I had no trouble telling them apart... yours was about the article and in italics.
Tacos was the off topic stuff about making sure to cash out his chips... because you know most people don't, because they like to have chips instead of cash;)
I hope your not serious....
What would really happen is they would go hmmmm this chip doesn't seem to be working. Please step aside while we check to see if it's fake or just broken.
I suppose you could... but I think the dealer might notice that your homemade radio transmitter doesn't look like one of their chips and would be hesitant to take the bet.
Google bans all ads that criticize someone or something. It's company policiy that they only show ads for something never aginst. https://adwords.google.com/select/contentpolicy.ht ml
"text advocating against any organization or person (public, private, or protected) is not permitted. "
Yes... yes I have.
In fact it's actually kind of a hobby of mine.
Late at night I sneak into the zoo and chase the penguins around their little tank.
I just can't help it they're so funny when they run.
Of course NASA played a big role in this, but they weren't alone, and to say 'way to go NASA' ignores the contribution of the others that helped in this. Many of whom don't work for NASA. And then to attack someone that was simply pointing out that NASA wasn't alone in this endeavor...
Would you get all defensive if you said 'way to go NASA good work on the ISS' and then someone pointed out that they had help building it?
The probe was to transmit data on two channels, A and B, Atkinson said. His Doppler wind experiment was to use Channel A, a very stable frequency.
But the order to activate the receiver, or oscillator, for Channel A was never sent, so the entire mission operated through Channel B, which is less stable, Atkinson said......
Also, he said some of the Channel A signal reached Earth and was picked up by radio telescopes. "We now have some of this data and lots of work to do to try to catch up," he wrote.
Do you have an example of such an algorithm?
I don't read the steganography news letter or anything like that, but I've never heard of one that couldn't be detected if you knew what your looking for.
I guess in smaller scales, like offices, where there are significantly fewer transmissions that an admin would need to watch would be a good reason to use steganography.
Of course the ability to commit corporate espionage probably isn't the best justification to do research in this area;)
But I definitely see your point now, thanks for the clarification.
Bah you think a little thing like death would stop those high-powered lawyers? They'd simply push the lawsuit through and sue the estate;)
Dead people can get sued just as easily as the living.
Not really since this probably had nothing to do with a mistake by the RIAA. What probably happened is the RIAA suponded the ISP to find out who has 123.45.67.89 and the ISPs records were out of date and or fake. Then instead of bothering to do the detective work to find out who really held that account they just said screw it and dropped the lawsuit altogether.
Someone out there was trading files under the name smittenedkitten but the RIAA just got the name wrong. I'd bet money it was really the daughter or one of her children.
But if someone has reason to be monitoring your transmissions in the first place then they are most likely going to be screening any data you may send out and if that is the case then steganography become nothing more then security through obscurity.
There are so many encrypted transmissions now a days that simply sending one us unlikely to draw any undue attention.
Worse then that is if someone detects that your using steganography your screwed. Sending encrypted transmissions is easily explained away as not wanting someone to monitor your communication, but there is legitment reason that you didn't want someone to know you made that communication in the first place. So in fact using steganography might lead to more problems then simply encrypting your communication.
Yes you can compare what they cost, but what I ment is you can't compare what they produce.
The war produced freedom while Hubble produced science. Since the war cost like 500 times what Hubble would cost then how would compare the two? The freedom brought to Iraq is worth less then 500 times the science Hubble produced? To some it's worth more then that, to some much much less (especially once you factor in the lives lost).
But even expending it farther. Maybe we could use that billion to save 1,000 lives somewhere. Is the science worth those 1,000 lives? These are very hard decisions to make and to compare them by saying oh well we spent 500 billion on the war surely we could afford 1 billion for Hubble is an over simplification of the situation.
I've thought the same thing.
The only way steganography will work is if you keep the way you hide it a secret because if it's public knowledge how your steganography program works it's trivially easily to tell if a message is hidden in something (even if you can't read it) which defeats the purpose of hiding it in the first place.
Seems kind of hypocritical unless someone would care to explained to me why this makes more sense to keep secret then a standard cryptoalgorithm./shrug
It's hard to brute force something when you don't know how it was hidden in the first place.
You can only design a brute force attack once you know how it was hidden in the first place. And the amount of different ways to do that right now precludes such an attack.
Maybe once a standard for steganography is agreed on we can get started on ways to crack it;)
Should the money I pay the government be used for something I want, would use, and enjoy?
Nope never. The government almost exclusively pays for things you wouldn't normally pay for;)
I bet there would be a lot more home schools if free public school was taken away. There would be a lot less paved roads. And god help social security.
If people are willing to pay for it then it's the public market's job to take care of it.
Not to defend the war in the least... but it's hard to compare the two.
Hubble has never helped anyone, sure it's given us some pretty pictures and a deeper understanding of the universe. But has it lead to new cures for diseases? New ways to predict the whether? Anything useful?
To many the war has very direct benefits (though debatable) of setting a country free from a brutal dictator.
People should really stop trying to compare the two.
Slashdot Mirror
Of course it's hard for the guilty to fight back... it's always been like that.
I had no trouble telling them apart... yours was about the article and in italics. Tacos was the off topic stuff about making sure to cash out his chips... because you know most people don't, because they like to have chips instead of cash ;)
I hope your not serious....
What would really happen is they would go hmmmm this chip doesn't seem to be working. Please step aside while we check to see if it's fake or just broken.
I suppose you could... but I think the dealer might notice that your homemade radio transmitter doesn't look like one of their chips and would be hesitant to take the bet.
Google bans all ads that criticize someone or something. It's company policiy that they only show ads for something never aginst.t ml
https://adwords.google.com/select/contentpolicy.h
"text advocating against any organization or person (public, private, or protected) is not permitted. "
I think Bush and Cheney seem to be mixing quite well ;)
Yes... yes I have.
In fact it's actually kind of a hobby of mine.
Late at night I sneak into the zoo and chase the penguins around their little tank.
I just can't help it they're so funny when they run.
That's because penguins aren't usually associated with evil ;)
Of course NASA played a big role in this, but they weren't alone, and to say 'way to go NASA' ignores the contribution of the others that helped in this. Many of whom don't work for NASA. And then to attack someone that was simply pointing out that NASA wasn't alone in this endeavor...
Would you get all defensive if you said 'way to go NASA good work on the ISS' and then someone pointed out that they had help building it?
If your post wasn't about NASA how come you mentioned them by name and then said they rocked?
:P
Yah, thanks for clearing that up.
So.... it was on?
Anyone else a bit puzzled?
Yes you can.r vicepacks/SP4/ordercd.asp
http://www.microsoft.com/windows2000/downloads/se
For the low low price of 9.95
Do you have an example of such an algorithm?
I don't read the steganography news letter or anything like that, but I've never heard of one that couldn't be detected if you knew what your looking for.
I guess in smaller scales, like offices, where there are significantly fewer transmissions that an admin would need to watch would be a good reason to use steganography. ;)
Of course the ability to commit corporate espionage probably isn't the best justification to do research in this area
But I definitely see your point now, thanks for the clarification.
Bah you think a little thing like death would stop those high-powered lawyers? They'd simply push the lawsuit through and sue the estate ;)
Dead people can get sued just as easily as the living.
Not really since this probably had nothing to do with a mistake by the RIAA. What probably happened is the RIAA suponded the ISP to find out who has 123.45.67.89 and the ISPs records were out of date and or fake. Then instead of bothering to do the detective work to find out who really held that account they just said screw it and dropped the lawsuit altogether.
Someone out there was trading files under the name smittenedkitten but the RIAA just got the name wrong. I'd bet money it was really the daughter or one of her children.
But if someone has reason to be monitoring your transmissions in the first place then they are most likely going to be screening any data you may send out and if that is the case then steganography become nothing more then security through obscurity.
There are so many encrypted transmissions now a days that simply sending one us unlikely to draw any undue attention.
Worse then that is if someone detects that your using steganography your screwed. Sending encrypted transmissions is easily explained away as not wanting someone to monitor your communication, but there is legitment reason that you didn't want someone to know you made that communication in the first place. So in fact using steganography might lead to more problems then simply encrypting your communication.
Probably not what you want, but it works ;)
<img src="flowers.jpg" onclick="this.src='porn.jpg'">
Moderation +1 ;)
100% Funny
Well at least one person got it
Yes you can compare what they cost, but what I ment is you can't compare what they produce.
The war produced freedom while Hubble produced science. Since the war cost like 500 times what Hubble would cost then how would compare the two? The freedom brought to Iraq is worth less then 500 times the science Hubble produced? To some it's worth more then that, to some much much less (especially once you factor in the lives lost).
But even expending it farther. Maybe we could use that billion to save 1,000 lives somewhere. Is the science worth those 1,000 lives? These are very hard decisions to make and to compare them by saying oh well we spent 500 billion on the war surely we could afford 1 billion for Hubble is an over simplification of the situation.
I've thought the same thing. /shrug
The only way steganography will work is if you keep the way you hide it a secret because if it's public knowledge how your steganography program works it's trivially easily to tell if a message is hidden in something (even if you can't read it) which defeats the purpose of hiding it in the first place.
Seems kind of hypocritical unless someone would care to explained to me why this makes more sense to keep secret then a standard cryptoalgorithm.
It's hard to brute force something when you don't know how it was hidden in the first place. ;)
You can only design a brute force attack once you know how it was hidden in the first place. And the amount of different ways to do that right now precludes such an attack.
Maybe once a standard for steganography is agreed on we can get started on ways to crack it
I bet there would be a lot more home schools if free public school was taken away. There would be a lot less paved roads. And god help social security.
If people are willing to pay for it then it's the public market's job to take care of it.
Not to defend the war in the least... but it's hard to compare the two.
Hubble has never helped anyone, sure it's given us some pretty pictures and a deeper understanding of the universe. But has it lead to new cures for diseases? New ways to predict the whether? Anything useful?
To many the war has very direct benefits (though debatable) of setting a country free from a brutal dictator.
People should really stop trying to compare the two.