I think thats part of a two-pronged approach to the same end: the net grows closer (meaning: high bandwidth connection density, and covered areas grow) and the tools become more portable and get longer (radio) range.
At some point in the future, the entire range will be spanned, so that neither (portable) computing power nor (portable) viewing capability are far away from the internet. That will be the time when our rollable displays and keyboards pc have both with radio interfaces to the internet (where avilable) and to each other. And to the mass storage units.
I couldn't make out where that exact prediction was made - that might have to do with the fact that I didn't find an article following the link, just an index of articles of which one was about Earthquakes.
It is apparently now possible to locate the epicenters of tiny earthquakes ("microquakes") that occur very often, and they found that these often occur in the same spot, which would tell us that that location is a place where no bigger Earthquake could happen, as the tension is released often.
Even if we assume that we can conclude the other way round (saying, if the microquakes cease for a while, the probability of a bigger quake right in that spot would rise - which is probably true sometimes), still there would be no information about when the bigger quake would occur or how much bigger it was.
Sure, one could estimate the energy buildup (maybe, in some way), but the time when the bigger quake happens is still unknown. Also, the absence of microquakes is just telling that no more of these are happening - noone can know if this is because tension is building up or if for some reason this place is now lubricated better and tends not to lock anymore.
What one would need is a reliable way to measure the tension underground, and still it wouldn't be possible to know when a big quake happens. It would give a result like "Uh this tension is really high. Better we leave right now and dont come back until the big quake happened."
So far, the only sensible protection against Earthquakes is either buildings that withstand earthquakes (or dont kill people when they collapse... well the first approach sure is favoured;) or not building at all where quakes happen.
As others stated, (as always in cryptography) if the stegging user isn't stupid (means he would encode before steg), the data to be stegged would be as random as the data that you steg it in. There is no possibility to tell one set of random data from another set of random data.
I think they do it for discovering stupid spys.
Slashdot Mirror
why don't you simply put these words in your filter before tomorrow?
I think thats part of a two-pronged approach to the same end: the net grows closer (meaning: high bandwidth connection density, and covered areas grow) and the tools become more portable and get longer (radio) range.
At some point in the future, the entire range will be spanned, so that neither (portable) computing power nor (portable) viewing capability are far away from the internet. That will be the time when our rollable displays and keyboards pc have both with radio interfaces to the internet (where avilable) and to each other. And to the mass storage units.
It is apparently now possible to locate the epicenters of tiny earthquakes ("microquakes") that occur very often, and they found that these often occur in the same spot, which would tell us that that location is a place where no bigger Earthquake could happen, as the tension is released often.
Even if we assume that we can conclude the other way round (saying, if the microquakes cease for a while, the probability of a bigger quake right in that spot would rise - which is probably true sometimes), still there would be no information about when the bigger quake would occur or how much bigger it was.
Sure, one could estimate the energy buildup (maybe, in some way), but the time when the bigger quake happens is still unknown. Also, the absence of microquakes is just telling that no more of these are happening - noone can know if this is because tension is building up or if for some reason this place is now lubricated better and tends not to lock anymore.
What one would need is a reliable way to measure the tension underground, and still it wouldn't be possible to know when a big quake happens. It would give a result like "Uh this tension is really high. Better we leave right now and dont come back until the big quake happened."
So far, the only sensible protection against Earthquakes is either buildings that withstand earthquakes (or dont kill people when they collapse... well the first approach sure is favoured ;) or not building at all where quakes happen.
As others stated, (as always in cryptography) if the stegging user isn't stupid (means he would encode before steg), the data to be stegged would be as random as the data that you steg it in. There is no possibility to tell one set of random data from another set of random data. I think they do it for discovering stupid spys.