the length of the "one time pad" is large, but the number of them available? I mean the number of quasars that are good enough receivable to use for this purpose. I have no idea, but I doubt if its more than 2^32. In that case, brute force would be quite easy: just try each of the available quasar signals.:
Record the signal of each of them at time T, also record the encrypted message at time T, and try them all out in a fast computer. Then you'll know which one you need to use for the rest of the encypted source.
The number of real "one time pads" is much larger, given a decent random generator. But indeed their length is shorter, which is also good since using a one time pad for a very long time is not good if the one time pad somehow leaks.
Maybe KDE is an exception here (I think there is this preloaded shared libraries which seems to help, is it disabled in the FreeBSD port?), but generally FreeBSD is not slower than Linux on the desktop.
Under some load and disk-I/O I think that FreeBSD remains much more responsive than Linux.
Hmm, I have to reply to myself. After trying it out some more I did find some drawbacks and limitations. I think we'll stick to pl/sql deverloper after all.
We've been using pl/sql developer for 5 years. I like it, but I could also live with oracle sql developer.
A problem with pl/sql developer has been partitioned tables (hardly supported).
I think for sql and ddl, the oracle tool is better. For pl/sql development and debugging, pl/sql deverloper seems better. However nowadays we hardly use pl/sql anymore, I think our group will move to sql deverloper and not renew our service contract for pl/sql developer.
in germany and switzerland all retailers still have it, with about equals shelf space than xbox and ps2. i have a ps2 myself but my next one shall be a nintendo revolution i think.
why should you blame everyone when everyone is blaming you?
a more logical reaction would be to consider that maybe there is really something wrong with your behaviour, and finally change it. until now, all MSFT has ever done is to keep their old ways in spite of several convictions, and try to hide that. they fail to have any sound self criticism. i think the companies culture is so rotten, it be better when they are split up after all, for the market but also for their shareholders. only then is there a chance to improve and change.
sorry to drag another subject into this, but i have been claiming for years that the current system of drug development is wrong. in discussions about patents, I am getting sick of people always coming up with the example of the pharmaceutical industry as "proof" that patents are necessary. I would say, to the contrary.
the current pharmaceutical industry system (including patents) only serves to develop new drugs that aren't really needed (broadly spoken). IMHO it is not money that should dictate what drugs are necessary. the subject is just too important on a political level. it should be politics determining what happens (in the end, if all is well with the political system) the people. short term financial gain has no place in something this critical for society.
therefore I propose to abolish patents, to have states direct and take over control on drug development (universities, state funded research) and sometimes pay commercial companies to develop in contract (e.g. to organize clinical trials). without patents the work can be more efficiently organized: better cooperation, free exchange and use of information in order to reach results as fast as possible, let research groups read and use each others results as fast as possible and try to achieve optimal scientific results.
It remains irritating that society is profiting from our most talented individuals. The others are only in it for the money, but their well being in the end depends on science/engineering. It is injust to value that so lowly.
In the long run, this shall have an impact: each parent wants the best for their children. I studied physics, and landed in time in software consulting to make a very nice living. However, future prospects don't look very good. I won't really motivate my 2 children to study physics for example, but rather become a doctor or something else with better prospects. After 1 or 2 generations, you'll have less and less people (already happening) that might be motivated in the first place because they have been influenced from infancy onwards to stay away from hard science & engineering.
Especially in times of gloomy prospects for the world and standard of living, people go back to ensuring basic needs, and in this case money is important. I am sure that many of these so called idealistic engineers are very annoyed by lawers and sales people being valued much better (both in money and also in influence in politics and power in general) nowadays. Where are the times that engineers also had a word to say in politics, in leading companies etc. For me personally, I am especially concerned with the low status not so much because of money, but for status and influence in society.
The general tendency now is that scientists and engineers are weird people that should be happy for their job but for the rest should be quiet and just make sure that the political elite (mainly lawyers, MBA's and the like) can continue their egoistic way of living.
If all higher educated people are only of that kind, I think society crumbles. The real substance is gone, all real innovation happens somewhere else (i.e. in Asia). The egoistic kind makes short sighted decisions and decisions that are harmfull to the great majority of the people.
So to summarize: if the state wants more engineers, maybe they should not (only) value them better in terms of money, but especially in terms of influence and status. And money is a secondary part of that.
I have an iPod and keep trying each new version of itunes, hoping that one day i'll like it. However, until now, I love my iPod but cannot stand itunes. Instead I use jriver media center, which also has excellent ipod and podcast support. It is much more versatile and advanced than itunes, however it is not free. It can handle huge libraries (I have almost 100'000 tracks on a remote disk) very well and fast. itunes just can't copy with that.
Since Java is used for almost 100% of new projects (at least in Switzerland in large companies), it can hardly go up any further.
Now Java/J2EE has replaced any other environment in the last years, obviously it is seen that in some cases there may be better solutions. Not each project is intended to last for 10 years, sometimes you just need some quick and dirty tool or prototype, for which a scripting language might be more appropriate. If it is a little tool with strong emphasis on GUI and office integration, of course.NET comes to mind as well. I have nothing against that. Lateley we have seen the approach that one tool (J2EE) had to be used for any task as forced by centralized architecture departments. Now I think they have seen that this was wrong, and one has to use the right tool for the job. However, for any large and long term project, there still is no real alternative (nor is one needed) for Java.
Indeed sometimes one gets the feeling that Sun, in the name of backwards compatability, is too conservative. People scream for new features. But in the long run, when you have large projects in a very large organization (with 1000's of developers) you can be glad that Java does not develop like C# does.
Yes, Java made some design mistakes in the beginning, and even today we're still stuck with them. However, MSFT also was able to copy Java and introduce new design errors in.NET even though they had years of experience to learn from (but alas they suffer from the not invented here syndrome), and they do not make a problem to make incompatible changes.
Which is the reason that all larger enterprises use Java and don't even think of.NET.
Re:Market Opportunity for Macs and Linux
on
Buy Vista or Else
·
· Score: 1
Windows might be degraded to a pure gaming platform. That is quite a step back from its current position.
I for one would consider to switch my desktop to linux, and move games to either a console or dual boot into my existing (by then outdated and unsupported) windows. When it is used only as a gaming environment, the security argument looses quite some weight. I won't upgrade to vista, that is sure.
yes, nice and just principle (do unto others...). however that doesn't change a thing in this respect: the state grants a monopoly to a person creating a work of entertainment. by this, the state grants the artificial possibility to consider such a work as "posession", thus making it possible to steal it (kind of).
however, I don't agree with granting this monopoly in the first place. I am principally against copyright, so I cannot acknowledge this kind of posession. I think that posession must only apply to physical objects, not to ideas or concepts. So for me it is not stealing, and it has nothing to do with "do unto others...".
no, science is a matter for universities and thus for the state. business may of course do research (or even science) and try to keep it secret and cash in on it, but IMO may not expect any state protection in the form of a state granted monopoly (i.e. patent).
patents are fundamentally and wrong as a matter of principle.
true science is not patentable anyway. only applied research is. the distinction is arbitrary and unjust, but to make true science patentable would be insane, which is even the insight of the usual patent proponents.
Interesting suggestion. I just read the spec, and it seems to have been designed to be truely universal. It supports attributes found in any operating system and can be adapted to any medium (all kinds of block size etc. are free and thus can be set to values to accomodate any type of medium).
I think it is a bit heavy, but nowadays that should not really matter.
you know patents exist to encourage innovation, so FAT must be innovative. If its inventor would not have the incentive provided by a possible patent, the world shurely would have had to live without FAT.
what are you talking about? java is faster than.net/C#. I benchmarked it myself. I don't care to prove it now, but believe me (and google around a bit for published benchmarks): java being slow is very very outdated and stems from times before a decent jit was available. it achieves about 80-90% of native (C/C++) speed in most cases, and.net is NOT faster than java.
it is very sad that so many people fall for the MSFT ploy to sabotage java and supply the world with incompatible and slow JVM, and now after all these years many still blindly assume that java is slow.
indeed, and since java offers all that.net offers, and more, I see no reason at all to use.net/mono. just use java, it runs everywhere and is superior to.net
if due to some software error your filesystem gets corrupt, or due to a human error you type the wrong command, all your data are gone even if the raid-hw and the drives is working perfectly.
i also use drives for backup, but make a daily or weekly rsync to copy one disk to the other(s). for important data i use more than 1 generation of backup.
Nickname: Stephan Kinsella Review: As a practicing patent attorney, I've observed that both proponents and opponents of the patent system use unprincipled, flawed, utilitarian (wealth-maximization) reasoning to support their position. The primarily principled opponents of patents are anti-industrialist, anti-private-property socialists. The solution is to realize that there is a non-socialist, pro-property rights, principled case against patents, as I have laid out in my article Against Intellectual Property, available at Mises.org http://www.mises.org/journals/jls/15_2/15_2_1.pdf> . Date reviewed: Jan 3, 2006 8:54 PM
Please do read this PDF, you'll see that rejecting intellectual property has NOTHING to do with rejecting property in general, on the contrary. Thus your comparison to communism is totally wrong.
it states correctly that trade marks should not exist either, but deceiving "consumers" (voters in this case) is punishable.
example: some crappy company A renaming itself and using a name of a well known company B could not be sued by B, since trade mark does not exist if all intellectual property is to be abolished. however, the consumers may feel deceived in this case and thus have a right to sue. it is not trade mark, but misleading that is the matter here.
Is the only thing stopping me from using Opera. All external solutions (I tried them all, squid + filter, webwasher, proxomitron, and several others) are all too cumbersome.
Slashdot Mirror
the length of the "one time pad" is large, but the number of them available? I mean the number of quasars that are good enough receivable to use for this purpose. I have no idea, but I doubt if its more than 2^32. In that case, brute force would be quite easy: just try each of the available quasar signals.:
Record the signal of each of them at time T, also record the encrypted message at time T, and try them all out in a fast computer. Then you'll know which one you need to use for the rest of the encypted source.
The number of real "one time pads" is much larger, given a decent random generator. But indeed their length is shorter, which is also good since using a one time pad for a very long time is not good if the one time pad somehow leaks.
Maybe KDE is an exception here (I think there is this preloaded shared libraries which seems to help, is it disabled in the FreeBSD port?), but generally FreeBSD is not slower than Linux on the desktop.
Under some load and disk-I/O I think that FreeBSD remains much more responsive than Linux.
Especially "or maybe that has happened already". Is the great diplomat Theo de Raadt now resorting to extortion?
If the people writing those drivers would not be working on OpenBSD, they would probably write those drivers for FreeBSD or Linux.
Hmm, I have to reply to myself. After trying it out some more I did find some drawbacks and limitations. I think we'll stick to pl/sql deverloper after all.
We've been using pl/sql developer for 5 years. I like it, but I could also live with oracle sql developer.
A problem with pl/sql developer has been partitioned tables (hardly supported).
I think for sql and ddl, the oracle tool is better.
For pl/sql development and debugging, pl/sql deverloper seems better. However nowadays we hardly use pl/sql anymore, I think our group will move to sql deverloper and not renew our service contract for pl/sql developer.
in germany and switzerland all retailers still have it, with about equals shelf space than xbox and ps2.
i have a ps2 myself but my next one shall be a nintendo revolution i think.
why should you blame everyone when everyone is blaming you?
a more logical reaction would be to consider that maybe there is really something wrong with your behaviour, and finally change it. until now, all MSFT has ever done is to keep their old ways in spite of several convictions, and try to hide that. they fail to have any sound self criticism. i think the companies culture is so rotten, it be better when they are split up after all, for the market but also for their shareholders. only then is there a chance to improve and change.
indeed, they should split content and electronics, just like philips electronics spun off Polygram in 1998.
sorry to drag another subject into this, but i have been claiming for years that the current system of drug development is wrong. in discussions about patents, I am getting sick of people always coming up with the example of the pharmaceutical industry as "proof" that patents are necessary. I would say, to the contrary.
the current pharmaceutical industry system (including patents) only serves to develop new drugs that aren't really needed (broadly spoken). IMHO it is not money that should dictate what drugs are necessary. the subject is just too important on a political level. it should be politics determining what happens (in the end, if all is well with the political system) the people. short term financial gain has no place in something this critical for society.
therefore I propose to abolish patents, to have states direct and take over control on drug development (universities, state funded research) and sometimes pay commercial companies to develop in contract (e.g. to organize clinical trials). without patents the work can be more efficiently organized: better cooperation, free exchange and use of information in order to reach results as fast as possible, let research groups read and use each others results as fast as possible and try to achieve optimal scientific results.
It remains irritating that society is profiting from our most talented individuals. The others are only in it for the money, but their well being in the end depends on science/engineering. It is injust to value that so lowly.
In the long run, this shall have an impact: each parent wants the best for their children. I studied physics, and landed in time in software consulting to make a very nice living. However, future prospects don't look very good. I won't really motivate my 2 children to study physics for example, but rather become a doctor or something else with better prospects. After 1 or 2 generations, you'll have less and less people (already happening) that might be motivated in the first place because they have been influenced from infancy onwards to stay away from hard science & engineering.
Especially in times of gloomy prospects for the world and standard of living, people go back to ensuring basic needs, and in this case money is important. I am sure that many of these so called idealistic engineers are very annoyed by lawers and sales people being valued much better (both in money and also in influence in politics and power in general) nowadays. Where are the times that engineers also had a word to say in politics, in leading companies etc. For me personally, I am especially concerned with the low status not so much because of money, but for status and influence in society.
The general tendency now is that scientists and engineers are weird people that should be happy for their job but for the rest should be quiet and just make sure that the political elite (mainly lawyers, MBA's and the like) can continue their egoistic way of living.
If all higher educated people are only of that kind, I think society crumbles. The real substance is gone, all real innovation happens somewhere else (i.e. in Asia). The egoistic kind makes short sighted decisions and decisions that are harmfull to the great majority of the people.
So to summarize: if the state wants more engineers, maybe they should not (only) value them better in terms of money, but especially in terms of influence and status. And money is a secondary part of that.
I have an iPod and keep trying each new version of itunes, hoping that one day i'll like it.
However, until now, I love my iPod but cannot stand itunes. Instead I use jriver media center, which also has excellent ipod and podcast support. It is much more versatile and advanced than itunes, however it is not free. It can handle huge libraries (I have almost 100'000 tracks on a remote disk) very well and fast.
itunes just can't copy with that.
Since Java is used for almost 100% of new projects (at least in Switzerland in large companies), it can hardly go up any further.
.NET comes to mind as well. I have nothing against that. Lateley we have seen the approach that one tool (J2EE) had to be used for any task as forced by centralized architecture departments. Now I think they have seen that this was wrong, and one has to use the right tool for the job. However, for any large and long term project, there still is no real alternative (nor is one needed) for Java.
Now Java/J2EE has replaced any other environment in the last years, obviously it is seen that in some cases there may be better solutions. Not each project is intended to last for 10 years, sometimes you just need some quick and dirty tool or prototype, for which a scripting language might be more appropriate. If it is a little tool with strong emphasis on GUI and office integration, of course
Indeed sometimes one gets the feeling that Sun, in the name of backwards compatability, is too conservative. People scream for new features. But in the long run, when you have large projects in a very large organization (with 1000's of developers) you can be glad that Java does not develop like C# does.
.NET even though they had years of experience to learn from (but alas they suffer from the not invented here syndrome), and they do not make a problem to make incompatible changes.
.NET.
Yes, Java made some design mistakes in the beginning, and even today we're still stuck with them. However, MSFT also was able to copy Java and introduce new design errors in
Which is the reason that all larger enterprises use Java and don't even think of
Windows might be degraded to a pure gaming platform. That is quite a step back from its current position.
I for one would consider to switch my desktop to linux, and move games to either a console or dual boot into my existing (by then outdated and unsupported) windows. When it is used only as a gaming environment, the security argument looses quite some weight. I won't upgrade to vista, that is sure.
yes, nice and just principle (do unto others ...). however that doesn't change a thing in this respect: the state grants a monopoly to a person creating a work of entertainment. by this, the state grants the artificial possibility to consider such a work as "posession", thus making it possible to steal it (kind of).
...".
however, I don't agree with granting this monopoly in the first place. I am principally against copyright, so I cannot acknowledge this kind of posession. I think that posession must only apply to physical objects, not to ideas or concepts. So for me it is not stealing, and it has nothing to do with "do unto others
no, science is a matter for universities and thus for the state. business may of course do research (or even science) and try to keep it secret and cash in on it, but IMO may not expect any state protection in the form of a state granted monopoly (i.e. patent).
patents are fundamentally and wrong as a matter of principle.
true science is not patentable anyway. only applied research is. the distinction is arbitrary and unjust, but to make true science patentable would be insane, which is even the insight of the usual patent proponents.
Interesting suggestion. I just read the spec, and it seems to have been designed to be truely universal. It supports attributes found in any operating system and can be adapted to any medium (all kinds of block size etc. are free and thus can be set to values to accomodate any type of medium).
I think it is a bit heavy, but nowadays that should not really matter.
you know patents exist to encourage innovation, so FAT must be innovative. If its inventor would not have the incentive provided by a possible patent, the world shurely would have had to live without FAT.
what are you talking about? java is faster than .net/C#. I benchmarked it myself. I don't care to prove it now, but believe me (and google around a bit for published benchmarks): java being slow is very very outdated and stems from times before a decent jit was available. it achieves about 80-90% of native (C/C++) speed in most cases, and .net is NOT faster than java.
it is very sad that so many people fall for the MSFT ploy to sabotage java and supply the world with incompatible and slow JVM, and now after all these years many still blindly assume that java is slow.
indeed, and since java offers all that .net offers, and more, I see no reason at all to use .net/mono. .net
just use java, it runs everywhere and is superior to
if due to some software error your filesystem gets corrupt, or due to a human error you type the wrong command, all your data are gone even if the raid-hw and the drives is working perfectly.
i also use drives for backup, but make a daily or weekly rsync to copy one disk to the other(s). for important data i use more than 1 generation of backup.
Please do read this PDF, you'll see that rejecting intellectual property has NOTHING to do with rejecting property in general, on the contrary. Thus your comparison to communism is totally wrong.
just read this comment (indirect reaction on todays article on patents): http://www.mises.org/journals/jls/15_2/15_2_1.pdf
it states correctly that trade marks should not exist either, but deceiving "consumers" (voters in this case) is punishable.
example: some crappy company A renaming itself and using a name of a well known company B could not be sued by B, since trade mark does not exist if all intellectual property is to be abolished. however, the consumers may feel deceived in this case and thus have a right to sue. it is not trade mark, but misleading that is the matter here.
Is the only thing stopping me from using Opera. All external solutions (I tried them all, squid + filter, webwasher, proxomitron, and several others) are all too cumbersome.