The episode in question was more about the balance of terror, with the terror taken out. (Yes, I know, "Balance of Terror" was a different, and IMHO far superior episode. Try to keep on topic.)
A few killbots on a hostile border aren't Armageddon's heralds. Talk to me about Dead Hand or other launch-on-warning or guaranteed retaliation automata and we'll have a good analogy to "A Taste of Armageddon".
Yeah. I always liked Vernor Vinge's concept of a "programmer-archaeologist", and his idea that the codebase of a starfaring trade civilization millenia in the future will still have components and artifacts dating back to Unix Version 1. MS Windows has received a lot of bad press in geekdom for perceived unnecessary legacy support ("holding it back and perpetuating old bugs and bad design decisions"), but Unix legacy support practically makes Microsoft a piker.
Unless you're 12 now, that happened too long ago for the Web 2.0 Blogosphere to have become your injustice-exposing savior.
Yes, nowadays, it would be news. And probably a kdawson submission here. And a delightful source of discussion between laissez-faire libertarians and social-justice greenies. Or something.
Just so you know, you're arguing with a fictitious example, since I'm pretty sure neither you nor GigaplexNZ "rocked the SAT" in the 99th percentile.
And, I'd further argue, if you took the SAT after two years of college math, "UR DOIN IT RONG" (in the immortal words of Ceiling Cat). Hell, if we wanna lay on unrealistic and irrelevant provisos, let's go one step beyond and say that if you had the entire answer key to the test, you would certainly score in the 99th percentile in math too.
How did this "blogger" (also being accused of being a mercenary consultant) get hands on the prototype? Was this a pre-release review unit provided to a media member? Found in a bar restroom a la iPhone 4? Corporate espionage?
I suspect it was the first case. It wouldn't be the first time a manufacturer pulled a review prototype after they came to believe the reviewer wasn't either (A) going to be particularly favorable, or (B) was going to do something beyond just reviewing the phone, like give competitors a peek.
Either you're trolling or you don't comprehend the difference between hashing, encryption, and compression.
You display a practical understanding of compression: output size is proportionate to input size. But again, since compression algorithms work in blocks or streams of data, there's no theoretical limit to input size. Things like filesystem file size limits may apply, but again, if it's a stream compression with a stream input (e.g., network socket) and a stream output (ditto), there's no limit (other than externals like the finite lifespan of the Universe).
Encryption's affect on size is different than compression. Without padding, encryption output size should be the same as input size. Many algorithms do pad short inputs, so there may be a small increase in output size. Again, since ciphers can operate in stream modes, there are no inherent limits (other than, for instance, available one-time-pad data for OTP ciphers.)
Hashing, on the other hand, is in essence an extremely fancy checksum, specifically designed to use cryptographic functions in order to radically increase the likelihood that the hash value derived from any particular input is relatively unique (i.e., the hash of a particular input is radically different from the hash of another particular input which is almost identical to the first--small differences in input yield obvious differences in output.)
Checksums are, by practical definition, fixed-size, and that size is much smaller than the majority of the potential inputs. The classic checksum is a single check digit: (running total of input) mod 10. Cryptographic hashes (such as MD5--which stands for Message Digest Algorithm 5, btw) are defined to be 128 bits. No matter how long the input is, the MD5 algorithm always produces a 128-bit output, because it iteratively processes bytes of the input 128 bits at a time.
C'mon. You mean to tell me I can take the collected works of Harry Potter and boil them down to a 128 bit MD5 number? Wow that's some amazing test compression. Even ZIP isn't that good!
It's not compression. Compression requires reversibility. Hashes are, by definition, not reversible: a "trap door function". The idea is that you can take an input and digest it into a 128-bit number which relatively uniquely represents it, but you can't reverse the 128-bit number and recover the original input. That would be foolish: "I'll reverse the hash, edit the text, re-hash it, and send it on its way; no one will be the wiser."
You've missed an important point. The FTC mandate has nothing to do with cable TV.
Quote from your cited website: "Analog-only TVs should continue to work as before with cable and satellite TV services, gaming consoles, VCRs, DVD players, and similar products."
Whatever Comcast is doing in this scenario, it absolutely has nothing to do with the mandated switch to digital over-the-air broadcast, which took effect 16 months ago.
Most people are aware that high explosives generate powerful and destructive shockwaves, and can fling shrapnel for startling distances at frightening velocities. However, they'll still watch Mythbusters, because actually seeing high explosives demonstrated is cool.
Anyone who doesn't find a real-world demonstration of social engineering fascinating and instructive is either waaaay too jaded, or is trying waaaay too hard to pose as being jaded because of a mistaken association between cynicism and cool.
Besides, a reminder of the ongoing effectiveness of social engineering is always good, especially in light of all the interesting vectors now available.
Not parallel (except in the sense as the original article's author's: "Any DB25 must be a parallel port")... but there's this. Old-sk00l Macintosh DB25 SCSI to 10Base2 or 10BaseT. I use one on my Mac SE for TCP/IP and Ethertalk on my LAN at home. It works quite well.
I think if he made it a IP interface over serial and then used the DEC as a graphical terminal to the netbook that would be more interesting.
That would be interesting. Especially since TCP/IP is flatly impossible with an out-of-the-box serial terminal, such as a VT320.
At best, it would have to be a lame-o casemod ("I have put this micro-ITX motherboard and an LCD display into the gutted case of a former VT320"). And that would render the matter uninteresting again.
In an upcoming iOS release, when an iPhone drops a call, its display will either blame the party at the other end ("<contact name> hung up") or randomly select oan excuse from a large internal database which includes such factors as "solar flares" or "interference generated by Android devices nearby".
Thomas Edison: Brilliant! The same Thomas Edison who fought AC power distribution well beyond the point of its having been proven superior and actually successfully deployed in numerous cities?
Einstein: Brilliant! The scientist who fought quantum mechanics to his last breath, in the face of some outstanding theoretical work to the contrary? The man who actually said "I, at any rate, am convinced that [God] does not throw dice." because he completely distrusted the statistical, seemingly random, nature of quantum physics?
These men are actually some of my heroes, and were since my childhood. But never forget, they're human, and that means they can wind up irrationally invested in their own opinions and beliefs, especially if the state of their art has moved on without them.
If "brilliant" means "mentally flexible enough to change a strongly held opinion in the face of strong evidence", very few human beings are brilliant.
Only the nuttiest of cyber-utopians would suggest that the "wisdom of crowds" holds up particularly well when part of the crowd is engaged in deliberate sabotage.
Yes. To paraphrase Tolkien, "It does not do to leave a live troll out of your calculations, if you post near him."
Never mind the tribes of trolls overrunning teh Intarwebs 2.0.
Because the Google Maps trip directions you worked out for Grandma isn't going to help her get to Sarasota unless you print it out, or give her your iPad. And if you've swallowed your nausea down well enough to buy an iPad, you probably don't want to give it to someone else, even if temporarily.
So in your world a bully is "nice" by punching a guy in the arm instead of the nose?
Since we're using metaphors of violence, let's use one which is faintly on-topic. Unlike yours.
"Nice" is using rock salt in my shotgun as I run trespassers off my posted property, instead of 00 steel.
The only element of unreality in this analogy is the whole "deadly force" thing for simple trespassing. I can't think of any real-life jurisdictions which permit that level of violence for property trespass, whereas the civil and criminal consequences of IP trespass, while not literally deadly, can seem so disproportionate that it would be a fiscal death penalty for any small company or individual.
You do understand that "Jew" is not actually a race in any anthropologically-significant manner? It's a religion and a non-biologic social identity, characterized primarily by religious faith (opinions) and practice (behavior) and resulting cultural environment?
You probably should rethink your position on this.
Slashdot Mirror
The episode in question was more about the balance of terror, with the terror taken out. (Yes, I know, "Balance of Terror" was a different, and IMHO far superior episode. Try to keep on topic.)
A few killbots on a hostile border aren't Armageddon's heralds. Talk to me about Dead Hand or other launch-on-warning or guaranteed retaliation automata and we'll have a good analogy to "A Taste of Armageddon".
You do understand that Mythbusters has a substantially higher budget than the DPRK, don't you?
And, as far as I can tell, better engineers. Except maybe for Tory.
Anyway, it's just a e-mail address, it's public.
Boldly stated, Soilworker (795251) (email not shown publicly)
Now you're just being repetitive.
You only need an account for uploading, posting comments, and viewing/downloading porn torrents.
Well, there's your problem!
Or, more specifically, there's why the hack yielded 4 million users when a great deal of the torrents are available without registration.
Yeah. I always liked Vernor Vinge's concept of a "programmer-archaeologist", and his idea that the codebase of a starfaring trade civilization millenia in the future will still have components and artifacts dating back to Unix Version 1. MS Windows has received a lot of bad press in geekdom for perceived unnecessary legacy support ("holding it back and perpetuating old bugs and bad design decisions"), but Unix legacy support practically makes Microsoft a piker.
Unless you're 12 now, that happened too long ago for the Web 2.0 Blogosphere to have become your injustice-exposing savior.
Yes, nowadays, it would be news. And probably a kdawson submission here. And a delightful source of discussion between laissez-faire libertarians and social-justice greenies. Or something.
Just so you know, you're arguing with a fictitious example, since I'm pretty sure neither you nor GigaplexNZ "rocked the SAT" in the 99th percentile.
And, I'd further argue, if you took the SAT after two years of college math, "UR DOIN IT RONG" (in the immortal words of Ceiling Cat). Hell, if we wanna lay on unrealistic and irrelevant provisos, let's go one step beyond and say that if you had the entire answer key to the test, you would certainly score in the 99th percentile in math too.
How did this "blogger" (also being accused of being a mercenary consultant) get hands on the prototype? Was this a pre-release review unit provided to a media member? Found in a bar restroom a la iPhone 4? Corporate espionage?
I suspect it was the first case. It wouldn't be the first time a manufacturer pulled a review prototype after they came to believe the reviewer wasn't either (A) going to be particularly favorable, or (B) was going to do something beyond just reviewing the phone, like give competitors a peek.
Well, it worked for Google, didn't it? They proclaim "Don't be evil" and by cracky, they're not evil!
Next subject: how to get <sarcasm> recognized in Slashcode.
Sheesh.
Either you're trolling or you don't comprehend the difference between hashing, encryption, and compression.
You display a practical understanding of compression: output size is proportionate to input size. But again, since compression algorithms work in blocks or streams of data, there's no theoretical limit to input size. Things like filesystem file size limits may apply, but again, if it's a stream compression with a stream input (e.g., network socket) and a stream output (ditto), there's no limit (other than externals like the finite lifespan of the Universe).
Encryption's affect on size is different than compression. Without padding, encryption output size should be the same as input size. Many algorithms do pad short inputs, so there may be a small increase in output size. Again, since ciphers can operate in stream modes, there are no inherent limits (other than, for instance, available one-time-pad data for OTP ciphers.)
Hashing, on the other hand, is in essence an extremely fancy checksum, specifically designed to use cryptographic functions in order to radically increase the likelihood that the hash value derived from any particular input is relatively unique (i.e., the hash of a particular input is radically different from the hash of another particular input which is almost identical to the first--small differences in input yield obvious differences in output.)
Checksums are, by practical definition, fixed-size, and that size is much smaller than the majority of the potential inputs. The classic checksum is a single check digit: (running total of input) mod 10. Cryptographic hashes (such as MD5--which stands for Message Digest Algorithm 5, btw) are defined to be 128 bits. No matter how long the input is, the MD5 algorithm always produces a 128-bit output, because it iteratively processes bytes of the input 128 bits at a time.
C'mon. You mean to tell me I can take the collected works of Harry Potter and boil them down to a 128 bit MD5 number? Wow that's some amazing test compression. Even ZIP isn't that good!
It's not compression. Compression requires reversibility. Hashes are, by definition, not reversible: a "trap door function". The idea is that you can take an input and digest it into a 128-bit number which relatively uniquely represents it, but you can't reverse the 128-bit number and recover the original input. That would be foolish: "I'll reverse the hash, edit the text, re-hash it, and send it on its way; no one will be the wiser."
You've missed an important point. The FTC mandate has nothing to do with cable TV.
Quote from your cited website: "Analog-only TVs should continue to work as before with cable and satellite TV services, gaming consoles, VCRs, DVD players, and similar products."
Whatever Comcast is doing in this scenario, it absolutely has nothing to do with the mandated switch to digital over-the-air broadcast, which took effect 16 months ago.
Most people are aware that high explosives generate powerful and destructive shockwaves, and can fling shrapnel for startling distances at frightening velocities. However, they'll still watch Mythbusters, because actually seeing high explosives demonstrated is cool.
Anyone who doesn't find a real-world demonstration of social engineering fascinating and instructive is either waaaay too jaded, or is trying waaaay too hard to pose as being jaded because of a mistaken association between cynicism and cool.
Besides, a reminder of the ongoing effectiveness of social engineering is always good, especially in light of all the interesting vectors now available.
Not parallel (except in the sense as the original article's author's: "Any DB25 must be a parallel port")... but there's this. Old-sk00l Macintosh DB25 SCSI to 10Base2 or 10BaseT. I use one on my Mac SE for TCP/IP and Ethertalk on my LAN at home. It works quite well.
I think if he made it a IP interface over serial and then used the DEC as a graphical terminal to the netbook that would be more interesting.
That would be interesting. Especially since TCP/IP is flatly impossible with an out-of-the-box serial terminal, such as a VT320.
At best, it would have to be a lame-o casemod ("I have put this micro-ITX motherboard and an LCD display into the gutted case of a former VT320"). And that would render the matter uninteresting again.
Yeah, Apple's working on that too.
In an upcoming iOS release, when an iPhone drops a call, its display will either blame the party at the other end ("<contact name> hung up") or randomly select oan excuse from a large internal database which includes such factors as "solar flares" or "interference generated by Android devices nearby".
Thomas Edison: Brilliant!
The same Thomas Edison who fought AC power distribution well beyond the point of its having been proven superior and actually successfully deployed in numerous cities?
Einstein: Brilliant!
The scientist who fought quantum mechanics to his last breath, in the face of some outstanding theoretical work to the contrary? The man who actually said "I, at any rate, am convinced that [God] does not throw dice." because he completely distrusted the statistical, seemingly random, nature of quantum physics?
These men are actually some of my heroes, and were since my childhood. But never forget, they're human, and that means they can wind up irrationally invested in their own opinions and beliefs, especially if the state of their art has moved on without them.
If "brilliant" means "mentally flexible enough to change a strongly held opinion in the face of strong evidence", very few human beings are brilliant.
Only the nuttiest of cyber-utopians would suggest that the "wisdom of crowds" holds up particularly well when part of the crowd is engaged in deliberate sabotage.
Yes. To paraphrase Tolkien, "It does not do to leave a live troll out of your calculations, if you post near him."
Never mind the tribes of trolls overrunning teh Intarwebs 2.0.
Because the Google Maps trip directions you worked out for Grandma isn't going to help her get to Sarasota unless you print it out, or give her your iPad. And if you've swallowed your nausea down well enough to buy an iPad, you probably don't want to give it to someone else, even if temporarily.
So in your world a bully is "nice" by punching a guy in the arm instead of the nose?
Since we're using metaphors of violence, let's use one which is faintly on-topic. Unlike yours.
"Nice" is using rock salt in my shotgun as I run trespassers off my posted property, instead of 00 steel.
The only element of unreality in this analogy is the whole "deadly force" thing for simple trespassing. I can't think of any real-life jurisdictions which permit that level of violence for property trespass, whereas the civil and criminal consequences of IP trespass, while not literally deadly, can seem so disproportionate that it would be a fiscal death penalty for any small company or individual.
But structurally, I think the analogy works.
True. I hate fighting packs of zombines more than anything else, except for maybe Hunter packs.
They had a database. One careless SQL injection later and they had "DROP'ped TABLES;" and that was that for the database.
link, if you didn't recognize the joke.
You do understand that "Jew" is not actually a race in any anthropologically-significant manner? It's a religion and a non-biologic social identity, characterized primarily by religious faith (opinions) and practice (behavior) and resulting cultural environment?
You probably should rethink your position on this.
The problem isn't race hate. The problem is hate.
This seems structurally comparable to the legal and moral frou-frou over running MacOS on non-Apple hardware.
Discuss.
That was supposed to say 2m.
And it did. It said "2 meters". (or 2/3 of 3M, if for some reason you were referring to a majority fraction of Minnesota Mining and Manufacturing Company).
Greek letter. like, mu? as in micro? as in ?<--note the missing letter
Slashdot doesn't accept either the unicode or HTML entity for any of the Greek alphabet, as far as I can tell.
Makes many scientific discussions pretty difficult, really. That's the ol' Slashdot we know and love.