but why not take a hash of a hash ? if its broken once - all you get is another hash and with no way of telling if you`ve cracked it or not, its useless
It would be more useful to know precisely what triggers it, and why - then saying it merely exists.
Im sure most people have at one point in their lives for an unexplainable reason (till now i guess) done something other then what they wanted to - and was better off because of it.
perhaps change the colour of the bar its in, like it does for https to a red or something ? Or you could put the relevent characters in red and bold with a caution icon next to the url? theres no way of making it foolproof that i can see, only to make it harder to do convincingly
a company that can afford to pout millions into R&D can afford to market the product they get at the end of the day.
The patent system was designed to allow for those 'Joe Averages' who tinker in their sheds for instance, to come up with an idea and make money from it without having to worry about a large corporation stealing it and then cornering the market , giving poor Joe Average nowhere to go.
with software theres no reason for not using copyright to protect it
i dont think its limited to the entertainment industry.
i firmly believe that there are many many more corporations which have 'yes men' in congress.
it stinks, it truely does at just how corrupt american politics have become - and dont make the mistake of believing its restricted to congress only.
" How can you expect anyone to believe you or take your responses seriously, given that it is your responsibility to Microsoft to respond favourably to them, regardless of what the facts may be? "
lighthouses are a good redundancy incase GPS/Radar fails on the boat, as far as i know they dont get paid for by passing ships either so why are they being 'forced to close' ?
does anyone know if the USPTO is liable if they grant frivilous patents such as this?
i recon the threat of getting sued over handing out daft patents like this might at least offer a glimmer of hope of sanity being restored to the decision making process over there
if they build a new one, why not sell the old one to someone else and let them worry about maintaining it. otherwise its only going to burn up in the atmosphere, this way you could make money on it too
in order to make such a ring, developers require the conclusive guide to women ( aka a manual ) , and unfortunately there isnt a reliable one out there yet:)
my old school made the unfortunate mistake of leaving an installer account active:) username installer, password install. it took a matter of minutes to work out:). there was also the gigglesome security software they had installed which stored user permissions in a.ini file. which happened to be on a network read/write share. im sure you can guess what happened to the admin binary string and where it ended up:)
1 million+ per episode is a little silly, i agree but i dont think theres anyone who gets paid that much ( or hope not ). 1 million+ per series, perhaps.
Its encouraging to see at least one US 'industry' actually take note of what does and does not work when trying to deal with the internet. If this is done right, and priced right then i can see it becoming a success - especially if you arent forced to wait a week for each episode to come out just so TV networks can show it first. ( laiden with ads ). Of course since you are getting it direct from the supplier, theres no need for adverts in it either - so if they`re gone, then yes i can see this becoming successful. Ofc they`re going to have to DRM , or otherwise watermark it in some way to slow down the spread of the files to p2p networks ( its impossible to stop it really ) but as long as its all done in a nice way - i cant imagine there being much of a problem in it being adopted readily
they could just be gearing up to release some severely kick ass firefox extentions.
That way, if any IE user wants to try them, they need to get Firefox ( double win for google , one away from IE and one into the rebellion;D )
given googles reputation and popularity i think people might look up and take notice if they were deliberately and publically snubbing microsoft
If you apply the same, or different encryption methods, multiple times to the same thing, is the result more or less secure then it was to start with?
For instance , say i have a block of text i want to encrypt. If i put it through PGP using a different key each time, and the person at the end knows which order to apply the keys to it in order to decrypt it - wouldnt it be much more secure from a hack? sure they might crack it once, but all theyll see is jibberish and have no way of knowing if they succeeded or not.
unless im missing something, most encryptions if applied several times to something would be massively more secure then an encryption done once ( ok except for rot13;D ).
if for example the probability that a given encryption can be broken is 1/100 ( a very high example probability ) , then applying the same encryption to the same thing 5 times would result in a probability of ( 0.01 * 0.01 * 0.01 * 0.01 * 0.01 ) = 0.0000000001 for breaking the whole thing
Surely you can see if you have a strong encryption and apply it several times like this, the probability it gets cracked rapidly approaches 0
unless theres a flaw in my reasoning someone would like to enlighten me on:)
Slashdot Mirror
but why not take a hash of a hash ?
if its broken once - all you get is another hash and with no way of telling if you`ve cracked it or not, its useless
It would be more useful to know precisely what triggers it, and why - then saying it merely exists.
Im sure most people have at one point in their lives for an unexplainable reason (till now i guess) done something other then what they wanted to - and was better off because of it.
perhaps change the colour of the bar its in, like it does for https to a red or something ?
Or you could put the relevent characters in red and bold with a caution icon next to the url?
theres no way of making it foolproof that i can see, only to make it harder to do convincingly
nope, ignore me. Im not awake yet. Misread theregister article on it and thought it was describing the dvd system when infact it was the cd system
Right from what i can gather it 'protects' the disk by basically messing up the audio channel so a ripped version has a corrupted soundtrack.
Now dvd players are supposed to correct for this in hardware yes?
What exactly is stopping someone from emulating the audio chip corrector thing?
this copy protection is at most a speedbump - its not sufficient on its own to prevent dvd ripping.
Problem is Microsoft is an american company. the EU cant break them up into seperate companies - that requires the US to do that.
:)
Im sure you know what the chances of that happening are, at least within the next 4 years
leading scientists reveal that water is ... WET!
Seriously - is this a suprise to anyone here?
AHA! so thats why americans want global warming to happen ;D
( note to overzealous mods - this IS intended as a joke )
a company that can afford to pout millions into R&D can afford to market the product they get at the end of the day.
The patent system was designed to allow for those 'Joe Averages' who tinker in their sheds for instance, to come up with an idea and make money from it without having to worry about a large corporation stealing it and then cornering the market , giving poor Joe Average nowhere to go.
with software theres no reason for not using copyright to protect it
i dont think its limited to the entertainment industry. i firmly believe that there are many many more corporations which have 'yes men' in congress. it stinks, it truely does at just how corrupt american politics have become - and dont make the mistake of believing its restricted to congress only.
" How can you expect anyone to believe you or take your responses seriously, given that it is your responsibility to Microsoft to respond favourably to them, regardless of what the facts may be? "
Thinking about it makes me think about casting a fireball spell on black and white and flinging it at some poor villiagers.
:D
i sure wouldnt want to be in the way of THAT fireball
lighthouses are a good redundancy incase GPS/Radar fails on the boat, as far as i know they dont get paid for by passing ships either so why are they being 'forced to close' ?
heres the Mirrordot copy incase the thing totally dies: http://mirrordot.org/stories/4ec4acbeb790ac0270a10 94afdd09d56/index.html
sigh
does anyone know if the USPTO is liable if they grant frivilous patents such as this?
i recon the threat of getting sued over handing out daft patents like this might at least offer a glimmer of hope of sanity being restored to the decision making process over there
if they build a new one, why not sell the old one to someone else and let them worry about maintaining it.
otherwise its only going to burn up in the atmosphere, this way you could make money on it too
i thought one of the most common security flaws was attributed to buffer overruns?
in order to make such a ring, developers require the conclusive guide to women ( aka a manual ) , and unfortunately there isnt a reliable one out there yet :)
my old school made the unfortunate mistake of leaving an installer account active :) :). .ini file. which happened to be on a network read/write share. :)
username installer, password install. it took a matter of minutes to work out
there was also the gigglesome security software they had installed which stored user permissions in a
im sure you can guess what happened to the admin binary string and where it ended up
1 million+ per episode is a little silly, i agree but i dont think theres anyone who gets paid that much ( or hope not ).
1 million+ per series, perhaps.
Its encouraging to see at least one US 'industry' actually take note of what does and does not work when trying to deal with the internet.
If this is done right, and priced right then i can see it becoming a success - especially if you arent forced to wait a week for each episode to come out just so TV networks can show it first. ( laiden with ads ).
Of course since you are getting it direct from the supplier, theres no need for adverts in it either - so if they`re gone, then yes i can see this becoming successful.
Ofc they`re going to have to DRM , or otherwise watermark it in some way to slow down the spread of the files to p2p networks ( its impossible to stop it really ) but as long as its all done in a nice way - i cant imagine there being much of a problem in it being adopted readily
rather then predator, lawyers are more like parasites. They feed off the life blood of others.
they could just be gearing up to release some severely kick ass firefox extentions. That way, if any IE user wants to try them, they need to get Firefox ( double win for google , one away from IE and one into the rebellion ;D )
given googles reputation and popularity i think people might look up and take notice if they were deliberately and publically snubbing microsoft
If you apply the same, or different encryption methods, multiple times to the same thing, is the result more or less secure then it was to start with? For instance , say i have a block of text i want to encrypt. If i put it through PGP using a different key each time, and the person at the end knows which order to apply the keys to it in order to decrypt it - wouldnt it be much more secure from a hack? sure they might crack it once, but all theyll see is jibberish and have no way of knowing if they succeeded or not. unless im missing something, most encryptions if applied several times to something would be massively more secure then an encryption done once ( ok except for rot13 ;D ).
if for example the probability that a given encryption can be broken is 1/100 ( a very high example probability ) , then applying the same encryption to the same thing 5 times would result in a probability of ( 0.01 * 0.01 * 0.01 * 0.01 * 0.01 ) = 0.0000000001 for breaking the whole thing
Surely you can see if you have a strong encryption and apply it several times like this, the probability it gets cracked rapidly approaches 0
unless theres a flaw in my reasoning someone would like to enlighten me on :)
nope, i thought of the balding bloke too :(
too much star trek and not enough gf time makes AC a dull geek ( repeat )