How is that vague and meaningless? One of the issues is that users are able to exercise direct control over the network through the same "port" which is used to send data. Sure, you would have to send some messages to set up a connection to your destination, but that control action should be done by the network, as it sees fit, instead of letting the user set the source and destination addresses on every packet. The user should be able to ask the network to set up a connection and then send data, and the network handles all the internal operations. Going back to the phone analogy, are you able to pick up the phone and make a call to someone while faking your own phone number? No. Are you able to place a call to and directly manipulate telephone switching equipment? Not since decades ago. Are you able to hijack someone's conversation, or force a specific path for your phone call? I don't think so. The original design of the internet did not anticipate the need for isolated control, management, and data planes. There was just no reason to do it back then. But with 30 years of development and growth, things have changed...
There has been some talk about separating the control plane from the data plane (ie, packet header from data). The phone network had its share of unsecurities when they were using in-band signalling, but since the two planes were separated, phones became far more secure. The same technique can be applied to the data network. If we separate the control information from the actual user data, we may achieve better security, as it would thwart any attempts to mess with the packet header, redirection attacks, prefix hijacks, or any of that other garbage. And the technology already exists. Look at MPLS- your computer can signal the upstream equipment to set up a connection to a specific address, and all you have to do is send forward data with the given label ID. The technology is already being used to route traffic within ISPs, but the security benefits of it won't really materialize until it's pushed out to the user level. Of course, good luck getting everyone switched over.
That doesn't quite constitute using (overall) signal strength, and neither is it the primary location method. Yes, it is possible to use the carrier phase information as well as the L2 carrier phase (and L1/L2 discrepancy) to get a more accurate fix, but this information is only used to adjust the TDOAs of the PRN signals and compensate for varying ionospheric delays. Signal strength of each satellite is much more affected by random low clouds and even the receiver's immediate environment, than by distance from the satellite. In fact, if your receiver provides an SNR readout for each satellite, you can get an idea about just how dramatically these values are affected by, say, a tree that partially obscures a portion of the sky.
That would be awesome, and not entirely infeasible. A bot to open up sites (that it gets from RSS or whatever) and automatically grab up the video using RMC or a similar implementation as described above. Then dump it to a mobile device and it is easy from there. But sadly, I am afraid terms of service and all those pesky laws would never make such a thing legal, since it would extract just the content and not all those (text, banner, or video) ads.
Replay Media Catcher (commercial software) sort of already does this. It sticks its grubby little fingers into the TCP layer and grabs up the packets of the flash video streaming to the player. The neat thing is that the video is usually a continuous stream, with the player inserting ads in the middle... so if you were to do something like that, no further processing of the video would be required.
Naaaah I don't think so. GPS does not rely on signal strength to find your location at all. In fact, it uses time difference of arrival (TDOA) information of a set of PRN sequences to trilaterate your position. And the reason cold-start takes so long is that GPS has to potentially download new alamanc and ephemeris data for every satellite, which is sent down at a whopping 50baud. And if you miss a bit, you have to wait 90 seconds, since this is how often the data is repeated. Of course, since there are usually numerous satellites in view, chances are you will be able to get complete data for 4 of them in approximately 45 seconds.
Wait... what? A TV tuner that skips ads in online video. Someone explain, how does that work, exactly? A TV tuner to skip commercials in broadcast TV, now that I can understand. Myth has a very decent commercial detector. But this thing skips ads in online video... how does it become a tuner? Besides, adblock plus seems to be doing a fantastic job in blocking most youtube ads anyway.
Hey look, two evil corporations suing each other. As long as one of them loses, we all win! And if not, this will at least put a dent in the litigation budget.
A random HD44780 LCD - $10 on Sparkfin
PIC18F4550 - Free sample from Microchip
20MHz crystal - $0.05
USB connector - Free if you splice one of the billion cables that comes with all of your stuff
A piece of perfboard to build it on - $3 at radioshack
Building it all yourself - Priceless
Of course people would buy a computer, rather than a gaming console, because you can still get most of the games for free without having to muck around with those pesky modchips.
That's now news, that's common sense.
However, what can hardware manufacturers actually do about piracy, and more importantly, why should they care? Why should hardware makers concern themselves with software piracy? How is it their problem?
These guys make the hardware on a large scale. TPM and all that hardware DRM is a design issue. If it is to be implemented at all, it needs (and I use the word loosely) to be done at a higher level. Otherwise, every vendor will have its own DRM solution, and the only thing worse than hardware DRM is ten different kinds of incompatible hardware DRM.
Certain components are already filled with oil. Most notably these are the thrusters, whose waterproof bearings cannot handle the pressure. So, they fill them with oil and put an expansion bladder on the outside.
Then there are magnetic couplings, which are a whole other barrel of fun altogether.
Uhh...
Why not rar or zip these things up? Even with no compression at all... Something like zlib allows random access into a compressed file without having to first decompress the entire thing... I fail to see the problem
Instead of yanking the RAM boards, why not send the whole server? Take it off the rack, unplug it, and send it! Then be like, "See? I didn't even tamper with the RAM.. here's the whole machine, unopened!"
* Atheros-based cards. Strangely, I don't hear these mentioned very often, but they have excellent support, complete with monitor mode, creating multiple interfaces from one card, etc. Oh and airpwn supports it:) - http://madwifi.org
* Intel Pro Wireless (2100 / 2200 / 2950) - Works well, has monitor mode, wep in hardware, drivers actually developed by intel - http://ipw2200.sf.net and in the kernel at this point
* Orinoco / Hermes / Lucent cards - in the kernel
* Cards based on the Prism chipset based (http://prism54.org) BE WARNED though, some of the newer ones require "softmac" firmware which is currently not working all that well
I have used a card from all of these manufacturers and if I were getting a new laptop, I would probably go with Atheros and if not that, then Intel.
I like how that article just blatantly copied the wikipedia page on AACS: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Advanced_Access_Conte nt_System
Look under System Overview. It is possible that the text may have come from a common source, but wikipedia cites no references and a google search for the text takes you to the wiki page. Still no direct indication that the author of the text is the same person who put it in wikipedia, but still interesting.
Unless you can somehow find a hole in the.NET framework that can be exploited to run native unsigned code. Then you can put in a bootloader and natively run the kernel. But this is likely to be quickly fixed.
On the contrary. The RC oscillators work quite well with RS232. Besides, some of the 18F series have internal RC and crystal oscillators, and a built in USB peripheral. The 30F I don't think have USB, but they have a ton of memory and an FPU.
That's sort of the point of building them on the same die. You can't just run a wire to it, as it would be quite slow. Wires tend to have parasitic inductances and capacitances, so the setup and hold times on the lines would be too large to provide a benefit.
Actually no.
You can reverse the direction of motion of a stepping motor by reversing the polarity of the windings.
Regardless, DVD drives use conventional DC brush motors to spin the CD. I've opened enough of them to know.:)
Besides, a stepping motor would need a huge amount of power (and would make a huge amount of noise) to accelerate the disc to that speed. And it would be very difficult to micro-step a stepping motor with the accuracy needed. The drive can speed up and slow down the disc as needed without a huge amount of motor control because it gets very accurate speed feedback from the laser. Just a relative adjustment in the motor current is sufficient.
Simple hardware hack to reverse the polarity of the disc motor in the DVD drive. A single DPDT switch will do it, mounted on the front of the case, I believe.
Slashdot Mirror
How is that vague and meaningless? One of the issues is that users are able to exercise direct control over the network through the same "port" which is used to send data. Sure, you would have to send some messages to set up a connection to your destination, but that control action should be done by the network, as it sees fit, instead of letting the user set the source and destination addresses on every packet. The user should be able to ask the network to set up a connection and then send data, and the network handles all the internal operations. Going back to the phone analogy, are you able to pick up the phone and make a call to someone while faking your own phone number? No. Are you able to place a call to and directly manipulate telephone switching equipment? Not since decades ago. Are you able to hijack someone's conversation, or force a specific path for your phone call? I don't think so.
The original design of the internet did not anticipate the need for isolated control, management, and data planes. There was just no reason to do it back then. But with 30 years of development and growth, things have changed...
There has been some talk about separating the control plane from the data plane (ie, packet header from data). The phone network had its share of unsecurities when they were using in-band signalling, but since the two planes were separated, phones became far more secure. The same technique can be applied to the data network. If we separate the control information from the actual user data, we may achieve better security, as it would thwart any attempts to mess with the packet header, redirection attacks, prefix hijacks, or any of that other garbage. And the technology already exists. Look at MPLS- your computer can signal the upstream equipment to set up a connection to a specific address, and all you have to do is send forward data with the given label ID. The technology is already being used to route traffic within ISPs, but the security benefits of it won't really materialize until it's pushed out to the user level. Of course, good luck getting everyone switched over.
Thank you sir. It is the first thing I hit ^F for when this page loaded.
That doesn't quite constitute using (overall) signal strength, and neither is it the primary location method. Yes, it is possible to use the carrier phase information as well as the L2 carrier phase (and L1/L2 discrepancy) to get a more accurate fix, but this information is only used to adjust the TDOAs of the PRN signals and compensate for varying ionospheric delays. Signal strength of each satellite is much more affected by random low clouds and even the receiver's immediate environment, than by distance from the satellite. In fact, if your receiver provides an SNR readout for each satellite, you can get an idea about just how dramatically these values are affected by, say, a tree that partially obscures a portion of the sky.
That would be awesome, and not entirely infeasible. A bot to open up sites (that it gets from RSS or whatever) and automatically grab up the video using RMC or a similar implementation as described above. Then dump it to a mobile device and it is easy from there. But sadly, I am afraid terms of service and all those pesky laws would never make such a thing legal, since it would extract just the content and not all those (text, banner, or video) ads.
Replay Media Catcher (commercial software) sort of already does this. It sticks its grubby little fingers into the TCP layer and grabs up the packets of the flash video streaming to the player. The neat thing is that the video is usually a continuous stream, with the player inserting ads in the middle... so if you were to do something like that, no further processing of the video would be required.
Naaaah I don't think so. GPS does not rely on signal strength to find your location at all. In fact, it uses time difference of arrival (TDOA) information of a set of PRN sequences to trilaterate your position. And the reason cold-start takes so long is that GPS has to potentially download new alamanc and ephemeris data for every satellite, which is sent down at a whopping 50baud. And if you miss a bit, you have to wait 90 seconds, since this is how often the data is repeated. Of course, since there are usually numerous satellites in view, chances are you will be able to get complete data for 4 of them in approximately 45 seconds.
Wait... what? A TV tuner that skips ads in online video. Someone explain, how does that work, exactly? A TV tuner to skip commercials in broadcast TV, now that I can understand. Myth has a very decent commercial detector. But this thing skips ads in online video... how does it become a tuner? Besides, adblock plus seems to be doing a fantastic job in blocking most youtube ads anyway.
Hey look, two evil corporations suing each other. As long as one of them loses, we all win! And if not, this will at least put a dent in the litigation budget.
$50?? Come ON.
A random HD44780 LCD - $10 on Sparkfin
PIC18F4550 - Free sample from Microchip
20MHz crystal - $0.05
USB connector - Free if you splice one of the billion cables that comes with all of your stuff
A piece of perfboard to build it on - $3 at radioshack
Building it all yourself - Priceless
PC Hardware manufacturers love piracy. Well, duh.
Of course people would buy a computer, rather than a gaming console, because you can still get most of the games for free without having to muck around with those pesky modchips.
That's now news, that's common sense.
However, what can hardware manufacturers actually do about piracy, and more importantly, why should they care? Why should hardware makers concern themselves with software piracy? How is it their problem?
These guys make the hardware on a large scale. TPM and all that hardware DRM is a design issue. If it is to be implemented at all, it needs (and I use the word loosely) to be done at a higher level. Otherwise, every vendor will have its own DRM solution, and the only thing worse than hardware DRM is ten different kinds of incompatible hardware DRM.
Certain components are already filled with oil. Most notably these are the thrusters, whose waterproof bearings cannot handle the pressure. So, they fill them with oil and put an expansion bladder on the outside. Then there are magnetic couplings, which are a whole other barrel of fun altogether.
Uhh... Why not rar or zip these things up? Even with no compression at all... Something like zlib allows random access into a compressed file without having to first decompress the entire thing... I fail to see the problem
Instead of yanking the RAM boards, why not send the whole server? Take it off the rack, unplug it, and send it! Then be like, "See? I didn't even tamper with the RAM.. here's the whole machine, unopened!"
Because the Internet is not something you can just dump something on
But... does it only show a movie if it is Blu-ray? ---- Evil wombat was here
Good for linux- with monitor mode
:) - http://madwifi.org
* Atheros-based cards. Strangely, I don't hear these mentioned very often, but they have excellent support, complete with monitor mode, creating multiple interfaces from one card, etc. Oh and airpwn supports it
* Intel Pro Wireless (2100 / 2200 / 2950) - Works well, has monitor mode, wep in hardware, drivers actually developed by intel - http://ipw2200.sf.net and in the kernel at this point
* Orinoco / Hermes / Lucent cards - in the kernel
* Cards based on the Prism chipset based (http://prism54.org) BE WARNED though, some of the newer ones require "softmac" firmware which is currently not working all that well
I have used a card from all of these manufacturers and if I were getting a new laptop, I would probably go with Atheros and if not that, then Intel.
I like how that article just blatantly copied the wikipedia page on AACS:e nt_System
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Advanced_Access_Cont
Look under System Overview. It is possible that the text may have come from a common source, but wikipedia cites no references and a google search for the text takes you to the wiki page. Still no direct indication that the author of the text is the same person who put it in wikipedia, but still interesting.
A good time to go into the tilfoil hat business, eh?
So does this mean we can predict solar flares and use them to travel to the past or the future?
Unless you can somehow find a hole in the .NET framework that can be exploited to run native unsigned code. Then you can put in a bootloader and natively run the kernel. But this is likely to be quickly fixed.
On the contrary. The RC oscillators work quite well with RS232. Besides, some of the 18F series have internal RC and crystal oscillators, and a built in USB peripheral. The 30F I don't think have USB, but they have a ton of memory and an FPU.
That's sort of the point of building them on the same die. You can't just run a wire to it, as it would be quite slow. Wires tend to have parasitic inductances and capacitances, so the setup and hold times on the lines would be too large to provide a benefit.
Actually no. :)
You can reverse the direction of motion of a stepping motor by reversing the polarity of the windings.
Regardless, DVD drives use conventional DC brush motors to spin the CD. I've opened enough of them to know.
Besides, a stepping motor would need a huge amount of power (and would make a huge amount of noise) to accelerate the disc to that speed. And it would be very difficult to micro-step a stepping motor with the accuracy needed. The drive can speed up and slow down the disc as needed without a huge amount of motor control because it gets very accurate speed feedback from the laser. Just a relative adjustment in the motor current is sufficient.
Simple hardware hack to reverse the polarity of the disc motor in the DVD drive. A single DPDT switch will do it, mounted on the front of the case, I believe.