information theory You probably mean "cryptography". Information theory is related but different. Anyway, cryptography makes a distinction between "obscure" and "secret". The idea is that good cryptography requires a secret. If something is in your possession (like a program on your disk), it's not secret to you (exception could be made for some secure chips that are designed specifically so that you can't read their secret).
> How sensitive would a device have to be, and how fast would it's > processor need to be, to detect a 10mph difference from the > frequency of a radio signal coming from space I wonder? Well, GPS works at about 1GHz; I think we can assume that a GPS receiver can count the number of cycles. 10mph vs speed of light is about 10^-8, meaning about 10 cycles difference in a second. Seems measurable (GPS also provides very accurate time measurements; there might also be possibilities of measuring interference between signals from different satellites). The link I gave indicates an accuracy of about 0.5mph using a combination of doppler shift and location change measurements.
Interesting. Either way, the fact that a given position is off doesn't really imply that the speed is wrong (as long as the position is consistently off). Also, it's the first time personally that I've said that, and there is obviously reason to think that some GPS receivers do use the doppler shift, so please don't be so mad.
High Speed Rail would have the EXACT same security measures as airplanes, except they would be even less safe as blowing up track is easy, especially when you have hundreds of miles to choose from. How do you explain that, in the countries that have high speed rail, the airport security is the same as in the US but there's no such thing for trains? Bombing a plane is already not the most effective way to kill people, it's mostly for show. Attacking a subway would still work better than attacking a high speed rail (or low speed rail for that matter, I don't see why that would make a difference except for popularity, I guess)
> That weird concept of "throwing away your vote" when the person you voted for doesn't win is probably one of the biggest things wrong with our voting system In technical terms it's called "independence of irrelevant alternatives". It doesn't work in most voting systems. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Arrow's_impossibility_theorem
Playing games with ambiguity of the language I used? Not exactly. I was using the same language that the OP used, proving his point that the claim didn't imply P = NP. Also, in maths, "a" usually means "at least one", not "all".
In fact it does suffice to show that the algorithm determines satisfiability of a 3-SAT instance in polynomial time. Really? I have an algorithm that can solve a 3-SAT instance in constant time. Algorithm: if(problem == "true") then "satisfiable" else "failure of classification" "true" is a 3-SAT instance with no variables
I'd LOVE to store entire large XML blocks in databases sometimes, and we decide not to because of space issues. Wait, do you mean that XML takes *less* space than a database? What kind of data do you have in there? I find that a binary format gzipped in a DB is way more efficient (time and space-wise) than XML.
why not just buy ready-made radio chips from people with the fabs to make them and do all the R&D on them? Gee, I wonder why not. Maybe because they're already doing it.
You have simply moved the combustion for energy from your engine to the power plant down the street. That's already a big deal. The plant down the street is way more efficient than a car. The only true answer to our car emissions problem is hydrogen fuel. Ah, yes, because generating/storing hydrogen is soooo efficient.
That's a lot higher than your piece of pie In fact, that's a lot lower. 1mL is about 1g (true for water, nearly true for alcohol) So, to have about 4mL of alcohol, you'd need about 10L of orange juice. BTW, here's your corrected link: http://www.sweetpoison.com/articles/dr-woodrow-monte10.html
I suggest you read up on cryptography. Encryption, in general, is attempting exactly what you're attempting: make plaintext look random. What you're trying to defend against is known as a "known-plaintext attack". You can use any standard cryptographic approach such as AES-CBC as suggested above. For a password-based approach, there are also standard key generation algorithms such as PKCS #5. Note that your claim that your approach gives "as random as it gets" data is not true; once you've fixed for all time a set of random numbers, they're no longer "random". As for generating random-like numbers deterministically, that's what stream ciphers (e.g. RC4) do.
Slashdot Mirror
information theory
You probably mean "cryptography". Information theory is related but different.
Anyway, cryptography makes a distinction between "obscure" and "secret". The idea is that good cryptography requires a secret. If something is in your possession (like a program on your disk), it's not secret to you (exception could be made for some secure chips that are designed specifically so that you can't read their secret).
How is calculating complexity "trivia"? Were the algorithms only described by name?
> How sensitive would a device have to be, and how fast would it's
> processor need to be, to detect a 10mph difference from the
> frequency of a radio signal coming from space I wonder?
Well, GPS works at about 1GHz; I think we can assume that a GPS receiver can count the number of cycles.
10mph vs speed of light is about 10^-8, meaning about 10 cycles difference in a second. Seems measurable (GPS also provides very accurate time measurements; there might also be possibilities of measuring interference between signals from different satellites). The link I gave indicates an accuracy of about 0.5mph using a combination of doppler shift and location change measurements.
Interesting.
Either way, the fact that a given position is off doesn't really imply that the speed is wrong (as long as the position is consistently off).
Also, it's the first time personally that I've said that, and there is obviously reason to think that some GPS receivers do use the doppler shift, so please don't be so mad.
GPS doesn't measure speed by looking at how your position changes; it uses the doppler effect, which is fairly accurate.
http://gpsinformation.net/main/gpsspeed.htm
High Speed Rail would have the EXACT same security measures as airplanes, except they would be even less safe as blowing up track is easy, especially when you have hundreds of miles to choose from.
How do you explain that, in the countries that have high speed rail, the airport security is the same as in the US but there's no such thing for trains?
Bombing a plane is already not the most effective way to kill people, it's mostly for show. Attacking a subway would still work better than attacking a high speed rail (or low speed rail for that matter, I don't see why that would make a difference except for popularity, I guess)
Like in the good old 19th century.
Well, you could always define it at some extremum. For instance the triple point.
> That weird concept of "throwing away your vote" when the person you voted for doesn't win is probably one of the biggest things wrong with our voting system
In technical terms it's called "independence of irrelevant alternatives". It doesn't work in most voting systems.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Arrow's_impossibility_theorem
Playing games with ambiguity of the language I used?
Not exactly. I was using the same language that the OP used, proving his point that the claim didn't imply P = NP. Also, in maths, "a" usually means "at least one", not "all".
In fact it does suffice to show that the algorithm determines satisfiability of a 3-SAT instance in polynomial time.
Really? I have an algorithm that can solve a 3-SAT instance in constant time.
Algorithm:
if(problem == "true") then "satisfiable" else "failure of classification"
"true" is a 3-SAT instance with no variables
France has had a ban on driving with a cell phone in hand for a while now.
I'd LOVE to store entire large XML blocks in databases sometimes, and we decide not to because of space issues.
Wait, do you mean that XML takes *less* space than a database? What kind of data do you have in there? I find that a binary format gzipped in a DB is way more efficient (time and space-wise) than XML.
I don't see anything wrong with old school redirects though.
Well, they only work for http, for one thing.
why not just buy ready-made radio chips from people with the fabs to make them and do all the R&D on them?
Gee, I wonder why not. Maybe because they're already doing it.
I guess you don't mind if someone kills you now then.
The vast majority of CO2 emissions from cars come from driving them, not manufacturing them.
See for instance page 4 of this report:
http://www.pacinst.org/topics/integrity_of_science/case_studies/hummer_vs_prius.pdf
Thats a great example
It also seems like a complete fabrication.
"Uzvekia" returns 4 google hits, "Uzvekia Waterloo" only returning this post.
You have simply moved the combustion for energy from your engine to the power plant down the street.
That's already a big deal. The plant down the street is way more efficient than a car.
The only true answer to our car emissions problem is hydrogen fuel.
Ah, yes, because generating/storing hydrogen is soooo efficient.
> nothing in the law forbids any of both cases, even if there is an exploit to the system in the second one.
Actually, there is a law:
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Rule_against_perpetuities
Are you saying that a FC SAN will give you fewer IOps than this DIMM SSD?
He's talking about latency, not throughput.
So... Everyone should be unhappy so that individuals should be happy?
That's a lot higher than your piece of pie
In fact, that's a lot lower.
1mL is about 1g (true for water, nearly true for alcohol)
So, to have about 4mL of alcohol, you'd need about 10L of orange juice.
BTW, here's your corrected link:
http://www.sweetpoison.com/articles/dr-woodrow-monte10.html
I suggest you read up on cryptography.
Encryption, in general, is attempting exactly what you're attempting: make plaintext look random.
What you're trying to defend against is known as a "known-plaintext attack".
You can use any standard cryptographic approach such as AES-CBC as suggested above.
For a password-based approach, there are also standard key generation algorithms such as PKCS #5.
Note that your claim that your approach gives "as random as it gets" data is not true; once you've fixed for all time a set of random numbers, they're no longer "random".
As for generating random-like numbers deterministically, that's what stream ciphers (e.g. RC4) do.
This is about as believable as the post about DuPont.
Hemp is still being cultivated commercially. It hasn't revolutionized anything.