I'm against all foreign operation of ports. At a bare minimum this means they have access to the manifests for military ships operating out of their ports. Not a good idea.
BTW, sorry, but I'm not afraid of a moron who apparenlty couldn't strike a match and didn't think to spend 69 cents at a gas station for a lighter.
Do you know when the state of Israel was founded? Do you?
Putting Israel in its current location was like dropping a piece of pure sodium into water and hoping the two could 'just get along'.
Anytime the international community draws lines on a map and says 'country a is here' it leads to decades (at a minimum) of strife and death in the area. Seriously we should just stop doing it.
Once again, from the article: "The knock code is the combination of the time intervals between knocks produced by the 'KnocKey', and the knock code itself is encrypted and has billions of different combinations. Even more importantly, if an unauthorized person tries to record the knocking sequence and play it back in order to open the door, the lock will not open since the knocking sequence changes every time. Another advantage of the technology is that all 'KnocKeys' are the same, if the 'KnocKey' is lost or stolen, it is possible to simply buy another 'KnocKey' and enter your personal code. "
This is not a person knocking on the door. You hold the device against the door, enter your code, and then the device does the knocking. You don't control the knocks directly. You're looking in the totally wrong place for the security weakness: "Another advantage of the technology is that all 'KnocKeys' are the same, if the 'KnocKey' is lost or stolen, it is possible to simply buy another 'KnocKey'"
This thing just has the numbers 0-9 on it. Any door secured with this would be breakable with a dictionary style attack on the device, assuming you cared to stand there long enough poking in numerical codes, or made a device to do that for you. Probably a good chunk of the time the code would be the street address, phone number, or birthday of the person owning the house.
Read the article again please (if you read it the first time).
The point of HDCP is that the content producers can revoke the keys of individual HDCP devices, like tvs, hd-dvd players, and the converter box you mentioned above. The manufacturer has already stopped selling it becuase they were just going to have all their keys revoked. THEY now control YOUR hardware at will.
"Well... there's a bigger problem looming ahead. Unfortunately, the good people behind HDCP weren't complete idiots. If you thought that the idea of OPM was a little scary, you're going to love Key Revocation Lists. Consider revocation HDCP's version of the History Eraser Button.
So what is revocation? Let's first start with a brief look at HDCP.
There are three main parts to HDCP's security system. First, there is the cryptographic Authentication and Key Exchange (AKE). When a company wishes to produce an HDCP-compliant device, that company requests a set of keys from the HDCP licensing body. After the licensing body has determined that the company's product has been designed in a manner robust enough to withstand attacks and that the keys will be protected, the company will be given a series of unique secret keys.
AKE is the cryptographic method that uses these keys to determine a mutual value with which to encrypt the data traveling between the playback device and the display device.
Once both the playback device and the display device have settled on a value with which to encrypt the content, all the video content will be encrypted using this mutual value (this is the second part). Additionally, the system will check every couple of seconds to ensure the integrity of both the keys and the link.
So far, that seems reasonable. However, what happens when rogue devices start to appear on the market? What happens when a company's design wasn't as robust as first thought or, worse yet, a company's secret keys are leaked "into the wild."
This is where key-revocation lists come into play. The third aspect of HDCP security is "device renewability." This is the ability for media, streaming content, or even other devices to invalidate keys known to be a problem. For instance, let's assume that you've purchased a DVIMAGIC. That little device is sitting between your cable box and your television. Everything is going fine. Then, one day, you wake up to discover that your television is no longer working with all the channels. What happened? Your cable box just used System Renewability Messages (SRMs) to invalidate the keys used by your DVIMAGIC. From that point on, your cable box will treat your DVIMAGIC as a rogue device. As such, it will not allow it to pass AKE.
Will your DVIMAGIC work with a HD-DVD player? That depends: what discs have you tried to play? Revocation lists are encoded onto the DVDs. The newer the disc is, the larger the revocation list will be, and, once you're "caught," that playback device should never pass AKE."
Key revocation is ridiculous. Devices like these are the only way for older HDTVs to work with the new players.
And here's the best part, about how innocent people buying brand new TVs could be screwed too:
"However, what happens when legitimate keys are "in the wild?" For instance, let's assume for a second that a large plasma-television company was the victim of a break-in/angry employee/etc. The result is that said company's keys have landed in the hands of a DVIMAGIC-type dongle maker. When that dongle-maker is caught, will the powers-that-be revoke its keys knowing that, in doing so, there will be legitimate customers caught in the crossfire?
The answer isn't 100% clear. Content owners might very well say, "Too bad - Company X didn't properly protect its keys." The result? Unclear."
One problem with this. If the player doen't get a valid response to the HDCP handshake with the player, it won't put out the high res content at all. Only the 1/4 res content. You can upscale that to true HD, but you're missing a lot of the info so it won't look the same. If any such device comes out, it will have to be licensed, and so while it may be $20 worth of electronics, it will cost at least $300.
The first post: "In discussion with some industry engineers, I found that there are some problems popping up with the adaptation of the new HDMI standard. Here is what was discussed:
(1) Some cable TV boxes with HDMI out are not delivering any picture to displays with HDMI inputs.
(2) The current HDMI plug appears not to be as sturdy as anticipated, and there may be a change next year in the design of the plug, and the new plug would not fit in current HDMI sockets.
(3) If you have an HDMI source such as a DVD player, and connect it to your display via HDMI, you may not be able to get 5.1 digital bitstreams to come out of the coaxial or Toslink digital output of the player at the same time as digital video and audio out of the HDMI output.
(4) HDMI is a two-way digital communication, and some displays send a handshake signal to the DVD player that permanently messes up the player's ability to output digital video through its HDMI jack.
(5) HDMI v 1.1 is already hitting the shelves, with v 1.2 on the way, and v 1.3 in the next couple of years (v 1.3 will deliver higher res 5.1 digital audio). What will be the backward compatibility of these versions?
In my own situation, using a DirecTV satellite box with HDMI out to an LCD TV with HDMI in, when I turn off the TV, the satellite box crashes. I have to unplug the satellite box and then plug it back in. I have not solved this problem, except by switching to some other input besides HDMI before turning the TV off. Then, when I turn the TV back on, I switch to the HDMI input for viewing."
There follows a litany of woe where devices need to be turned on in a specific order for the HDCP handshake to work, where the coax cable needs to run from the digital set top box to the tv (even though it's not needed) to keep the box from crashing, complaints from professional AV system installers who can't get components to work, some boxes that will either transmit the HDCP stream or the digital audio but not both, some components that don't recognize HDCP repeaters so that hooking your cable box straight into your tv works, but not with the dvr between them, etc. All for nothing. If the HDMI cables just didn't have to deal with HDCP they would transmit the same quality with no problems. You can't put out a technology that requires you to turn on components in a specific order to work, it's just ridiculous.
Ketamine is tons of fun. Only substance I ever had a problem with though. It's stupid to say people would do a substance, or anything else, just because it's illegal.
" 794. Gathering or delivering defense information to aid foreign government (a) Whoever, with intent or reason to believe that it is to be used to the injury of the United States or to the advantage of a foreign nation, communicates, delivers, or transmits, or attempts to communicate, deliver, or transmit, to any foreign government, or to any faction or party or military or naval force within a foreign country, whether recognized or unrecognized by the United States, or to any representative, officer, agent, employee, subject, or citizen thereof, either directly or indirectly, any document, writing, code book, signal book, sketch, photograph, photographic negative, blueprint, plan, map, model, note, instrument, appliance, or information relating to the national defense, shall be punished by death or by imprisonment for any term of years or for life, except that the sentence of death shall not be imposed unless the jury or, if there is no jury, the court, further finds that the offense resulted in the identification by a foreign power (as defined in section 101(a) of the Foreign Intelligence Surveillance Act of 1978) of an individual acting as an agent of the United States and consequently in the death of that individual, or directly concerned nuclear weaponry, military spacecraft or satellites, early warning systems, or other means of defense or retaliation against large-scale attack; war plans; communications intelligence or cryptographic information; or any other major weapons system or major element of defense strategy."
If the NSA is reclassifying these docs, there's a chance at least one would give away at least one identity, making the publishing of it an offense punishable by any length jail term or death.
That had damn well better be a DOD document, and not an NSA document.
You do realize their different jurisdictions, right? NSA gathers intelligence, they don't build bombs. DOD documents were never included in the original order that declassified the NSA documents.
Not for ethical reasons (couldn't really give a flying fig about weasel death), more for environmental reasons. The amount of water it takes to raise one pound of beef would let you grow 70 pounds of wheat - seems really non-sustainable to raise livestock for food, and I hate that that practice is subsidized by my tax dollars. Truly free range animal husbandry can be lighter on the land than farming, but it's just not practiced in this country. We've turned the whole process industrial.
In the article the historians suggested that they could be charged with violating the espionage act. I doubt they would be, but it's probably very unpleasant to find out one morning that the papers you have in your filing cabinet could condemn you to death.
Oh yes. I see your point. Deciding that it was embarassing that the CIA didn't think China would interfere in the Korean war is just the same as classifying detailed plans of power stations. Becuase you know, the Korean war is of vital, vital interest to Al-Qaeda.
You didn't read enough. These were historians who had received papers published by the government and stamped declassified. They were since re-classified using a twisted logic that they were never properly declassified in the first part, so they didn't have to be reported as re-classified. This process was not published, so the historians had no idea. They are all now guilty of violating the Espionage act, an act of high treason against the united states with a maximum penalty of death.
Tell me again this isn't a serious problem. You're "guessing" this will be quickly reversed. You're wrong. The agency doing this investigation doesn't have that power. Meanwhile, the NSA and others continue to have a team working 5 days a week "un-declassifiying" papers, and not reporting on which papers they're working with. You may notice how it would be impossible for the first agency to ever catch up. This is a sign of a broken system, not one working properly.
Governments can have secrets, yes. They should stop being secret 25 years after the fact though. Name me one viable security threat from 25 years ago that is still important today. I can think of China, and that's it. So I would expect documents on China to remain classified. But unless it's relevant to national security, it should become the province of historians - that's a vital part of a culture understanding itself.
The bureaucracy is too entrenched. Please remind me how easy it was for public officials to do anything about J Edgar Hoover when he had dirt on all of them. They simply couldn't act or they'd lose their political power. That's the problem when you're dealing with professional spies with access to phone taps, covert surveillance, etc.
When do the American people elect an entirely fresh slate to Congress? Never. There are a few seats realistically up for change each election, no matter what the theory is about all of them being up for reelection. In theory, there's no difference between theory and practice, in practice there is. So you're stuck with a Congress that has a lot of inertia, with members who've been there for up to 53 years (Robert Byrd of W.Va.). He might be a good man, but he's not trying to change the course he's been on for all these years.
I don't know how much credence I'd give that paper. It's over 30 years old, and my vegetarianism doesn't seem to have stopped my brain from developing.
If you read the second paragraph there in the primate baseline, the diet they ascribe to early primates is strikingly similar to the diet that is promoted to cure America's dietary ills: fruits, veggies, lots of vitamins, low sodium, low fat, low cholesterol.
I think the position in the paper reflects the poor understanding of nutrition in the 70s. People used to think you had to eat a 'complete protein' to have enough protein, which is just silly. The body synthesizes the protein from the component amino acids in the diet just fine - or else how in world would a cow grow so much beef from eating grass?
Furthermore I don't think the end of the paper is correct: "While human cranial capacity tripled over the 2.5 million years after H. habilis first appeared, this trend has recently reversed. Since peaking among Cro Magnons and other humans living during the Late Paleolithic, cranial capacity has fallen off about 11%." They blame this on a decrease in meat eating. This just isn't relevant. Cranial capacity is the volume in your skull. But that's not all brains - that would also include the large protuding jaws we used to have and don't have anymore. There was a recent study: http://www.buzz.bham.ac.uk/Buzz_69.pdf/ (warning pdf) that measured skulls over a 600 year period and found that we have less prominent facial features and a larger cranial vault, the part that actually matters. What matters is the complexity of the structure in the pre-frontal lobe, which is reinforced by social and other educational interactions, not the volume of your head or how much meat you eat.
Slashdot Mirror
I'm against all foreign operation of ports. At a bare minimum this means they have access to the manifests for military ships operating out of their ports. Not a good idea.
BTW, sorry, but I'm not afraid of a moron who apparenlty couldn't strike a match and didn't think to spend 69 cents at a gas station for a lighter.
China needed to expel the Japanese?
What are you talking about? You mean the end of WWII when the Japanese were forced to leave by allied forces?
Do you know when the state of Israel was founded? Do you?
Putting Israel in its current location was like dropping a piece of pure sodium into water and hoping the two could 'just get along'.
Anytime the international community draws lines on a map and says 'country a is here' it leads to decades (at a minimum) of strife and death in the area. Seriously we should just stop doing it.
So.... english is your fifteenth language? This bordered on incomprehensible.
Did you just say that criminals commit more crimes than other people?
Do you mean like 100% vs 0%?
Well you just have to plant a small potato garden in your front yard and equip the devices with a back up to plug into the potato.
This invention might be interesting if it were potato powered. Not as is.
Once again, from the article:
"The knock code is the combination of the time intervals between knocks produced by the 'KnocKey', and the knock code itself is encrypted and has billions of different combinations. Even more importantly, if an unauthorized person tries to record the knocking sequence and play it back in order to open the door, the lock will not open since the knocking sequence changes every time. Another advantage of the technology is that all 'KnocKeys' are the same, if the 'KnocKey' is lost or stolen, it is possible to simply buy another 'KnocKey' and enter your personal code. "
This is not a person knocking on the door. You hold the device against the door, enter your code, and then the device does the knocking. You don't control the knocks directly. You're looking in the totally wrong place for the security weakness:
"Another advantage of the technology is that all 'KnocKeys' are the same, if the 'KnocKey' is lost or stolen, it is possible to simply buy another 'KnocKey'"
This thing just has the numbers 0-9 on it. Any door secured with this would be breakable with a dictionary style attack on the device, assuming you cared to stand there long enough poking in numerical codes, or made a device to do that for you. Probably a good chunk of the time the code would be the street address, phone number, or birthday of the person owning the house.
Problems:
1) This is DVI, not HDMI which will be the connector of choice for HD-DVD and Blu_Ray.
2) They can revoke your key at any time.
3) It costs $400.
What's this format? Can you post some links to some shops or something?
Wrong.
Read the article again please (if you read it the first time).
The point of HDCP is that the content producers can revoke the keys of individual HDCP devices, like tvs, hd-dvd players, and the converter box you mentioned above. The manufacturer has already stopped selling it becuase they were just going to have all their keys revoked. THEY now control YOUR hardware at will.
Please read up on HDCP and key revocation before you start posting about 20 year old technology. This is different from Macrovision, way different.
The product is already gone. Here's why:
"Well... there's a bigger problem looming ahead. Unfortunately, the good people behind HDCP weren't complete idiots. If you thought that the idea of OPM was a little scary, you're going to love Key Revocation Lists. Consider revocation HDCP's version of the History Eraser Button.
So what is revocation? Let's first start with a brief look at HDCP.
There are three main parts to HDCP's security system. First, there is the cryptographic Authentication and Key Exchange (AKE). When a company wishes to produce an HDCP-compliant device, that company requests a set of keys from the HDCP licensing body. After the licensing body has determined that the company's product has been designed in a manner robust enough to withstand attacks and that the keys will be protected, the company will be given a series of unique secret keys.
AKE is the cryptographic method that uses these keys to determine a mutual value with which to encrypt the data traveling between the playback device and the display device.
Once both the playback device and the display device have settled on a value with which to encrypt the content, all the video content will be encrypted using this mutual value (this is the second part). Additionally, the system will check every couple of seconds to ensure the integrity of both the keys and the link.
So far, that seems reasonable. However, what happens when rogue devices start to appear on the market? What happens when a company's design wasn't as robust as first thought or, worse yet, a company's secret keys are leaked "into the wild."
This is where key-revocation lists come into play. The third aspect of HDCP security is "device renewability." This is the ability for media, streaming content, or even other devices to invalidate keys known to be a problem. For instance, let's assume that you've purchased a DVIMAGIC. That little device is sitting between your cable box and your television. Everything is going fine. Then, one day, you wake up to discover that your television is no longer working with all the channels. What happened? Your cable box just used System Renewability Messages (SRMs) to invalidate the keys used by your DVIMAGIC. From that point on, your cable box will treat your DVIMAGIC as a rogue device. As such, it will not allow it to pass AKE.
Will your DVIMAGIC work with a HD-DVD player? That depends: what discs have you tried to play? Revocation lists are encoded onto the DVDs. The newer the disc is, the larger the revocation list will be, and, once you're "caught," that playback device should never pass AKE."
Key revocation is ridiculous. Devices like these are the only way for older HDTVs to work with the new players.
And here's the best part, about how innocent people buying brand new TVs could be screwed too:
"However, what happens when legitimate keys are "in the wild?" For instance, let's assume for a second that a large plasma-television company was the victim of a break-in/angry employee/etc. The result is that said company's keys have landed in the hands of a DVIMAGIC-type dongle maker. When that dongle-maker is caught, will the powers-that-be revoke its keys knowing that, in doing so, there will be legitimate customers caught in the crossfire?
The answer isn't 100% clear. Content owners might very well say, "Too bad - Company X didn't properly protect its keys." The result? Unclear."
One problem with this. If the player doen't get a valid response to the HDCP handshake with the player, it won't put out the high res content at all. Only the 1/4 res content. You can upscale that to true HD, but you're missing a lot of the info so it won't look the same. If any such device comes out, it will have to be licensed, and so while it may be $20 worth of electronics, it will cost at least $300.
Check out this forum of people complaining about HDCP: http://www.hometheaterhifi.com/forum/showthread.ph p?t=3121&page=1&pp=10/
The first post:
"In discussion with some industry engineers, I found that there are some problems popping up with the adaptation of the new HDMI standard. Here is what was discussed:
(1) Some cable TV boxes with HDMI out are not delivering any picture to displays with HDMI inputs.
(2) The current HDMI plug appears not to be as sturdy as anticipated, and there may be a change next year in the design of the plug, and the new plug would not fit in current HDMI sockets.
(3) If you have an HDMI source such as a DVD player, and connect it to your display via HDMI, you may not be able to get 5.1 digital bitstreams to come out of the coaxial or Toslink digital output of the player at the same time as digital video and audio out of the HDMI output.
(4) HDMI is a two-way digital communication, and some displays send a handshake signal to the DVD player that permanently messes up the player's ability to output digital video through its HDMI jack.
(5) HDMI v 1.1 is already hitting the shelves, with v 1.2 on the way, and v 1.3 in the next couple of years (v 1.3 will deliver higher res 5.1 digital audio). What will be the backward compatibility of these versions?
In my own situation, using a DirecTV satellite box with HDMI out to an LCD TV with HDMI in, when I turn off the TV, the satellite box crashes. I have to unplug the satellite box and then plug it back in. I have not solved this problem, except by switching to some other input besides HDMI before turning the TV off. Then, when I turn the TV back on, I switch to the HDMI input for viewing."
There follows a litany of woe where devices need to be turned on in a specific order for the HDCP handshake to work, where the coax cable needs to run from the digital set top box to the tv (even though it's not needed) to keep the box from crashing, complaints from professional AV system installers who can't get components to work, some boxes that will either transmit the HDCP stream or the digital audio but not both, some components that don't recognize HDCP repeaters so that hooking your cable box straight into your tv works, but not with the dvr between them, etc. All for nothing. If the HDMI cables just didn't have to deal with HDCP they would transmit the same quality with no problems. You can't put out a technology that requires you to turn on components in a specific order to work, it's just ridiculous.
Ketamine is tons of fun. Only substance I ever had a problem with though. It's stupid to say people would do a substance, or anything else, just because it's illegal.
"which were down sharply as audiences proved apathetic for many time-tested movie formulas."
OK, audiences aren't willing to shell out big bones to see crap. They aren't buying pirate copies, they're just not watching crap.
This is a current article in the washington post:c le/2006/02/21/AR2006022101947.html?referrer=email& referrer=email/
s c_sec_18_00000794----000-.html/
http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/arti
Here is the US code relevant:
http://www.law.cornell.edu/uscode/html/uscode18/u
" 794. Gathering or delivering defense information to aid foreign government
(a) Whoever, with intent or reason to believe that it is to be used to the injury of the United States or to the advantage of a foreign nation, communicates, delivers, or transmits, or attempts to communicate, deliver, or transmit, to any foreign government, or to any faction or party or military or naval force within a foreign country, whether recognized or unrecognized by the United States, or to any representative, officer, agent, employee, subject, or citizen thereof, either directly or indirectly, any document, writing, code book, signal book, sketch, photograph, photographic negative, blueprint, plan, map, model, note, instrument, appliance, or information relating to the national defense, shall be punished by death or by imprisonment for any term of years or for life, except that the sentence of death shall not be imposed unless the jury or, if there is no jury, the court, further finds that the offense resulted in the identification by a foreign power (as defined in section 101(a) of the Foreign Intelligence Surveillance Act of 1978) of an individual acting as an agent of the United States and consequently in the death of that individual, or directly concerned nuclear weaponry, military spacecraft or satellites, early warning systems, or other means of defense or retaliation against large-scale attack; war plans; communications intelligence or cryptographic information; or any other major weapons system or major element of defense strategy."
If the NSA is reclassifying these docs, there's a chance at least one would give away at least one identity, making the publishing of it an offense punishable by any length jail term or death.
Sure.
That had damn well better be a DOD document, and not an NSA document.
You do realize their different jurisdictions, right? NSA gathers intelligence, they don't build bombs. DOD documents were never included in the original order that declassified the NSA documents.
Not for ethical reasons (couldn't really give a flying fig about weasel death), more for environmental reasons. The amount of water it takes to raise one pound of beef would let you grow 70 pounds of wheat - seems really non-sustainable to raise livestock for food, and I hate that that practice is subsidized by my tax dollars. Truly free range animal husbandry can be lighter on the land than farming, but it's just not practiced in this country. We've turned the whole process industrial.
In the article the historians suggested that they could be charged with violating the espionage act. I doubt they would be, but it's probably very unpleasant to find out one morning that the papers you have in your filing cabinet could condemn you to death.
Oh yes. I see your point. Deciding that it was embarassing that the CIA didn't think China would interfere in the Korean war is just the same as classifying detailed plans of power stations. Becuase you know, the Korean war is of vital, vital interest to Al-Qaeda.
Did you read the whole article?
How do you deny access to something after it's already been published and given to historians?
The only mechanism now available to them is to threaten the historians with violating the espionage act.
You didn't read enough. These were historians who had received papers published by the government and stamped declassified. They were since re-classified using a twisted logic that they were never properly declassified in the first part, so they didn't have to be reported as re-classified. This process was not published, so the historians had no idea. They are all now guilty of violating the Espionage act, an act of high treason against the united states with a maximum penalty of death.
Tell me again this isn't a serious problem. You're "guessing" this will be quickly reversed. You're wrong. The agency doing this investigation doesn't have that power. Meanwhile, the NSA and others continue to have a team working 5 days a week "un-declassifiying" papers, and not reporting on which papers they're working with. You may notice how it would be impossible for the first agency to ever catch up. This is a sign of a broken system, not one working properly.
Governments can have secrets, yes. They should stop being secret 25 years after the fact though. Name me one viable security threat from 25 years ago that is still important today. I can think of China, and that's it. So I would expect documents on China to remain classified. But unless it's relevant to national security, it should become the province of historians - that's a vital part of a culture understanding itself.
Right. Please, go ahead and try.
The bureaucracy is too entrenched. Please remind me how easy it was for public officials to do anything about J Edgar Hoover when he had dirt on all of them. They simply couldn't act or they'd lose their political power. That's the problem when you're dealing with professional spies with access to phone taps, covert surveillance, etc.
When do the American people elect an entirely fresh slate to Congress? Never. There are a few seats realistically up for change each election, no matter what the theory is about all of them being up for reelection. In theory, there's no difference between theory and practice, in practice there is. So you're stuck with a Congress that has a lot of inertia, with members who've been there for up to 53 years (Robert Byrd of W.Va.). He might be a good man, but he's not trying to change the course he's been on for all these years.
I don't know how much credence I'd give that paper. It's over 30 years old, and my vegetarianism doesn't seem to have stopped my brain from developing.
If you read the second paragraph there in the primate baseline, the diet they ascribe to early primates is strikingly similar to the diet that is promoted to cure America's dietary ills: fruits, veggies, lots of vitamins, low sodium, low fat, low cholesterol.
I think the position in the paper reflects the poor understanding of nutrition in the 70s. People used to think you had to eat a 'complete protein' to have enough protein, which is just silly. The body synthesizes the protein from the component amino acids in the diet just fine - or else how in world would a cow grow so much beef from eating grass?
Furthermore I don't think the end of the paper is correct: "While human cranial capacity tripled over the 2.5 million years after H. habilis first appeared, this trend has recently reversed. Since peaking among Cro Magnons and other humans living during the Late Paleolithic, cranial capacity has fallen off about 11%." They blame this on a decrease in meat eating. This just isn't relevant. Cranial capacity is the volume in your skull. But that's not all brains - that would also include the large protuding jaws we used to have and don't have anymore. There was a recent study: http://www.buzz.bham.ac.uk/Buzz_69.pdf/ (warning pdf) that measured skulls over a 600 year period and found that we have less prominent facial features and a larger cranial vault, the part that actually matters. What matters is the complexity of the structure in the pre-frontal lobe, which is reinforced by social and other educational interactions, not the volume of your head or how much meat you eat.