I knew EMI was a bunch of greedy bastards, and I'm not surprised about that; however, I find it very troubling that mdash, an *excellent* HTML entity, has turned to the dark side like this. Really, I never saw it coming.
You're right, it's slightly more complex, but it's still not very hard to do. And you don't need to "automatically get one for free"; no matter how hard they make it to get, the key just needs to be gotten once, and then it can be used to decrypt all of the discs that use it.
Unless the Wikipedia article is horribly wrong, or I'm misreading that, I'm pretty sure that's not a known-plaintext attack. Known-plaintext attacks (again, assuming Wikipedia is correct; IANAC) use the ciphertext and its known plaintext to derive the information necessary to decrypt further data encrypted the same way; in this case, the processing key. It'd be a known-plaintext attack if they used a C value decrypted with the old key and the same C value encrypted with the new key to get the new processing key. The method that person proposed is much easier, instead relying on the fact that the memory location the key is stored in is unlikely to change, as it is of a fixed size and as a result only needs memory allocated for it once.
Of course, there's nothing stopping them from simply moving the key around each time, however then you merely need to find the location that the pointer to the key's location is stored to defeat that. They could also pile on more layers of obscurity of a wide variety of types in order to protect the ones below them, but they'll merely delay the inevitable, like all DRM, as you have no way of knowing if a customer could be a possible attacker and thus must allow everyone access to the content.
i said that regardless if it is the best choice of word for the sentence, it is still chosen by evolutionists far more often than not.
There is no best choice. Any of the synonyms of evolution could be dropped in without a difference.
its rare to see an evolutionist use the words progress, progression, advancement, furtherance, development, succession, expansion, improvement and so forth. what's not rare to see, is a sentence built around the word evolution to make it fit correctly.
Again, you could drop in any of its synonyms without changing the rest of the sentence, or its meaning as a whole. It's not like using 'evolution' requires some strange and awkward rearrangement of the sentence that the others don't. And yes, I'm sure that 'evolution' is only ever used to irk you creationists. The whole world is conspiring to carefully word their sentences to cause the most possible annoyance for you. Have you taken your pills yet today?
Utterly irrelevant. I haven't used Windows for years, and Vista isn't going to bring me back; if anything, it's pushed me further away. They spent half a decade on a new OS, and all they've got to show for it is higher requirements, a shiny new UI, features other OSes have had for a very long time, and DRM. While I'm sure that the average computer user is in awe at the additions Vista brings, anyone who uses a non-Windows OS is laughing, saying, "We've had that feature for n years, and it's better done, too."
It plainly says in the first sentence of the article that they're going after medium sized companies, and later on that "Microsoft is targeting companies with around 250 PCs", which is a bit more than a small company would have.
It makes it way too difficult to slowly take over the world, one government at a time. We should welcome our new overlords, not try to make it harder for them.
They came out with those a while ago, I think they're called 'girlfriends'. I can't seem to find any, though, so I suspect it might've just been a joke.
Well, except for the fact that it demeans women (and men for that matter),
This argument has always confused me. If people are willing to be in porn, even if it 'demeans' them, then why shouldn't they be allowed to? They're adults, and they're only 'harming' themselves, if it could even be called that. It just doesn't make sense, unless you mean that it demeans *everyone*, in which case it makes even *less* sense in other ways.
cheapens and turns a God-given gift into a commodity,
If you can find significant evidence of a loving god, of the kind whose gifts would be worthy respecting, then maybe you'd have a point.
reduces human beings from being to people to be loved and honored to being objects and tools for one's one self-gratification
See above. If you mean human beings that are in porn, it's their choice, and if you mean all humans, I'd like to see you explain how that works.
Slashdot Mirror
Madness? This is SLASHDOOOOOT!
oh nine eff nine one
one oh two nine dee seven
four ee three five bee
dee eight four one five
six see five six three five six
eight eight see zero
Nothing quite says "we're watching you" like a camera that actually says "we're watching you".
Hahaha oh wow.
Funniest post I've seen today.
I knew EMI was a bunch of greedy bastards, and I'm not surprised about that; however, I find it very troubling that mdash, an *excellent* HTML entity, has turned to the dark side like this. Really, I never saw it coming.
You don't.
Hot barely legal goat porn? Sign me up!
Go to "Preferences", click "Comments", scroll to the bottom, set "Comment Post Mode" to "Plain Old Text", and BAM! No more sailboats.
So if we were humorously referencing another fictional work, it'd be okay?
You're right, it's slightly more complex, but it's still not very hard to do. And you don't need to "automatically get one for free"; no matter how hard they make it to get, the key just needs to be gotten once, and then it can be used to decrypt all of the discs that use it.
It can, but obviously it needs to know the new location when it's changed. All that would do is add another layer of indirection.
Unless the Wikipedia article is horribly wrong, or I'm misreading that, I'm pretty sure that's not a known-plaintext attack. Known-plaintext attacks (again, assuming Wikipedia is correct; IANAC) use the ciphertext and its known plaintext to derive the information necessary to decrypt further data encrypted the same way; in this case, the processing key. It'd be a known-plaintext attack if they used a C value decrypted with the old key and the same C value encrypted with the new key to get the new processing key. The method that person proposed is much easier, instead relying on the fact that the memory location the key is stored in is unlikely to change, as it is of a fixed size and as a result only needs memory allocated for it once.
Of course, there's nothing stopping them from simply moving the key around each time, however then you merely need to find the location that the pointer to the key's location is stored to defeat that. They could also pile on more layers of obscurity of a wide variety of types in order to protect the ones below them, but they'll merely delay the inevitable, like all DRM, as you have no way of knowing if a customer could be a possible attacker and thus must allow everyone access to the content.
Or, more succinctly:
LEARN ENGLISH, DAMMIT.
evolution
-noun
1. any process of formation or growth; development: the evolution of a language; the evolution of the airplane.
Welcome to the English language. You must be new here.
...that the editors are intentionally making all these mistakes to troll us. You simply cannot accidentally fuck up this much.
Utterly irrelevant. I haven't used Windows for years, and Vista isn't going to bring me back; if anything, it's pushed me further away. They spent half a decade on a new OS, and all they've got to show for it is higher requirements, a shiny new UI, features other OSes have had for a very long time, and DRM. While I'm sure that the average computer user is in awe at the additions Vista brings, anyone who uses a non-Windows OS is laughing, saying, "We've had that feature for n years, and it's better done, too."
Why can't I ever have mod points when I see a *really* good comment?
I smell yet another idiot who thinks that 'troll' means 'person I disagree with'.
And just because he doesn't think it's worth paying for the constant upgrades doesn't mean he can't afford them.
It plainly says in the first sentence of the article that they're going after medium sized companies, and later on that "Microsoft is targeting companies with around 250 PCs", which is a bit more than a small company would have.
It makes it way too difficult to slowly take over the world, one government at a time. We should welcome our new overlords, not try to make it harder for them.
Your examples go far beyond demeaning, and you still haven't addressed the question of why people shouldn't be allowed to 'demean' themselves.
You might want to read this Wikipedia article before replying.
Okay, then I'm still confused as to how exactly it demeans them.
And don't bring religion or morals into this without proof that your choice of such is correct.
They came out with those a while ago, I think they're called 'girlfriends'. I can't seem to find any, though, so I suspect it might've just been a joke.