A "strengthening" dollar is _exactly_ what will eventually place the collective nads of the USians in the hands of foreign powers. That's because most of the US foreign and domestic debt is expressed in US dollars.
Paying debts incurred when the dollar was "strong" with "weak" dollars is a game the US has been playing for quite a while - essentially using the rest of the world as a buffer-zone for moderating the boom-bust economic cycle they have going over there.
Up until now it's been business as usual - war, leading to internal economic crisis leading to inflation leading to lower (nominal) debt leading to economic "recovery" at the expense of creditors.
However, it seems the powers that be (or the invisible hand, or some other factor or combination of factors) have made it so that the US of A will not be allowed to weasel their way out of crisis via inflation this time.
Imho, it's the price you pay for being the reserve currency of a truly globalized economy - your currency is not under your control anymore, even if the money-printing press is.
Yes, we all know that's Bill's wet dream but who the heck do you think is going to pay rent for computing?
Hint: even the most retarded know (or will find out soon enough if such a model is tried) that if they don't pay the tax, their data will be held for ransom.
"Wanna see photos of your grandson? Pony up, Gramps!" Joe Sixpack Sr won't stand for that. Ever.
Could be the slow file-copy bug - known issue, partly fixed in SP1. The network API basically races for I/O time with the file API. If your CAD app moves around a lot of small files on the fly (such as I dunno... layers maybe?), you're bound to get in trouble.
Scared much? Grow a pair, will ya? Those kids on guard detail are mostly on fixed posts. If there is a patrol - a big if - just wait till they move along, maybe get nice shots of their ill-fitting army issue pants from behind as well.
But preempting a product by stealing its idea? It very seldom happens.
You are conflating my argument with a previous poster's. I never suggested that some competitor could (or would want to) preempt anything. A better scenario would be a second-mover scenario where you have stolen the idea and developed it, yet wait for the originator to develop, launch and take the inevitable early popularity hit from minor game mechanics glitches and launch-time bugs. You hit the shelves two weeks later, with a bigger and better thing - one that also has your own secret sauce added.
Suppose Miyamoto lets it slip that they're working on Wii Philately.
That's another strawman you're fighting. It matters not one whit what he's working on. The angle, the spin, the original twist is everything. If the company knows that his musings about newfound hobbies usually turn into original ideas about games and gaming, well...
Other than that, you're still missing the point with all that talk about creativity being process. It's not. Everybody who's somebody has process down pat.
You talk about an iPod killer. That's Microsoft talk, big bureaucracy crapolanguage. "Og smash!" is not a recipe for creativity.
Apple killed the iPod themselves - they let the iPhone gobble it up, while everyone was scrambling to produce a better iPod than the iPod.
Well guess what, you can't be a better Catholic than the Pope is. All you can do is start your own religion, be Luther - a revolutionary, not a process guy whose thinking is limited to "everything you can do, we can do better".
There must be some part of your reasoning that I'm missing. If the guy (who's something of a genius) bleats publicly for half an hour on what *exactly* he likes about poker, a team of people just as competent and dedicated as his own team might be able to get all the inspiration they need from that to create one of the best chance-based games of all time. Ideas are very valuable but eminently stealable.
And why shouldn't we? Let's make duels legal again. I'd be willing to bet that no-one will go to jail for a "crime of passion" ever again. Not to mention the huge benefits to the body politic.
Ah, it's possible. But maybe you're just unable to look beyond your sweeping generalization ("driving game with cute characters") to see the actual original ideas that made his games big.
It may not help every scenario, but it adds log2(number of addresses) bits of entropy.
That's not much, and as you stated it doesn't help in every scenario, unlike the source port thing.
Point taken on the DoS scenarios you propose, but they're definitely less serious, as far as the user is concerned. An unavailable DNS is better than a spoofed one, imo.
Your statistical oracle is off here too.
I was going to take that statistical oracle for a check-up one of these days. Seems the date just got moved up a bit.
The solution to DNS cache poisoning has a name: DNSSEC
Afaik, there are known key distribution and rollover problems with the standard as proposed. Also, I'm not so fond of the idea of a single entity controlling the domain name system.
The entropy of query IDs was thought to be adequate to defend against all known methods of blind collision.
There seems to have been no valid technical reason for that particular belief, no?
You could also, for example, note when a nameserver has multiple IP addresses and have it randomize source address as well,
What good would that do? How would treating a particular deployment scenario do anything for the security of all the different servers?
If there's any disingenuity here, it's in how you keep ignoring the effect additional complexity has on analyzing the security of the implementation, and that the approach djb chose may in fact have created vulnerabilities in other areas.
You meant "might" instead of "may", probably. It's improbable (verging on damn near impossible) that the multi-vendor patch would have gone out (after months of hand-wringing) if anyone had suspected the fix might introduce other problems.
It's obvious no one knew about this attack until recently. Attacks don't stay secret for 7 years.
Oh, but you are. Here's a comment from 2001 clearly stating the class of attacks against which source port randomization works as a mitigating factor. The attack vector was known, the solution known... but not implemented, except by DJB.
Are you seriously suggesting that no hacker ever found out about that particular trick until Kaminsky made such a fuss about it?
As a white hat, your moral obligation is to protect the innocent (i.e. Joe Public), not to safeguard the guilty/incompetent (i.e. John Company) from the consequences of their decisions and actions. Anything less than full disclosure runs many risks - corruption, gag orders, you name it.
You're disingenuous to the extreme, sir. There was reasoning behind his "inefficient" design - it's not like he got up one morning and said "Oh hey, I know what I'll do today - I'll go and implement DNS in the most ass-backwards way I can think of!". Luck has nothing to do with it.
Easy. They get horrible power density (few watts per square meter). However, since they stumbled upon a process that doesn't use the cumbersome and highly expensive technology inherited by solar from the chip fabbing industry, their cost per square meter is low enough that they can get away with that. Who'd 'a' thunk it?
Read some history. You could do worse than to start with the history of the RAF (the terrorist group, not the flyboys) or that of the Russian revolution.
Bwahahaha. A rag-tag mix of all the world's outcast creeds and populations, with a "history" of barely four centuries is going to dominate Earth's most ancient civilization - on cultural grounds, no less. Do tell.
Slashdot Mirror
I'm curious as to what you think this accomplishes, beside putting undue thermal stress on your processor.
A "strengthening" dollar is _exactly_ what will eventually place the collective nads of the USians in the hands of foreign powers. That's because most of the US foreign and domestic debt is expressed in US dollars.
Paying debts incurred when the dollar was "strong" with "weak" dollars is a game the US has been playing for quite a while - essentially using the rest of the world as a buffer-zone for moderating the boom-bust economic cycle they have going over there.
Up until now it's been business as usual - war, leading to internal economic crisis leading to inflation leading to lower (nominal) debt leading to economic "recovery" at the expense of creditors.
However, it seems the powers that be (or the invisible hand, or some other factor or combination of factors) have made it so that the US of A will not be allowed to weasel their way out of crisis via inflation this time.
Imho, it's the price you pay for being the reserve currency of a truly globalized economy - your currency is not under your control anymore, even if the money-printing press is.
Yes, we all know that's Bill's wet dream but who the heck do you think is going to pay rent for computing?
Hint: even the most retarded know (or will find out soon enough if such a model is tried) that if they don't pay the tax, their data will be held for ransom.
"Wanna see photos of your grandson? Pony up, Gramps!" Joe Sixpack Sr won't stand for that. Ever.
Could be the slow file-copy bug - known issue, partly fixed in SP1. The network API basically races for I/O time with the file API. If your CAD app moves around a lot of small files on the fly (such as I dunno... layers maybe?), you're bound to get in trouble.
That's all stuff that third parties implemented for XP a long while ago.
Minitru, comrade! Oldspeak doubleplusungood! Thoughtcrime imminent!
Scared much? Grow a pair, will ya? Those kids on guard detail are mostly on fixed posts. If there is a patrol - a big if - just wait till they move along, maybe get nice shots of their ill-fitting army issue pants from behind as well.
Heh. Damn straight.
But preempting a product by stealing its idea? It very seldom happens.
You are conflating my argument with a previous poster's. I never suggested that some competitor could (or would want to) preempt anything. A better scenario would be a second-mover scenario where you have stolen the idea and developed it, yet wait for the originator to develop, launch and take the inevitable early popularity hit from minor game mechanics glitches and launch-time bugs. You hit the shelves two weeks later, with a bigger and better thing - one that also has your own secret sauce added.
Suppose Miyamoto lets it slip that they're working on Wii Philately.
That's another strawman you're fighting. It matters not one whit what he's working on. The angle, the spin, the original twist is everything. If the company knows that his musings about newfound hobbies usually turn into original ideas about games and gaming, well...
Other than that, you're still missing the point with all that talk about creativity being process. It's not. Everybody who's somebody has process down pat.
You talk about an iPod killer. That's Microsoft talk, big bureaucracy crapolanguage. "Og smash!" is not a recipe for creativity.
Apple killed the iPod themselves - they let the iPhone gobble it up, while everyone was scrambling to produce a better iPod than the iPod.
Well guess what, you can't be a better Catholic than the Pope is. All you can do is start your own religion, be Luther - a revolutionary, not a process guy whose thinking is limited to "everything you can do, we can do better".
There must be some part of your reasoning that I'm missing. If the guy (who's something of a genius) bleats publicly for half an hour on what *exactly* he likes about poker, a team of people just as competent and dedicated as his own team might be able to get all the inspiration they need from that to create one of the best chance-based games of all time. Ideas are very valuable but eminently stealable.
And why shouldn't we? Let's make duels legal again. I'd be willing to bet that no-one will go to jail for a "crime of passion" ever again. Not to mention the huge benefits to the body politic.
Wii Extreme Penetration. Playable with just the original nunchuks.
Ah, it's possible. But maybe you're just unable to look beyond your sweeping generalization ("driving game with cute characters") to see the actual original ideas that made his games big.
It being NZ, I suspect it has something to do with sheep, no?
So where's the UN now? Their mandate should be withdrawn, perhaps?
I always get mod points when I don't need them. No fair!
It may not help every scenario, but it adds log2(number of addresses) bits of entropy.
That's not much, and as you stated it doesn't help in every scenario, unlike the source port thing.
Point taken on the DoS scenarios you propose, but they're definitely less serious, as far as the user is concerned. An unavailable DNS is better than a spoofed one, imo.
Your statistical oracle is off here too.
I was going to take that statistical oracle for a check-up one of these days. Seems the date just got moved up a bit.
The solution to DNS cache poisoning has a name: DNSSEC
Afaik, there are known key distribution and rollover problems with the standard as proposed. Also, I'm not so fond of the idea of a single entity controlling the domain name system.
The entropy of query IDs was thought to be adequate to defend against all known methods of blind collision.
There seems to have been no valid technical reason for that particular belief, no?
You could also, for example, note when a nameserver has multiple IP addresses and have it randomize source address as well,
What good would that do? How would treating a particular deployment scenario do anything for the security of all the different servers?
If there's any disingenuity here, it's in how you keep ignoring the effect additional complexity has on analyzing the security of the implementation, and that the approach djb chose may in fact have created vulnerabilities in other areas.
You meant "might" instead of "may", probably. It's improbable (verging on damn near impossible) that the multi-vendor patch would have gone out (after months of hand-wringing) if anyone had suspected the fix might introduce other problems.
It's obvious no one knew about this attack until recently. Attacks don't stay secret for 7 years.
How is it obvious?
Oh, but you are. Here's a comment from 2001 clearly stating the class of attacks against which source port randomization works as a mitigating factor. The attack vector was known, the solution known... but not implemented, except by DJB.
Are you seriously suggesting that no hacker ever found out about that particular trick until Kaminsky made such a fuss about it?
As a white hat, your moral obligation is to protect the innocent (i.e. Joe Public), not to safeguard the guilty/incompetent (i.e. John Company) from the consequences of their decisions and actions. Anything less than full disclosure runs many risks - corruption, gag orders, you name it.
You're disingenuous to the extreme, sir. There was reasoning behind his "inefficient" design - it's not like he got up one morning and said "Oh hey, I know what I'll do today - I'll go and implement DNS in the most ass-backwards way I can think of!". Luck has nothing to do with it.
Easy. They get horrible power density (few watts per square meter). However, since they stumbled upon a process that doesn't use the cumbersome and highly expensive technology inherited by solar from the chip fabbing industry, their cost per square meter is low enough that they can get away with that. Who'd 'a' thunk it?
Read some history. You could do worse than to start with the history of the RAF (the terrorist group, not the flyboys) or that of the Russian revolution.
Of course! That's exactly why anglo culture didn't go anywhere!
Bwahahaha. A rag-tag mix of all the world's outcast creeds and populations, with a "history" of barely four centuries is going to dominate Earth's most ancient civilization - on cultural grounds, no less. Do tell.