True, (according to space-time and time dilation..) It would be nice if we had one in our solar system and could use it to hitch a ride..a bit dengerous though I would have thought!
...yet somehow they'll find a way to blame it all on George W Bush.
I filtered through gollum123's article submission to find any political bias.. he's clean. Although I still believe that global warming is a big problem that we must do something about,. I cannot deny that nature itself is as big a problem:
All we can do is work on the stuff we can control. We cant control earthquakes, tsunamis from those, hurricanes etc.. we need to keep focussing on prediction and reducing emmisions. If we get taken out because the sun suddenly goes supernova (which shuoldnt happen) and blows the f*$@ out of the whole solar system, we can live with that... or if an indistructible massive depleted uranium asteroid slams into the earth
By the way, I think we should be spending more money on probes like ESA's Rosetta that studies th sun than on Huygens which merely tells us about how we could kill ourselves off with freexing cold ethane rain just in case we cant kill ourselves off on this world...
The education will catch up with the technology eventually and then we will see something new.
True, I think strategy games are simply brilliant for your mind when you're young. Its really not that deifferent from chess and no teacher will tell you that chess is bad for you unless they can't play it. I remeber a study (sorry - no source) that claimed cases of alzheimers were far less common in elderly who played chess. It naturally follows that this is the same for strategy games. I and others I know have been saying that games are good for you for years.
We don't stop playing becuase we get older. We get older because we stop playing.
Also, as Einstein said: 'Learning by exmple is not the best way to learn. It is the only way..
I tend to agree with a man with the achievements of Einstein. This is very similar to the learning experience of games. You play and learn inductive and deductive skills -> then you apply those skills when playing at a higher level. This recursively continues...
Very very few people argue against copyright when it comes to software. Free software people/open source people argue against patents alone.
Yes, and thats why the term $Intellectual$Property$ is totally evil. It is an attempt to insult our intelligence and band the 2 together. In other words, if we want $IP$ protection we might well end up patenting something instead. Please stay away from that word and avoid using it. If you have to use, put dollar signs around it or something. It is written in the language of Mordor,.. which I will not utter here
Officials for the European Space Agency said last week they would investigate to learn what happened. They were not available for comment on Thursday, nor did NASA officials immediately respond to telephone messages...
Yeah, both groups know how to shut up and watch each others backs when it all goes f*@$ ways : )
By the way, I thought they ended up using channel B because they did not take the full effect of the Doppler shift for channel A into account. Can anyine correct me on this?..
I read it. It's very interesting. It sould have potiential but they still have yet to carry out a real lab test. So far it has all ben thought experiments. But, given the right minds, a thought experiment is as good as the real thing. I think they may be on to something big..
Karen Regis, manager of mobile programs and promotions at the chipmaker said the reason for the change was that with the release of the 2.6.8 Linux kernel, the open source operating system's power management abilities now meet Intel's requirements for Centrino notebook battery life.
Can you give me a source for that. Can't find it on google.
Also, do you know how Windows power requirements compared. If I find no truth to the above, I will never again buy Intel and lobby others to follow. If Windows power consumption was in a par with Linux and the claims are simply a mask for discrimination I will never buy Intel again...never have but I do like the Pentium M and if I was going to buy a laptop, I was thinking of a Centino..
Make it so the FBI is able to download their Brittney Spears MP3s but completely unable to determine who is responsible for distributing it.
...
Or did I just conspire to commit fraud... Hmm, I guess it's back undergound for me...
They can always find us, unless we are in solidarity..
Another thing is to clone the nature of existing mass used applications - this makes it harder again to track. The most safe solution is to pwn personal boxes to set up these p2p's and purge the logs..but then we are getting serious. We need a legal way too in my opinion. This is where my solution has credibility..
and also th esame as dont use browsers with secoond letter 'n' and third letter 't' in their name.... ah what the heck..dont Use Microsofts Internet Explorer or any variants...
No, but dont worry. In my opinion they are not going any where just yet. I want to describe again my call for a legitimate p2p of free media (for those artists etc. who distribute their work free!):
What we need is ap2p network which is centrally controlled (centralised). This control centre locks down all channels to all clients. A client cannot get material from any other client without getting a code from the control centre. The control centre uses a special hash function to compute the MD5 (example) checksum of any _OFFICIAL_ material from an artist. Then this MD5 is encrypted. ONLY the control centre can know the value of the encrypted MD5 checksum foar any file.
Now, knowing this, we can assume that it is impossible (extremely hard) to get an encrypted MD5 for any artists official files. The control centre only publishes (makes public) codes if the artist requests his/her work to be made public on the p2p. Once you have the encrypted MD5 you use it as a code to get that son / movie etc.. (file) from someone else on a p2p. YOu CANNOT get material that has not been requested to be made public on the p2p because you cannot know the code because the control centre will not have created an encrypted checksum for that material to be propagated on the network. ONLY free material could propagate on the p2p.
Disadvantage: If the central control centre was hacked, the hackers could generated encrypted checksums for non-free files. However this could be overcome by simply changing the encryption and transmitting the changes to the clients.
Exactly, though I don't thnik elliptic curve encryptiopn is the best example, I do believe that classical computers will continue to have a part to play in cryptography long after any Q computer revolution.
This would be just enough to emulate a quantum computer with only 261 qubits. Now, take a key length of more than 261 bits, and you are completely safe from that universe-sized classical computer.
You are hitting on a good point. By appending more bits to the ciphertext you can repel brute force attacks, but attacks will inevitable be far more sophisticated than that. Remember, as this technolgy is available to security experts, so too will it be available to crackers. The real 'key' selling point of this is that is sensitive to mig-in-the-middle attacks.
Even if it is untappable, wouldn't it be vulnerable to a man-in-the-middle attack?
No, what he's attempting to do is describe entanglement - the presently baffling feature of quantum mechanices. As Heisenberg would tell you, any attempt to measure the state of a photon (an entangled pair of a photon in this case) will in fact alter the state of the photon itself and consequently sound an alarm bell if the data (many photons!) is corrupt at the other end. However, a sub-atomic group in Paris - ENS- have made progress in findinf ways to not measure the magnitude of a photon, but rather measure the phase shift of tiny rubidium rods as they pass through a photon. This still makes a change of course but a change that is even more difficult to detect! It's fascinating stuff and arguably the future of communication and computing, and who knows even replication...
You misunderstood me too. I know I wasnt very clear.. Its not about encrypting the file. Its about encrypting the channels the channels themselves. You cant access the NON ENCRYPTED file unless you have a code. You cant have a code unless the file is publically available. Then what do you have?
Just another p2p network obviously, only one where only free material is propagated around. Its not voodoo. Im not a politician. Im just bored...
But its too easy to simply write programs that don't use the keys and don't care. What authors can do is encrypt their files by PGP or GPG and keep the private keys. But the public key is still transferable -- you just tar the file with the key. Even if it worked, it still has to be decrypted and can theoretically be intercepted.
Moreover, forcing every copyrighted work to be encrypted is like putting locks on every book. Very few books need it but any system of book distribution either becomes very complex or often worked around, making it ineffective anyway.
I knew I shouldnt have used the word 'key' What Im talking about is actually not encrpting of the artists material but encrypting of a special password or code to be able to get a file on p2p. i,e a system which only tranfers a file if you have the specific key / code for that file. Do you get me?
He was also arrested trying to attend the third presidential debate yet that never made the news..
Yeah he probably used bad tactics trying to attend that debate. He should have groomed himself as a supporter of one of the other 2 to gain publicity and credibilty. Then turned on both of them like a vicious cur at the exact right time!
I feel sorry for Americans though. I do feel as though you have your backs against the wall when it comes to elections. You are crying out for a coordinated mass lobbying for a 3rd. party candidate - only way to remove the boolean (unary!?) system you use now. You need allot more parties, you actually need complete reform,maybe via a revolution or something.
where does it leave an independent filmmaker like myself?
We have Ogg vorbis and flack etc...
What about a regulatory authority that produces a special key for any material produced by an artist like yourself.
A music example:
Dave Fancella is an artist who distributes his music for free in a non royaly format - ogg vorbis.
He can request a key from the regulatory authority and make it public. Once public, the p2p software can accept its distribution on the network. So, I just type in the key and I can download it on P2P. There is no obligation on anmy artist to make their keys public so lets assume an artist doesnt want his/her music on p2p - they just keep their key private so their work cannot be propagated.
What do you think of my idea? All it takes is a regulatory body to generate these keys (codes) per song or per album - whatever way you want.
The p2p software is programmed to only work with these codes which are securely updated into the software. No key - no music, same could apply for movies etc.....
Slashdot Mirror
gnome is p00
helpless vs. those in need of know help. intelligent vs. stupid. bandit vs. tamed judgemental vs. open-minded .............
I filtered through gollum123's article submission to find any political bias .. he's clean. Although I still believe that global warming is a big problem that we must do something about,. I cannot deny that nature itself is as big a problem:
All we can do is work on the stuff we can control. We cant control earthquakes, tsunamis from those, hurricanes etc.. we need to keep focussing on prediction and reducing emmisions. If we get taken out because the sun suddenly goes supernova (which shuoldnt happen) and blows the f*$@ out of the whole solar system, we can live with that ... or if an indistructible massive depleted uranium asteroid slams into the earth
By the way, I think we should be spending more money on probes like ESA's Rosetta that studies th sun than on Huygens which merely tells us about how we could kill ourselves off with freexing cold ethane rain just in case we cant kill ourselves off on this world ...
True, I think strategy games are simply brilliant for your mind when you're young. Its really not that deifferent from chess and no teacher will tell you that chess is bad for you unless they can't play it. I remeber a study (sorry - no source) that claimed cases of alzheimers were far less common in elderly who played chess. It naturally follows that this is the same for strategy games. I and others I know have been saying that games are good for you for years.
We don't stop playing becuase we get older. We get older because we stop playing.
Also, as Einstein said: 'Learning by exmple is not the best way to learn. It is the only way..
I tend to agree with a man with the achievements of Einstein. This is very similar to the learning experience of games. You play and learn inductive and deductive skills -> then you apply those skills when playing at a higher level. This recursively continues...
Yes, and thats why the term $Intellectual$Property$ is totally evil. It is an attempt to insult our intelligence and band the 2 together. In other words, if we want $IP$ protection we might well end up patenting something instead. Please stay away from that word and avoid using it. If you have to use, put dollar signs around it or something. It is written in the language of Mordor, .. which I will not utter here
Officials for the European Space Agency said last week they would investigate to learn what happened. They were not available for comment on Thursday, nor did NASA officials immediately respond to telephone messages...
Yeah, both groups know how to shut up and watch each others backs when it all goes f*@$ ways : )
By the way, I thought they ended up using channel B because they did not take the full effect of the Doppler shift for channel A into account. Can anyine correct me on this? ..
I read it. It's very interesting. It sould have potiential but they still have yet to carry out a real lab test. So far it has all ben thought experiments. But, given the right minds, a thought experiment is as good as the real thing. I think they may be on to something big ..
No, I think
This has vast implications..not. Probably not much
The tooth fairy is their last hope.
Can you give me a source for that. Can't find it on google.
Also, do you know how Windows power requirements compared. If I find no truth to the above, I will never again buy Intel and lobby others to follow. If Windows power consumption was in a par with Linux and the claims are simply a mask for discrimination I will never buy Intel again...never have but I do like the Pentium M and if I was going to buy a laptop, I was thinking of a Centino..
...
Or did I just conspire to commit fraud... Hmm, I guess it's back undergound for me... They can always find us, unless we are in solidarity..
Another thing is to clone the nature of existing mass used applications - this makes it harder again to track. The most safe solution is to pwn personal boxes to set up these p2p's and purge the logs..but then we are getting serious. We need a legal way too in my opinion. This is where my solution has credibility..
and also th esame as dont use browsers with secoond letter 'n' and third letter 't' in their name....
ah what the heck..dont Use Microsofts Internet Explorer or any variants...
No, but dont worry. In my opinion they are not going any where just yet. I want to describe again my call for a legitimate p2p of free media (for those artists etc. who distribute their work free!):
What we need is ap2p network which is centrally controlled (centralised).
This control centre locks down all channels to all clients. A client cannot get material from any other client without getting a code from the control centre. The control centre uses a special hash function to compute the MD5 (example) checksum of any _OFFICIAL_ material from an artist. Then this MD5 is encrypted. ONLY the control centre can know the value of the encrypted MD5 checksum foar any file.
Now, knowing this, we can assume that it is impossible (extremely hard) to get an encrypted MD5 for any artists official files. The control centre only publishes (makes public) codes if the artist requests his/her work to be made public on the p2p. Once you have the encrypted MD5 you use it as a code to get that son / movie etc.. (file) from someone else on a p2p. YOu CANNOT get material that has not been requested to be made public on the p2p because you cannot know the code because the control centre will not have created an encrypted checksum for that material to be propagated on the network. ONLY free material could propagate on the p2p.
Disadvantage: If the central control centre was hacked, the hackers could generated encrypted checksums for non-free files. However this could be overcome by simply changing the encryption and transmitting the changes to the clients.
--
But thats not hacking, thats manual labour ; ) ..
http://www.lkb.ens.fr/recherche/qedcav/english/eng lishframes.html
Exactly, though I don't thnik elliptic curve encryptiopn is the best example, I do believe that classical computers will continue to have a part to play in cryptography long after any Q computer revolution.
You are hitting on a good point. By appending more bits to the ciphertext you can repel brute force attacks, but attacks will inevitable be far more sophisticated than that. Remember, as this technolgy is available to security experts, so too will it be available to crackers. The real 'key' selling point of this is that is sensitive to mig-in-the-middle attacks.
No, what he's attempting to do is describe entanglement - the presently baffling feature of quantum mechanices. As Heisenberg would tell you, any attempt to measure the state of a photon (an entangled pair of a photon in this case) will in fact alter the state of the photon itself and consequently sound an alarm bell if the data (many photons!) is corrupt at the other end. However, a sub-atomic group in Paris - ENS- have made progress in findinf ways to not measure the magnitude of a photon, but rather measure the phase shift of tiny rubidium rods as they pass through a photon. This still makes a change of course but a change that is even more difficult to detect! It's fascinating stuff and arguably the future of communication and computing, and who knows even replication...
You misunderstood me too. I know I wasnt very clear..
...
Its not about encrypting the file. Its about encrypting the channels the channels themselves.
You cant access the NON ENCRYPTED file unless you have a code. You cant have a code unless the file is publically available. Then what do you have?
Just another p2p network obviously, only one where only free material is propagated around. Its not voodoo. Im not a politician. Im just bored
Moreover, forcing every copyrighted work to be encrypted is like putting locks on every book. Very few books need it but any system of book distribution either becomes very complex or often worked around, making it ineffective anyway.
I knew I shouldnt have used the word 'key' What Im talking about is actually not encrpting of the artists material but encrypting of a special password or code to be able to get a file on p2p. i,e a system which only tranfers a file if you have the specific key / code for that file. Do you get me?
Yeah he probably used bad tactics trying to attend that debate. He should have groomed himself as a supporter of one of the other 2 to gain publicity and credibilty. Then turned on both of them like a vicious cur at the exact right time!
I feel sorry for Americans though. I do feel as though you have your backs against the wall when it comes to elections. You are crying out for a coordinated mass lobbying for a 3rd. party candidate - only way to remove the boolean (unary!?) system you use now. You need allot more parties, you actually need complete reform ,maybe via a revolution or something.
We have Ogg vorbis and flack etc... What about a regulatory authority that produces a special key for any material produced by an artist like yourself.
A music example:
Dave Fancella is an artist who distributes his music for free in a non royaly format - ogg vorbis. He can request a key from the regulatory authority and make it public. Once public, the p2p software can accept its distribution on the network. So, I just type in the key and I can download it on P2P. There is no obligation on anmy artist to make their keys public so lets assume an artist doesnt want his/her music on p2p - they just keep their key private so their work cannot be propagated.
What do you think of my idea? All it takes is a regulatory body to generate these keys (codes) per song or per album - whatever way you want.
The p2p software is programmed to only work with these codes which are securely updated into the software. No key - no music, same could apply for movies etc .....