I just purchased WoW on Monday and was stunned when I tried to create a character and was denied on every server. I had just dropped 50 bucks on my new game and signed up for a $14/month fee and couldn't even play! I wasn't very impressed starting out...
Most articles I've read indicate that the engineers think this is a critical hardware problem, perhaps with one of the main controllers or the solar panels.
What actually gets you in trouble is the are the length contraction, time dialation, and relativistic mass equations.
For example, when calculating relativistic mass you use:
m = m(r)/SQRT(1 - v^2/c^2)
Where:
m(r) = mass at rest
v = velocity
c = speed of light
So, if v=c (i.e. you're going the speed of light) then mass becomes infinte. Therefore, using E=MC^2 you need an inifinite amount of energy.
What's interesting to note here is that faster than light velocities do *not* result in these numbers (though they do result in some interesting other effects). Where you get in trouble is going *exactly* the speed of light.
The problem is finding my important email in all the crap I have to wade through in my inbox. Appromixately 95% of the email I now receive is spam. That certainly makes it hard to find legitimate messages, in addition to the fact I have to make sure my kids aren't around when I check my email because of all the pr0n that comes in.
OK, this is just a crazy thought I suppose, but why in the world would a company the size of SCO take on a company the size of IBM if they knew their claims were bull? Is it that their claims are "just arguable enough" in a court of law, and they think somehow that choosing the right jurisdiction with the right judge will net them a win? I.e. Choose a really clueless judge in a really backwards jurisdiction or some such crap like that? Or maybe they already have a judge up their sleeve? Or some other MAJOR leverage point that will make this worth their while?
Because they really believe they milk millions or billions out of this. Like it or not, the courts don't always make the "right" choice or even common sense ones.
Then again, immediately going after IBM wasn't the smartest thing in the world, so maybe they are just nuts...
Yes, but a lot of people put way to much stock into biometric identification. I'm reminded of this story where a Japanese cryptographer used $10 of household chemicals to bypass the majority of fingerprint readers. Keep in mind, this guy was not a professional finger print cracker.
I think Schneier hits pretty close to home when he points out that security is based on three things: something you are (fingerprints), something you have (an ATM card), and something you know (a pin number). A good security system will use at least two of these (think about your ATM card).
Wrong. the strongest possible password is simply the longest string you can reliably comit to memory. It makes no difference if your alphabet is 50% larger.
Say what? In terms of a brute force attack, which is what the previous poster cited, the larger your "alphabet" the better.
As a simplified example, if you use only lower case alpha characters with an 8 byte password then you have a keyspace of 26^8 passwords (about 209 billion). However, if you can use all 8 bits of every byte (something you could get if your passwords allowed the full ASCII set), you then get 256^8 passwords (about 1.8 x 10^19) passwords.
Even given something a user can memorize reliably, as you suggest, a set of lower case letters and numbers produce a much large keyspace than letters alone. I would say a user can pretty much as easily memorize "doggy1" as "doggy".
Of course, this completely ignores the most fundamental problem of passwords - users tend to pick really bad ones. This is where the inkblot test would help, by generating a seemingly random string of letters. This was the orginal poster's point - a biger keyspace would help.
Actually, there's a reason why it's called "copyright". It has to do with the "right" to "copy". Only the copyright holder has the right to copy the original work.
Not exactly.
If you purchase a piece of copyrighted material you have certain limited rights to copy it, called fair-use rights. These include the ability to make backup copies for your personal use, in case the original is destroyed. Of course, it ceases being a legitimate copy the second you put it up for the world to download for free.
IANAL, but as I understand it, these rights are not expressly given by law, but are generally recognized as legitimate uses in the courts. I'd like to see if someone know for sure.
CASPIAN also has some pretty far out claims when it comes to rfid technology. Among my favorites is this page which claims These tiny tags, predicted by some to cost less than 1 cent each by 2004, are "somewhere between the size of a grain of sand and a speck of dust." They are to be built directly into food, clothes, drugs, or auto-parts during the manufacturing process.
Directly into food!?!? Seriously folks, I work for a major food manufacturer and we would never dream of putting these things directly into food.
Although labs might be able to produce microscopic tags, the ones we currently use in the industry are around 1 inch square (ever open a new book to find a funny sticker with metal in it?). The tags are also relatively extremely expensive. The two vendors I talked to within the last two weeks both quoted me a price of around $0.50 per tag for an order of 50 million tags, nowhere near the price we'd require for a realistic rollout.
In short, yes the tags will come and there will be some potential for abuse. And yes, it should be illegal for a stalker (or merchant) to sit in a mall and see what you're walking around with. But the hype is is way overblown.
Verizon did fight, and even tried to get a delay after losing the case, seeking to force the the RIAA to first get a judge's order (which is normally required), instead of just requesting the names directly (which the DMCA allows).
Verizon had a major intrest in winning this case and really did try to fight it out. Go to this link for a quick look at it.
Hmmm... Let's see. He won the first time the ballots were counted, and the second, and the third... The only way you could argue he was "appointed" by the judicial branch if if you're a fucktard. Guess that solves it.:)
Slashdot Mirror
I just purchased WoW on Monday and was stunned when I tried to create a character and was denied on every server. I had just dropped 50 bucks on my new game and signed up for a $14/month fee and couldn't even play! I wasn't very impressed starting out...
Most articles I've read indicate that the engineers think this is a critical hardware problem, perhaps with one of the main controllers or the solar panels.
SCO - 3 letters
Darl - 4 letters
McBride - 7 letters
Nope, sorry! You got that one wrong!
What actually gets you in trouble is the are the length contraction, time dialation, and relativistic mass equations.
For example, when calculating relativistic mass you use:
m = m(r)/SQRT(1 - v^2/c^2)
Where:
m(r) = mass at rest
v = velocity
c = speed of light
So, if v=c (i.e. you're going the speed of light) then mass becomes infinte. Therefore, using E=MC^2 you need an inifinite amount of energy.
What's interesting to note here is that faster than light velocities do *not* result in these numbers (though they do result in some interesting other effects). Where you get in trouble is going *exactly* the speed of light.
The problem is finding my important email in all the crap I have to wade through in my inbox. Appromixately 95% of the email I now receive is spam. That certainly makes it hard to find legitimate messages, in addition to the fact I have to make sure my kids aren't around when I check my email because of all the pr0n that comes in.
OK, this is just a crazy thought I suppose, but why in the world would a company the size of SCO take on a company the size of IBM if they knew their claims were bull? Is it that their claims are "just arguable enough" in a court of law, and they think somehow that choosing the right jurisdiction with the right judge will net them a win? I.e. Choose a really clueless judge in a really backwards jurisdiction or some such crap like that? Or maybe they already have a judge up their sleeve? Or some other MAJOR leverage point that will make this worth their while?
Because they really believe they milk millions or billions out of this. Like it or not, the courts don't always make the "right" choice or even common sense ones.
Then again, immediately going after IBM wasn't the smartest thing in the world, so maybe they are just nuts...
Yes, but a lot of people put way to much stock into biometric identification. I'm reminded of this story where a Japanese cryptographer used $10 of household chemicals to bypass the majority of fingerprint readers. Keep in mind, this guy was not a professional finger print cracker.
I think Schneier hits pretty close to home when he points out that security is based on three things: something you are (fingerprints), something you have (an ATM card), and something you know (a pin number). A good security system will use at least two of these (think about your ATM card).
Wrong. the strongest possible password is simply the longest string you can reliably comit to memory. It makes no difference if your alphabet is 50% larger.
Say what? In terms of a brute force attack, which is what the previous poster cited, the larger your "alphabet" the better.
As a simplified example, if you use only lower case alpha characters with an 8 byte password then you have a keyspace of 26^8 passwords (about 209 billion). However, if you can use all 8 bits of every byte (something you could get if your passwords allowed the full ASCII set), you then get 256^8 passwords (about 1.8 x 10^19) passwords.
Even given something a user can memorize reliably, as you suggest, a set of lower case letters and numbers produce a much large keyspace than letters alone. I would say a user can pretty much as easily memorize "doggy1" as "doggy".
Of course, this completely ignores the most fundamental problem of passwords - users tend to pick really bad ones. This is where the inkblot test would help, by generating a seemingly random string of letters. This was the orginal poster's point - a biger keyspace would help.
Actually, there's a reason why it's called "copyright". It has to do with the "right" to "copy". Only the copyright holder has the right to copy the original work.
Not exactly.
If you purchase a piece of copyrighted material you have certain limited rights to copy it, called fair-use rights. These include the ability to make backup copies for your personal use, in case the original is destroyed. Of course, it ceases being a legitimate copy the second you put it up for the world to download for free.
IANAL, but as I understand it, these rights are not expressly given by law, but are generally recognized as legitimate uses in the courts. I'd like to see if someone know for sure.
CASPIAN also has some pretty far out claims when it comes to rfid technology. Among my favorites is this page which claims These tiny tags, predicted by some to cost less than 1 cent each by 2004, are "somewhere between the size of a grain of sand and a speck of dust." They are to be built directly into food, clothes, drugs, or auto-parts during the manufacturing process. Directly into food!?!? Seriously folks, I work for a major food manufacturer and we would never dream of putting these things directly into food.
Although labs might be able to produce microscopic tags, the ones we currently use in the industry are around 1 inch square (ever open a new book to find a funny sticker with metal in it?). The tags are also relatively extremely expensive. The two vendors I talked to within the last two weeks both quoted me a price of around $0.50 per tag for an order of 50 million tags, nowhere near the price we'd require for a realistic rollout.
In short, yes the tags will come and there will be some potential for abuse. And yes, it should be illegal for a stalker (or merchant) to sit in a mall and see what you're walking around with. But the hype is is way overblown.
Verizon did fight, and even tried to get a delay after losing the case, seeking to force the the RIAA to first get a judge's order (which is normally required), instead of just requesting the names directly (which the DMCA allows).
Verizon had a major intrest in winning this case and really did try to fight it out. Go to this link for a quick look at it.
Hmmm... Let's see. He won the first time the ballots were counted, and the second, and the third... The only way you could argue he was "appointed" by the judicial branch if if you're a fucktard. Guess that solves it. :)
"Bill Gates is hoarding cash. What does he know that you don't?"
His bank account number.