The standards (sorry - I am only familiar with one side of the UWB arena) define security measures: 1. All traffic is encrypted. 2. There are anti-replay counters. 3. There are multiple-key exchanges. 4. A method for ensuring devices can't be "impersonated".
Don't get me wrong - I don't believe these measures are going to help. The only thing that's going to ensure your data's safety from prying eyes, is if you are sufficiently paranoid.
It's like the thing with viruses - you put an anti-virus on your PC, and think it's OK? I don't. I admit it - I am paranoid, but I know I am not paranoid enough.
Well, the UWB contenders both promise a secure channel for each participating device. Overhead? HW will take care of that part. The overhead will be in silicon, just a bit.
And anyway, with UWB output power limits, you'd need to be very close to have a chance to pick it up. Normal range is going to be up to 10 meters (just short of 11 yards).
Say, what about those guys who sold us plots of land on the moon? Do you think if they crash it in my plot I can sue them?
Has anyone else considered this?
(Both serious and funny replies are welcome).
I had a CT scan done, and they found I have 3 protruding discs. This is one step before a burst disc. For those who might not know the difference, a protruding disc is when the disc has shifted, or becomes twiseted and loses its correct shape. This may cause the protrusion to put pressure on a nerve, causing pain, including pain radiating to the lower limbs.
A burst disc is when the disc has ruptured and the fluid filling of the disc itself is pouring out of the disc and into the dural cavity. This is usually accompanied by extreme pain because the disc is no longer able to support the pressure between the two verterbra, and these crush the remains of the disc and rub against each other.
Personally, I went to the best chiropractor I know of (I have an appointment today, too). In my case, I came to him for the first time and I was unable to tie my own shoelaces. I also had some parasthesia (partial loss of feeling) in my lower left leg.
After about 10-12 treatments, I have almost no pain at all. My suggestions:
First go see a doctor. Get a lower back X-Ray done. If you're worried about radiation, you can skip this.
Go see a chiropractor. They work wonders even if you don't have a serious problem like mine yet. They prefer to see the X-Ray mentioned above.
Don't hesitate to ask for a better chair from the company you work for. They tend to help.
And swim, at least 30 minutes 3 times a week. It doesn't matter what style, but maybe you should avoid butterfly style.
Gates should not be #1 on the list, but not just because I (or we) don't like him. His influence on the world became significant only a decade ago.
It's like many radio stations around the globe that are running a Chart of the Century or some such endeavour. Do you think today's char tops won't appear there just because their time-wise proximity blinds the voters? Of course some of them will.
Being from Israel, it is nice to see Rabin at the top, but believe it or not, IMHO he doesn't qualify. His effect on this century is smaller than Hitler's. Being a Jew as well, this is hard for me to say, but nonetheless true.
So how do we choose? Each of us can either follow the instructions as best we can, and try to assess in our own opinions who had the most influence on this century.
The other thing we could do (and some of us do this), is to take a dominant figure in a certain field, who influenced our own lives a lot and vote for this person.
Is there another way? Of course. We could always try to look at the consequences of choosing a certain person for "Man of the Century". Undoubtedly a bad title, because such titles are rarely used to say anything other than "Good Man of the Century". Choosing someone like Madonna, Hitler, or other might cause the people of the 21st century look back at us and say "How could they choose this person?" Not too many would bother finding out that Hitler was chosen because the definition called for "for better or worse influenced...".
And so we are stuck. Because as computer people, we have this tendency towards following the instructions literally (almost too much so). But we already understand that the consequences of this may not be to our liking.
IMHO, this means that we (computer geeks) need to grow up a little more. We must have some sort of life outside the computer, if we are to choose the person who most influenced the century - life existed outside the computer for more than 70% of this century, after all...
IMHO, the risk of hungry lawyers turning to security-related lawsuits once the Y2K issues are over seems high. Menacingly high, in fact. Lawyers have this ability to turn simple things into gigantic monsters. Put a lawyer to start working on security-related cases and one of them will likely make all of us look like the Devil incarnate through misunderstanding of the difference between Hacker and Cracker. But what can we do? I think we need to keep working hard at plugging the difference between Hacker and Cracker into the public awareness. If we don't do this job well enough, we might end up seeing unfortunate cases of public-opinion turning against us. Since I aspire to be a representative of Better_Operating_Systems.org and a member of the Open Source movement, I don't like that idea... Has anyone any idea just how well the public understands the Hacker/Cracker difference? How much work do we have in this field? Perhaps we can harness the Net itself to find out. Maybe a poll in the right place, or a letter to everyone you know asking them to ask their family and neighbors to see if they understand the difference... We ought to get started.
This actually makes us think about a very important issue. Where do we draw the line? Consider the following. What if a person sends an email message confessing that he purchased a gun, and intends to murder a certain person. In many countries of the world, this constitutes reasonable cause for arrest and interrogation. Personally, I think that privacy is more important, because what AOL is doing has only one outcome: People should start ditching their AOL accounts. If the courts rule in favor of service providers who disclose such informations, people will start forming their own "black-market" networks to avoid these firms. Just like open source is doing to commercial software. In light of what we see, perhaps we should start forming those free network services to rival AOL right now...
Slashdot Mirror
The standards (sorry - I am only familiar with one side of the UWB arena) define security measures:
;-)
1. All traffic is encrypted.
2. There are anti-replay counters.
3. There are multiple-key exchanges.
4. A method for ensuring devices can't be "impersonated".
Don't get me wrong - I don't believe these measures are going to help. The only thing that's going to ensure your data's safety from prying eyes, is if you are sufficiently paranoid.
It's like the thing with viruses - you put an anti-virus on your PC, and think it's OK? I don't. I admit it - I am paranoid, but I know I am not paranoid enough.
I say - paranoia will keep you safe
There are 2 competing groups:
.5Gbps at up to 10 meters range.
i) Motorola-side, using "Direct Sequence Spread-Spectrum".
ii) Intel (MBOA), using a different method.
Both promise about
GGF
Well, the UWB contenders both promise a secure channel for each participating device. Overhead? HW will take care of that part. The overhead will be in silicon, just a bit.
And anyway, with UWB output power limits, you'd need to be very close to have a chance to pick it up. Normal range is going to be up to 10 meters (just short of 11 yards).
The rates will be up to 480Mbps.
GGF
Say, what about those guys who sold us plots of land on the moon? Do you think if they crash it in my plot I can sue them?
Has anyone else considered this?
(Both serious and funny replies are welcome).
A burst disc is when the disc has ruptured and the fluid filling of the disc itself is pouring out of the disc and into the dural cavity. This is usually accompanied by extreme pain because the disc is no longer able to support the pressure between the two verterbra, and these crush the remains of the disc and rub against each other.
Personally, I went to the best chiropractor I know of (I have an appointment today, too). In my case, I came to him for the first time and I was unable to tie my own shoelaces. I also had some parasthesia (partial loss of feeling) in my lower left leg.
After about 10-12 treatments, I have almost no pain at all. My suggestions:
Hope this helps someone.
Gates should not be #1 on the list, but not just because I (or we) don't like him. His influence on the world became significant only a decade ago.
It's like many radio stations around the globe that are running a Chart of the Century or some such endeavour. Do you think today's char tops won't appear there just because their time-wise proximity blinds the voters? Of course some of them will.
Being from Israel, it is nice to see Rabin at the top, but believe it or not, IMHO he doesn't qualify. His effect on this century is smaller than Hitler's. Being a Jew as well, this is hard for me to say, but nonetheless true.
So how do we choose? Each of us can either follow the instructions as best we can, and try to assess in our own opinions who had the most influence on this century.
The other thing we could do (and some of us do this), is to take a dominant figure in a certain field, who influenced our own lives a lot and vote for this person.
Is there another way? Of course. We could always try to look at the consequences of choosing a certain person for "Man of the Century". Undoubtedly a bad title, because such titles are rarely used to say anything other than "Good Man of the Century". Choosing someone like Madonna, Hitler, or other might cause the people of the 21st century look back at us and say "How could they choose this person?" Not too many would bother finding out that Hitler was chosen because the definition called for "for better or worse influenced...".
And so we are stuck. Because as computer people, we have this tendency towards following the instructions literally (almost too much so). But we already understand that the consequences of this may not be to our liking.
IMHO, this means that we (computer geeks) need to grow up a little more. We must have some sort of life outside the computer, if we are to choose the person who most influenced the century - life existed outside the computer for more than 70% of this century, after all...
IMHO, the risk of hungry lawyers turning to security-related lawsuits once the Y2K issues are over seems high. Menacingly high, in fact.
Lawyers have this ability to turn simple things into gigantic monsters. Put a lawyer to start working on security-related cases and one of them will likely make all of us look like the Devil incarnate through misunderstanding of the difference between Hacker and Cracker.
But what can we do? I think we need to keep working hard at plugging the difference between Hacker and Cracker into the public awareness.
If we don't do this job well enough, we might end up seeing unfortunate cases of public-opinion turning against us. Since I aspire to be a representative of Better_Operating_Systems.org and a member of the Open Source movement, I don't like that idea...
Has anyone any idea just how well the public understands the Hacker/Cracker difference? How much work do we have in this field? Perhaps we can harness the Net itself to find out. Maybe a poll in the right place, or a letter to everyone you know asking them to ask their family and neighbors to see if they understand the difference...
We ought to get started.
This actually makes us think about a very important issue. Where do we draw the line?
Consider the following. What if a person sends an email message confessing that he purchased a gun, and intends to murder a certain person. In many countries of the world, this constitutes reasonable cause for arrest and interrogation.
Personally, I think that privacy is more important, because what AOL is doing has only one outcome: People should start ditching their AOL accounts.
If the courts rule in favor of service providers who disclose such informations, people will start forming their own "black-market" networks to avoid these firms. Just like open source is doing to commercial software.
In light of what we see, perhaps we should start forming those free network services to rival AOL right now...