Seconded. Why in the world would anyone with a quarter of a clue look at
We are pleased to announce the go-live date for a new Data Center, scheduled to go live on April 19, 2010.
Please update your firewall rules to allow SMTP traffic on port 25 from the following IP address ranges:213.199.180.128/26 (213.199.180.129 - 213.199.180.190)94.245.120.64/26 (94.245.120.65 - 94.245.120.126)
It's okay to take a photo of a sculpture but it's not okay to use that photo to market your service, such as the way the USPS was trying to do with this stamp. This is part of the reason they make sure people are dead for a good long time before they honor them with a postage stamp.
"Why does the United States of America put only dead people on stamps when other countries picture people who are still living?
Each of the world's stamp-issuing nations has its own set of rules governing selection of subjects for stamps. The United States does not consider putting an individual on a stamp sooner than 10 years following his or her death. The exception is former Presidents of the United States, each of whom is honored with a memorial stamp on the first birthday following their death. The United States believes the impact of a person's life cannot be assessed until it has ended and that at least 10 years after death are required to make a fair evaluation. Most historians would agree that this is a sound policy."
All of us that have been gainfully employed for being able to actually work in IT would become modern day partisans in any such event. It would be a rare opportunity to do our worst to other people's systems with the full knowledge of what has unintentionally brought us pain for years. That said, unlike common partisans we do think for ourselves. Many of us would need to be convinced that we were indeed on the side of what we consider good before we took an offensive approach.
As an Apple app store consumer I will say that these business and productivity apps are basically unwanted spam to me. They make the app store less appealing to use since they clutter the place up. They make it really hard for me to find my boobie apps.
So what you're saying is that one man's boobie app is another man's productivity app?
When you throw the dice we can guess the number that will appear with : their original position, the movement of the hand, how fast they throw, the speed of wind [...] but true random is a lie !
When the degree of accuracy needed to determine position, motion, etc. go below the Planck length, it is no longer possible to make such predictions. In other words, for a sufficiently chaotic system true randomness does exist.
I hope the employees kept backups of the code... I hope the employees can form some kind of cooperative (company owned by the employees) and finish the game. I'm sure that the gamming community would support them and buy their version of the game instead of the one made by this dishonest assholes.
Let me start by saying that the guy is a douche and needs to go to prison. Having said that, the employees most likely have no right to the code. Anything produced while an employee of the company is most likely the property of the company. He might have to come back to Australia to pursue any legal actions and would most likely be in irons before he cleared the airport, so maybe it will work out after all.
WTF are you smoking?
You are apparently living in cheaterland, where you have no hand-eye coordination and you rely on software to play for you.
None of modern existance is automated. You are just trying to rationalize your cheating. Epic FAIL!
I'm going to guess that a DD214 is not among your personal papers, is it?
If there aren't any cracked versions available for the first months, most players who want it (including those who would had pirated it) are going to buy it as everyone else is playing. That's what counts mosts to the companies, since most sales are made during that period.
If a pirate has to wait several months to get their version, it's a huge win for the publisher. And with this case exactly that will happen, because it's completely new system and relies on online parts. It won't be cracked anytime soon.
E.g., my GF, an unrepentant Windows user, runs just about everything full-screen, regardless of how little real estate the contents of the window might consume. She uses PS a lot, and to her GIMP looks very fragmented and confusing. I, on the other hand, find that GIMP's multiple windows fits my thought process very well, and consider PS to be overwrought and clunky.
Go ahead, tell her she's not using it right. I dare you.
Suddenly P2P programs can't get accredited anywhere, regardless of their legitimate use because they 'don't meet standards' or other such vague explanation, and exorbitant fees are charged for processing applications that cut the smaller players out of the market.
You can be mean to me,
Mean as you want to be.
Just say anything that you like.
You can be nasty and catty,
and cruel and unusual.
Twist my nose with your fingers,
trip me while i carry liquids.
But as you pin me down,
my arms down on the ground,
and your spit drips into my face,
deep in the back of your mind
remember at some point you'll have to fall asleep.
You might also consider Giganews. They offer plans starting at $2.99 and you can get SSL encryption if you wish. They are also rolling out a VPN offering soon.
I agree and I appreciate that you pointed that out. I probably should have stated it. That is why 3DES turns out to be stronger than DES. I was speaking to the more general assertion that seemed to be claimed by the parent post which implied that multiple encryptions with different keys would always yield increased effective key length.
If the encryption is properly implemented, the repeated cycles should not reveal any information, but it works better to just use a larger key (encrypting twice with 2 different 2 bit keys should be roughly equivalent to encrypting once with a 3 bit key, 4 different 2 bit keys would be equivalent to a 4 bit key and so on, so just going up to a much larger key is probably easier).
Now you start getting into the number theoretic part of cryptography relating to groups, rings, etc. What you have said above does not necessarily hold true though, and can be disproved through a simple counterexample.
Consider a 2 bit key and a 2 bit data block where the exnryption/decryption operation is to XOR the two together. We can perform the same operation a second time using a second, independent key. Now what is the strength? It still remains only 2 bits, because in the end their is an equivalent third key that will produce the same ciphertext from the cleartext. You can find the third key in this case by XORing the two keys together. The point is that brute force will turn up this third key with no more effort than was required for a single key.
As for the question of knowing when you have decrypted the text, there are methods of identifying a small number of candicate decryptions for . In many cases, you may not know the contents of the file but you might know its type. If you know that, there are often known values at specific locations in the file, particularly in the header. Let's say for example that we find a computer that has an encrypted document that is most likely a spreadsheet and that I also find excel 2003 loaded on the same computer. I can begin by assuming that the file format is an excel format appropriate to that version and that it will probably have the headers associated with that format on it when it is decrypted. For each key we decrypt the first block, check out the bytes that we know in the header, and flag any match for further investigation. because crypto algorithms are natural randomizers, false positives should occur with no more frequency than a random selection would predict. If the document in question was a letter in a known language such as English, we could further reduce the false positives by performing a basic letter frequency count in the decrypted result. If it were text source code, we should expect to see only ASCII chars below 128. If the resulting sample decryption block has half of its byte values above 127, then it probably isn't the right key.
We should not forget the flip side to all of this. At any time someone wants, they can DOS all players of the game by DOSing the auth server. Maybe during the product launch, for instance? Not that I would ever advocate such a course of action of course...
Slashdot Mirror
and think "Hey, I better do this right away."?
From the American Philatelic Society FAQ page:
Just remember that in most economic theories, the real world often turns out to be a special case.
Have you heard of Infragard?
They filed in Delaware? Don't they know all suits like this seem to be required to be filed in East Texas!
They did. They were asked to reboot the car and then update the drivers.
So what you're saying is that one man's boobie app is another man's productivity app?
When the degree of accuracy needed to determine position, motion, etc. go below the Planck length, it is no longer possible to make such predictions. In other words, for a sufficiently chaotic system true randomness does exist.
Yeah, there's nothing like a good old fashioned slashdotting to brighten up a day.
Let me start by saying that the guy is a douche and needs to go to prison. Having said that, the employees most likely have no right to the code. Anything produced while an employee of the company is most likely the property of the company. He might have to come back to Australia to pursue any legal actions and would most likely be in irons before he cleared the airport, so maybe it will work out after all.
I'm going to guess that a DD214 is not among your personal papers, is it?
Tony Key, is that you?
You know that 87.236% of all statistics are just made up on the spot, right?
Maybe because for a very large percentage of the home computer owning public this has been(as WGA) and will be a non-issue?
Go ahead, tell her she's not using it right. I dare you.
What's the big deal? It's not like it was rocket science or anything.
And the amateur radio people will still complain about interference.
Maybe they could require the development team to ride along. I'll bet the quality of the code would go way up.
Suddenly P2P programs can't get accredited anywhere, regardless of their legitimate use because they 'don't meet standards' or other such vague explanation, and exorbitant fees are charged for processing applications that cut the smaller players out of the market.
You know, kinda like the app store.
You can be mean to me
You might also consider Giganews. They offer plans starting at $2.99 and you can get SSL encryption if you wish. They are also rolling out a VPN offering soon.
I agree and I appreciate that you pointed that out. I probably should have stated it. That is why 3DES turns out to be stronger than DES. I was speaking to the more general assertion that seemed to be claimed by the parent post which implied that multiple encryptions with different keys would always yield increased effective key length.
Now you start getting into the number theoretic part of cryptography relating to groups, rings, etc. What you have said above does not necessarily hold true though, and can be disproved through a simple counterexample.
Consider a 2 bit key and a 2 bit data block where the exnryption/decryption operation is to XOR the two together. We can perform the same operation a second time using a second, independent key. Now what is the strength? It still remains only 2 bits, because in the end their is an equivalent third key that will produce the same ciphertext from the cleartext. You can find the third key in this case by XORing the two keys together. The point is that brute force will turn up this third key with no more effort than was required for a single key.
As for the question of knowing when you have decrypted the text, there are methods of identifying a small number of candicate decryptions for . In many cases, you may not know the contents of the file but you might know its type. If you know that, there are often known values at specific locations in the file, particularly in the header. Let's say for example that we find a computer that has an encrypted document that is most likely a spreadsheet and that I also find excel 2003 loaded on the same computer. I can begin by assuming that the file format is an excel format appropriate to that version and that it will probably have the headers associated with that format on it when it is decrypted. For each key we decrypt the first block, check out the bytes that we know in the header, and flag any match for further investigation. because crypto algorithms are natural randomizers, false positives should occur with no more frequency than a random selection would predict. If the document in question was a letter in a known language such as English, we could further reduce the false positives by performing a basic letter frequency count in the decrypted result. If it were text source code, we should expect to see only ASCII chars below 128. If the resulting sample decryption block has half of its byte values above 127, then it probably isn't the right key.
We should not forget the flip side to all of this. At any time someone wants, they can DOS all players of the game by DOSing the auth server. Maybe during the product launch, for instance? Not that I would ever advocate such a course of action of course...
So it seems like there is a lower bound to the price as well and the item will never sell at a loss to the buyer.