I haven't seen any other distro that manages to not crash. Most distros are pretty stable, but they tend to fall over once every few months (IME of course). Not Debian.
Re:When four corners is too much
on
Drafting GPL3
·
· Score: 1
Are you sure? I've never read anything about that. The cyberpunks believed in putting their code in the public domain, but they weren't around until the early 90s afaik. There was a shareware community and the idea of freeware was starting to take off, but none of that was free software. I really don't remember seeing much in the public domain back then.
Yeah, I tried it. I don't need the features, really, I mean being able to play tetris is nice and all but I have separate programs for that, and generally a dedicated program is better at what it does than a jack of all trades. By now vim has most useful features from emacs, and it performs better at them. (I was particularly amused to see an emacs fan citing how emacs is better because you can get a module to allow opening files directly from ftp sites, when you can do exactly the same thing in vim without needing anything extra). And the : key is slightly handier than ESC (not much, but it adds up when you're using it a lot).
Yes, in fact I'm using it now. If you actually need QoS or something then fair enough, but so many people seem to want to run the latest and supposedly greatest kernel just because they can.
I don't know about mozilla, but I do know that as far as kernels are concerned 2.4 was always more stable than 2.6, that older versions of VLC were more stable than recent ones. Equally I know that newer versions of some other apps are more stable than older ones. In general, I think stability is pretty much independent of which release it is, but packages that have had a lot of testing and bugfixes without new features added - which the debian stable ones have by now - are the most stable ones.
Re:the code of conduct for free software distribut
on
Drafting GPL3
·
· Score: 1
Hmm. What I'd normally do is "/* I irrevocably disclaim all copyright on this code */". Wouldn't that be valid in all jurisdictions?
All word processors can read rtf files, it's only ms' doc that you can't, just like you can play mp3 on anything but can't play apple's drmed AAC on anything but an iPod.
EU has rules against it wrt countries outside the EU too. They're rarely (probably never) enforced, but you're not allowed to take measures to prevent importing things into the EU if you're selling them cheaper outside the EU. (I'm not sure whether there's a rule against taking measures to prevent exporting things if they're cheaper within the EU, probably not since that would benefit the EU)
Not really. They don't want to emphasise you can move unless there's something in it for them (they may well charge apple more royalties because there's less restrictive DRM on iTMS files), and it would just make it more obvious that they're a real racket in terms of how much money they get for how little they do.
Well, five is a lot better than one, but doesn't that mean you'll eventually get to a point where you can't play any of your files (since no computer lasts forever)?
I very much doubt that. Why would anyone choose to be starving?
While it doesn't have to be that extreme (though I've never seen a non-socialist state avoid having starving people, I can see it might be possible) the only way you can have people rising above the average is if you're having others sinking below it. Fine if you're one of the ones going up, not so fine if you're one of the ones going down. And I think America being somewhere the average ain't so bad has more to do with luck and natural resources than it being capitalist.
Sorry, typo, I meant the rules of war. Which they may have been doing, certainly the relatives of some claim they were, which to my mind is enough to cast some doubt. If they were caught in the act of impersonating an enemy or raping a civilian or carrying weapons under a red cross then OK, but I seriously doubt that's the case for every person in there. As for competent tribunal not being clearly defined, it at least implies they must have some form of tribunal, where they haven't had any.
Voters don't keep the copy. They read it, fold it in half and post it into a secure ballot box like was used before any of this fancy technology. Then if there's a dispute they count the votes in the ballot box, the old fashioned way.
Nope. It was meant to be a cryptographic hash. A cryptographic hash means you have to not be able to find a collision faster than brute force would. MD5 was thought to suit that, but now fails it, quite severely actually
That was my first though. My second was "no, they can't be that dumb". Hopefully they've put the lengths and offsets in the exploit code, so it will only work if the two letters you make have exactly the same length as the ones in their example. Still a cause for concern - but then duplicating their attack is very much possible anyway, that's why it's an attack.
If you're signing hashes of documents without seeing the document itself you're a huge fool. And if you're seeing the document (presumably on your own machine, since security-conscious people don't go leaving their private keys around everywhere) you can make a digital copy of it, and keep it, easily.
Not really. Given a long enough hash the hash itself can be fast and if it works as intended it will not be breakable. MD5 is *supposed* to take 2^128 times as long to break as to make. If it was full strength, there would not be a problem, even though it's fast to create.
The point is that an attack which allows finding collisions is good enough, even if it's in very bad looking data. This wouldn't have worked against an algorithm with no attacks, just a partially-broken one like MD5.
Try any of the unreal tournament series. The original runs just as fast, and 2k3 runs faster. (Can't speak for 2k4, my system's not good enough for it)
No, it isn't. That's a stupid idea for several reasons, all of which you see explained at least 4 times in every hashing algorithms thread. Mods, please stop giving the idea insightful. For a start, most modern hashes are far from distinct.
RIPEMD160 is the only hash from that "generation" still standing, so it's probably the simplest one to use. There are newer hashes that probably still work though, SHA256, along with the new Tiger and Whirlpool hashes.
I hope all those who said the previous MD5 attacks were nothing to worry about will take it back. A theoretical break or partial break is almost always followed by a practical break. The lesson to learn from this is not to do the same thing with SHA1 and, I would suggest, AES. The vulnerabilities might be impractical now but they won't stay that way. Move now, while you're still at least partially secure, rather than once there's a practical break.
Re:When four corners is too much
on
Drafting GPL3
·
· Score: 1
I've read it, and other stuff about him, and he says it got to the point where he was "the last true hacker", the only person who still believed in it. So maybe not the whole movement, but the modern free software movement, seems to have been started entirely by him.
Slashdot Mirror
I haven't seen any other distro that manages to not crash. Most distros are pretty stable, but they tend to fall over once every few months (IME of course). Not Debian.
Are you sure? I've never read anything about that. The cyberpunks believed in putting their code in the public domain, but they weren't around until the early 90s afaik. There was a shareware community and the idea of freeware was starting to take off, but none of that was free software. I really don't remember seeing much in the public domain back then.
Yeah, I tried it. I don't need the features, really, I mean being able to play tetris is nice and all but I have separate programs for that, and generally a dedicated program is better at what it does than a jack of all trades. By now vim has most useful features from emacs, and it performs better at them. (I was particularly amused to see an emacs fan citing how emacs is better because you can get a module to allow opening files directly from ftp sites, when you can do exactly the same thing in vim without needing anything extra). And the : key is slightly handier than ESC (not much, but it adds up when you're using it a lot).
I don't know about mozilla, but I do know that as far as kernels are concerned 2.4 was always more stable than 2.6, that older versions of VLC were more stable than recent ones. Equally I know that newer versions of some other apps are more stable than older ones. In general, I think stability is pretty much independent of which release it is, but packages that have had a lot of testing and bugfixes without new features added - which the debian stable ones have by now - are the most stable ones.
Hmm. What I'd normally do is "/* I irrevocably disclaim all copyright on this code */". Wouldn't that be valid in all jurisdictions?
All word processors can read rtf files, it's only ms' doc that you can't, just like you can play mp3 on anything but can't play apple's drmed AAC on anything but an iPod.
EU has rules against it wrt countries outside the EU too. They're rarely (probably never) enforced, but you're not allowed to take measures to prevent importing things into the EU if you're selling them cheaper outside the EU. (I'm not sure whether there's a rule against taking measures to prevent exporting things if they're cheaper within the EU, probably not since that would benefit the EU)
Not really. They don't want to emphasise you can move unless there's something in it for them (they may well charge apple more royalties because there's less restrictive DRM on iTMS files), and it would just make it more obvious that they're a real racket in terms of how much money they get for how little they do.
Well, five is a lot better than one, but doesn't that mean you'll eventually get to a point where you can't play any of your files (since no computer lasts forever)?
Apple has not, yet. At this point in their monopoly abuse MS hadn't been convicted either.
On what basis do you claim an OS and applications are different markets but a portable music player and music are the same?
While it doesn't have to be that extreme (though I've never seen a non-socialist state avoid having starving people, I can see it might be possible) the only way you can have people rising above the average is if you're having others sinking below it. Fine if you're one of the ones going up, not so fine if you're one of the ones going down. And I think America being somewhere the average ain't so bad has more to do with luck and natural resources than it being capitalist.
Sorry, typo, I meant the rules of war. Which they may have been doing, certainly the relatives of some claim they were, which to my mind is enough to cast some doubt. If they were caught in the act of impersonating an enemy or raping a civilian or carrying weapons under a red cross then OK, but I seriously doubt that's the case for every person in there. As for competent tribunal not being clearly defined, it at least implies they must have some form of tribunal, where they haven't had any.
You know you're trailing when even windows has a port to a new architecture before you do.
Voters don't keep the copy. They read it, fold it in half and post it into a secure ballot box like was used before any of this fancy technology. Then if there's a dispute they count the votes in the ballot box, the old fashioned way.
Nope. It was meant to be a cryptographic hash. A cryptographic hash means you have to not be able to find a collision faster than brute force would. MD5 was thought to suit that, but now fails it, quite severely actually
That was my first though. My second was "no, they can't be that dumb". Hopefully they've put the lengths and offsets in the exploit code, so it will only work if the two letters you make have exactly the same length as the ones in their example. Still a cause for concern - but then duplicating their attack is very much possible anyway, that's why it's an attack.
If you're signing hashes of documents without seeing the document itself you're a huge fool. And if you're seeing the document (presumably on your own machine, since security-conscious people don't go leaving their private keys around everywhere) you can make a digital copy of it, and keep it, easily.
Not really. Given a long enough hash the hash itself can be fast and if it works as intended it will not be breakable. MD5 is *supposed* to take 2^128 times as long to break as to make. If it was full strength, there would not be a problem, even though it's fast to create.
The point is that an attack which allows finding collisions is good enough, even if it's in very bad looking data. This wouldn't have worked against an algorithm with no attacks, just a partially-broken one like MD5.
Try any of the unreal tournament series. The original runs just as fast, and 2k3 runs faster. (Can't speak for 2k4, my system's not good enough for it)
No, it isn't. That's a stupid idea for several reasons, all of which you see explained at least 4 times in every hashing algorithms thread. Mods, please stop giving the idea insightful. For a start, most modern hashes are far from distinct.
RIPEMD160 is the only hash from that "generation" still standing, so it's probably the simplest one to use. There are newer hashes that probably still work though, SHA256, along with the new Tiger and Whirlpool hashes.
I hope all those who said the previous MD5 attacks were nothing to worry about will take it back. A theoretical break or partial break is almost always followed by a practical break. The lesson to learn from this is not to do the same thing with SHA1 and, I would suggest, AES. The vulnerabilities might be impractical now but they won't stay that way. Move now, while you're still at least partially secure, rather than once there's a practical break.
I've read it, and other stuff about him, and he says it got to the point where he was "the last true hacker", the only person who still believed in it. So maybe not the whole movement, but the modern free software movement, seems to have been started entirely by him.