Sure, that works too. "Safe deposit box" is just an example of secure off-site storage. If you already have one anyway it's about as easy as any other location, especially if your girlfriend isn't off-site and your parents are far away and you work at home and your friends have an almost supernatural ability to misplace any item....
External notebook drive + safe deposit box. Full snapshot of the filesystem each day (magical rsync scripts using --link-dest) with full-drive encryption and one or two visits to the bank each month. House burns down, I lose a couple weeks of current events.
It's so easy and so secure, I cannot understand why nobody else seems to do this.
I'm skeptical of the claim that higher speeds to not lead to higher collision rates. At higher speeds it takes longer to brake to a stop, which means more collisions with stationary (or near-stationary) objects. It's also harder to recover if you lose control in an avoidance maneuver or go off-pavement for any reason. Are there any actual data to back up the claim?
It doesn't have to be like that at all. It only takes high school math, a semester of introductory physics, and some introductory primers on relativity, astrophysics, and quantum mechanics to get a sense of how such science is done. Even if you can't do (or even check) the math yourself you can at least understand how others would do it, and understand that theories don't become commonly accepted until the math all checks out and results are experimentally verified. The only "faith" required is the faith that there isn't some gigantic scientific conspiracy to promote absurd theories. ("Gigantic" as in, including everybody in the world with a 4-year science degree.)
Either the encryption is strong, and they can't access the data lawfully or unlawfully; or the encryption is weak (backdoored), and the data are accessible to both lawful and unlawful searches.
So providing "lawful access" is the same as providing "unlawful access". We just have to hope that the "unlawful access" option will never be used. Or we can say, "no access at all, sorry," because that's the fact of strong encryption.
The problem is the Indian government (and others) denying mathematical reality, and RIM (and others) crippling useful technology to support the fantasy that strong encryption doesn't exist.
It seems that this exploit requires you to trick the user into opening a file from a filesystem you have access to, at which point you could probably just as easily get them to open a trojan directly.
Infected removable media would be the most likely vector. You plug in a USB flash drive or load a CDROM, browse to a file you want to open but don't notice the malicious DLL in the same directory, perhaps because it's hidden among hundreds of other files. We're used to being cautious about opening files on removable media (make sure it's not.EXE!) but now we have to be even more cautious (make sure there are no.DLL files in the same directory!).
8:1 is the correct ratio. O2 has molecular mass ~32, H2 has molecular mass ~2, and you need twice as many atoms of H as of O if you want to end up with mostly H2O at the end. So 32:4 or 8:1. (The masses are approximate because of binding energies and isotope ratios.) Regardless, the principle as described above holds: the product of an exothermic reaction has very slightly less mass than the reactants. Although I suppose if you did not allow the heat of the reaction to escape then the mass would be exactly the same... right?
When the teaser for "Lie to Me" first came on I thought, Cool, they turned "Deceiver" into a series. Unfortunately it's just yet another cop-hero show, nothing like that movie. Check out the movie if you'd like to see a realistic portrayal of lie detectors.
A dog can't be party to a legally binding contract. Only adult humans can.
I see no reason to restrict marriages to exactly two people. Households with more than two adults have been common everywhere forever -- traditionally some of those adults are close genetic relatives but that doesn't need to be the case as long as the relationships are clearly established by contract or custom.
The best investment for weathering the collapse of civilization is ammunition, and ammunition dispensers. Worst case, you pay for everything one bullet at a time.
we had 3 professors teaching calculus and we'd tell new students that if they wanted to know calculus they should take professor X. But if they wanted an "A" to take professor Z. A "C" in X's class was a "B" in professor Y's class and an "A" in Z's class. However X always said he didn't want students to remember formulas, instead he wanted students to learn how to solve for the formulas. He was the same in Physics.
Slashdot Mirror
Another useless executive with an overinflated sense of his [company's] importance in the world. "Intellectual" indeed.
"Entertainment content" would be a better term for it, or maybe just "dreck".
There, FTFH.
Sure, that works too. "Safe deposit box" is just an example of secure off-site storage. If you already have one anyway it's about as easy as any other location, especially if your girlfriend isn't off-site and your parents are far away and you work at home and your friends have an almost supernatural ability to misplace any item....
External notebook drive + safe deposit box. Full snapshot of the filesystem each day (magical rsync scripts using --link-dest) with full-drive encryption and one or two visits to the bank each month. House burns down, I lose a couple weeks of current events.
It's so easy and so secure, I cannot understand why nobody else seems to do this.
Better safe than sorry!
I'm skeptical of the claim that higher speeds to not lead to higher collision rates. At higher speeds it takes longer to brake to a stop, which means more collisions with stationary (or near-stationary) objects. It's also harder to recover if you lose control in an avoidance maneuver or go off-pavement for any reason. Are there any actual data to back up the claim?
It doesn't have to be like that at all. It only takes high school math, a semester of introductory physics, and some introductory primers on relativity, astrophysics, and quantum mechanics to get a sense of how such science is done. Even if you can't do (or even check) the math yourself you can at least understand how others would do it, and understand that theories don't become commonly accepted until the math all checks out and results are experimentally verified. The only "faith" required is the faith that there isn't some gigantic scientific conspiracy to promote absurd theories. ("Gigantic" as in, including everybody in the world with a 4-year science degree.)
Yes, that was the point: The sound "barrier" is actually sort of a barrier; the 10^n foos per bar "barrier" never is, for any value of n, foo, or bar.
According to sleazy web advertisers, sleazy web advertising is not that big a deal.
According to spammers, spam is not that big a deal.
According to criminals, crime is not that big a deal.
All those tools would definitely be "once per lifetime" for me, in the sense that I would only use them once (or less) in my lifetime.
Either the encryption is strong, and they can't access the data lawfully or unlawfully; or the encryption is weak (backdoored), and the data are accessible to both lawful and unlawful searches.
So providing "lawful access" is the same as providing "unlawful access". We just have to hope that the "unlawful access" option will never be used. Or we can say, "no access at all, sorry," because that's the fact of strong encryption.
The problem is the Indian government (and others) denying mathematical reality, and RIM (and others) crippling useful technology to support the fantasy that strong encryption doesn't exist.
Infected removable media would be the most likely vector. You plug in a USB flash drive or load a CDROM, browse to a file you want to open but don't notice the malicious DLL in the same directory, perhaps because it's hidden among hundreds of other files. We're used to being cautious about opening files on removable media (make sure it's not .EXE!) but now we have to be even more cautious (make sure there are no .DLL files in the same directory!).
8:1 is the correct ratio. O2 has molecular mass ~32, H2 has molecular mass ~2, and you need twice as many atoms of H as of O if you want to end up with mostly H2O at the end. So 32:4 or 8:1. (The masses are approximate because of binding energies and isotope ratios.) Regardless, the principle as described above holds: the product of an exothermic reaction has very slightly less mass than the reactants. Although I suppose if you did not allow the heat of the reaction to escape then the mass would be exactly the same ... right?
He "realized there were instances" of misconduct on his part? More like he realized he'd been caught.
Arguments are metaphorically analogous to similies, which grow on trees.
When the teaser for "Lie to Me" first came on I thought, Cool, they turned "Deceiver" into a series. Unfortunately it's just yet another cop-hero show, nothing like that movie. Check out the movie if you'd like to see a realistic portrayal of lie detectors.
Jet engines run fine on vegetable oil. As long as we have some plentiful energy source we'll have air travel.
A dog can't be party to a legally binding contract. Only adult humans can.
I see no reason to restrict marriages to exactly two people. Households with more than two adults have been common everywhere forever -- traditionally some of those adults are close genetic relatives but that doesn't need to be the case as long as the relationships are clearly established by contract or custom.
That sounds like Zipcon.
The best investment for weathering the collapse of civilization is ammunition, and ammunition dispensers. Worst case, you pay for everything one bullet at a time.
Immanuel Kant was a real pissant who was very rarely stable.
Just watched the shuttle pass over Seattle without re-entry on orbit 222, closely followed by ISS. Next pass will be well past sunrise (6:57).
Is this going to be on the test?
So "miles per hour" is meaningless when you drive for less than an hour?
Nice! In a universe of 3000-year-old code, 3000-year-old hackers rule.