Unfortunately it can't; the method they are talking about relies on the taking of multiple shots that overlap. Because the camera is mounted on a swing arm, the overlapping shots are also taken at different locations, which enables depth to be reconstructed from what are effectively stereo pairs. The only tricky part is that the stereo pairs have been taken facing in different directions, so the algorithm has to compensate for this.
While it is true that the panaromic painting may have been observed from different points at a tower, each spot in the scene only corresponds to a single point in the painting, so the stereo information has been lost.
Understanding primes is fundamental to an understanding of number theory.
Number theory itself is pure mathematics, which concerns itself with abstract concepts, so the immediate motivation is one of exercising our intelligence and playing with the puzzles that we discover. "Intellectual masturbation", to use your classy phrase, is fun. You should try it sometime.
But of course, in turn number theory underpins many other areas of mathematics, including for example the discrete mathematics used in the development of computer algorithms, not to mention the numerical analysis we use in engineering.
You seem to be making the mistake of thinking that research is best directed according to practical goals. Actually, it is more time effective to solve hard and fundamental problems that have general usefulness in the field than it is to pick off application specific tasks that won't have any relevance beyond next year.
Of course, there has to be a balance here between general and specific. But since the number of people doing pure research is such a small fraction of the population, it is really up to you to justify why we don't have more people studying these matters.
Ah, here we go again. The myth that technology and technological standards can be politically neutral. A convenient myth, since it we can then absolve ourselves from any responsibility for how that technology is used.
"security through obscurity" usually refers to obscuring the design of a system, not to key secrecy. Unlike design obscurity, secret keys provide a measurable barrier to brute force attacks.
Changing port number for ssh is interesting to classify. If chosen it randomly for each system being set up, it could be argued that it wasn't a design obscurity. But it doesn't add to the total security against a targeted attack, because the port number can be determined prior to key forcing (and in a lot shorter time). Also, the port number is not secret, in the sense that it is sent in clear text across the network when the real user logs in.
Of course, changing port number may have practical advantages (reducing traffic, simplifying logs). But it isn't a security strategy.
The reason it was noticed on Linux is because a portion of this UEFI space is being used to keep a non-volatile copy of the most recent kernel log messages (so that on a crash event, it is easier to find out what happened).
Why should someone need an Apple developer account to code the device that they own? How is that a general purpose computing device? It's not about the money, it's about all the strings attached. I can program my microwave oven if I really wanted to, but the manufacturer did not intend for me to do so. Apple is mighty close to having the same attitude towards its clients; it intends them to be consumers, not creators. So they forfeit the right to describe their fashion items as computers.
Yes, Turbo Pascal wasn't sophisticated, but on CP/M it was a game changer. I bought a copy in 1984, because the alternative was Pascal/MT. MT was excruciatingly slow (taking something like 9 passes over the file, which was of course being read from a floppy on each pass). Because Turbo was all in one, the whole thing could run out of memory, which took the edit/compile/test process down from minutes to seconds.
The issue here is not whether all genetic modification is safe, it is about the misleading reporting of a scientific article. The scientific community do have ethical concerns about safety, which is why such studies are performed in the first place.
In this particular instance, they were screening for toxins that could be produced in error by a sequence. In the particular gene they were looking at (one commonly used to promote expression of proteins for another inserted gene), they couldn't find any. This doesn't automatically make it safe, but it rules out a set of potential issues.
And remember, such allergens/toxins can be produced in non-modified organisms, which is why we even know about them in the first place.
Many language varieties in China would be seen by linguists as distinct. Compare putonghua or guangzhou hua with holooe. Whether you call these 'dialects' or 'languages' or fangyan depends on how you define the term 'language'.
While it is true that some spoken variants of English are quite difficult for other English speakers to understand (such as Black Country English, or the Glasgow Patter), there's not the linguistic range that you would find between the Chinese languages/dialects. Most English varieties are mutually intelligible, and differ primarily in pronunciation and a few words.
Interestingly, the Switzerland firearm-related deaths per capita are not that much lower than for the United States. The firearm related suicide rate is roughly the same. But the firearm-related homicide rate for the United States is significantly higher. Interpret that how you will.
The aim here is not to shield a single individual from government intercept, but to protect the wider community from wholesale surveillance by the state.
The latter requires simply that strong encryption becomes defacto, as part of email, as part of browsing the web, as part of all communication. The primary difficulties are not around message encryption (for example, many people use Skype, which is encrypted by default), but the decentralization of keys in a way that is usable en masse.
Assymetric cryptography is used for key exchange in transport layer security. So this protects you from man-in-the-middle attacks, since the private key is never transmitted (and the session keys are encrypted), at least in an ideal world where implementations are perfect.
The real structural issue is the chain of trust; the certificate authorities are rather more centralized than is healthy. But subverting these involves more than just sitting in the middle of the network.
for the maze effect, you need an old fashioned micro with a character size so small (eg 8 pixels square) that the slash characters were forced to go from one corner to the opposite just to make them legible...
Slashdot Mirror
Unfortunately it can't; the method they are talking about relies on the taking of multiple shots that overlap. Because the camera is mounted on a swing arm, the overlapping shots are also taken at different locations, which enables depth to be reconstructed from what are effectively stereo pairs. The only tricky part is that the stereo pairs have been taken facing in different directions, so the algorithm has to compensate for this.
While it is true that the panaromic painting may have been observed from different points at a tower, each spot in the scene only corresponds to a single point in the painting, so the stereo information has been lost.
you shouldn't be ashamed for people to know who you are
... says Anonymous Coward
Understanding primes is fundamental to an understanding of number theory.
Number theory itself is pure mathematics, which concerns itself with abstract concepts, so the immediate motivation is one of exercising our intelligence and playing with the puzzles that we discover. "Intellectual masturbation", to use your classy phrase, is fun. You should try it sometime.
But of course, in turn number theory underpins many other areas of mathematics, including for example the discrete mathematics used in the development of computer algorithms, not to mention the numerical analysis we use in engineering.
You seem to be making the mistake of thinking that research is best directed according to practical goals. Actually, it is more time effective to solve hard and fundamental problems that have general usefulness in the field than it is to pick off application specific tasks that won't have any relevance beyond next year.
Of course, there has to be a balance here between general and specific. But since the number of people doing pure research is such a small fraction of the population, it is really up to you to justify why we don't have more people studying these matters.
Ah, here we go again. The myth that technology and technological standards can be politically neutral. A convenient myth, since it we can then absolve ourselves from any responsibility for how that technology is used.
let me guess, you're running Debian stable?
So a password is a secret, not an obscurity, and is not sent across the communications channel.
"security through obscurity" usually refers to obscuring the design of a system, not to key secrecy. Unlike design obscurity, secret keys provide a measurable barrier to brute force attacks.
Changing port number for ssh is interesting to classify. If chosen it randomly for each system being set up, it could be argued that it wasn't a design obscurity. But it doesn't add to the total security against a targeted attack, because the port number can be determined prior to key forcing (and in a lot shorter time). Also, the port number is not secret, in the sense that it is sent in clear text across the network when the real user logs in.
Of course, changing port number may have practical advantages (reducing traffic, simplifying logs). But it isn't a security strategy.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=gDW_Hj2K0wo
The reason it was noticed on Linux is because a portion of this UEFI space is being used to keep a non-volatile copy of the most recent kernel log messages (so that on a crash event, it is easier to find out what happened).
Why should someone need an Apple developer account to code the device that they own? How is that a general purpose computing device? It's not about the money, it's about all the strings attached. I can program my microwave oven if I really wanted to, but the manufacturer did not intend for me to do so. Apple is mighty close to having the same attitude towards its clients; it intends them to be consumers, not creators. So they forfeit the right to describe their fashion items as computers.
Yes, Turbo Pascal wasn't sophisticated, but on CP/M it was a game changer. I bought a copy in 1984, because the alternative was Pascal/MT. MT was excruciatingly slow (taking something like 9 passes over the file, which was of course being read from a floppy on each pass). Because Turbo was all in one, the whole thing could run out of memory, which took the edit/compile/test process down from minutes to seconds.
The issue here is not whether all genetic modification is safe, it is about the misleading reporting of a scientific article. The scientific community do have ethical concerns about safety, which is why such studies are performed in the first place.
In this particular instance, they were screening for toxins that could be produced in error by a sequence. In the particular gene they were looking at (one commonly used to promote expression of proteins for another inserted gene), they couldn't find any. This doesn't automatically make it safe, but it rules out a set of potential issues.
And remember, such allergens/toxins can be produced in non-modified organisms, which is why we even know about them in the first place.
Have you read the Pirate Party's submission regarding copyright review, or their submission regarding patent reform? Do you have specific points of disagreement other than just implying that it is not sensible?
Canberra. No one knows why anyone would want to live there.
Are you really claiming that a computer being run by Los Alamos and called Trinity is primarily going to be used for alternative energy?
Exactly; the only Skype API that is "open" is the scripting interface to the proprietary client software; not to the Skype network itself.
Psychological comfort. Because it is nice to know that you weren't just being paranoid when you go to the trouble to reinstall everything.
Many language varieties in China would be seen by linguists as distinct. Compare putonghua or guangzhou hua with holooe. Whether you call these 'dialects' or 'languages' or fangyan depends on how you define the term 'language'.
While it is true that some spoken variants of English are quite difficult for other English speakers to understand (such as Black Country English, or the Glasgow Patter), there's not the linguistic range that you would find between the Chinese languages/dialects. Most English varieties are mutually intelligible, and differ primarily in pronunciation and a few words.
Interestingly, the Switzerland firearm-related deaths per capita are not that much lower than for the United States. The firearm related suicide rate is roughly the same. But the firearm-related homicide rate for the United States is significantly higher. Interpret that how you will.
And of course you need to consider other risks, not just theft. If the place catches fire, you may not be able to get out of the window.
The aim here is not to shield a single individual from government intercept, but to protect the wider community from wholesale surveillance by the state.
The latter requires simply that strong encryption becomes defacto, as part of email, as part of browsing the web, as part of all communication. The primary difficulties are not around message encryption (for example, many people use Skype, which is encrypted by default), but the decentralization of keys in a way that is usable en masse.
Assymetric cryptography is used for key exchange in transport layer security. So this protects you from man-in-the-middle attacks, since the private key is never transmitted (and the session keys are encrypted), at least in an ideal world where implementations are perfect.
The real structural issue is the chain of trust; the certificate authorities are rather more centralized than is healthy. But subverting these involves more than just sitting in the middle of the network.
for the maze effect, you need an old fashioned micro with a character size so small (eg 8 pixels square) that the slash characters were forced to go from one corner to the opposite just to make them legible...
A4 size
at least 150dpi
daylight readable
a day or more battery life
robust but light
able to take annotations
minimal DRM sillyness
quick page turns
C does indeed do type checking; the issue here is that there are a number of implicit conversions (coercions) defined by the language.
You can enable warnings in many compilers that will flag potential problems caused by such coercions (for example, '-Wconversion' in gcc).