What you say is true, but you seem to have overlooked one thing that the benchmarks don't cover - the perception of smoothness. All it takes is one process doing a moments calculation, causing a stutter in the framerate. Such a tiny thing won't make a difference in a benchmark test, but it shows up really obviously when you're watching the screen intently. That is the kind of thing that I will buy dualcore for.
Hah hah! This reminds me of the time a friend was convinced that an asteroid could hit the moon hard enough to "knock it out of its orbit" causing it to "fall to earth". He was thinking that orbits are like rails, and are only precariously maintained. I tried to tell him, but he wouldn't listen to me...
It may have been the same friend that thought planets could be destroyed Dragonball Z style...:/
Massive redundancy would be suitable, the brain regularly loses neurons, and can usually recover pretty well from moderate damage. Upgrades would be interesting - adding new hardware that can be automatically extended into and utilized by the copied brain (hey, if monkeys can learn a third arm, why not extra pseudo-greymatter?)
I don't think a exactly precise snapshot would be required - once you could reliably emulate the workings of the brain, then you could determine what info you need to make a suitably accurate copy. Something like a template, over which you write the specifics of the brain to be copied.
I suggest this is a hoax, because it is impossible to photograph that which can't be seen using a regular camera and regular film, such as the opposite side of a playing card.
You might be able to bounce a laser off the card onto the page such that you could tell the color of the light reflecting from the page and match that to where the laser was pointing.
Did you watch TFVideo? That's essentially what they did. Lit the card projector pixel by projector pixel.
'Coz I'm looking for more information on this image.
It says "multi lock on" and a date, but all Google reports is other forum posts looking for the creator of the image. Apparently, there's a high-res version of it too.
Wasn't there that whole kerfuffle about how IDN can be used to imitate domain names? Wouldn't it be wiser to leave it off by default, or will another bad choice be made, then patched later?
Re:Kelly's Out of Control, Stephenson's Diamond Ag
on
Of Ants and Robots
·
· Score: 1
Hey, you've got your email in obscured form on your sig, but not on your profile... you might want to tick that "spam armouring" option in preferences -> comments.
The only sort of application that a typical user (i.e. a non-developer) uses that's actually capable of maxing the CPU is, say, video editing, or a high-performance game.
Don't forget some unoptimised p2p, most Java apps, archive tools, near-full-screen Flash movies, any distributed computing projects, not to mention the horde of handy background apps doing their thing.
All it takes is one spike in one of these apps for the user to notice that their system can't quite take the load. (Also, it gets quite annoying when a background app you want to keep running consistently spikes the CPU load every few minutes.)
Understanding and extensively testing an algorithm is indispensable for security.
Of course - I understand that complexity isn't necessarily security. I was referring to hashes though, not encryption. I'm not suggesting to make a hash of a hash or anything like that, but to use 2 different hash functions to verify a single public file. For example, if it became common practice to use SHA-256 and RIPEMD-160 on BSD downloads, then even if one algorithm was reported "broken" or significantly compromised, then there is still the other function to weaken before it becomes feasible to modify the file without changing either of the hash results. Of course, this sort of technique wouldn't carry over to many other areas, as you say.
You've intrigued me, sir. Particularly with regards to the "640k should be enough" comment. I was under the impression that once quantum computing becomes practical, many complex calculations such as these would become almost trivial to brute-force. I it's not too much trouble, could you comment on this?
Such use-whatever-you-can solutions can indeed make intruder's life harder, but cannot offer true security.
Indeed, nothing can. But Mr2cents' suggestion is definetely interesting, as it would exponentially increase the difficulty of generating a specifically sized chunk of data to match two different hash algorithms, while still containing the intended message. (Perhaps even more so than just doubling the keylength, as the complexity is increased).
It's like using two passwords instead of one. Of course it's better, but it can only slow down an attacker who knows how to break passwords.
That's not the best analogy - it would be more accurate to say "It's like using two different passwords, methods and sets of software to double-encrypt your data", but as you can see I'm pretty terrible with analogies.
Heh, funny 'cause it's true.
Do you think the banality of the the net would increase arithmetically, logarithmically or exponentially after direct thoughts-to-input tech was created? My bet's on a positive feedback loop for an exponential increase in crap (crap begets crap, ad infinitum). Maybe the 'net would collapse, to be reborn when super-moderation system is applied to all public forums? A blacklist equivalent of del.icio.us?
Its my firm belief that there will not be revolutionary things such as the printing press, radio, tv, and the Internet coming withing the next 100 or so years.
Except for, say, direct neural interfaces or holographic displays.
Well, if they have some foresight they could take advantage of it - by reencoding movies & such at '6000x4500 pixels at 30 fps, using 2:1 lossless compression, is 1215 MB/sec' (thanks, (negative video) (792072)).
A lot of consumers would think "Wow, that would look great! Heaps better than DVD, or from BitTorrent! And so many extra features!" if they get the marketing spin right. That way they make a little more money by competing on quality (content is another matter altogether), while the inevitable 'pirates' distribute and store their lo-res versions.
I wanted to make the title "Is there an end-point to security" but the answer to that is obvious.
Rather, I'm asking whether, given a system to which no new features will be added, will the process of patching the vulnerabilities (buffer overflows, whathaveyou) eventually make it impossible to enter the system by exploiting the software it is runnning? (ignoring other avenues such as social engineering for the moment).
Man, that game ate so much of my time. It was damn hard, took me two years (I was a kid, but not hardcore) to get past the speeder bike section. I was ecstatic when I finally reached those levels with the giant gears in the pipes and the race with the electricity ball.
I may just have to fire up the rom, now...
It would have to happen completely, there are far too many people who would keep their pc even for just p2p. It is a little alarmist to decry "this would be the death of p2p!"
Besides all of the other reasons why this centralisation wouldn't work.
Doesn't it seem odd that an industry that would take more losses from piracy (i.e. a much higher percentage of users that already have the means and ability to pirate the products, and where the individual products are priced higher, providing further incentive for piracy) is making more money than the film industry, which should have a much larger customer base?
Or is it that the barrier-to-piracy on movies is a lot lower?
Slashdot Mirror
Didja get to the secret boss?
Didja beat it?
Cause I sure as hell can't (..without cheating)
What you say is true, but you seem to have overlooked one thing that the benchmarks don't cover - the perception of smoothness. All it takes is one process doing a moments calculation, causing a stutter in the framerate. Such a tiny thing won't make a difference in a benchmark test, but it shows up really obviously when you're watching the screen intently. That is the kind of thing that I will buy dualcore for.
Hah hah! This reminds me of the time a friend was convinced that an asteroid could hit the moon hard enough to "knock it out of its orbit" causing it to "fall to earth". He was thinking that orbits are like rails, and are only precariously maintained. I tried to tell him, but he wouldn't listen to me...
:/
It may have been the same friend that thought planets could be destroyed Dragonball Z style...
del.icio.us'd!
or adwared (can that be used as a verb?)...
Anything can be verb'd. Just add 'd !
I don't think a exactly precise snapshot would be required - once you could reliably emulate the workings of the brain, then you could determine what info you need to make a suitably accurate copy. Something like a template, over which you write the specifics of the brain to be copied.
I suggest this is a hoax, because it is impossible to photograph that which can't be seen using a regular camera and regular film, such as the opposite side of a playing card.
You might be able to bounce a laser off the card onto the page such that you could tell the color of the light reflecting from the page and match that to where the laser was pointing.
Did you watch TFVideo? That's essentially what they did. Lit the card projector pixel by projector pixel.
Sweet! Thanks!
Now to find someone who can I.D. the Asian writing...
'Coz I'm looking for more information on this image.
It says "multi lock on" and a date, but all Google reports is other forum posts looking for the creator of the image. Apparently, there's a high-res version of it too.
Indeed, I've sometimes noticed this. It's certainly better than full-time redirection (and the resulting link obfuscation).
Wasn't there that whole kerfuffle about how IDN can be used to imitate domain names? Wouldn't it be wiser to leave it off by default, or will another bad choice be made, then patched later?
Hey, you've got your email in obscured form on your sig, but not on your profile... you might want to tick that "spam armouring" option in preferences -> comments.
The only sort of application that a typical user (i.e. a non-developer) uses that's actually capable of maxing the CPU is, say, video editing, or a high-performance game.
Don't forget some unoptimised p2p, most Java apps, archive tools, near-full-screen Flash movies, any distributed computing projects, not to mention the horde of handy background apps doing their thing.
All it takes is one spike in one of these apps for the user to notice that their system can't quite take the load. (Also, it gets quite annoying when a background app you want to keep running consistently spikes the CPU load every few minutes.)
Now my Bayesian mail filter can translate spam to english before it's read!
Understanding and extensively testing an algorithm is indispensable for security.
Of course - I understand that complexity isn't necessarily security. I was referring to hashes though, not encryption. I'm not suggesting to make a hash of a hash or anything like that, but to use 2 different hash functions to verify a single public file.
For example, if it became common practice to use SHA-256 and RIPEMD-160 on BSD downloads, then even if one algorithm was reported "broken" or significantly compromised, then there is still the other function to weaken before it becomes feasible to modify the file without changing either of the hash results.
Of course, this sort of technique wouldn't carry over to many other areas, as you say.
You've intrigued me, sir. Particularly with regards to the "640k should be enough" comment.
I was under the impression that once quantum computing becomes practical, many complex calculations such as these would become almost trivial to brute-force. I it's not too much trouble, could you comment on this?
Such use-whatever-you-can solutions can indeed make intruder's life harder, but cannot offer true security.
Indeed, nothing can. But Mr2cents' suggestion is definetely interesting, as it would exponentially increase the difficulty of generating a specifically sized chunk of data to match two different hash algorithms, while still containing the intended message. (Perhaps even more so than just doubling the keylength, as the complexity is increased).
It's like using two passwords instead of one. Of course it's better, but it can only slow down an attacker who knows how to break passwords.
That's not the best analogy - it would be more accurate to say "It's like using two different passwords, methods and sets of software to double-encrypt your data", but as you can see I'm pretty terrible with analogies.
Heh, funny 'cause it's true.
Do you think the banality of the the net would increase arithmetically, logarithmically or exponentially after direct thoughts-to-input tech was created? My bet's on a positive feedback loop for an exponential increase in crap (crap begets crap, ad infinitum).
Maybe the 'net would collapse, to be reborn when super-moderation system is applied to all public forums? A blacklist equivalent of del.icio.us?
Its my firm belief that there will not be revolutionary things such as the printing press, radio, tv, and the Internet coming withing the next 100 or so years. Except for, say, direct neural interfaces or holographic displays.
Well, if they have some foresight they could take advantage of it - by reencoding movies & such at '6000x4500 pixels at 30 fps, using 2:1 lossless compression, is 1215 MB/sec' (thanks, (negative video) (792072)).
A lot of consumers would think "Wow, that would look great! Heaps better than DVD, or from BitTorrent! And so many extra features!" if they get the marketing spin right. That way they make a little more money by competing on quality (content is another matter altogether), while the inevitable 'pirates' distribute and store their lo-res versions.
Yeah, I was just watching that. Coincidence, eh?
I wanted to make the title "Is there an end-point to security" but the answer to that is obvious.
Rather, I'm asking whether, given a system to which no new features will be added, will the process of patching the vulnerabilities (buffer overflows, whathaveyou) eventually make it impossible to enter the system by exploiting the software it is runnning? (ignoring other avenues such as social engineering for the moment).
Man, that game ate so much of my time. It was damn hard, took me two years (I was a kid, but not hardcore) to get past the speeder bike section. I was ecstatic when I finally reached those levels with the giant gears in the pipes and the race with the electricity ball. I may just have to fire up the rom, now...
It would have to happen completely, there are far too many people who would keep their pc even for just p2p.
It is a little alarmist to decry "this would be the death of p2p!"
Besides all of the other reasons why this centralisation wouldn't work.
Doesn't it seem odd that an industry that would take more losses from piracy (i.e. a much higher percentage of users that already have the means and ability to pirate the products, and where the individual products are priced higher, providing further incentive for piracy) is making more money than the film industry, which should have a much larger customer base?
Or is it that the barrier-to-piracy on movies is a lot lower?