See, you assume that rules and laws are, like, for the people.
We here in the us have optimized. (yes, with a "z".)
Jails are for producers. Anyone useful I knew in college. Religious leaders will guide me. hell, (exuse me) not like this world is going to last or anything.
Our airlines have wanted ID for years. Profit demanded it. It took terrorism to make it a reality. Funny thing, but it isn't like it is saving the airlines now...
You're giving me awful flashbacks to my Philosophy of Mind and Language class. If I never hear about Intentionality, keyholes, or NS semantics, I'll be happy. Searles, parse my code.
(Intentionality is a useful useful concept. Don't get me wrong. It is the bowels of philosophy that kills me, in the same way that the bowels of Crit Lit kills me.)
BTW, Godwin's law is a crock. Some mediocre SF writer says we can't learn from Hitler, because his image is so polarizing?
Mike Godwin may be a "mediocre SF writer", but to my knowledge, doesn't write sf. Even if he does, that would be like calling Heinlein an "undistinguished silver miner" - hardly looking at the important points.
And you're misunderstanding the point of Godwin's Law. He was only pointing out, semi-tongue in cheek, that debates on mailing lists and Usenet, should they go on long enough, always end up with a comparison to Hitler being made. Any stifling of discussion resultant is strictly peer pressure from other people who are either (a) using the concept as a rhetorical device or (b) truly and genuinely sick of a flamewar that has jumped the shark.
As of today, it is clear that ten articles were accepted in October, six in November, and four in December (so far).
I don't like opportunists, but I dislike reposters even more.This is clearly an old article, perhaps not even the reposter's; if this had been written in Feb, 2005 (or if the karma whore had actually read it), this statement would not have been made.
As an aside, I'm not surprised that people don't read articles, but moderating without reading what you're moderating? Why even bother? This isn't a presidential election, you know.
Yes, you're correct. Sorry to have been imprecise; it isn't right to speak of keyspace. I probably should have said 'search space'.
If I'm not mistaken, though (paper isn't out yet), this isn't finding a collision for a given message,this is about finding two arbitrary messages that hash to the same value, which is an easier proposition than the scenario you outline. Of course, I may be wrong about that.
is to speak of averages. So, it is likely that 56 hours is the time to search half the keyspace on such a machine, as over a large number of uses, that will be the average time required per use.
You are correct. But... I believe that it is only because of the risk of embarrassment on the part of legislators that sex is not considered economic activity. See the pending Ashcroft v. Raich for instance - Randy Barnett (Respondant's council) uses this close to this analogy to compare commerce clause reach to self-grown for self-use pot to the potential for reach into sex.
The premise is that it is possible to differentiate economic activity from personal activity. Prostitution is economic activity, and there may be some cross substitution effects between prostitution and sex within marriage, but that does not make sex within marriage economic activity. You look at the nature of the activity to determine whether or not it is economic.
If SCOTUS decides that Raich was engaging in economic activity by growing her own dope, they will, modulo a distinction drawn in the decision, tacitly seem to be arguing that sex within marriage is an economic activity.
First of all, it isn't easy getting a hold of radioactive material.
It is a lot easier than you apparently think.
Also, radiation exposure is not lethal, it causes radiation poisoning.
Right. Conventional explosives and bullet wounds are also nonleathal. I mean, people recover from both, right? The point is, imagine shooting everyone in a 1 mile radius of NYC in the shin. What happens to your (a) communications, (b) emergency response systems, (c) political environment, (d) economic systems? Never mind the people; we're disposable, apparently. (I live in NYC.) Look at the cost.
Now, being exposed would also put people at a higher risk of cancer in the future. But I don't think there are terrorists out there plotting "I will release fire on the Great Satan... then a small percentage of the infidels will eventually die from cancer resulting from mutated cells! Mwahahahahahaha!"
I understand that the word "terrorist" has been highly devalued recently; it is used to describe everything from genuinely dangerous people to freedom fighters the USG happens not to like, and on to tree spikers and worm writers. However, there is still a class of people who have a very direct goal: cause mass panic, get press, and/or cause economic and systemic damage. And to that class of person, a flashy explosion that increases the cancer rate is really quite attractive. Actually, I suspect it is nearly perfect. Think about it for a second.
Not like there's anything to be done about it. Dear Leader is, based on observed behaviour, more interested in dismantling the New Deal and being questioned by gay prostitutes about family values.
I think this is a good thing.
States need revenue to function and provide services, and they have every right to tax themselves however they see fit to generate this revenue. Where a sex tax is inappropriate, many states have enacted a "masturbation Tax." This is essentially a tool that taxes self pleasure outside the marital system, rather than the mutual enjoyment itself.
When we consider the alternative, it only makes sense that states pursue new ways to collect the taxes they need. The folks that masturbate are likely to generate health care costs born by the state, how does the state pay for this? Likewise with sex used to fund your roads, police, school, fire department, court, legislature.....
Personally, I am very impressed that a state took the initiative to meet new methods of conducting business with a new method for collecting taxes. Would we rather our states cling to some old, outmoded taxation model and try to impose burdensome limits on our rights to protect it (like some **AA?)
I don't know much about how GPS works. I know recievers are passive devices though. So, is it possible to build a device one can carry that is "louder" than the sattilites in order to spoof the signal?
..US schools are effectively mandated to teach a theory believed to be entirely true only by a minority of the population, and they are so mandated for religious reasons - specifically, they are mandated in support of Materialism.
I will not debate any weird ideas you come up with (materialism, et all). I will talk to about the fact (yes, it is a fact) that science actually, on a continual basis, works. Please come back when god agrees. In the mean time, he seems to give jobs liberally to the anointed,
Much like gravity, evolution is a fact. The com[etition is welcome to advance clear notions about the geneis if life.
The important point is that either your a person of science, or you're a hack. Don't believe that you'll get well via some government boon - Physics of the world is, well, a little hard to argue with..
If you're really interested, goodle "mechanisms of control'.
The US is a country where a particular strain of Christian theology is, for political reasons, close to becoming officially mandated teaching in state schools as an "alternative theory" to evolution.
When you hear the US talking about a "war on [fill-in-the-blank]", you have to realize that the main philosphic drivers of the attitude are a belief that a zero-sum game is in play. The US has excelled, in the private sphere, at pareto-optimal games, but politically, has never gotten the hint.
If you actually run a company and have that sort of problem with employees, you're clearly doing something wrong. (Yes, I do run a company and manage several employees.) hints: accounting processes and methodologies aren't just for bean counters, and small business is as much about finding the right person for a role as it is about watching the bottom line.
And as a consumer, if I cannot pay cash, I will go somewhere else. I rarely buy on plastic, for several reasons. That includes the time I purchased a car with cash, but that's a different, if amusing, story about how the state likes to know about certain commercial transactions.
As someone who develops on PG, Mysql, Oracle and several other DBs, let me just say that if you're so wrapped up with your RDMBS that you react like that, you should really take up jogging, get a dog, start doing heroin, or something.
Christ on a cracker, some geeks are more of a downer than condom breakage. Coding is supposed to be fun.
I thought anonymous cowards could read, but then I realized I was wrong.
Perhaps you could either learn to read, or learn that you're wrong. (Hints: I'm not a "liberal" as you use that word, Stephenson's not either, Reason is a libertarian rag, and the reading classes probably start at about 7PM in your local public library's basement.)
There's a lot of babbling and finger pointing about political bias, the media, etc. Perhaps one voice of reason that's a favorite around here might have a thing or two to say on the topic that looks beyond party politics, and is extremely relevant to this discussion:
The success of the U.S. has not come from one consistent cause, as far as I can make out. Instead the U.S. will find a way to succeed for a few decades based on one thing, then, when that peters out, move on to another. Sometimes there is trouble during the transitions. So, in the early-to-mid-19th century, it was all about expansion westward and a colossal growth in population. After the Civil War, it was about exploitation of the world's richest resource base: iron, steel, coal, the railways, and later oil.
For much of the 20th century it was about science and technology. The heyday was the Second World War, when we had not just the Manhattan Project but also the Radiation Lab at MIT and a large cryptology industry all cooking along at the same time. The war led into the nuclear arms race and the space race, which led in turn to the revolution in electronics, computers, the Internet, etc. If the emblematic figures of earlier eras were the pioneer with his Kentucky rifle, or the Gilded Age plutocrat, then for the era from, say, 1940 to 2000 it was the engineer, the geek, the scientist. It's no coincidence that this era is also when science fiction has flourished, and in which the whole idea of the Future became current. After all, if you're living in a technocratic society, it seems perfectly reasonable to try to predict the future by extrapolating trends in science and engineering.
It is quite obvious to me that the U.S. is turning away from all of this. It has been the case for quite a while that the cultural left distrusted geeks and their works; the depiction of technical sorts in popular culture has been overwhelmingly negative for at least a generation now. More recently, the cultural right has apparently decided that it doesn't care for some of what scientists have to say. So the technical class is caught in a pincer between these two wings of the so-called culture war. Of course the broad mass of people don't belong to one wing or the other. But science is all about diligence, hard sustained work over long stretches of time, sweating the details, and abstract thinking, none of which is really being fostered by mainstream culture.
Since our prosperity and our military security for the last three or four generations have been rooted in science and technology, it would therefore seem that we're coming to the end of one era and about to move into another. Whether it's going to be better or worse is difficult for me to say. The obvious guess would be "worse." If I really wanted to turn this into a jeremiad, I could hold forth on that for a while. But as mentioned before, this country has always found a new way to move forward and be prosperous. So maybe we'll get lucky again. In the meantime, efforts to predict the future by extrapolating trends in the world of science and technology are apt to feel a lot less compelling than they might have in 1955.
Why is it so hard for people to accept that the Social Security system needs to be updated. Yes it is true that it won't become a true burden for several decades, but why whould we continually put off the inevitable? If the administration and/or Congress can come up with a viable solution to correct a long-term problem, why shouldn't it be persued? We all may not agree with President Bush's specific solution, but he did say that his administration is open to considering alternative solutions....
I'll tell you what sets me off about it - by the definitions of "bankrupt" used by Bush and pals when talking about SS, the U.S. is currently bankrupt. The general fund has been using the SS surplus for years, and now that this stealth tax has a potential end point, people in power don't wish to repay the loan that is currently funding massive tax cuts for those in high income brackets.
It is as if a home owner were obsessing about the possible need for a new septic tank in 15 years when their basement is currently flooding.
Fact is, the shortfall in SS to come is modest, and could be easily fixed with minor tax or benefits adjustments. Bus and company are pushing a decidedly ideological arguement (they don't like the New Deal) through highly deceptive arguments.
It's kind of ironic, because Ross Anderson's lying Anti-TCPA FAQ tries to claim that TC exists to kill Linux.
I'm not fresh on TCPA at the moment. But that's a pretty harsh statement. Can you illustrate one or more of these lies? I don't know Ross personally, but I have traded mail with him, and don't know him to be a lier.
Once booted, data (such as symmetric keys for encrypted files) can be "sealed" under a PCR. The sealed data can only be unsealed if the PCR has the same value as at the time of sealing. Thus, if an attempt is made to boot an alternative system, or a virus has backdoored the operating system, the PCR value will not match, and the unseal will fail, thus protecting the data.
One wonders what forensics types, particulary government forensics types, have to say about this.
And I mean "have to say about this" in a very literal sense.
Slashdot Mirror
We here in the us have optimized. (yes, with a "z".)
Jails are for producers. Anyone useful I knew in college. Religious leaders will guide me. hell, (exuse me) not like this world is going to last or anything.
Our airlines have wanted ID for years. Profit demanded it. It took terrorism to make it a reality. Funny thing, but it isn't like it is saving the airlines now...
ID won't stop EvilDoers(tm)..
Why, then, are we doing it
Look to airline profit margins.
me, I hitch-hike.
(Intentionality is a useful useful concept. Don't get me wrong. It is the bowels of philosophy that kills me, in the same way that the bowels of Crit Lit kills me.)
Mike Godwin may be a "mediocre SF writer", but to my knowledge, doesn't write sf. Even if he does, that would be like calling Heinlein an "undistinguished silver miner" - hardly looking at the important points.
And you're misunderstanding the point of Godwin's Law. He was only pointing out, semi-tongue in cheek, that debates on mailing lists and Usenet, should they go on long enough, always end up with a comparison to Hitler being made. Any stifling of discussion resultant is strictly peer pressure from other people who are either (a) using the concept as a rhetorical device or (b) truly and genuinely sick of a flamewar that has jumped the shark.
I don't like opportunists, but I dislike reposters even more.This is clearly an old article, perhaps not even the reposter's; if this had been written in Feb, 2005 (or if the karma whore had actually read it), this statement would not have been made.
As an aside, I'm not surprised that people don't read articles, but moderating without reading what you're moderating? Why even bother? This isn't a presidential election, you know.
If I'm not mistaken, though (paper isn't out yet), this isn't finding a collision for a given message,this is about finding two arbitrary messages that hash to the same value, which is an easier proposition than the scenario you outline. Of course, I may be wrong about that.
is to speak of averages. So, it is likely that 56 hours is the time to search half the keyspace on such a machine, as over a large number of uses, that will be the average time required per use.
If SCOTUS decides that Raich was engaging in economic activity by growing her own dope, they will, modulo a distinction drawn in the decision, tacitly seem to be arguing that sex within marriage is an economic activity.
(If you're interested, here's the brief.)
It is a lot easier than you apparently think.
Also, radiation exposure is not lethal, it causes radiation poisoning.
Right. Conventional explosives and bullet wounds are also nonleathal. I mean, people recover from both, right? The point is, imagine shooting everyone in a 1 mile radius of NYC in the shin. What happens to your (a) communications, (b) emergency response systems, (c) political environment, (d) economic systems? Never mind the people; we're disposable, apparently. (I live in NYC.) Look at the cost.
Now, being exposed would also put people at a higher risk of cancer in the future. But I don't think there are terrorists out there plotting "I will release fire on the Great Satan... then a small percentage of the infidels will eventually die from cancer resulting from mutated cells! Mwahahahahahaha!"
I understand that the word "terrorist" has been highly devalued recently; it is used to describe everything from genuinely dangerous people to freedom fighters the USG happens not to like, and on to tree spikers and worm writers. However, there is still a class of people who have a very direct goal: cause mass panic, get press, and/or cause economic and systemic damage. And to that class of person, a flashy explosion that increases the cancer rate is really quite attractive. Actually, I suspect it is nearly perfect. Think about it for a second.
Not like there's anything to be done about it. Dear Leader is, based on observed behaviour, more interested in dismantling the New Deal and being questioned by gay prostitutes about family values.
Eye hope yoo is be trolling.
I think this is a good thing. States need revenue to function and provide services, and they have every right to tax themselves however they see fit to generate this revenue. Where a sex tax is inappropriate, many states have enacted a "masturbation Tax." This is essentially a tool that taxes self pleasure outside the marital system, rather than the mutual enjoyment itself. When we consider the alternative, it only makes sense that states pursue new ways to collect the taxes they need. The folks that masturbate are likely to generate health care costs born by the state, how does the state pay for this? Likewise with sex used to fund your roads, police, school, fire department, court, legislature..... Personally, I am very impressed that a state took the initiative to meet new methods of conducting business with a new method for collecting taxes. Would we rather our states cling to some old, outmoded taxation model and try to impose burdensome limits on our rights to protect it (like some **AA?)
I answered my own question.
I don't know much about how GPS works. I know recievers are passive devices though. So, is it possible to build a device one can carry that is "louder" than the sattilites in order to spoof the signal?
I will not debate any weird ideas you come up with (materialism, et all). I will talk to about the fact (yes, it is a fact) that science actually, on a continual basis, works. Please come back when god agrees. In the mean time, he seems to give jobs liberally to the anointed,
Much like gravity, evolution is a fact. The com[etition is welcome to advance clear notions about the geneis if life.
The important point is that either your a person of science, or you're a hack. Don't believe that you'll get well via some government boon - Physics of the world is, well, a little hard to argue with..
If you're really interested, goodle "mechanisms of control'.
When you hear the US talking about a "war on [fill-in-the-blank]", you have to realize that the main philosphic drivers of the attitude are a belief that a zero-sum game is in play. The US has excelled, in the private sphere, at pareto-optimal games, but politically, has never gotten the hint.
And as a consumer, if I cannot pay cash, I will go somewhere else. I rarely buy on plastic, for several reasons. That includes the time I purchased a car with cash, but that's a different, if amusing, story about how the state likes to know about certain commercial transactions.
As someone who develops on PG, Mysql, Oracle and several other DBs, let me just say that if you're so wrapped up with your RDMBS that you react like that, you should really take up jogging, get a dog, start doing heroin, or something.
Christ on a cracker, some geeks are more of a downer than condom breakage. Coding is supposed to be fun.
Perhaps you could either learn to read, or learn that you're wrong. (Hints: I'm not a "liberal" as you use that word, Stephenson's not either, Reason is a libertarian rag, and the reading classes probably start at about 7PM in your local public library's basement.)
What will you give me for mine?
What better way to make sure evil institutions don't rebuild? Punish the people involved.
I'll tell you what sets me off about it - by the definitions of "bankrupt" used by Bush and pals when talking about SS, the U.S. is currently bankrupt. The general fund has been using the SS surplus for years, and now that this stealth tax has a potential end point, people in power don't wish to repay the loan that is currently funding massive tax cuts for those in high income brackets.
It is as if a home owner were obsessing about the possible need for a new septic tank in 15 years when their basement is currently flooding.
Fact is, the shortfall in SS to come is modest, and could be easily fixed with minor tax or benefits adjustments. Bus and company are pushing a decidedly ideological arguement (they don't like the New Deal) through highly deceptive arguments.
I'm not fresh on TCPA at the moment. But that's a pretty harsh statement. Can you illustrate one or more of these lies? I don't know Ross personally, but I have traded mail with him, and don't know him to be a lier.
One wonders what forensics types, particulary government forensics types, have to say about this.
And I mean "have to say about this" in a very literal sense.