Shouldn't market forces be allowed to decide whether or not the public wants their internet and mobile communications blocked or censored? btw I know that in some areas carriers have a total monopoly over internet access, but still...
not really relevant, just something somebody posted from a previous article, i thought the code comments were slightly relevant. In any case I was trying to look "geeky", now I'll have to curl up in the fetal position and cry all day.... booo hooo booo hooo:(
This method is quiet interesting, though it falls over in situations where the detail level or entropy of the background is as great as the foreground. Also the paper doesn't go into too much details about the dynamic programming approach they used to find the path of least energy, I guess that aspect of it is patentable. Another thing they could investigate is the use of diagonal seams instead of just staggered vertical and horizontal seams.
I don't know "who" is grumbling, but just looking at the C++ and C side of things, those languages's syntax to RTL conversions are written by a small group of people (I believe 4-5) under the auspices of something called "code sourcery" of which some of them are employed by a company called EDG.
Hence I believe if the majority of people from this group were to revolt and stay with gpl2 then a fork occurring would be inevitable and the FSF wouldn't have a leg to stand on, they would have to concede as they did with EGCS.
That said no one from code sourcery has made a comment about gpl3,positive or negative. We'll just have to wait and see.
Essentially what they are using are erasure codes such as tornado and digital fountains. The problem with these codes are that even though they near Shannon's limit, they are not nice towards other forms of data transmission such as TCP (aka bandwidth hungry).
By using such codes the round-trip overheads that are evident in protocols such as TCP are eliminated.
These codes are mainly used for massive multi-cast and stateless loss transmissions.
But using these codes doesn't mean you get rid of routers, it just means you get rid of the need to persist connections over multiple routers.
Essentially most comms will be over something similar to UDP. But one must remember that there will always be an inherent need for reliable comms. As most of these schemes require an initial exchange of information in the case of digital fountains a seed and a scheme for the distribution must be communicated to the end user.
Such technology would be great for wireless connections.
I believe the translation of his speech was poorly done by US media outlets. Why can the BBC translate it properly but not the mainstream US media?
What he essentially said was that the current socioeconomic structure of Israel (where-by it is continually being propped up by foreign powers eg: the US) can not be maintained indefinitely. It will eventually collapse. that was his opinion, he has a right to put forth his opinion as does anyone else. I believe that he did not incite genocide or the eradication of a nation as some people like to suggest.
I would like to ask this to the US citizens reading this, do any of you know how much "required" tax which would be used to prop-up your ailing health care and education systems for example is not being paid by companies because they get tax breaks for setting up offices in Israel?
The reason why the US was late in pulling its people out was because after supporting the Shah and then seeing him grow the brass balls needed to ask for more than $30 per barrel the US began supporting the revolutionary movement that was beginning to grow in Iran and which was being controlled by Khomeini in Paris - with the hopes that by destabilizing the current regime they could bring about another regime that might be more friendly or more brainless or both towards their oil and gas negotiations.
My guess is the Carter administration thought that the friendly smiles and winks they were getting from the "new kids on the block" was going to last indefinitely.
0.95^n = 0.1%// prob of not hitting with n missiles.
n = -1 / -0.02227 ~= 44.903
With an n of 37 you get 0.1498, which is a probability of 99.85 and not 99.9!
As I said at the start you are a dumb ass or a real tight ass not wanting to spend the extra 8 missiles to make sure you get a 99.9% probability of success.
THESE ARE BIGINTS!!! they have nothing to do with what an x86 thinks they are, libraries are specifically designed to handle bigint numbers that 100+ digits long. that is the branching they are talking about in the article nothing else.
That said, temporal and power cryptography has been known for at least 15 years now. this article is yesterdays news. the people writing this stuff are for all intents and purposes burnouts from the 90s.
In short such attack don't work will in multitasking OSs running on multiple execution pipeline processors.
Slashdot Mirror
Shouldn't market forces be allowed to decide whether
or not the public wants their internet and mobile
communications blocked or censored?
btw I know that in some areas carriers have a total
monopoly over internet access, but still...
I mean come on is it really that hard to come up with a unique looking design?
not really relevant, just something somebody posted from a previous article, i thought the code comments were slightly relevant. In any case I was trying to look "geeky", now I'll have to curl up in the fetal position and cry all day.... booo hooo booo hooo :(
Have a look at the method on line 22330g ate/usr/src/uts/common/inet/tcp/tcp.c
http://cvs.opensolaris.org/source/xref/onnv/onnv-
This method is quiet interesting, though it falls over in situations where the detail level
or entropy of the background is as great as the foreground. Also the paper doesn't go into
too much details about the dynamic programming approach they used to find the path of least
energy, I guess that aspect of it is patentable. Another thing they could investigate is the
use of diagonal seams instead of just staggered vertical and horizontal seams.
All in all a very interesting read.
[They] should have just taken an existing product and put a clock on it or something.
I don't know "who" is grumbling, but just looking at the C++ and C side of things, those
,positive or negative.
languages's syntax to RTL conversions are written by a small group of people (I believe 4-5)
under the auspices of something called "code sourcery" of which some of them are employed
by a company called EDG.
Hence I believe if the majority of people from this group were to revolt and stay with gpl2
then a fork occurring would be inevitable and the FSF wouldn't have a leg to stand on, they
would have to concede as they did with EGCS.
That said no one from code sourcery has made a comment about gpl3
We'll just have to wait and see.
I believe the DA would still have to prove the data exists to get a
conviction.
Asking someone to prove a negative goes against "the innocent until
proven guilty" paradigm.
That said I suggest you read up on plausible deniability file systems.
Essentially what they are using are erasure codes such as tornado
and digital fountains. The problem with these codes are that even
though they near Shannon's limit, they are not nice towards other
forms of data transmission such as TCP (aka bandwidth hungry).
By using such codes the round-trip overheads that are evident in
protocols such as TCP are eliminated.
These codes are mainly used for massive multi-cast and stateless
loss transmissions.
But using these codes doesn't mean you get rid of routers, it just
means you get rid of the need to persist connections over multiple
routers.
Essentially most comms will be over something similar to UDP. But one
must remember that there will always be an inherent need for reliable
comms. As most of these schemes require an initial exchange of
information in the case of digital fountains a seed and a scheme for
the distribution must be communicated to the end user.
Such technology would be great for wireless connections.
Remember to duck and cover when they come
I just can't help lovifying my wordiness!
Now the only question remaining, Is Tony getting his cut?
I believe the translation of his speech was poorly done by US media
outlets. Why can the BBC translate it properly but not the mainstream
US media?
What he essentially said was that the current socioeconomic structure
of Israel (where-by it is continually being propped up by foreign
powers eg: the US) can not be maintained indefinitely. It will
eventually collapse. that was his opinion, he has a right to put forth
his opinion as does anyone else. I believe that he did not incite
genocide or the eradication of a nation as some people like to
suggest.
I would like to ask this to the US citizens reading this, do any of
you know how much "required" tax which would be used to prop-up your
ailing health care and education systems for example is not being paid
by companies because they get tax breaks for setting up offices in
Israel?
The reason why the US was late in pulling its people out was because
after supporting the Shah and then seeing him grow the brass balls
needed to ask for more than $30 per barrel the US began supporting the
revolutionary movement that was beginning to grow in Iran and which
was being controlled by Khomeini in Paris - with the hopes that by
destabilizing the current regime they could bring about another regime
that might be more friendly or more brainless or both towards their
oil and gas negotiations.
My guess is the Carter administration thought that the friendly smiles
and winks they were getting from the "new kids on the block" was going
to last indefinitely.
You're dumb ass!
// prob of not hitting with n missiles.
100% - 99.9% = 0.1%
0.95^n = 0.1%
n = -1 / -0.02227 ~= 44.903
With an n of 37 you get 0.1498, which is a probability
of 99.85 and not 99.9!
As I said at the start you are a dumb ass or a real tight
ass not wanting to spend the extra 8 missiles to make sure
you get a 99.9% probability of success.
You Americans and your wasteful ways you only need ~45 missiles to :)
reach a 99.9% probability hit rate!
In the US I believe the term is: "On the balance of probabilities" for civil action suits
Nuf said.
And will there be mutton dressed up as lamb?
you are insanely insane! :)
that he liked BEER and NACHOS!
So how will we coordinate our counter attacks when the aliens from independence day come-a-knockin'?
sms perhaps?
well - tell me?
THESE ARE BIGINTS!!! they have nothing to do with what an x86 thinks they are, libraries
are specifically designed to handle bigint numbers that 100+ digits long. that is the
branching they are talking about in the article nothing else.
That said, temporal and power cryptography has been known for at least 15 years now. this article
is yesterdays news. the people writing this stuff are for all intents and purposes burnouts from
the 90s.
In short such attack don't work will in multitasking OSs running on multiple execution pipeline
processors.
everyone one of the statements that contain *, mod and + have
branching. Or did you just think they magically happen?