Surely HDMI is a benefit? Just hack into the lines carrying data to the actual display elements themselves.
Although I suppose modern analogue systems aren't *too* bad - just remove the smoothing capacitors from the one bit output DACs, and sample the pulse width modulated data at an exceedingly silly rate.;)
That depends on filing system - I vaugely remember hearing something about XFS being about to log subsequent writes so that the image is of the drive as it was when the backup started.
For my degree thesis, I worked on combining genetic algorithms, simulated annealing, error injection, and timing side channel analysis.
My supervisor had done prior research in the field, applying it to strong public key encryption. IIRC, with the cipher text and plain text, you could reduce the key search space by about a third in a couple of hours.
I can't believe that AES wouldn't wither under the same sort of attack.
My server is set up to use it. If SpamAssassin thinks it's clean, it gets delivered straight away. If it's a little spammy, it's put on a grey list, and the sending machine is told to retry later. If it's blatant spam, it's rejected. Optionally, it can even tarpit the sender, leaving the socket open.
I now receive one piece of spam email a day, and that is tagged correctly and goes straight into my junk mail folder.
This only applies if you're a mathematician - if you merely want to use mathematics, you only need to know that it works, not how it works or why it works.
It was a single user operating system, for crying out loud! It would have required a review of every single line of code to ensure that it worked reliably and securely after a multiuser retrofit.
No, an attempt was made to use it in embedded systems, and it failed miserably. Clearly it was unsuited, otherwise it's superior media capabilities would have walked all over the likes of VxWorks.
The first rule of tooth club is: You must not talk about tooth club. The second rule of tooth club is: YOU MUST NOT TALK ABOUT TOOTH CLUB... Wait i got that wrong. The second rule is: No smoking
It was inflexible in the fact that it was suited only to the desktop. Therefore, once MS made the desktop market unviable for them, it died.
If they had produced a flexible operating system that was widely applicable, they wouldn't have had to worry about the desktop market dying, because they would have had fingers in the server, embedded and console markets.
Bad stuff? Like proper network support, multiuser operation, etc?
With NeXTStep, they got a proven OS base that would scale from single user workstations, up through servers, all the way on to gigantic clusters. Such abilities are important for diversification, and thus survival. The work required to add such capabilities to BeOS would have been gigantic, and the fact that BeOS died a testament to it's inflexibility.
I'd imagine people would think it's spite due to the fact he always goes after the low hanging fruit that is Apple, rather than the far more draconian DRM of Windows Media, etc.
C is crap. Not a truly OO language. Your hands are tied to a bunch of low level commands, and if you want more features you need to download a lot of nonsensical libraries.... or you can write your own libraries. But unfortunately the average C programm doesn't know how to do that and make them reusable.... and if they did know how to do that, then they'd use LISP to write those components.... whih would kill any reason why you should use C.
So C is crap.
Scheme rules. Why? Because it's the essence of LISP. And LISP rules.
L
Slashdot Mirror
Tell the person forced away from the hospital bedside mere moments before their lover passes away that it's all in the name of lawsuit prevention.
I'm sure that'll brighten their spirits in no time.
Surely HDMI is a benefit? Just hack into the lines carrying data to the actual display elements themselves.
;)
Although I suppose modern analogue systems aren't *too* bad - just remove the smoothing capacitors from the one bit output DACs, and sample the pulse width modulated data at an exceedingly silly rate.
That depends on filing system - I vaugely remember hearing something about XFS being about to log subsequent writes so that the image is of the drive as it was when the backup started.
If your code compensates properly for leapseconds, then fixing the daylight savings computations will be a piece of cake in comparison.
For my degree thesis, I worked on combining genetic algorithms, simulated annealing, error injection, and timing side channel analysis.
My supervisor had done prior research in the field, applying it to strong public key encryption. IIRC, with the cipher text and plain text, you could reduce the key search space by about a third in a couple of hours.
I can't believe that AES wouldn't wither under the same sort of attack.
SA-Exim does this and more.
My server is set up to use it. If SpamAssassin thinks it's clean, it gets delivered straight away. If it's a little spammy, it's put on a grey list, and the sending machine is told to retry later. If it's blatant spam, it's rejected. Optionally, it can even tarpit the sender, leaving the socket open.
I now receive one piece of spam email a day, and that is tagged correctly and goes straight into my junk mail folder.
What, other than being not only the last of them left, but previously being their president in exile?
There's a fair chance of him having the equipment tucked up safely in his tardis!
And when you have a bad, inelegant proof, you still have a proof, because it's proven.
Being short, elegant, etc. has no bearing on it's provenness, and little bearing on it's utility for the majority of users.
This only applies if you're a mathematician - if you merely want to use mathematics, you only need to know that it works, not how it works or why it works.
Ah, I see you've come across the Z method then?
I hate prooving algorithms >_
A proof is a proof, whether it be long or short.
It was a single user operating system, for crying out loud! It would have required a review of every single line of code to ensure that it worked reliably and securely after a multiuser retrofit.
No, an attempt was made to use it in embedded systems, and it failed miserably. Clearly it was unsuited, otherwise it's superior media capabilities would have walked all over the likes of VxWorks.
The first rule of tooth club is: You must not talk about tooth club. ... Wait i got that wrong. The second rule is: No smoking
The second rule of tooth club is: YOU MUST NOT TALK ABOUT TOOTH CLUB
It was inflexible in the fact that it was suited only to the desktop. Therefore, once MS made the desktop market unviable for them, it died.
If they had produced a flexible operating system that was widely applicable, they wouldn't have had to worry about the desktop market dying, because they would have had fingers in the server, embedded and console markets.
Bad stuff? Like proper network support, multiuser operation, etc?
With NeXTStep, they got a proven OS base that would scale from single user workstations, up through servers, all the way on to gigantic clusters. Such abilities are important for diversification, and thus survival. The work required to add such capabilities to BeOS would have been gigantic, and the fact that BeOS died a testament to it's inflexibility.
You can tell the which aren't April fools stories - the original story didn't fall on April 1st last year.
There's a simple solution to that: make sure people know how to cross roads, and make sure people know how to drive.
From my experience, both are sorely lacking in UK society, and it has one of the best road safety records going.
Why's the parent been modded funny?
Now, if you'll excuse me, I have to spend some personal time with my bluetooth mouse >:D
I'd imagine people would think it's spite due to the fact he always goes after the low hanging fruit that is Apple, rather than the far more draconian DRM of Windows Media, etc.
And here was me thinking most trannies want to get rid of the gear stick they've already got!
I've got a 1000 CD DJ flight case to store all my discs in - it's about the size of a large suitcase, and nearly indestructable.
I know I'm only a girl, and therefore stereotypically bad with tools, but isn't a ground down screwdriver called an awl?
C is crap. Not a truly OO language. Your hands are tied to a bunch of low level commands, and if you want more features you need to download a lot of nonsensical libraries. ... or you can write your own libraries. But unfortunately the average C programm doesn't know how to do that and make them reusable. ... and if they did know how to do that, then they'd use LISP to write those components. ... whih would kill any reason why you should use C.
So C is crap.
Scheme rules. Why? Because it's the essence of LISP. And LISP rules.
L
If it's targetted at POSIX, does that mean I can host PPC Linux binaries with it on OS X?