it reminds me too much about that incident of a political entity trying to forbid the dangerous substance dihydromonoxide, AKA water. Is that really neccessary on/. now?!
Will there be measures in place that prevent the massive privacy problems of a fixed IP? I mean, it sounds a bit ugly to have anything I'll ever search or browse directly and eternally linked to my name/IP, with every website operator knowing who does what when on their sites? (Apart from larger entities such as goverments,...). Right now, I can in most cases hide behind a/24.
This question is partly rhetorical, as I don't think that this will be the case. But if anyone here knows about recent developments in this area, I'd be glad to hear!
People engaged in insipid, useless, self-referential activities are not just 'playing a different game'. They're playing a dumb game, demonstrably. But they get the chicks!
No, I don't know for sure. But that's not what anybody wants to hear. And that's not what anybody will report in the press. That's not what politicians base decisions on. The overwhelming majority of times you see science misused as you stated above its by companies/politicians/people taking scientific data and theory and restating it as scientific fact.
Thank you!
To add to this: I think a lot of the aversion against science by parts of the population stems from the misinterpration of "true" in the scientific sense not only as common-sense "true" (as the other poster said), but with an inherent opinion. This may be a bad example, but consider the fuss about whether man descends from the apes. People attack this (scientific fact) - they feel that they are somehow worth less because of this link. It seems that those people feel degraded to animals by the 'arrogant scientist'.
Fiber optic cables will still have less noise, less loss and the ability to put a bunch of them into a conduit to increase capacity. Probably very true:)
But also consider that a fiberless link can get (or is, in the case of WiFi) ridiculously cheap compared to a fiber. And with FSO, anyone that sees any other one can form a link. Two cheap devices (with the proper economy of scale) on each end, ready. With fiber, you have do invest a lot in digging up the streets, the fibers itself etc.
A different Internet without anything on it that people want.
But hey, it'll be fun to watch....
If you see major inconveniences and billions of $/EUR GDP burned for completely idiotic reasons as fun, then, yes it's fun.
As a european, I have a vested interest that things stay as they are with ICANN under US 'control'. This is especially true if there is not a real reason to change anything in this regard. There are problems, they should be addressed (DNS games, needed IPv6 transition etc.) etc., but in a democratic manner!
I can imagine the classical image of a bunch of eurocrats, us-o-crats and unocrats making mafia-like deals in a dimly lit room full of cigar smoke. YUCK.
One can presume to "take control" of the DNS "root servers," but there's nothing preventing someone else from creating their own set. Who wins depends strictly upon which set the individual networks point to, and no one has control over that decision except the individual network admins.
REALLY NOTHING to control?!
I can imagine that bought law makers will enact something that will:
- centralise RFC and standards writing. A single body like the ITU will do it that can be lobbied for 'certain changes', e.g. patented protocols. Not that the ITU is inherently evil, they do good things, too... - force certain protocol types, 'good internet behaviour' (think: DRM 'enabled' IP) - force 'standard applications', 'certified applications' - make monitoring all internet traffic mandatory (They're already working on this; see e.g. this article).
- I'm an european, a supporter of the EU idea and, in this context, usually pro-government in the sense that some competition rules and standards should be set (e.g. telcos should serve rural areas etc). But: 1. My support for the EU organization as it is faded alot as I watched the SWPAT issues progress. Even if the directive did not succeed, I saw very undemocratic, lobbied law making detached from the population, something that should not be possible would the EU be truly democratic. 2. The UN, EU and US seem to be equally corrupted in this area. 3. The internet works as it is. Surely some quirks exist, but I don't see anything that could not be resolved by the people/engineers. I find it highly suspect that there are people trying to push for changes without any real need.
Your post sounds very optimistic to me, I hope you're at least partly right. However, consider such documents as The Digital Imprimatur, which I believe, are now more on-topic than ever.
Having no formal education in planetology does not stop me to spout nonsense on slashdot:
But the first picture looks like there was just big collision (old big crater) followed by lots of small collisions, without any erosion in between. I *think* I have seen similar features on the moon. To have this picture is nonetheless an astonishing accomplishment.
I think that simply the lighting makes this view impressive:)
While that's probably the safest way to implement TCP/IP tansmission to multiple destination addresses, it has several shortcomings. Some are provider dependent (it's not widespread, and some providers only have provider-local multicasting), some are structural (the number of multicasting addresses is quite small).
I'm trying again and again to do what you do here - trying to infect others with the multicast meme:-) But, seriously, the next generation IP protocol IPv6 makes multicast, AFAIK, mandatory. So we need it and a lot of the P2P applications are no longer neccessary. And that'd be good!
It's not a perfect solution, but I'm willing to take acceptable risks to get around the fact that I need over 40 passwords for my job/personal life. Well, for some passwords I even have a text file, especially for the 100+ web accounts that are not really important but still somehow neccessary. Of course, one needs to be realistic here:)
So for example, a Dell Trinitron monitor, her password becomes trinitron. She picks up brand names from things associated with her work area or things around the house, and uses it once. Ok, you have a very valid reason for not making your girlfriend's name public. And is not because you don't really have one:-)
I use Password Safe on a USB pen drive. It has a master password that it uses to encrypt all my other passwords in a tidy MFC application.
You use the USB pen drive because you want to have your passwords portable? Do you use it only on computers installed by yourself?
What if the PC you use your decryption APP has a password logger installed?
I think that a cheap pocket database/organizer would be a better way to store password. Attaching a cable to get a dump of the database's flash memory is still a bit harder than using a hw/sw key logger. If the organizer encrypts everything with your master password, the situation is even better.
Re:Just use your Social Security number.
on
Too Many Passwords
·
· Score: 1
You're just trying to obfuscate the fact that 880782 is your general password!
Yes, that would be nice... but thanks to competition in software standards there are probably at leas a hundred system like your GPG form. And they all work as well. But because they are different, you still need many different passwords.
While only a small percentage of rainwater contains atoms of deuterium, the lightning still provides enough energy to create fusion events.
Of course, the next interesting thing to do would be creating artificial lightning in a heavy water atmosphere... maybe this even has practical (neutron generation) uses?
But someone must have done this already. I'm to lazy to google-research this. Are there any such experiments?
Slashdot Mirror
it reminds me too much about that incident of a political entity trying to forbid the dangerous substance dihydromonoxide, AKA water. /. now?!
Is that really neccessary on
Will there be measures in place that prevent the massive privacy problems of a fixed IP? I mean, it sounds a bit ugly to have anything I'll ever search or browse directly and eternally linked to my name/IP, with every website operator knowing who does what when on their sites? (Apart from larger entities such as goverments, ...). /24.
Right now, I can in most cases hide behind a
This question is partly rhetorical, as I don't think that this will be the case. But if anyone here knows about recent developments in this area, I'd be glad to hear!
Maybe you're actively posting about this on the other one? :D
Obscenity by definition is neither porn nor protected speech.
And I could, as a german/european, state:
Hate speech by definition is neither political nor protected speech.
Of course, the line has to be drawn somewhere, as I wouldn't consider slander protected speech.
But I'd rather live with a) hate speech and b) obscenity on the internet than any forced 'anti-smut glasses' by a 'well-meaning government'. Yuck!
Also, consider that it a) is good to know your enemy and b) people have strange interests, but that is none of my/your business.
People engaged in insipid, useless, self-referential activities are not just 'playing a different game'. They're playing a dumb game, demonstrably.
But they get the chicks!
Yes, and she really needs to sing underwater for the pressure, as the loudest sound possible in air (STP) is 194dB.
For example, see here.
This article being the most obvious example. :-P
Do you have evidence for this? References???
No, I don't know for sure. But that's not what anybody wants to hear. And that's not what anybody will report in the press. That's not what politicians base decisions on. The overwhelming majority of times you see science misused as you stated above its by companies/politicians/people taking scientific data and theory and restating it as scientific fact.
Thank you!
To add to this: I think a lot of the aversion against science by parts of the population stems from the misinterpration of "true" in the scientific sense not only as common-sense "true" (as the other poster said), but with an inherent opinion.
This may be a bad example, but consider the fuss about whether man descends from the apes. People attack this (scientific fact) - they feel that they are somehow worth less because of this link. It seems that those people feel degraded to animals by the 'arrogant scientist'.
Fiber optic cables will still have less noise, less loss and the ability to put a bunch of them into a conduit to increase capacity. :)
Probably very true
But also consider that a fiberless link can get (or is, in the case of WiFi) ridiculously cheap compared to a fiber. And with FSO, anyone that sees any other one can form a link. Two cheap devices (with the proper economy of scale) on each end, ready.
With fiber, you have do invest a lot in digging up the streets, the fibers itself etc.
Well, then let's use free space optical wireless mesh networks. Practically no interference, no broad antenna beams etc.
:|
There are very cheap, homebrew solutions.
I'm proposing this for YEARS now, sadly finding anyone who is willing to build such a thing (even in a city) is a complicated *social* effort
A different Internet without anything on it that people want.
But hey, it'll be fun to watch....
If you see major inconveniences and billions of $/EUR GDP burned for completely idiotic reasons as fun, then, yes it's fun.
As a european, I have a vested interest that things stay as they are with ICANN under US 'control'. This is especially true if there is not a real reason to change anything in this regard. There are problems, they should be addressed (DNS games, needed IPv6 transition etc.) etc., but in a democratic manner!
I can imagine the classical image of a bunch of eurocrats, us-o-crats and unocrats making mafia-like deals in a dimly lit room full of cigar smoke. YUCK.
One can presume to "take control" of the DNS "root servers," but there's nothing preventing someone else from creating their own set. Who wins depends strictly upon which set the individual networks point to, and no one has control over that decision except the individual network admins.
REALLY NOTHING to control?!
I can imagine that bought law makers will enact something that will:
- centralise RFC and standards writing. A single body like the ITU will do it that can be lobbied for 'certain changes', e.g. patented protocols. Not that the ITU is inherently evil, they do good things, too...
- force certain protocol types, 'good internet behaviour' (think: DRM 'enabled' IP)
- force 'standard applications', 'certified applications'
- make monitoring all internet traffic mandatory (They're already working on this; see e.g. this article).
- I'm an european, a supporter of the EU idea and, in this context, usually pro-government in the sense that some competition rules and standards should be set (e.g. telcos should serve rural areas etc).
But:
1. My support for the EU organization as it is faded alot as I watched the SWPAT issues progress. Even if the directive did not succeed, I saw very undemocratic, lobbied law making detached from the population, something that should not be possible would the EU be truly democratic.
2. The UN, EU and US seem to be equally corrupted in this area.
3. The internet works as it is. Surely some quirks exist, but I don't see anything that could not be resolved by the people/engineers. I find it highly suspect that there are people trying to push for changes without any real need.
Mod parent up, he should approximately be right.
:)
Of course, one could elaborate more on this Fermi-like problem, but I don't that'd be neccessary
Your post sounds very optimistic to me, I hope you're at least partly right. However, consider such documents as The Digital Imprimatur, which I believe, are now more on-topic than ever.
Having no formal education in planetology does not stop me to spout nonsense on slashdot:
:)
But the first picture looks like there was just big collision (old big crater) followed by lots of small collisions, without any erosion in between. I *think* I have seen similar features on the moon.
To have this picture is nonetheless an astonishing accomplishment.
I think that simply the lighting makes this view impressive
While that's probably the safest way to implement TCP/IP tansmission to multiple destination addresses, it has several shortcomings. Some are provider dependent (it's not widespread, and some providers only have provider-local multicasting), some are structural (the number of multicasting addresses is quite small).
:-)
I'm trying again and again to do what you do here - trying to infect others with the multicast meme
But, seriously, the next generation IP protocol IPv6 makes multicast, AFAIK, mandatory. So we need it and a lot of the P2P applications are no longer neccessary. And that'd be good!
It's not a perfect solution, but I'm willing to take acceptable risks to get around the fact that I need over 40 passwords for my job/personal life. :)
Well, for some passwords I even have a text file, especially for the 100+ web accounts that are not really important but still somehow neccessary. Of course, one needs to be realistic here
If you can't beat 'em, join 'em.
But, hiding in a thick container of tin foil, I would add: Until we have the means in place to kill FOSS.
Are you selling tupperware?
So for example, a Dell Trinitron monitor, her password becomes trinitron. She picks up brand names from things associated with her work area or things around the house, and uses it once. :-)
Ok, you have a very valid reason for not making your girlfriend's name public. And is not because you don't really have one
I use Password Safe on a USB pen drive. It has a master password that it uses to encrypt all my other passwords in a tidy MFC application.
You use the USB pen drive because you want to have your passwords portable? Do you use it only on computers installed by yourself?
What if the PC you use your decryption APP has a password logger installed?
I think that a cheap pocket database/organizer would be a better way to store password. Attaching a cable to get a dump of the database's flash memory is still a bit harder than using a hw/sw key logger. If the organizer encrypts everything with your master password, the situation is even better.
You're just trying to obfuscate the fact that 880782 is your general password!
Yes, that would be nice... but thanks to competition in software standards there are probably at leas a hundred system like your GPG form. And they all work as well. But because they are different, you still need many different passwords.
While only a small percentage of rainwater contains atoms of deuterium, the lightning still provides enough energy to create fusion events.
Of course, the next interesting thing to do would be creating artificial lightning in a heavy water atmosphere... maybe this even has practical (neutron generation) uses?
But someone must have done this already. I'm to lazy to google-research this. Are there any such experiments?
Not very much reduced. The set of mobile phones which frequently move between my home and the corner of the university where I work is very small.
Therefore I said and also meant anonymized and not pseudonymized. I did not say 'phone ID# XYZ moved from A to B'.
Of course, if this ID# XYZ is unique to the phone or the SIM card, correlation to other data may in some cases be possible.