I don't think you understand. A hardware player is a microcontroller running software. There is no hardware-only DVD player. The software running on this microcontroller is a bit harder to access than software running in windows or linux, but it is just as easy to hack once you get access to the software. You might need to physically modify or damage the device to get access, but there is no way to stop that.
There are embedded devices (what you call hardware) that run special versions of windows and linux. For example, I have a router that runs linux. I don't know what OS the HD-DVD standalone players use, but I'd be surprised if there weren't some running these embedded versions of windows and/or linux.
You were right 5 years or more ago, but things have changed drastically since then.
The US is very close to being a net importer of food. According to the WSJ, our net food trade balance has gone from tens of billions in 2000 to a hundred million in 2005 and will go negative this year. It's shocking to me, too, but we are no longer the breadbasket to the world we once were.
When I first heard about the pet food scandal my first thought was "Why are we importing wheat gluten?" It turns out we are dependent on imports already, not just seasonally, and becoming more so every year.
It *IS* DRM. User Operations (such as FF, Menu, etc) are a Right. This right is being "managed" by someone who is not the user. Pretty much the definition of DRM.
Yeah, this type of misunderstanding sure seems to happen more online than in person. I think the lack of realtime feedback contributes to the problem, as well as a more confrontational environment.
I don't think I'm particularly psycho. Do psychos think they are psycho? I doubt it.
My eyes are frequently bloodshot. I don't know why. I wore hard contacts as a kid and eventually blew out my corneas. Maybe it's the late hours, staring at a computer screen, my mild allergy to my girlfriend's cats, the heavy constant drinking, I simply don't know. In any case, hiding my eyes reduces people who stare or make comments.
Another benefit seems to be I am less approachable to bums seeking change, tourists asking directions, businessguys trying to network, fratboys wanting to comment to me about T&A, or drunks wanting companionship. I'm definitely a bit of a misanthrope, and it seems that irritating people can somehow detect this and are drawn to it. I was an eager adopter of portable music players for partly the same reason.
I don't think that makes me a psychopath. I am not violent and feel empathy for some people. I do dislike a lot of people and wish they'd leave me alone, but I think that's pretty normal. For someone who's a bit of a misanthrope.
OK. Number one, your link is broken. Here is a working one
Number two, snopes says that this little tidbit is false.
Number three, snopes says that this bit of misinformation started out in the 50s in a list of common insect misconceptions, and was used in the early 90s in an experiment of fake facts on the internet to show how gullible people are.
You caught me. I even got lightly tinted ones specifically to wear inside and at night. My eyes are pretty sensitive, but I also like having my eyes hidden.
Re:Some facts to back up your opinion please?
on
Treating the Dead
·
· Score: 1
Quick google found in 1998 Germany spent $2424 per capita on health care, US spent $4178. The numbers widen after that. You can find more current numbers easily. Try something like "health care spending per capita countryname"
We're #1 in spending per capita, spending percentage of GDP, every category. We're nowhere near #1 in any type of quality of care or life.
I've been going to this place that gives 2 pair of polycarbonate glasses, one sunglass-tinted and an eye exam for about $150. I now have lots of acceptable spares. My vision has stopped degrading violently from year to year, and I'm looking forward to needing bifocals in a few years. That'll be fantastic. Blind up close, too. It used to be that 3 year old glasses were nearly worthless, but now I can barely tell the difference.
Prescription sunglasses make me happy, plus in a pinch you can wear them indoors or at night.
If you could build this model of the whole earth, wouldn't it be trivial to build several models of those glasses (for backup purposes)?
I don't see why not. Should have thought of that before we started breaking things.
How did you know I wear glasses?
Educated guess. I can also guess that you work with computers, like scifi, and are male. I'm probably wrong about at most 1 of those 4 things.
I thought it was funny to build an exact replica of the earth, atom for atom. Especially if the purpose of such an endeavor was to crack encryption. What other logical next step is there than using it for something truly trivial like broken glasses?
Broken glasses are nontrivial for me. I couldn't make it to the eyeglass store without glasses. Luckily I have several spares on this planet, no duplication necessary.
This shouldn't be so hard. Let me give an illustration.
We're in progress of an active MITM attack. Fraudulent key exchange has already been made, and the 2 parties think they're talking to each other. The sender sends 00110011, which is encrypted with his private key. You decrypt with his public key, encrypt with your private key, and send 11100011 to the recipient. You have to admit that 00110011 is different from 11100011. You have changed the data. You have to admit that. Data doesn't care if it is encrypted or not. Data is data.
Here is another example, of a passive MITM attack. You are simply eavesdropping on the signal, either by sniffing packets or an inductive pickup or however. You cannot change the signal - this is what makes it a passive MITM attack. Key exchange is made, and you are powerless to perform key substitution. You simply know both parties public keys. They start sending encrypted data, and you are powerless to decrypt this. You do not have their private keys. You cannot fake different keys because you cannot change data. You need to change data during key exchange and during encrypted data transmission in order to perform a successful active MITM attack.
Let me quote your post once again.
There is no reason the man in the middle needs to modify the data. Just being able to evesdrop on the conversation may be enough, just like a tap on a standard phone.
You state that there is no reason the MITM needs to modify the data. That means you are talking about a passive MITM attack, which is just like a tap on a standard phone.
Hopefully I have explained the difference between an active and passive MITM attack to your satisfaction.
Hopefully I have explained the necessity of an active MITM attack to intercept unencrypted data with a key exchange encryption method.
The conclusion is inevitable if you understand both of these concepts. A standard phone tap, which is simply eavesdropping on the data without changing anything, which is what you were talking about in my quoted text, is insufficient.
There are plenty of real-world situations where an active MITM attack is simply not possible. You are stuck with a passive MITM, which is foiled by this exact encryption scheme. It is important to understand the difference between an active and passive MITM. Your comparison of an active MITM to an analog phone tap is wrong.
The biggest advantage I can see to building this 1:1 scale model of the earth and atmosphere is having a backup copy of every person, place, and thing on earth. If you drop your glasses you can simply grab the pair from the duplicate world. Of course, then your duplicate self won't have any glasses. And, it is possible that your duplicate self would have dropped his glasses at the same moment.
A tank-style water heater does indeed heat hot water. You can save quite a bit of energy by putting a blanket on there or switching to a tankless design.
Here's another one: There are cold water heaters in some climates and applications to keep the water from freezing or to reduce condensation.
There is no reason the man in the middle needs to modify the data. Just being able to evesdrop on the conversation may be enough, just like a tap on a standard phone.
I was pointing out MITM needs to modify the data. It needs to perform key substitution. It is utterly unlike a standard phone tap. Just being able to evesdrop (sic) on the conversation is not enough. Your post was completely wrong.
There were other comments talking about an active MITM attack, granted. This type of attack will work, although there are various countermeasures against it. Your comment was not talking about an active MITM. It was talking about a passive MITM, where no data modification is made.
I'm sorry if I came across as rude, but it truly seemed to me that you were claiming that a passive MITM attack is effective in this case. It's not.
Maybe the source of confusion is this: There are different types of MITM attacks. Two kinds are active and passive. Passive changes nothing; active allows changes to be made, for example the key exchange.
Nobody can prove that it is random. We might live in a deterministic universe where radioactive decay intervals have been preordained. We can prove that radioactive decay has no detectable patterns and meets accepted ideas about randomness.
Another source of truly random numbers is atmospheric noise. (e.g. thunderstorms) You could predict this easily by constructing a 1:1 scale model of the earth and atmosphere with each atom corresponding to the original, but this would only work in a deterministic universe. If there is truly chaotic behavior your model would diverge from the original.
Classic truly random numbers can be obtained using coin tosses or die rolls, although some coins and dice have detectable patterns.
Since at this point we're already breaking US law, I go a step further and rip from a library copy. People that support the broken system because it is "more legal" are fooling themselves.
UOP (User Operation Prohibition) is not implemented in VLC, a cross-platform player. There are mods for hardware players, or you can buy one that doesn't implement UOP. There is a website called google that is helpful for this kind of information.
No, if there is hard evidence nobody needs faith. If a glowing fightin' Jesus came down on a cloud and started stomping around, performing miracles, overturning tables, and pissing off the religious right nobody would need faith to believe in Jesus. They could just watch him burn Focus on the Family HQ to the ground and know that Jesus is Love, Jesus is Lord.
Until that glorious day, if you want to believe in Jesus you need faith.
Slashdot Mirror
I don't think you understand. A hardware player is a microcontroller running software. There is no hardware-only DVD player. The software running on this microcontroller is a bit harder to access than software running in windows or linux, but it is just as easy to hack once you get access to the software. You might need to physically modify or damage the device to get access, but there is no way to stop that.
There are embedded devices (what you call hardware) that run special versions of windows and linux. For example, I have a router that runs linux. I don't know what OS the HD-DVD standalone players use, but I'd be surprised if there weren't some running these embedded versions of windows and/or linux.
You were right 5 years or more ago, but things have changed drastically since then.
The US is very close to being a net importer of food. According to the WSJ, our net food trade balance has gone from tens of billions in 2000 to a hundred million in 2005 and will go negative this year. It's shocking to me, too, but we are no longer the breadbasket to the world we once were.
When I first heard about the pet food scandal my first thought was "Why are we importing wheat gluten?" It turns out we are dependent on imports already, not just seasonally, and becoming more so every year.
Have you ever had a nice dinner machine-tooled to aircraft specifications? Delicious!
Standalone players don't use software? What do they use?
The next key could easily be from a hacked standalone player. Maybe an xbox or something.
Australia's AG agrees with this. The AG doesn't have the editing problem.
Wikipedia agrees with this.
Thank you! I knew I read it somewhere. I'm a big fan of the Skeptical Inquirer.
Yeah, this type of misunderstanding sure seems to happen more online than in person. I think the lack of realtime feedback contributes to the problem, as well as a more confrontational environment.
I don't think I'm particularly psycho. Do psychos think they are psycho? I doubt it.
My eyes are frequently bloodshot. I don't know why. I wore hard contacts as a kid and eventually blew out my corneas. Maybe it's the late hours, staring at a computer screen, my mild allergy to my girlfriend's cats, the heavy constant drinking, I simply don't know. In any case, hiding my eyes reduces people who stare or make comments.
Another benefit seems to be I am less approachable to bums seeking change, tourists asking directions, businessguys trying to network, fratboys wanting to comment to me about T&A, or drunks wanting companionship. I'm definitely a bit of a misanthrope, and it seems that irritating people can somehow detect this and are drawn to it. I was an eager adopter of portable music players for partly the same reason.
I don't think that makes me a psychopath. I am not violent and feel empathy for some people. I do dislike a lot of people and wish they'd leave me alone, but I think that's pretty normal. For someone who's a bit of a misanthrope.
I've heard the same thing. I'd have modded you up but you gave no sources. I can't find any with a quick search. Do you know any?
People want so bad to find patterns and magic in the world. That's why people believe in gods, supernatural phenomena, astrology, etc.
OK. Number one, your link is broken. Here is a working one
Number two, snopes says that this little tidbit is false.
Number three, snopes says that this bit of misinformation started out in the 50s in a list of common insect misconceptions, and was used in the early 90s in an experiment of fake facts on the internet to show how gullible people are.
You caught me. I even got lightly tinted ones specifically to wear inside and at night. My eyes are pretty sensitive, but I also like having my eyes hidden.
Quick google found in 1998 Germany spent $2424 per capita on health care, US spent $4178. The numbers widen after that. You can find more current numbers easily. Try something like "health care spending per capita countryname"
We're #1 in spending per capita, spending percentage of GDP, every category. We're nowhere near #1 in any type of quality of care or life.
Oklahoma, ouch. That'll teach 'em!
I've been going to this place that gives 2 pair of polycarbonate glasses, one sunglass-tinted and an eye exam for about $150. I now have lots of acceptable spares. My vision has stopped degrading violently from year to year, and I'm looking forward to needing bifocals in a few years. That'll be fantastic. Blind up close, too. It used to be that 3 year old glasses were nearly worthless, but now I can barely tell the difference.
Prescription sunglasses make me happy, plus in a pinch you can wear them indoors or at night.
I thought it was funny to build an exact replica of the earth, atom for atom. Especially if the purpose of such an endeavor was to crack encryption. What other logical next step is there than using it for something truly trivial like broken glasses?
Broken glasses are nontrivial for me. I couldn't make it to the eyeglass store without glasses. Luckily I have several spares on this planet, no duplication necessary.
We're in progress of an active MITM attack. Fraudulent key exchange has already been made, and the 2 parties think they're talking to each other. The sender sends 00110011, which is encrypted with his private key. You decrypt with his public key, encrypt with your private key, and send 11100011 to the recipient. You have to admit that 00110011 is different from 11100011. You have changed the data. You have to admit that. Data doesn't care if it is encrypted or not. Data is data.
Here is another example, of a passive MITM attack. You are simply eavesdropping on the signal, either by sniffing packets or an inductive pickup or however. You cannot change the signal - this is what makes it a passive MITM attack. Key exchange is made, and you are powerless to perform key substitution. You simply know both parties public keys. They start sending encrypted data, and you are powerless to decrypt this. You do not have their private keys. You cannot fake different keys because you cannot change data. You need to change data during key exchange and during encrypted data transmission in order to perform a successful active MITM attack. Let me quote your post once again. You state that there is no reason the MITM needs to modify the data. That means you are talking about a passive MITM attack, which is just like a tap on a standard phone. Hopefully I have explained the difference between an active and passive MITM attack to your satisfaction. Hopefully I have explained the necessity of an active MITM attack to intercept unencrypted data with a key exchange encryption method. The conclusion is inevitable if you understand both of these concepts. A standard phone tap, which is simply eavesdropping on the data without changing anything, which is what you were talking about in my quoted text, is insufficient.
There are plenty of real-world situations where an active MITM attack is simply not possible. You are stuck with a passive MITM, which is foiled by this exact encryption scheme. It is important to understand the difference between an active and passive MITM. Your comparison of an active MITM to an analog phone tap is wrong.
The biggest advantage I can see to building this 1:1 scale model of the earth and atmosphere is having a backup copy of every person, place, and thing on earth. If you drop your glasses you can simply grab the pair from the duplicate world. Of course, then your duplicate self won't have any glasses. And, it is possible that your duplicate self would have dropped his glasses at the same moment.
A tank-style water heater does indeed heat hot water. You can save quite a bit of energy by putting a blanket on there or switching to a tankless design.
Here's another one: There are cold water heaters in some climates and applications to keep the water from freezing or to reduce condensation.
There were other comments talking about an active MITM attack, granted. This type of attack will work, although there are various countermeasures against it. Your comment was not talking about an active MITM. It was talking about a passive MITM, where no data modification is made.
I'm sorry if I came across as rude, but it truly seemed to me that you were claiming that a passive MITM attack is effective in this case. It's not.
Maybe the source of confusion is this: There are different types of MITM attacks. Two kinds are active and passive. Passive changes nothing; active allows changes to be made, for example the key exchange.
Nobody can prove that it is random. We might live in a deterministic universe where radioactive decay intervals have been preordained. We can prove that radioactive decay has no detectable patterns and meets accepted ideas about randomness.
Another source of truly random numbers is atmospheric noise. (e.g. thunderstorms) You could predict this easily by constructing a 1:1 scale model of the earth and atmosphere with each atom corresponding to the original, but this would only work in a deterministic universe. If there is truly chaotic behavior your model would diverge from the original.
Classic truly random numbers can be obtained using coin tosses or die rolls, although some coins and dice have detectable patterns.
Wrong. A passive MITM would only know both public keys, which are public. It wouldn't know either private key.
Radioactive decay. Truly random.
Since at this point we're already breaking US law, I go a step further and rip from a library copy. People that support the broken system because it is "more legal" are fooling themselves.
UOP (User Operation Prohibition) is not implemented in VLC, a cross-platform player. There are mods for hardware players, or you can buy one that doesn't implement UOP. There is a website called google that is helpful for this kind of information.
No, if there is hard evidence nobody needs faith. If a glowing fightin' Jesus came down on a cloud and started stomping around, performing miracles, overturning tables, and pissing off the religious right nobody would need faith to believe in Jesus. They could just watch him burn Focus on the Family HQ to the ground and know that Jesus is Love, Jesus is Lord.
Until that glorious day, if you want to believe in Jesus you need faith.