out with just one paper, those people will be in a position to see the vote. If nobody is enforcing, people can get out with the three paper strips, and prove how they voted.
There are already procedures for dealing with them, as the fingerprints are already collected (just not by a machine).
Mobsters will just cut off people's fingers and use them to vote.
That is hylarious. Yes, people will just show up in a line, holding handless fingers, and nobody will notice. They'll put that extra finger in a machine, in front of six random people, and none of them will see anything.
Mythbusters proved that fingerprints are easy to fake.
Yeah, now we have something. It is indeed arguable if this will provide any extra security, and there wasn't any wide discussion about that. But the cost is no big deal - the Government will colect everybody's fingerprint, again - thus, I'd classify it as low risk.
Anonimity makes it impossible to make a secure (in the mathematical sense) election. The best we can do is to make the flaws hard to exploit, what is a completely diferent problem from securing an ATM.
If the Brazilian Government was just a bit organized, it would already have the fingerprint of everybody. It already collects them, and several times. It is just one more collection.
By the way, I just don't get the antagony some people have about the government cadastrating people. No, it doen't lead to retriction of freedom, and is not necessary for that.
Heh, that's why everybody pulls emails now. Yes, it does use more boattery than real push, but modern phones can stand it. Besides, that was exactly the GP's point.
Yeah, accusing an insider of not having inside information is the way to go!
Part of the infrastrucutre was brought by the governemnt, but even that part most countries did sell, not give to the private initiative. Besides, on lots of places the infrastruture was severely underdimensionated, and needed an upgrade at the time.
Yes, all systems have a limited life span. Good telecom equipment usualy have a life span around 20 years, sometimes more. The evolution of analogic cellphones to the old digital ones (CDMA, TDMA), to GSM, to 3G (forgetting that there were several technologies called 3G) took just a few years, not enough to depreciate the old equipment by a huge margin.
Yeah, if you want to offer a better service, you just need to talk your government into granting you some channels at the eletromagnetic spectrum. Oh, wait, all of them are already granted? I guess you can't offer that better service.
Because due to the finite bandwidth of the spectrum, there is a fixed number of mobile telecom companies, that are choosen by the government. If all of them choose to not let you use their infrastructure the way you want, you can't choose another one.
There will probably be new AAAA games, made by different companies, that may or may not last longer than the current crop, but will start as nice indie companies with great games (just like the current ones did).
Life existing elsewhere still does not make it easy for inteligent (or should I say technological?) life to appear.
The Drake Equation is still useless like that, we have no idea what half the probabilities are, and any one of those can be so exceptionally small that the other ones being near 1 won't matter.
* This word brought to you by the Committee Against The Misuse Of The Word 'Exponentially'
Why so? If the probability of capture of one planet is p, of two planets is p^2, of three planets is p^3, and in the general case it is p^n, where n is the number of captured planets. Or, in other words, the odds decrease exponentialy.
At what point do I shrug and trust the new machine, vs calling up the ISP to get some info on the latest fingerprint change?
At no point. That is because there is no way for them to tell you the new key (or even that the key changed) whitout the possiblity it was forged. You shouldn't trust an email either.
The wrong thing here is that they are changing the keys. They shouldn't. If they have several servers pretending to be one, they should configure them to share the key and IP address.
Slashdot Mirror
Yep, but how do you decide that the cooling capacity is too low? Remember that it doesn't have a linear relationship with the temperature, and doesn't come on the manual.
You'll really have to test a batch of disks, correlate (cooling power, temperature) with longevity. And then, when your disks are already obsolete, you'll have enough data to gather conclusions from that test.
Well, if your bomb is strong enough, you can blow it enough for the center of mass to become irrelevant, as all debris will fly away from it. If it isn't that strong, you can still ensure you blow it into small enough pieces that it's surface to mass ratio is big enough for them to not survive reentry.
But the best option is probably just to propel the thing, you are right.
I don't know. If a receipt describing how to create the virus, and the knowledge that Nature does follow all those steps at random all the time isn't enough for you to belive that the virus could appear... Yeah, I can't think about anything that will convince you. You can repeat the experiment if you know how to handle such virus, that's the entire reason that "science" stuff works. Just make sure to not let it into the public.
You also don't belive on your history books, do you?
That study comproves that there was a wolf there, and goes into details on what to look for on that wolf (so we can find it faster), and how to protect against it. Oh, and incidentaly, it comes with a receipt on how to create your own lethal wolf.
The one thing you don't put in a system with a tight power envelope is an emulation layer. I doubt that has any practical application, but it is cool.
The difference is that physicists do physics research, where some words like "proof" and "solve" have different meanings from mathematical research.
For matematicians, yes it is.
Take a look at rdiff-backup. It easier to manage.
Quite likely. Also, no data is trusted above electoral data, thus the government can't use police's data for electoral porpouses.
Nope. The data is stored at the voting machine. There is a central database, but as you guessed, the voting machines are required to be able to work offline (they only connect into a network to send the results. Even then, it is just for antecipating things, the offline collected results are the ones that count).
It is anonymous if used correctly. The problem is that if you put people enforcing that each person gets out with just one paper, those people will be in a position to see the vote. If nobody is enforcing, people can get out with the three paper strips, and prove how they voted.
There are already procedures for dealing with them, as the fingerprints are already collected (just not by a machine).
That is hylarious. Yes, people will just show up in a line, holding handless fingers, and nobody will notice. They'll put that extra finger in a machine, in front of six random people, and none of them will see anything.
Yeah, now we have something. It is indeed arguable if this will provide any extra security, and there wasn't any wide discussion about that. But the cost is no big deal - the Government will colect everybody's fingerprint, again - thus, I'd classify it as low risk.
It is because of that anonimity requirement.
Anonimity makes it impossible to make a secure (in the mathematical sense) election. The best we can do is to make the flaws hard to exploit, what is a completely diferent problem from securing an ATM.
If the Brazilian Government was just a bit organized, it would already have the fingerprint of everybody. It already collects them, and several times. It is just one more collection.
By the way, I just don't get the antagony some people have about the government cadastrating people. No, it doen't lead to retriction of freedom, and is not necessary for that.
Heh, that's why everybody pulls emails now. Yes, it does use more boattery than real push, but modern phones can stand it. Besides, that was exactly the GP's point.
Yeah, accusing an insider of not having inside information is the way to go!
Part of the infrastrucutre was brought by the governemnt, but even that part most countries did sell, not give to the private initiative. Besides, on lots of places the infrastruture was severely underdimensionated, and needed an upgrade at the time.
Yes, all systems have a limited life span. Good telecom equipment usualy have a life span around 20 years, sometimes more. The evolution of analogic cellphones to the old digital ones (CDMA, TDMA), to GSM, to 3G (forgetting that there were several technologies called 3G) took just a few years, not enough to depreciate the old equipment by a huge margin.
Yeah, if you want to offer a better service, you just need to talk your government into granting you some channels at the eletromagnetic spectrum. Oh, wait, all of them are already granted? I guess you can't offer that better service.
Because due to the finite bandwidth of the spectrum, there is a fixed number of mobile telecom companies, that are choosen by the government. If all of them choose to not let you use their infrastructure the way you want, you can't choose another one.
Well, have you throwed an eink device from several meters hight, or hit it with a hammer?
Prone to cracking is relative.
It will all be fine if they clearly label their product with the warning: "May contain gluten".
There will probably be new AAAA games, made by different companies, that may or may not last longer than the current crop, but will start as nice indie companies with great games (just like the current ones did).
Since that would still be illegal, why would someone bother?
P.S. That's a shame. I was interested on the game.
Yep, point taken.
Life existing elsewhere still does not make it easy for inteligent (or should I say technological?) life to appear.
The Drake Equation is still useless like that, we have no idea what half the probabilities are, and any one of those can be so exceptionally small that the other ones being near 1 won't matter.
Why so? If the probability of capture of one planet is p, of two planets is p^2, of three planets is p^3, and in the general case it is p^n, where n is the number of captured planets. Or, in other words, the odds decrease exponentialy.
At no point. That is because there is no way for them to tell you the new key (or even that the key changed) whitout the possiblity it was forged. You shouldn't trust an email either.
The wrong thing here is that they are changing the keys. They shouldn't. If they have several servers pretending to be one, they should configure them to share the key and IP address.