>The one paret that I find so discouraging (at >least in our current state of tech) is that what >we saw happened 153 years ago. Think about that. >Even at our fastest possible (theoritcally >speaking) speed of light, it would take 153 years >to go and poke around that system.
Why would you want to poke around there? As they said the planet is most likely a gas giant and so you might as well do research on Jupiter. (Which has the added advantage that you can reach it within your lifetime, if the flight just werent that damn expensive)
> Then he says "Second, Microsoft's dominant > market share is protected by a high barrier to > entry." Say that again? How is it that a *FREE* > OS made by people that do not get paid for their > services are able to enter the market and > compete quite well? That's a high barrier?
You say that the fact the only major competition to Microsoft can arise from thousands of people working their asses off for free over several years is not a high barrier? Is there any way that you could put any more effort into a system? I do not think so, which shows that the barrier MS built is as high as it can get. Every attempt to create a profit-oriented OS to compete on the Windows home market has failed, only because you have all those people putting in work without getting anything out of it, Linux can succeed there. And its still a very rough game, even with this advantage.
From January 1 2000 on, DVD drive manufacturers may *only* produce RPC-2 drives, which is probably why most of them are already starting the transition now.
So, I agree with you. Read some reviews to find RPC-1 drives before it is too late.
Eric Raymond: Very different. The SCSL enforces control with the threat of lawsuit and jail. Linus controls the kernel because the community grants him authority in recognition of his authorship.
Richard Gabriel: What if Torvalds were a dictator? Would this be better or worse than Sun exerting some influence or control? Hard to say.
The kind of control Linus has over the kernel (lets just leave out Alan for simplicity) is far better than what Sun does simply because if for example Linus started to think that upcoming kernel releases should only run on "Genuine Intel" processors, everyone would just start using a kernel distribution managed by someone else. Linus just managed to keep the control by the users respect for the quality of what he is doing, not because it says in some license that he is entitled to that control.
Does anyone have a URL to a Mozilla build that can do HTTPS? Non-US server preferred of course, but I can live with a "restricted" one too if you only got that.
Yes, that key copy is erased but how do you know that I (the recipient) didnt copy the key when the D-I servers sent it to me?
Also, if that is to prevent against the mail being used in a trial: The recipient might still be asked to tell from memory what the mail said. Unless you wipe the recipients memory or the r. himself too, but thats restricted to organizations higher up on the criminal scale than M$ I think.:)
[Question: would it be possible to look at how Sun's code does something (say, for example, SMP) and then use the *ideas*, not the code itself, to improve areas of Linux?]
That would be educational use of their source; doesnt sound problematic as long as you dont steal the actual source of course.
Why dont you play "last post", where you wait until just before an article goes static and try to be the last one posting to it. You will be very 31337 and it wont bother anyone else. I promise.:)
"Cryptology 101: you only need a cipher strong enough to last as long as you use it."
IMHO its so that a cipher can be considered "safe enough" as soon as other ways of obtaining the encrypted information (breaking into your house and taking your PC/forcing you to tell your passwords/you name it) become easier than breaking the encryption. Breaking the SSL key that you entrust your credit card info to is technically possible. But it still requires significantly more effort than just stealing your wallet or even writing down the numbers while you use your card in a shop, so thats safe as far as I am concerned.
Yes, you might have incredibly valuable information that you want absolutely no one to get... But if you pick an encryption strong enough that whoever wants that information is easier off doing something like getting you drugged and making you just tell your password than brute-forcing the encryption, thats about as much as you can do. (Except for completely hiding the existance of secret information; see steganography)
If they want to reintroduce the species (in the long term even), I hope they froze cells of enough different exemplars (100? Anyone here have an idea of how many different DNA samples you would need to create a healthy population?) or they will have to clone the same animal again and again which doesnt seem too useful to me.
about "Soft Law" is that this way the law-makers can get away with insane stuff that would cause their heads to be ripped off by the people if they really wrote this up in a bill instead of this undercover stuff.
Slashdottings aside, I dont think the army sites get that many hits that they absolutely need some fast apache box, and with as many "employees" as they have the possible extra effort to maintain the server isnt a problem either.
I predict they wont be making the specs available to non-corporate people. If you are a hardware-making company they will send the technical details available to you, but if you are "just" an individual trying to see whether you really want to entrust your money to this, good luck getting the information. (I am not saying it is smart to hold back those specs; but many suits, especially in that not-really computer oriented area think so)
With enough work (and equipment), you could actually make the antenna part quite small and still keep it powerful. Your only problem will be the power supply. Flashlight batteries just dont really cut it here.:)
(Although you could carry around the car battery in a backpack)
The one in the book is real EMP, capable of causing permanent damage to electronics, not HERF. (But, yes both exist; although EMP devices are more expensive to build, at least I havent read about "simple" ones yet)
I hope the batteries will last long enough. Does anyone have an idea how much power an mp3 decoder unit might draw in addition to the regular CD parts (laser)?
Cant wait until they ship the first units over here.:)
> The crew finding an unknown piece of alien technology, and immediately knowing how to operate it/reprogram the computer
Thats actually quite trivial. They only have to figure out whether the alien race belongs/belonged to the good or the bad guys. Group one uses Unix, so they take some time to compile their favorite tools but then can work very quickly. Group two uses Windows - Which are usually the episodes where the person at the keyboard is heard saying "Almost got it. One more minute, I have nearly figured it out. Damn, Bluescreen!"
Hmm, speaking of mirrors... How about setting up large deflectors to point at the location of those sattelites so they get some nice direct sunlight into their optics? Of course, the sat would have to be looking down at you, but if you are paranoid, you might try this as a sat DoS attack.
OK, just fooling around with weird ideas; probably wouldnt work anyway but the picture in my mind was just too tempting.:P
You say, you can see why they wouldnt have backups all over the place. But isnt having 'KEY' at M$ and 'NSAKEY' at the secret MS-Vault 99 just as safe/insecure as having 'KEY' at M$ and another copy of 'KEY' at the second location?
Although as easy as it is to hack into MS systems, I suppose the NSA key might rather be for NSA internal usage; that way they could sign crypto modules that they dont want anyone else to see.
Slashdot Mirror
>The one paret that I find so discouraging (at >least in our current state of tech) is that what >we saw happened 153 years ago. Think about that. >Even at our fastest possible (theoritcally >speaking) speed of light, it would take 153 years >to go and poke around that system.
Why would you want to poke around there? As they said the planet is most likely a gas giant and so you might as well do research on Jupiter. (Which has the added advantage that you can reach it within your lifetime, if the flight just werent that damn expensive)
> Then he says "Second, Microsoft's dominant
> market share is protected by a high barrier to
> entry." Say that again? How is it that a *FREE*
> OS made by people that do not get paid for their
> services are able to enter the market and
> compete quite well? That's a high barrier?
You say that the fact the only major competition to Microsoft can arise from thousands of people working their asses off for free over several years is not a high barrier? Is there any way that you could put any more effort into a system? I do not think so, which shows that the barrier MS built is as high as it can get. Every attempt to create a profit-oriented OS to compete on the Windows home market has failed, only because you have all those people putting in work without getting anything out of it, Linux can succeed there. And its still a very rough game, even with this advantage.
> Imagine robots with similar logic looking for,
> say, the debris from the EgyptAir crash the
> other day.
Similiar logic? So they would feed on the passengers to keep on going until they find the black box?
(OK, so thats a bit disgusting)
From January 1 2000 on, DVD drive manufacturers may *only* produce RPC-2 drives, which is probably why most of them are already starting the transition now.
So, I agree with you. Read some reviews to find RPC-1 drives before it is too late.
Eric Raymond: Very different. The SCSL enforces control with the threat of lawsuit and jail. Linus controls the kernel because the community grants him authority in recognition of his authorship.
Richard Gabriel: What if Torvalds were a dictator? Would this be better or worse than Sun exerting some influence or control? Hard to say.
The kind of control Linus has over the kernel (lets just leave out Alan for simplicity) is far better than what Sun does simply because if for example Linus started to think that upcoming kernel releases should only run on "Genuine Intel" processors, everyone would just start using a kernel distribution managed by someone else. Linus just managed to keep the control by the users respect for the quality of what he is doing, not because it says in some license that he is entitled to that control.
1) Its not our fault; if it were not for all the users, NT would work just great. In idle mode you can leave it up for weeks without a crash.
2) till 10) See 1)
It would be hard to shut down GnuPG with US export controls, as it was made completely outside of the US.
Does anyone have a URL to a Mozilla build that can do HTTPS? Non-US server preferred of course, but I can live with a "restricted" one too if you only got that.
Yes, that key copy is erased but how do you know that I (the recipient) didnt copy the key when the D-I servers sent it to me?
:)
Also, if that is to prevent against the mail being used in a trial: The recipient might still be asked to tell from memory what the mail said. Unless you wipe the recipients memory or the r. himself too, but thats restricted to organizations higher up on the criminal scale than M$ I think.
[Question: would it be possible to look at how Sun's code does something (say, for example, SMP) and then use the *ideas*, not the code itself, to improve areas of Linux?]
That would be educational use of their source; doesnt sound problematic as long as you dont steal the actual source of course.
Why dont you play "last post", where you wait until just before an article goes static and try to be the last one posting to it. You will be very 31337 and it wont bother anyone else. I promise. :)
"Cryptology 101: you only need a cipher strong enough to last as long as you use it."
IMHO its so that a cipher can be considered "safe enough" as soon as other ways of obtaining the encrypted information (breaking into your house and taking your PC/forcing you to tell your passwords/you name it) become easier than breaking the encryption. Breaking the SSL key that you entrust your credit card info to is technically possible. But it still requires significantly more effort than just stealing your wallet or even writing down the numbers while you use your card in a shop, so thats safe as far as I am concerned.
Yes, you might have incredibly valuable information that you want absolutely no one to get... But if you pick an encryption strong enough that whoever wants that information is easier off doing something like getting you drugged and making you just tell your password than brute-forcing the encryption, thats about as much as you can do. (Except for completely hiding the existance of secret information; see steganography)
Cant wait for the first Java-controlled coffee machine. *rips the pun-alert siren off the wall*
If they want to reintroduce the species (in the long term even), I hope they froze cells of enough different exemplars (100? Anyone here have an idea of how many different DNA samples you would need to create a healthy population?) or they will have to clone the same animal again and again which doesnt seem too useful to me.
about "Soft Law" is that this way the law-makers can get away with insane stuff that would cause their heads to be ripped off by the people if they really wrote this up in a bill instead of this undercover stuff.
Check the related links in the slashbox next to the article for a review of Cryptonomicon.
Slashdottings aside, I dont think the army sites get that many hits that they absolutely need some fast apache box, and with as many "employees" as they have the possible extra effort to maintain the server isnt a problem either.
I predict they wont be making the specs available to non-corporate people. If you are a hardware-making company they will send the technical details available to you, but if you are "just" an individual trying to see whether you really want to entrust your money to this, good luck getting the information. (I am not saying it is smart to hold back those specs; but many suits, especially in that not-really computer oriented area think so)
With enough work (and equipment), you could actually make the antenna part quite small and still keep it powerful. Your only problem will be the power supply. Flashlight batteries just dont really cut it here. :)
(Although you could carry around the car battery in a backpack)
The one in the book is real EMP, capable of causing permanent damage to electronics, not HERF. (But, yes both exist; although EMP devices are more expensive to build, at least I havent read about "simple" ones yet)
I hope the batteries will last long enough. Does anyone have an idea how much power an mp3 decoder unit might draw in addition to the regular CD parts (laser)?
:)
Cant wait until they ship the first units over here.
Just when I was about to post "No Problem", slashdot told me "Internal server error". :)
Anyway, the 99999 thing was only meant to hit ancient databases anyway; and I cant think of any vital stuff that relies on one.
> The crew finding an unknown piece of alien technology, and immediately knowing how to operate it/reprogram the computer
Thats actually quite trivial. They only have to figure out whether the alien race belongs/belonged to the good or the bad guys. Group one uses Unix, so they take some time to compile their favorite tools but then can work very quickly. Group two uses Windows - Which are usually the episodes where the person at the keyboard is heard saying "Almost got it. One more minute, I have nearly figured it out. Damn, Bluescreen!"
Hmm, speaking of mirrors... How about setting up large deflectors to point at the location of those sattelites so they get some nice direct sunlight into their optics? Of course, the sat would have to be looking down at you, but if you are paranoid, you might try this as a sat DoS attack.
:P
OK, just fooling around with weird ideas; probably wouldnt work anyway but the picture in my mind was just too tempting.
You say, you can see why they wouldnt have backups all over the place. But isnt having 'KEY' at M$ and 'NSAKEY' at the secret MS-Vault 99 just as safe/insecure as having 'KEY' at M$ and another copy of 'KEY' at the second location?
Although as easy as it is to hack into MS systems, I suppose the NSA key might rather be for NSA internal usage; that way they could sign crypto modules that they dont want anyone else to see.