Actually, the more I think about it, the more I think it would also potentially stop a lot of other attacks. For instance, if I can propogate a signed message declaring that client X gave me Y chunks, you might be able to do a better job allocating bandwidth to clients that upload a lot. A node could keep a "relative trust index" used to prioritize who gets data. Basically, anyone who gives me data (that passed checksum!) gets their trust index increased, and anyone they vouch for, and so on. Bogus clients would get dropped from the network more quickly, while legitimate clients might be able to "spin up" faster.
Technically that is certainly true. You could make the legal argument that presenting a certificate as belonging to another organization if fraud.
Not that it matters for the moment. Comcast can't currently afford to intercept all SSL connections, inspect the certificate to see if they can forge it, and proxy the connection just to do packet inspection.
Furthermore, I think you can prevent that. Essentially, create a new "CA" key whenever you create a.torrent file, and include the public key in the.torrent. Then, on-the-fly build a chain of authority stemming from that key. Then, whenever you get directed to a new peer, the message includes a public key for that peer, signed by your current peer, and so forth. Even if comcast tries to join the network to disrupt it, they can't disrupt communication between nodes when the chain-of-authority does not use their keys, and if tampering is detected, their keys can be revoked, un-authenticating any bogus keys they have generated and signed.
Sounds like a fun project, actually, assuming it doesn't already exist.
This has zero relevance to copyright law. They have agreed to collect data on the condition that they only release statistics. Which is what they did. It is legally and ethically fine. Anonymous surveys are an incredibly useful tool, especially when done by people that understand how to do them well, and what the limitations are.
That is true, but not the same thing. Natural selection and selective breeding are the same process, one controlled by us, and one "controlled" by nature, in which advantageous traits existing within the population become more widespread. Genetic engineering is a similar process to evolution (not the same thing as natural selection) that is guided by deliberate changed to the genome, vs. random mutation, both introducing new characteristics into the gene pool. Those traits may, through selective breeding or natural selection may become the dominant genotype.
It is also a bit silly to say "the only difference is timescale" when that difference is between 100 years and 100 million years, even if it were technically true (which it isn't).
While selective breeding is definitely a form of genetic manipulation, it isn't true that the only difference is the timescale.
Selective breeding basically only suppresses or enhances traits the parent genome already had. It can't introduce entirely new genes borrowed from an unrelated organism, or even synthesized independently.
Selective breeding of a cow will never make it produce spider venom in its milk, but genetic engineering probably could (though unless you could make the cow immune, it wouldn't be viable).
That will pretty much guarantee that they lose, though, by ICANN rules.
They appear to have a reasonable, though perhaps not ironclad shot at winning the dispute. If they use the site to attack another organization with the same initials, they will almost certainly lose.
The zombies *will* go through the smarthost, and we will be pretty much back where we started, whether or not the smarthosts get blacklisted.
Blocking port 25 is a reasonable idea, and many ISPs do it, but to say to do otherwise is criminally negligent or that doing so would stop worms from spreading is completely absurd.
Pretty much the only effective tool ISPs have is to completely shut down the connection to any infected computer. But people will (rightly) get upset about that.
Does the house arrest and monitoring cost that much less than $50,000/year? It seems that if you actually paid enough attention to see that they were not violating the terms of the house arrest, it would cost more.
Also, they 50,000/year * 10 person-years = $500,000, but they are having $1.3 M confiscated, so it is still a net win.
I think the prison system is messed up, and I am not sure what I think about this, but I am also not comfortable with putting a guy in prison for holding me up with a knife for my wallet but letting someone who steals $10M through embezzlement, causes the local widget manufacturer to go bankrupt, and leaves the first guy unemployed just having his ill-gotten wins confiscated and told he can't use computers.
Just because you can't be bothered to make a reliable system that actually meets the requirements at hand does not mean everyone needs to spend an order of magnitude more for features that provide no value for the problem.
Also, according to the USB consortium, A-to-A cables are illegal. While it is true they are a bunch of hosemonkeys when it comes to cables, technically they could sue you if you sold such a cable and called it USB.
Sadly, it seems we are stuck with USB, despite its general suckiness.
What I have heard is that during the colonial era, English was considerably less standardized, and multiple forms existed. This is plausible, considering the high illiteracy rate. Later, there was fairly significant efforts at standardization (probably to have consistent school curricula), in which America and Britain settled on different variants. If true, then it would actually look like "theirs is old and busted, we have moved on" to both Americans and British, as they look back in their own historical documents and see the other form.
Biodiesel production also requires (or at least prefers) carefully bred strains with high oil production. This also leads to somewhat reduced fitness. Probably not as big a deal as these hydrogen producers, but still an issue.
What I can't seem to get anyone to explain is why we want a hydrogen economy anyway. Liquid fuel for vehicles seems like a much better plan. The only reason to go hydrogen is if you want to fuel vehicles with coal or nuclear plants, and even then, I think it is a better plan to convert they hydrogen to methane or methanol at the generation facility. Biodisel, on the other hand, seems nearly the optimal motor fuel.
Transportation, storage, transfer, and use of hydrogen are all difficult. All of those problems are solvable, but it seems like unnecessary cost and complexity to me.
I guess I was assuming that for an application like this, reliability and speed would trump density and cost, and they would just use SLC mode. I didn't think anyone considered MLC flash suitable for anything other than MP3 players and cell phones where size the overwhelming factor. If they really have the wear leveling and error correction up to where they get 300k writes, then maybe that is no longer the case.
I suspect the odd error modes are also much worse for MLC, but I don't really know that much about them. From what I have heard, SLC is pretty tame.
MTBF is usually misunderstood. This is largely because it does not measure the mean time until your drive fails, despite the name. MTBF is usually quoted for a 5 year drive life. So, if the MTBF is 50 years, and you have 100 drives, you expect 2 failures/year, as long as you replace all the drives when their 5-year life is up, failed or not.
Hence, it is a metric only of direct importance to people estimating failure rates for RAID arrays and the like.
You can tell if flash is bad, if worst comes to worst, by reading after writing. Or reading after erasing, and looking for stuck 1's.
'worn out' flash doesn't spontaneously change state. Bits just get stuck and don't erase correctly.
I don't know how flash drives actually handle this, but it isn't magic or impossible to fix.
Also, the lifetime of modern flash is long enough that it is hardly an issue any more, even for normal desktop use. Maybe you don't want to use it for swap *IF* you swap a lot, but given the cost is in the same ballpark as RAM, you could just buy more RAM.
I don't think I have ever heard someone claim that chroot is complex when contrasted with SELinux. Actually, I don't think I have ever heard someone claim that X is complex when contrasted with SELinux, for any value of X.
Elegant? maybe. Depends on your point of view. But SELinux is more complex that essentially every security architecture commercially deployed outside the defense and intelligence sectors. With a considerable amount of effort, RedHat has managed to contain some of that complexity as long as you stick to the default configuration.
BTW, the "terminator" gene may, actually, be viewed as an assurance against the modified plants "escaping" into the wild -- a concern commonly voiced by the opponents of the (modern) genetic modifications.
Yes, but those people suffer from an acute shortage of sense.
I agree that the system should be robust against unintended interference. But you just can't make navigation instruments that are not susceptible to jamming. Thus we limit the broadcast power of devices, and use anti-jamming devices such as metal poles applied to the heads of people trying to use illegal devices.
Every time you get on an airplane, you *are* trusting your life that someone does not have a high-powered transmitter operating on a frequency near enough to the relevant bands to cause a problem.
Also, you would be amazed at how far off in frequency you can be and still disrupt things. Those hand held two-way radios that operate in the 400 MHz region can easily disrupt FM radio at 100 MHz. The signal from the transmitter in the same room simply saturates the input amplifier stage, reducing its gain at 100 MHz below what is needed for detection.
You can equally well argue that eyes should be hardened against being blinded by a laser pointer. It is just not going to happen. So we have laws that say "don't shine a laser in someone's eye"
You can continue to use it as a webserver. What they are requesting is that you add to your webserver configuration a virtual server entry for "pool.ntp.org" that redirects to their webpage. That ensures that people hitting your computer trying to access the www.pool.ntp.org website will get redirected to the right place. Normal visitors will be unaffected.
Currently, however, people think there is no center to the universe, and it is more than an academic distinction.
Think of the universe as the surface of a balloon, and someone is blowing air into the balloon. Where is the center of the surface of the balloon? There isn't one. You can see that once the balloon was very small, but you can't "go to the place where the big bang happened" -- it was literally everywhere in the universe, only much closer together.
Slashdot Mirror
Actually, the more I think about it, the more I think it would also potentially stop a lot of other attacks. For instance, if I can propogate a signed message declaring that client X gave me Y chunks, you might be able to do a better job allocating bandwidth to clients that upload a lot. A node could keep a "relative trust index" used to prioritize who gets data. Basically, anyone who gives me data (that passed checksum!) gets their trust index increased, and anyone they vouch for, and so on. Bogus clients would get dropped from the network more quickly, while legitimate clients might be able to "spin up" faster.
Technically that is certainly true. You could make the legal argument that presenting a certificate as belonging to another organization if fraud.
.torrent file, and include the public key in the .torrent. Then, on-the-fly build a chain of authority stemming from that key. Then, whenever you get directed to a new peer, the message includes a public key for that peer, signed by your current peer, and so forth. Even if comcast tries to join the network to disrupt it, they can't disrupt communication between nodes when the chain-of-authority does not use their keys, and if tampering is detected, their keys can be revoked, un-authenticating any bogus keys they have generated and signed.
Not that it matters for the moment. Comcast can't currently afford to intercept all SSL connections, inspect the certificate to see if they can forge it, and proxy the connection just to do packet inspection.
Furthermore, I think you can prevent that. Essentially, create a new "CA" key whenever you create a
Sounds like a fun project, actually, assuming it doesn't already exist.
This has zero relevance to copyright law. They have agreed to collect data on the condition that they only release statistics. Which is what they did. It is legally and ethically fine. Anonymous surveys are an incredibly useful tool, especially when done by people that understand how to do them well, and what the limitations are.
That is true, but not the same thing. Natural selection and selective breeding are the same process, one controlled by us, and one "controlled" by nature, in which advantageous traits existing within the population become more widespread. Genetic engineering is a similar process to evolution (not the same thing as natural selection) that is guided by deliberate changed to the genome, vs. random mutation, both introducing new characteristics into the gene pool. Those traits may, through selective breeding or natural selection may become the dominant genotype.
It is also a bit silly to say "the only difference is timescale" when that difference is between 100 years and 100 million years, even if it were technically true (which it isn't).
While selective breeding is definitely a form of genetic manipulation, it isn't true that the only difference is the timescale.
Selective breeding basically only suppresses or enhances traits the parent genome already had. It can't introduce entirely new genes borrowed from an unrelated organism, or even synthesized independently.
Selective breeding of a cow will never make it produce spider venom in its milk, but genetic engineering probably could (though unless you could make the cow immune, it wouldn't be viable).
That will pretty much guarantee that they lose, though, by ICANN rules.
They appear to have a reasonable, though perhaps not ironclad shot at winning the dispute. If they use the site to attack another organization with the same initials, they will almost certainly lose.
The zombies *will* go through the smarthost, and we will be pretty much back where we started, whether or not the smarthosts get blacklisted.
Blocking port 25 is a reasonable idea, and many ISPs do it, but to say to do otherwise is criminally negligent or that doing so would stop worms from spreading is completely absurd.
Pretty much the only effective tool ISPs have is to completely shut down the connection to any infected computer. But people will (rightly) get upset about that.
Does the house arrest and monitoring cost that much less than $50,000/year? It seems that if you actually paid enough attention to see that they were not violating the terms of the house arrest, it would cost more.
Also, they 50,000/year * 10 person-years = $500,000, but they are having $1.3 M confiscated, so it is still a net win.
I think the prison system is messed up, and I am not sure what I think about this, but I am also not comfortable with putting a guy in prison for holding me up with a knife for my wallet but letting someone who steals $10M through embezzlement, causes the local widget manufacturer to go bankrupt, and leaves the first guy unemployed just having his ill-gotten wins confiscated and told he can't use computers.
Where on there did he say he didn't have backups?
Just because you can't be bothered to make a reliable system that actually meets the requirements at hand does not mean everyone needs to spend an order of magnitude more for features that provide no value for the problem.
Everybody but you thinks that not being able to rename files while they are open is a bug.
You might make an argument about not allowing hard links, or deleting files that are in use, but the renaming thing is just stupid.
Also, according to the USB consortium, A-to-A cables are illegal. While it is true they are a bunch of hosemonkeys when it comes to cables, technically they could sue you if you sold such a cable and called it USB.
Sadly, it seems we are stuck with USB, despite its general suckiness.
What I have heard is that during the colonial era, English was considerably less standardized, and multiple forms existed. This is plausible, considering the high illiteracy rate. Later, there was fairly significant efforts at standardization (probably to have consistent school curricula), in which America and Britain settled on different variants. If true, then it would actually look like "theirs is old and busted, we have moved on" to both Americans and British, as they look back in their own historical documents and see the other form.
Biodiesel production also requires (or at least prefers) carefully bred strains with high oil production. This also leads to somewhat reduced fitness. Probably not as big a deal as these hydrogen producers, but still an issue.
What I can't seem to get anyone to explain is why we want a hydrogen economy anyway. Liquid fuel for vehicles seems like a much better plan. The only reason to go hydrogen is if you want to fuel vehicles with coal or nuclear plants, and even then, I think it is a better plan to convert they hydrogen to methane or methanol at the generation facility. Biodisel, on the other hand, seems nearly the optimal motor fuel.
Transportation, storage, transfer, and use of hydrogen are all difficult. All of those problems are solvable, but it seems like unnecessary cost and complexity to me.
I guess I was assuming that for an application like this, reliability and speed would trump density and cost, and they would just use SLC mode. I didn't think anyone considered MLC flash suitable for anything other than MP3 players and cell phones where size the overwhelming factor. If they really have the wear leveling and error correction up to where they get 300k writes, then maybe that is no longer the case.
I suspect the odd error modes are also much worse for MLC, but I don't really know that much about them. From what I have heard, SLC is pretty tame.
MTBF is usually misunderstood. This is largely because it does not measure the mean time until your drive fails, despite the name. MTBF is usually quoted for a 5 year drive life. So, if the MTBF is 50 years, and you have 100 drives, you expect 2 failures/year, as long as you replace all the drives when their 5-year life is up, failed or not.
Hence, it is a metric only of direct importance to people estimating failure rates for RAID arrays and the like.
You can tell if flash is bad, if worst comes to worst, by reading after writing. Or reading after erasing, and looking for stuck 1's.
'worn out' flash doesn't spontaneously change state. Bits just get stuck and don't erase correctly.
I don't know how flash drives actually handle this, but it isn't magic or impossible to fix.
Also, the lifetime of modern flash is long enough that it is hardly an issue any more, even for normal desktop use. Maybe you don't want to use it for swap *IF* you swap a lot, but given the cost is in the same ballpark as RAM, you could just buy more RAM.
I don't think I have ever heard someone claim that chroot is complex when contrasted with SELinux. Actually, I don't think I have ever heard someone claim that X is complex when contrasted with SELinux, for any value of X.
Elegant? maybe. Depends on your point of view. But SELinux is more complex that essentially every security architecture commercially deployed outside the defense and intelligence sectors. With a considerable amount of effort, RedHat has managed to contain some of that complexity as long as you stick to the default configuration.
Do not compare floating point numbers for equality. Doing so is almost always a bug.
Better make sure Tove isn't there, she will kick your ass :)
Yes, but those people suffer from an acute shortage of sense.
I agree that the system should be robust against unintended interference. But you just can't make navigation instruments that are not susceptible to jamming. Thus we limit the broadcast power of devices, and use anti-jamming devices such as metal poles applied to the heads of people trying to use illegal devices.
Every time you get on an airplane, you *are* trusting your life that someone does not have a high-powered transmitter operating on a frequency near enough to the relevant bands to cause a problem.
Also, you would be amazed at how far off in frequency you can be and still disrupt things. Those hand held two-way radios that operate in the 400 MHz region can easily disrupt FM radio at 100 MHz. The signal from the transmitter in the same room simply saturates the input amplifier stage, reducing its gain at 100 MHz below what is needed for detection.
You can equally well argue that eyes should be hardened against being blinded by a laser pointer. It is just not going to happen. So we have laws that say "don't shine a laser in someone's eye"
Yes, you should.
We do. It is called the FCC, and without them, the state of wireless communication would be worse that usenet.
You can continue to use it as a webserver. What they are requesting is that you add to your webserver configuration a virtual server entry for "pool.ntp.org" that redirects to their webpage. That ensures that people hitting your computer trying to access the www.pool.ntp.org website will get redirected to the right place. Normal visitors will be unaffected.
Currently, however, people think there is no center to the universe, and it is more than an academic distinction.
Think of the universe as the surface of a balloon, and someone is blowing air into the balloon. Where is the center of the surface of the balloon? There isn't one. You can see that once the balloon was very small, but you can't "go to the place where the big bang happened" -- it was literally everywhere in the universe, only much closer together.
Fluke, maker of test and measurement equipment, not only survived with the name fluke, but used to use the marketing slogan:
"If it works, it's a Fluke"
People still bought their stuff because, you know, they work.