As simple as it may be to YOU, this is "technical" knowledge that the average citizen does not possess. It is the "average citizen" standard we must go by, not YOUR technical knowledge.
It appears that the judge disagrees with you.
Knowing how to listen to WiFi streams is a legal, and non-regulated, form of technical knowledge, not in the same realm as owning and operating lock-picks.
It takes "special methods" to open most doors, you have to learn how to turn the knob or push the release lever. Just because internet communications are more complex, doesn't mean they are any less open than an unlocked door. For that matter, reading is a whole special skill required to understand written communication, takes years of learning - probably longer than it would take your average college grad to Google up the tools required to listen in on an open WiFi and start scraping out private communications.
"Breaking" occurs when you get out the lock picks, or start trying every one of a thousand possible key shapes that might open a lock. Just using ordinary, published standards is not the same thing as encryption, or locking a door, or sealing an envelope.
I had a school principal leave me a voice mail on Vonage... she was shocked as hell when I forwarded the recording in an e-mail to a 3rd party. I asked her if she would have preferred me to paraphrase her in the e-mail? I thought it was important for the full communication to be passed on so I wouldn't distort her words, she was just pissed that what, in her mind, was a passing statement made to me was forwarded in recorded form to her management - she's the one who consented to record the message in the first place.
I think there's a distinction to be made between the old unencrypted cellphones and modern WiFi.
Back in analog cellphone days, there wasn't much practical way of making the conversations private (SSB isn't much of an encryption...), so, to promote the industry, they legislated the bands "off limits" to common scanners & receivers. Didn't mean that you couldn't buy a scanner and modify it, but the act of modifying the scanner was in some way similar to "breaking into" the "private" bands. Owners of the cellphones had no practical method to "turn on" privacy for themselves.
By contrast, virtually all WiFi hardware commercially sold has at least some form of encryption available. Sure, a lot of it can be broken with minimal effort, but so can the front door of your house, or your windows. There is an expectation in society that "breaking" is "bad." If you're too lazy to lock your house and car, and perhaps leave the keys in the ignition, you're not going to get a lot of sympathy when something bad happens to your stuff, regardless of whether the perp was breaking the law, you made it far easier for them to target you than the average citizen.
What distresses me is the lack of end-to-end encryption in common commercial e-mail and chat programs, the tech was "out there" in 1989 when I took crypto in college... I guess it's no surprise that Facebook and similar exploitations of what used to be private data have done so well, people just don't seem to care if you read their mail.
Now I for one do not have a problem with them using public surveillance or Driver's License ID's. If you go out in Public, you consent to being watched by the same public and by extension, the Government.
A normal person who was watched by "the same public" as closely as these systems can would quickly feel like he was being stalked and harassed. Going out in public does not mean you give consent to be stalked and have the time and date of your location constantly recorded in a permanent database.
Exactly this, any corporeal person obtaining this much information about you "in public" 20 years ago would have been eligible for a restraining order against them.
This particular bolt problem might have been solved by a team of thousands on the ground, but if you've got the people up there already, it's going to be faster and cheaper to use them than to do something clever with fabricators, manipulators, etc.
By the time the robot fabrication factories get to be as capable as humans, they will be just as costly to launch into orbit and maintain there.
Between the two, I've seen far more 300+hp RWD cars spin and crash than I have seen underpowered cars actually cause collisions from merge difficulties.
Mostly the slow to accelerate actual crashes I have seen have resulted from drivers not applying the power they had, pulling out into 50+mph traffic and doing 20, because they're not going very far or whatever. I actually spoke with a guy that got rear-ended this way, his attitude was that just because everybody on the road was doing 50 in a 45 was no reason they had to, the traffic was supposed to slow down for them. Legally correct, sir. Too bad your pregnant wife miscarried as a result of your knowledge of the law + ignorance of how things really work.
It's not safe for the simple reason that the automatic cars will drive the speed limit, and cause accidents because everybody else is going 20 over.
That's pretty short sighted. As much as I enjoy driving my car myself, I imagine automatic cars getting their own lanes and higher speed limits within the next 10-20 years, it's one of the few things I like about their coming (that, and less idiots to contend with on the road.)
Do a CRC32 of each file. Write to a file one per line in this order: CRC, directory, filename. Sort the file by CRC. Read the file linearly doing a full compare on any file with the same CRC (these will be adjacent in the file).
Would you be so kind to write a program/script which can do that ?
Added benefit, when sorting by filesize you can hit the biggest ones first. Depending on your dataset, most of your redundant data might be in just a few duplicated files.
I think it's cool from a systems perspective in that I can make a system without any support for SATA interfaces or drives, smaller, cheaper, maybe faster maybe not, but a driveless system takes less silicon and less power.
While the basic concept may not be patentable, within the present patent system I'm sure there's plenty of details of implementation that can be patented, since nobody seems to be able to make the "obvious to one skilled in the art" clause fly with a jury.
As a nation we treat our warriors and heroes as crappy as possible.
Over the decades, I've seen some very uneven treatment in this area: military, police, fire, and similar benefits range from princely to insulting, and not based so much on merit, rank, or quality of service, but mostly on the economic climate at the time of service. Consistently, if you want a king's ransom, you'll have to make that on your own in the private sector, but if you're happy with a 3000sf house on 10 acres in Hawaii and money to travel at will, it's amazing how many public sector/military retirees can pull that off.
Slashdot Mirror
He also answered his own criticisms succinctly with:
Don't take a class from a world-famous researcher, because they don't really have time or interest for teaching.
Equally true online or off.
Failing to announce vulnerabilities immediately is a dick move that only protects the people that made the vulnerable product.
Wrong, it protects and benefits the black hats who are using the vulnerability even more...
As simple as it may be to YOU, this is "technical" knowledge that the average citizen does not possess. It is the "average citizen" standard we must go by, not YOUR technical knowledge.
It appears that the judge disagrees with you.
Knowing how to listen to WiFi streams is a legal, and non-regulated, form of technical knowledge, not in the same realm as owning and operating lock-picks.
It takes "special methods" to open most doors, you have to learn how to turn the knob or push the release lever. Just because internet communications are more complex, doesn't mean they are any less open than an unlocked door. For that matter, reading is a whole special skill required to understand written communication, takes years of learning - probably longer than it would take your average college grad to Google up the tools required to listen in on an open WiFi and start scraping out private communications.
"Breaking" occurs when you get out the lock picks, or start trying every one of a thousand possible key shapes that might open a lock. Just using ordinary, published standards is not the same thing as encryption, or locking a door, or sealing an envelope.
Transparent envelopes that anyone with a vague interest can look through, scan mass volumes of for words of interest, etc.
If you would at least take the effort to encrypt your message, it would "level up" the expectation of privacy significantly.
I had a school principal leave me a voice mail on Vonage... she was shocked as hell when I forwarded the recording in an e-mail to a 3rd party. I asked her if she would have preferred me to paraphrase her in the e-mail? I thought it was important for the full communication to be passed on so I wouldn't distort her words, she was just pissed that what, in her mind, was a passing statement made to me was forwarded in recorded form to her management - she's the one who consented to record the message in the first place.
I think there's a distinction to be made between the old unencrypted cellphones and modern WiFi.
Back in analog cellphone days, there wasn't much practical way of making the conversations private (SSB isn't much of an encryption...), so, to promote the industry, they legislated the bands "off limits" to common scanners & receivers. Didn't mean that you couldn't buy a scanner and modify it, but the act of modifying the scanner was in some way similar to "breaking into" the "private" bands. Owners of the cellphones had no practical method to "turn on" privacy for themselves.
By contrast, virtually all WiFi hardware commercially sold has at least some form of encryption available. Sure, a lot of it can be broken with minimal effort, but so can the front door of your house, or your windows. There is an expectation in society that "breaking" is "bad." If you're too lazy to lock your house and car, and perhaps leave the keys in the ignition, you're not going to get a lot of sympathy when something bad happens to your stuff, regardless of whether the perp was breaking the law, you made it far easier for them to target you than the average citizen.
What distresses me is the lack of end-to-end encryption in common commercial e-mail and chat programs, the tech was "out there" in 1989 when I took crypto in college... I guess it's no surprise that Facebook and similar exploitations of what used to be private data have done so well, people just don't seem to care if you read their mail.
Now I for one do not have a problem with them using public surveillance or Driver's License ID's. If you go out in Public, you consent to being watched by the same public and by extension, the Government.
A normal person who was watched by "the same public" as closely as these systems can would quickly feel like he was being stalked and harassed. Going out in public does not mean you give consent to be stalked and have the time and date of your location constantly recorded in a permanent database.
Exactly this, any corporeal person obtaining this much information about you "in public" 20 years ago would have been eligible for a restraining order against them.
Didn't anyone watch the last season finale of Battlestar Galactica?
This particular bolt problem might have been solved by a team of thousands on the ground, but if you've got the people up there already, it's going to be faster and cheaper to use them than to do something clever with fabricators, manipulators, etc.
By the time the robot fabrication factories get to be as capable as humans, they will be just as costly to launch into orbit and maintain there.
It's the difference between spending millions of man hours planning and executing the mission perfectly, and just cowboying up there to git'er done.
NASA has been lacking in the Cowboy department since about 1969.
Um.... it is end-user expandable with a micro-SD slot, which even if it's a pain to change cards, having 32GB in there is good enough for me.
If you're a true "travelling man," you won't be in one place long enough (3 weeks) for mosquito larvae to mature.
They are an invasive species with no redeeming qualities.
Do you mean humans or fire ants? :)
Both, though fire ants are ultimately less destructive.
Kids in your school actually used the provided soap? Suckers. We washed with our own soap at gym time and otherwise dried hands on jeans.
If boiling water is too much trouble, gasoline is also effective, though not recommended when parking one's bed atop the dead nest.
Between the two, I've seen far more 300+hp RWD cars spin and crash than I have seen underpowered cars actually cause collisions from merge difficulties.
Mostly the slow to accelerate actual crashes I have seen have resulted from drivers not applying the power they had, pulling out into 50+mph traffic and doing 20, because they're not going very far or whatever. I actually spoke with a guy that got rear-ended this way, his attitude was that just because everybody on the road was doing 50 in a 45 was no reason they had to, the traffic was supposed to slow down for them. Legally correct, sir. Too bad your pregnant wife miscarried as a result of your knowledge of the law + ignorance of how things really work.
It's not safe for the simple reason that the automatic cars will drive the speed limit, and cause accidents because everybody else is going 20 over.
That's pretty short sighted. As much as I enjoy driving my car myself, I imagine automatic cars getting their own lanes and higher speed limits within the next 10-20 years, it's one of the few things I like about their coming (that, and less idiots to contend with on the road.)
I disagree - human driven cars have become more, and less, safe with engineering, and other, advances over the years.
Collapsible steering column, steel belted radial tires, seat belts, crumple zones: more safe
Crowded roads, mobile phones, multi-hundred horsepower engines: less safe
Anti-lock brakes, air bags, tougher DUI laws, better roads: more safe
Texting, e-mail, twitter and Facebook on mobile phones: less safe
Do a CRC32 of each file. Write to a file one per line in this order: CRC, directory, filename. Sort the file by CRC. Read the file linearly doing a full compare on any file with the same CRC (these will be adjacent in the file).
Would you be so kind to write a program/script which can do that ?
Payment information please, AC?
Added benefit, when sorting by filesize you can hit the biggest ones first. Depending on your dataset, most of your redundant data might be in just a few duplicated files.
I think it's cool from a systems perspective in that I can make a system without any support for SATA interfaces or drives, smaller, cheaper, maybe faster maybe not, but a driveless system takes less silicon and less power.
It's an awesome SSD speedup device.
While the basic concept may not be patentable, within the present patent system I'm sure there's plenty of details of implementation that can be patented, since nobody seems to be able to make the "obvious to one skilled in the art" clause fly with a jury.
I think the death benefits were there, this was just a supplemental scheme...
As a nation we treat our warriors and heroes as crappy as possible.
Over the decades, I've seen some very uneven treatment in this area: military, police, fire, and similar benefits range from princely to insulting, and not based so much on merit, rank, or quality of service, but mostly on the economic climate at the time of service. Consistently, if you want a king's ransom, you'll have to make that on your own in the private sector, but if you're happy with a 3000sf house on 10 acres in Hawaii and money to travel at will, it's amazing how many public sector/military retirees can pull that off.