In which case: all the money that's being hoarded ends up out of circulation, which means that the economy would stagnate. And how is that a good thing again?
Because you learned that 'saving is good' from having a piggy bank as a kid, and that's where your understanding of economics ended?
Tay-Sachs frequently doesn't cause death until the afflicted is in their 20s or 30s. Like most traditional cultures, Jewish culture places a lot of weight on getting married and having children. So, chances are the disease would be passed on well before it becomes lethal in any individual. So, no effect on the propagation of the genes.
Not really - unless a genetic makeup actively harms an individually in a given environment, it will stick around indefinitely. Just failing to be beneficial isn't bad enough to stop a genetic line from propagating.
For instance, NPR just aired a story about Gustav Albin WeiBkopf, of Bridgeport CT, who flew his proto-plane (albeit not in an especially controlled fashion) on August 14th, 1901.
Yeah, that's true - I didn't realize how out of date I was, though. (After your modification , I looked on the web - even Novell hasn't been involved in 8 years.)
And, this gives that much more punch to my original point...people using Solaris, HP-UX, AIX, Irix, etc. have that much less reason to throw stones.
Indeed, HP-UX, Solaris, AIX, etc., may be considered 'UNICes', since they use the AT&T UNIX base software to some extent, but only those pieces of software explicitly deigned UNIX by Novell are technically UNIX (Novell holds the trademark, at the moment, not AT&T). Frankly, I don't see much Novell-Unix out in the real world, so to heack with them.
Personally, I believe that if the vast bulk of the people concerned use a word in a particular way, then that use is the definition of the word - legalities notwithstanding. So, if most people using Unix-like operating systems (such as myself) want to say they're using Unix - to simplify matters - then more power to them. After all, those who are legally accurate in their use of Unix(TM) can be counted on one hand...
Now, in all honesty, why would the air force care about being able to speed a rocket sled to Mach 8.6? It's still too slow for ABM use (assuming they could target it, once it's off the sled - and, IMHO, ABM is an inane, dangerous idea). It's entirely too fast for any sort of useful transportation. And, for that matter it's barely faster than the 20 year old record, relatively speaking.
So how much did this cost to develop? Whiz-bang garbage like this is part of the reason we have a $400 billion military budget...
It's almost as if you can read the air quotes around the word 'encryption'...you can assume that even if it is military grade encryption, the NSA knows how to crack it, via back doors or otherwise. After all they were in on DES from the beginning, and had a hand in selecting Rijndael as the new AES.
From an American Mathematical Society report, for instance: "NIST's evaluation used published research from academic and industry experts and private advice from the National Security Agency (NSA)." Gee, I wonder what kind of 'advice' they gave...
Or, they'll make the classic blunder. Having set up a network with no way in or out, someone will say "Hey, we can't move our data! Somebody get this fixed immediately!" To which they'll respond by hooking up a bank of modems, leaving them vulnerable to the some of oldest exploits in the books.
(Lord, I hope this ends up classified as 'funny', since I'd hate to think we have a government which will prove it to be 'insightful')
The moon doesn't keep the earth's orbit, per se, stable; it keeps the earth on a stable rotational axis (for anyone who's curious). That said, it will probably take a _very_ long time for the moon to be mined to the point where it loses sufficient mass for this to be an issue. _That_ said, I doubt the powers that be would care, so this something to consider for the long-distant future (after all, since when has a UN treaty made any difference when national wealth is at stake?)
Of course, if any programmer tries to create a non-DNS program which listens on UDP 53, they'll be run out of the business. Well-known port, after all.
In fact, some firewalls (Raptor, for instance - more specifically, the Raptor DNSd proxy) are designed to drop any non-DNS traffic which comes through on port 53.
That is certainly true - IPV6 already promises to bring about this sort of deluge - after all, no one is likely to remember a 128 bit number, no matter how it's represented (zeroes taken out, and the like). Sendmail, among other programs already asks for AAAA records.
On another note, has anyone thought about the second-level nameservers? Sure, there are only 13 root servers, but heck, there are only 200 or so GTLDs and CCTLDs to deal with. Now look at the 13 nameservers authoritative for the '.com' GTLD - there must be _millions_ of.com domains registered, and each one of these has to be accounted for by these servers. Now that's a lot of traffic...
I think the bigger reason to fear Google is that they're as popular as they are, and have yet to learn the concept of 'OR'. It's a like a 400-pound toddler...
Oh, yeah, definitely...one-time pads, two-time flats, three-time apartments - let me tell you, if you have ANY of these, your back will be against the wall faster than you can say 'kalashnikov' (Or 'samizdat', as the case may be.)
Seems to me this discussion isn't properly taking into account the distinction between theory and practice. Theoretically, yes, a one-time pad is EXTREMELY secure, as proven by the Soviet Union in the early portion of the Cold War.
However, practically, it runs into a number of problems - for instance, if individual charged with using the one-time pads get lazy, and use the pads again - as Soviet spies did, in fact - it's relatively easy to crack the related messages.
Years ago, while working at an Apple repair depot
on
Baked Apple
·
· Score: 2, Interesting
I ran across a client who excalimed that there was a problem with his 'starter chip'. Apparently, the battery had run out, and as those with Apple experience know, the most frequent symptom of a bad battery is a blank screen; the blank screen goes away with a warm reboot.
So, as I watched in horror, the client showed me what he was doing: just after the computer started up, while it was on, he removed the RAM SIMM, and plugged it back in. Recoiling from the shock of having its RAM torn out and plunked back in, the computer restarted.
The client, of course, was disturbed that 'this seemed to work less and less often lately'. Either the computer gods, or the patron saint of the feeble-minded, had clearly been smiling on him...
I completely agree...and insurance is likely one of the best ways to force this sort of responsibility. Bruce Schneier (quoted in the article) has been talking about this for a long time; his monthly newsletter addresses the subject at reasonable length, in the section "Liability and Security", from his April CryptoGram.
http://www.counterpane.com/crypto-gram-0204.html
...than a patent on the human genome, which has been done more than once. (Note, for instance the patent on the genetic material of a member of the Hagahai tribe of Papua New Guinea - patent number 5,397,696.)
Slashdot Mirror
In which case: all the money that's being hoarded ends up out of circulation, which means that the economy would stagnate. And how is that a good thing again? Because you learned that 'saving is good' from having a piggy bank as a kid, and that's where your understanding of economics ended?
Tay-Sachs frequently doesn't cause death until the afflicted is in their 20s or 30s. Like most traditional cultures, Jewish culture places a lot of weight on getting married and having children. So, chances are the disease would be passed on well before it becomes lethal in any individual. So, no effect on the propagation of the genes.
Not really - unless a genetic makeup actively harms an individually in a given environment, it will stick around indefinitely. Just failing to be beneficial isn't bad enough to stop a genetic line from propagating.
For instance, NPR just aired a story about Gustav Albin WeiBkopf, of Bridgeport CT, who flew his proto-plane (albeit not in an especially controlled fashion) on August 14th, 1901.
Bill's new motto: "DRM Macht Frei".
Yeah, that's true - I didn't realize how out of date I was, though. (After your modification , I looked on the web - even Novell hasn't been involved in 8 years.) And, this gives that much more punch to my original point...people using Solaris, HP-UX, AIX, Irix, etc. have that much less reason to throw stones.
Indeed, HP-UX, Solaris, AIX, etc., may be considered 'UNICes', since they use the AT&T UNIX base software to some extent, but only those pieces of software explicitly deigned UNIX by Novell are technically UNIX (Novell holds the trademark, at the moment, not AT&T). Frankly, I don't see much Novell-Unix out in the real world, so to heack with them. Personally, I believe that if the vast bulk of the people concerned use a word in a particular way, then that use is the definition of the word - legalities notwithstanding. So, if most people using Unix-like operating systems (such as myself) want to say they're using Unix - to simplify matters - then more power to them. After all, those who are legally accurate in their use of Unix(TM) can be counted on one hand...
Now, in all honesty, why would the air force care about being able to speed a rocket sled to Mach 8.6? It's still too slow for ABM use (assuming they could target it, once it's off the sled - and, IMHO, ABM is an inane, dangerous idea). It's entirely too fast for any sort of useful transportation. And, for that matter it's barely faster than the 20 year old record, relatively speaking. So how much did this cost to develop? Whiz-bang garbage like this is part of the reason we have a $400 billion military budget...
It's almost as if you can read the air quotes around the word 'encryption'...you can assume that even if it is military grade encryption, the NSA knows how to crack it, via back doors or otherwise. After all they were in on DES from the beginning, and had a hand in selecting Rijndael as the new AES.
From an American Mathematical Society report, for instance:
"NIST's evaluation used published research from academic and industry experts and private advice from the National Security Agency (NSA)." Gee, I wonder what kind of 'advice' they gave...
Or, they'll make the classic blunder. Having set up a network with no way in or out, someone will say "Hey, we can't move our data! Somebody get this fixed immediately!" To which they'll respond by hooking up a bank of modems, leaving them vulnerable to the some of oldest exploits in the books. (Lord, I hope this ends up classified as 'funny', since I'd hate to think we have a government which will prove it to be 'insightful')
This is true - although the article was clearly about guitar tabs. No, wait, tabs of acid. No, wait...
The moon doesn't keep the earth's orbit, per se, stable; it keeps the earth on a stable rotational axis (for anyone who's curious). That said, it will probably take a _very_ long time for the moon to be mined to the point where it loses sufficient mass for this to be an issue. _That_ said, I doubt the powers that be would care, so this something to consider for the long-distant future (after all, since when has a UN treaty made any difference when national wealth is at stake?)
Of course, if any programmer tries to create a non-DNS program which listens on UDP 53, they'll be run out of the business. Well-known port, after all. In fact, some firewalls (Raptor, for instance - more specifically, the Raptor DNSd proxy) are designed to drop any non-DNS traffic which comes through on port 53.
That is certainly true - IPV6 already promises to bring about this sort of deluge - after all, no one is likely to remember a 128 bit number, no matter how it's represented (zeroes taken out, and the like). Sendmail, among other programs already asks for AAAA records.
.com domains registered, and each one of these has to be accounted for by these servers. Now that's a lot of traffic...
On another note, has anyone thought about the second-level nameservers? Sure, there are only 13 root servers, but heck, there are only 200 or so GTLDs and CCTLDs to deal with. Now look at the 13 nameservers authoritative for the '.com' GTLD - there must be _millions_ of
I think the bigger reason to fear Google is that they're as popular as they are, and have yet to learn the concept of 'OR'. It's a like a 400-pound toddler...
Oh, yeah, definitely...one-time pads, two-time flats, three-time apartments - let me tell you, if you have ANY of these, your back will be against the wall faster than you can say 'kalashnikov' (Or 'samizdat', as the case may be.)
Seems to me this discussion isn't properly taking into account the distinction between theory and practice. Theoretically, yes, a one-time pad is EXTREMELY secure, as proven by the Soviet Union in the early portion of the Cold War. However, practically, it runs into a number of problems - for instance, if individual charged with using the one-time pads get lazy, and use the pads again - as Soviet spies did, in fact - it's relatively easy to crack the related messages.
I ran across a client who excalimed that there was a problem with his 'starter chip'. Apparently, the battery had run out, and as those with Apple experience know, the most frequent symptom of a bad battery is a blank screen; the blank screen goes away with a warm reboot. So, as I watched in horror, the client showed me what he was doing: just after the computer started up, while it was on, he removed the RAM SIMM, and plugged it back in. Recoiling from the shock of having its RAM torn out and plunked back in, the computer restarted. The client, of course, was disturbed that 'this seemed to work less and less often lately'. Either the computer gods, or the patron saint of the feeble-minded, had clearly been smiling on him...
I completely agree...and insurance is likely one of the best ways to force this sort of responsibility. Bruce Schneier (quoted in the article) has been talking about this for a long time; his monthly newsletter addresses the subject at reasonable length, in the section "Liability and Security", from his April CryptoGram. http://www.counterpane.com/crypto-gram-0204.html
...than a patent on the human genome, which has been done more than once. (Note, for instance the patent on the genetic material of a member of the Hagahai tribe of Papua New Guinea - patent number 5,397,696.)