That's because Lisp is using Polish Notation... the Reverse part of RPN means that the operator comes after the operands. The nice aspect of RPN over PN is that you can perform serveral operations on an operand that is already on the stack, without needing to prequeue the operators.
Did you diagram it out? Unfortunately for you, that looks like a long, but verifiably grammatically correct sentence, with one spelling error, "unneccesary" (sic), a misplaced comma or two, and missing an apostrophe in "Microsofts" (sic); not a run-on sentence, as you would have others believe, with your misguided second-rate education. While you're diagramming the first sentence, you should give my rebutal a go too.:) Exercises like these are fun!
ASK MR. LANGUAGE PERSON Q. Please explain how to diagram a sentence.
A. First spread the sentence out on a clean, flat surface, such as an ironing board. Then, using a sharp pencil or X-Acto knife, locate the "predicate," which indicates where the action has taken place and is usually located directly behind the gills. For example, in the sentence: "LaMont never would of bit a forest ranger," the action probably took place in a forest. Thus your diagram would be shaped like a little tree with branches sticking out of it to indicate the locations of the various particles of speech, such as your gerunds, proverbs, adjutants, etc.
-- Dave Barry
Yes, we know. "Would of bit" is an unacceptable spelling of "would have bitten," but Mr. Language Person is not very bright and to change his spelling would be just plain sic.
So patching a shared lib isn't going to break something. WTF? That's half of the dependency problems in Linux. If there is a vunerability in a shared lib, it would absolutly impact more than one program. That isn't any different than the problems Windows can exhibit.
It's easy to pretend that each and every application is seperate and doesn't bother another, but it is hard to reuse code or have interprocess communication if programs aren't codependent at some level.
Actually I just got in a discussion about this today with a coworker, not knowing about this posting even. The line driver mode works if you have a good feel for the area, but my problem is that it is easy to get lost, and with out other reference maps it is sometimes harder to determine where you went wrong. I'll admit it is cleaner when you know the area, but if your visiting, you are better off sticking with the regular maps.
Office 2003 doesn't rely on MSHTML to render those emails. Your assumption may be based on older versions of Office, but MS does work hard to increase security everywhere. The newer software shows their dedication to improving the platform.
Why? There isn't any map, art, model or sound data included. It isn't like you can sit down and start playing HL2 once it's compiled. The collective art of a game is just as important as the engine.
Just to clarify, you can store values on many (all?) RPN calculators too. On the 48's these are called variables though, and can be more powerful than those of the TI because the variable could be a stored function, or a singular numeric value.
With Java stack replacement and ALG48 running on my HP, I can also see on the stack, and manipulate values and equations symbolically. This lets me use my rational ( 1/3 ) and irrational ( sqrt(2) and pi ) numbers without precesion rounding errors.
So if you are solving an expression with 15 parentheses, you may have to explicitly enter EACH opening and closing paren. With RPN, you don't need to enter a single one.
Alg: (15 - 5) * (((( 1 / 2 ) / 4) / 8) / 16) = is already a pain to enter, and I've only typed in 5 pairs of parentheses. At best this is 26 keys...
With RPN, the '=' will represnt [Enter] RPN: 15 = 5 - 1 = 2 / 4 / 8 / 16 / * and 17 keys later, you are done.
I don't need to remember if I've added all the correct and matching parentheses, I don't need to work in the constraints of how the calculator actually enters those parentheses. The calculation is live, so perhaps at a slight disadvantage you need to keep track of where you are in the expresion, but not any more than you do on an algebraic.
On some calculators, I've seen them where the parens are provided as a set, so the paren key produces '(x)', leaving your cursor at the x. This if fine if you already know exactly how nested you need to make the expression. Getting the depth wrong makes mistakes easier to make, and you need to use cursor keys to move outside of the paren block.
There is also no ambiguity with order of operations with RPN. Not every calulator performs order of operations the exact same way, and this too can make expressions more difficult to ensure they are entered correctly. On a 48 series calculator, the 10 that resulted from (15 - 5) stays on the stack, and is a reminder to me to perform that last multiplication step.
Progressing left to right is also easier to process, I enter a number followed by one or more singular or binary operation. [Enter], ^2, and ^(1/2) are examples of these singular operations where +, -, *, and / are binary. There is a distinct rhythm that your get into while performing calculations on an RPN calulator.
You really need to have your head examined. Wait a minute, I'm reminded of my court-ordered sensitivity training, I shouldn't say that...
You're freakin' whacked!
NTFS replaces the antiquated FAT, and does a smashing good job of beefing up security to the PC file system through ACLs. NTFS was not done simply to frustrate free software users.
NT was released sometime in 1993 with NTFS in full glory. It was designed begining in 1989. How concerned do you think Microsoft was about free software anything in 1989?
Yes, actually when you installed Live, then you agreed to that EULA. Specifically B.7:
7. SERVICE OPERATION AND EQUIPMENT
Xbox Live may only be accessed with an unmodified, except for Microsoft authorized repairs and upgrades, Xbox video game console. Any attempt to disassemble, decompile, create derivative works of, reverse engineer, modify, further sublicense, distribute or use for other purposes either the hardware or software of this system, is strictly prohibited and may result in termination of your account and/or your ability to access Xbox Live via your Xbox, and the pursuit of other legal remedies by Microsoft. Microsoft may take any legal action it deems appropriate against users who violate Microsoft's systems or network security, and such users may also incur criminal and/or civil liability.
Microsoft reserves complete and sole discretion with respect to the operation of Xbox Live. Microsoft may, among other things: (a) restrict or limit access to Xbox Live; (b) retrieve information from the Xbox used to log onto Xbox Live as necessary to operate and protect the security of Xbox Live, and to enforce this Agreement and (c) upgrade, modify, withdraw, suspend, or discontinue any functionality or feature of Xbox Live or any game from time to time without notice, which may involve the automatic download of related software directly to your Xbox video game console, and which software may prevent your Xbox from accessing Xbox Live. Microsoft has no obligation to maintain any content or services, and has no responsibility or liability for the deletion, loss, corruption or failure to store any messages, software or other information or content maintained or transmitted by or through Xbox Live.
As a Live subscriber, I'm glad. This means that I know everyone I'm playing against online has the exact same configuration as me. This is a feature. If you don't like this aspect of Live, then don't subscribe.
Thank you for saying this. I was about to respond the same way when I read this AC posting. This is exactly the reason. However, to use the same logic as earlier; If I type ls and press enter, I get a list of all the files. I have to know to type "ls -al|less" or similar to get the security information on all those files. As a novice user I still don't know what it means, and it is hardly discoverable. How did I know that I could type ls -al? I looked up the man for it. Why would I even expect ls to list the files for me? That isn't an intuitive command for me...
Now, suppose that I'm using some GUI in X11 to view those same files. The meaning of all those x's might make more sense to me now, and maybe I can even relate some of those security attributes to what it means for another user. Windows makes this task just as easy.
ACLs while maybe more complicated, especially if you break inheritance, really can provide more flexibility and power than a Group permission. Then again, I don't expect most novice users to change either of these settings much.
The truth is, that neither system as they are currently implemented will make security "easy" for the novice computer user. This is where both Microsoft and Linux should invest some more time trying to make the task seem less daunting.
And the cool thing, is that you can now extend it to use the rainbow tables that Philippe Oechslin used in the demo, and achieve the same results. Add the salt to the equation, and attack a specific account. The 14 seconds is nothing -- waiting for it to build the dictionary is going to be the longest part of the project, but the concept is almost trivial.
Ok, but you are still missing the point here. The salt has to be accessable to the system and paired with the username still. How else will you determine if the password was correct. Because there is still a correlation between the salt and the username, then there is a vunerability with MD5 too. The question that no one has asked, but is really the most meaningful, is how long did it take to compute the dictionary? Salt won't matter when you are attacking a specific account.
...this is still a dictionary attack. Salt is not going to protect you from someone who knows what account they want to crack. What is more interesting about this, and means something even to the Linux folk, is how long did it take for him to build his dictionary? If you know the hash and salt for the account you are trying to crack then all you need to do is build a dictionary around the salt. The resultant dictionary will open things wide up on a *nix box just as fast.
Ad you stated, salt doesn't safe guard against everything, it simply removes the opportunity of a birthday attack. If you know the account you are trying to breach, Administrator for instance, a salt still wouldn't do you any good because you simply have to precompute the dictionary seeded with that salt. If you have access to the passwd list, you have access to the salt too.
This falls under one of those laws of security, if anyone has physical access to a machine, then there is no security. This is more FUD than anything.
Are you sure that you're on the right site... this is/.
Actually I agree with you completely and stopped reading/. for a while because of the anti-MS sentiment on this site. I still get the email digests, and when I find a headline interesting, I check it out -- but I don't read/. daily anymore for that exact reason.
Linux was interesting to me for awhile, and I wanted to believe as many/. contributers do, but then I realized that I was investing a lot more time and effort to accomplish the same goals in other OS's. Windows isn't perfect, it has flaws, but for the consistancy of the platform, and hardware driver support, it is hard to do better than it for the effort invested.
Yes, but then you are asking someone to burn a mini-CD that has autorun bits. This is a premeditated attack, and is not as sever as the Mac screen saver attack. Both attacks could be avoided if the machines were physically secure. Let's face it, this is where the admin would truly have failed because their box has NO security if it can be physically accessed.
Unless you are recording on a DirecTiVo, the source is analog. I don't see how this makes it any different from recording a song on the radio to a CD. Just because it was recorded on a CD doesn't make it as good as a prerecorded CD.
And how do you get around Macrovision on a punch card or paper tape? Don't come crying to me when the punches meander all over and cause problems when trying to make duplicates.
That's a VERY expensive method to transfer the files... You'd be spending a lot on DVD-Rs or DVD-RWs (RWs DO wear out after a
few rewrites, and that's assuming they allow you to record to RWs).
Are you kidding me? DVD-RW can handle over 1000 rewrites, and DVD+RW can handle 100,000.
The real issue is if you can burn an RW, and it is my guess that you will be able to, or should be able to replace the drive with another that will support RW. Even if you can't erase them from the TiVo, you should still be able to burn to it.
This is how I write a date down too. I'm a military brat with 4 years of NROTC education too, so like you, I believe this is a product of US military influence in my life.
When using the date in filenames, or a similar use where a no nonsense sorting method is needed, I fall back to using ISO myself. Roughly, yyyymmddhhmmss. Very practical.
If you are lucky enough to use Windows XP, you might also consider Microsoft Plus! Digital Media Edition. I prefer WMA over MP3 anyway, but I find the benefit "add copy protection", a little puzzling. Over all, a good program for cleaning up the hiss and pop from old LPs, and porting them into the digital world with as clear a sound as possible.
Slashdot Mirror
That's because Lisp is using Polish Notation... the Reverse part of RPN means that the operator comes after the operands. The nice aspect of RPN over PN is that you can perform serveral operations on an operand that is already on the stack, without needing to prequeue the operators.
Did you diagram it out? Unfortunately for you, that looks like a long, but verifiably grammatically correct sentence, with one spelling error, "unneccesary" (sic), a misplaced comma or two, and missing an apostrophe in "Microsofts" (sic); not a run-on sentence, as you would have others believe, with your misguided second-rate education. While you're diagramming the first sentence, you should give my rebutal a go too. :) Exercises like these are fun!
I'm especially fond of this little bit I found on diagramming sentences:
ASK MR. LANGUAGE PERSON
Q. Please explain how to diagram a sentence.
A. First spread the sentence out on a clean, flat surface, such as an ironing board. Then, using a sharp pencil or X-Acto knife, locate the "predicate," which indicates where the action has taken place and is usually located directly behind the gills. For example, in the sentence: "LaMont never would of bit a forest ranger," the action probably took place in a forest. Thus your diagram would be shaped like a little tree with branches sticking out of it to indicate the locations of the various particles of speech, such as your gerunds, proverbs, adjutants, etc.
-- Dave Barry
Yes, we know. "Would of bit" is an unacceptable spelling of "would have bitten," but Mr. Language Person is not very bright and to change his spelling would be just plain sic.
So patching a shared lib isn't going to break something. WTF? That's half of the dependency problems in Linux. If there is a vunerability in a shared lib, it would absolutly impact more than one program. That isn't any different than the problems Windows can exhibit.
It's easy to pretend that each and every application is seperate and doesn't bother another, but it is hard to reuse code or have interprocess communication if programs aren't codependent at some level.
Actually I just got in a discussion about this today with a coworker, not knowing about this posting even. The line driver mode works if you have a good feel for the area, but my problem is that it is easy to get lost, and with out other reference maps it is sometimes harder to determine where you went wrong. I'll admit it is cleaner when you know the area, but if your visiting, you are better off sticking with the regular maps.
Office 2003 doesn't rely on MSHTML to render those emails. Your assumption may be based on older versions of Office, but MS does work hard to increase security everywhere. The newer software shows their dedication to improving the platform.
Why? There isn't any map, art, model or sound data included. It isn't like you can sit down and start playing HL2 once it's compiled. The collective art of a game is just as important as the engine.
Just to clarify, you can store values on many (all?) RPN calculators too. On the 48's these are called variables though, and can be more powerful than those of the TI because the variable could be a stored function, or a singular numeric value.
With Java stack replacement and ALG48 running on my HP, I can also see on the stack, and manipulate values and equations symbolically. This lets me use my rational ( 1/3 ) and irrational ( sqrt(2) and pi ) numbers without precesion rounding errors.
So if you are solving an expression with 15 parentheses, you may have to explicitly enter EACH opening and closing paren. With RPN, you don't need to enter a single one.
Alg: (15 - 5) * (((( 1 / 2 ) / 4) / 8) / 16) =
is already a pain to enter, and I've only typed in 5 pairs of parentheses. At best this is 26 keys...
With RPN, the '=' will represnt [Enter]
RPN: 15 = 5 - 1 = 2 / 4 / 8 / 16 / *
and 17 keys later, you are done.
I don't need to remember if I've added all the correct and matching parentheses, I don't need to work in the constraints of how the calculator actually enters those parentheses. The calculation is live, so perhaps at a slight disadvantage you need to keep track of where you are in the expresion, but not any more than you do on an algebraic.
On some calculators, I've seen them where the parens are provided as a set, so the paren key produces '(x)', leaving your cursor at the x. This if fine if you already know exactly how nested you need to make the expression. Getting the depth wrong makes mistakes easier to make, and you need to use cursor keys to move outside of the paren block.
There is also no ambiguity with order of operations with RPN. Not every calulator performs order of operations the exact same way, and this too can make expressions more difficult to ensure they are entered correctly. On a 48 series calculator, the 10 that resulted from (15 - 5) stays on the stack, and is a reminder to me to perform that last multiplication step.
Progressing left to right is also easier to process, I enter a number followed by one or more singular or binary operation. [Enter], ^2, and ^(1/2) are examples of these singular operations where +, -, *, and / are binary. There is a distinct rhythm that your get into while performing calculations on an RPN calulator.
You can if you remember to use the swap key... not really a recomended way to perform calculations though.
You really need to have your head examined. Wait a minute, I'm reminded of my court-ordered sensitivity training, I shouldn't say that...
You're freakin' whacked!
NTFS replaces the antiquated FAT, and does a smashing good job of beefing up security to the PC file system through ACLs. NTFS was not done simply to frustrate free software users.
NT was released sometime in 1993 with NTFS in full glory. It was designed begining in 1989. How concerned do you think Microsoft was about free software anything in 1989?
Thank you for saying this. I was about to respond the same way when I read this AC posting. This is exactly the reason. However, to use the same logic as earlier; If I type ls and press enter, I get a list of all the files. I have to know to type "ls -al|less" or similar to get the security information on all those files. As a novice user I still don't know what it means, and it is hardly discoverable. How did I know that I could type ls -al? I looked up the man for it. Why would I even expect ls to list the files for me? That isn't an intuitive command for me...
Now, suppose that I'm using some GUI in X11 to view those same files. The meaning of all those x's might make more sense to me now, and maybe I can even relate some of those security attributes to what it means for another user. Windows makes this task just as easy.
ACLs while maybe more complicated, especially if you break inheritance, really can provide more flexibility and power than a Group permission. Then again, I don't expect most novice users to change either of these settings much.
The truth is, that neither system as they are currently implemented will make security "easy" for the novice computer user. This is where both Microsoft and Linux should invest some more time trying to make the task seem less daunting.
And the cool thing, is that you can now extend it to use the rainbow tables that Philippe Oechslin used in the demo, and achieve the same results. Add the salt to the equation, and attack a specific account. The 14 seconds is nothing -- waiting for it to build the dictionary is going to be the longest part of the project, but the concept is almost trivial.
Ok, but you are still missing the point here. The salt has to be accessable to the system and paired with the username still. How else will you determine if the password was correct. Because there is still a correlation between the salt and the username, then there is a vunerability with MD5 too. The question that no one has asked, but is really the most meaningful, is how long did it take to compute the dictionary? Salt won't matter when you are attacking a specific account.
...this is still a dictionary attack. Salt is not going to protect you from someone who knows what account they want to crack. What is more interesting about this, and means something even to the Linux folk, is how long did it take for him to build his dictionary? If you know the hash and salt for the account you are trying to crack then all you need to do is build a dictionary around the salt. The resultant dictionary will open things wide up on a *nix box just as fast.
Ad you stated, salt doesn't safe guard against everything, it simply removes the opportunity of a birthday attack. If you know the account you are trying to breach, Administrator for instance, a salt still wouldn't do you any good because you simply have to precompute the dictionary seeded with that salt. If you have access to the passwd list, you have access to the salt too.
This falls under one of those laws of security, if anyone has physical access to a machine, then there is no security. This is more FUD than anything.
Are you sure that you're on the right site... this is /.
/. for a while because of the anti-MS sentiment on this site. I still get the email digests, and when I find a headline interesting, I check it out -- but I don't read /. daily anymore for that exact reason.
/. contributers do, but then I realized that I was investing a lot more time and effort to accomplish the same goals in other OS's. Windows isn't perfect, it has flaws, but for the consistancy of the platform, and hardware driver support, it is hard to do better than it for the effort invested.
Actually I agree with you completely and stopped reading
Linux was interesting to me for awhile, and I wanted to believe as many
Of course, a macintosh is also a species of apple (the fruit), so your search might drop the page you are really looking for.
Yes, but then you are asking someone to burn a mini-CD that has autorun bits. This is a premeditated attack, and is not as sever as the Mac screen saver attack. Both attacks could be avoided if the machines were physically secure. Let's face it, this is where the admin would truly have failed because their box has NO security if it can be physically accessed.
Unless you are recording on a DirecTiVo, the source is analog. I don't see how this makes it any different from recording a song on the radio to a CD. Just because it was recorded on a CD doesn't make it as good as a prerecorded CD.
And how do you get around Macrovision on a punch card or paper tape? Don't come crying to me when the punches meander all over and cause problems when trying to make duplicates.
Are you kidding me? DVD-RW can handle over 1000 rewrites, and DVD+RW can handle 100,000.
The real issue is if you can burn an RW, and it is my guess that you will be able to, or should be able to replace the drive with another that will support RW. Even if you can't erase them from the TiVo, you should still be able to burn to it.
Hell, let it come as it is. I can always burn it to an RW, then rip that RW later to make my final compilation.
This way TiVo and Pioneer can still make the product, and I can still use it the way I want. This should keep all the intersted parties happy.
This is how I write a date down too. I'm a military brat with 4 years of NROTC education too, so like you, I believe this is a product of US military influence in my life.
When using the date in filenames, or a similar use where a no nonsense sorting method is needed, I fall back to using ISO myself. Roughly, yyyymmddhhmmss. Very practical.
If you are lucky enough to use Windows XP, you might also consider Microsoft Plus! Digital Media Edition. I prefer WMA over MP3 anyway, but I find the benefit "add copy protection", a little puzzling. Over all, a good program for cleaning up the hiss and pop from old LPs, and porting them into the digital world with as clear a sound as possible.