I have an ignorant question about these encryption schemes. If the hardware can decrypt it, why can't software decrypt it? They are deploying this hardware, so someone can determine what the algorithm is. Using brute force techniques we should be able to crack the keys, right? I'm curious what makes this encryption so challenging to crack compared to other encryption schemes.
I think some of us that were actually using the Internet back then know the difference between WWW/HTML and the Internet. I was a heavy user of Gopher, Archie, WhoIs, Threaded Internet News, and FTP. Those web pages back then didn't hold any content I couldn't already get using those other tools. Since most sites I was hitting then were using either microwave relay or satellite relay (I had a strong interest in POV Ray then which had a lot of content in Australia at the time) the whole wasteful WWW thing seemed pretty stupid to me when I first saw it. But of course.. I actually lived back then to see it.. and *yes* my crystal ball was definitely broken when I said "I'll never use that." when I first say Mosaic 1.0 when it was first released.
It's unfortunate that you and other posters feel the need to judge people in hindsite to make yourself feel important or smart. It's also unfortunate that you're focusing on a single statement taken out of context and not the message itself I was sending. This topic is about Internet OSs, and not why I couldn't predict the future acurately. The other poster is saying why Internet OS's are stupid. The very same reasons I thought Mosaic 1.0 was stupid back in 1993. So given your and the other poster's vitrol toward me.. can I pre-emptively call you guys stupid for thinking Internet OS's are stupid using my crystal ball to predict the future that they indeed are part of our future solution to computing?
I suspect the concept is like an app server. Not too different than a local JVM or a remote Tomcat. Since our apps are blurring the lines between remote and local, it only makes sense that other concepts that are required to enable capabilities may also be blurred.
Slashdot is more than a web page. It is an Internet Application. Although this particular app would be immensely boring to use on a disconnected PC if a heavy client were created.
The boundary between web page, web application, internet application, distributed application, and dedicated heavy apps are blurring very heavily. These Internet OS's may or may not be a wise way to enable a better future for merging all of these into something more cohesize to the end user, but whether or not these Internet OSs will play any roll in our future, does not invalidate that someone is trying to make progress toward our future of computing.
When I first saw Mosaic 1.0 I thought it was stupid and a waste of bandwidth. I said no one would ever want to use the World Wide Web. This was in 1993. Obviously I was way wrong in my assessment for how wasting currently valuable resources would become irrelevant for a greater good in the future. I *could* have been right. But the point is.. what makes sense to us today by our measures today, will not apply tomorrow as these new concepts will enable things we cannot do at all today.
There are lots of examples of distributed and online applications that you use all of the time. But you see them as a web page. Does it really matter where the source code lives, if it is statically compiled or dynamically interpretted, if it is rendered on the server from one form into another (say PHP to HTML) or rendered on your desktop (Flash), or even used with an locally installed heavy application (Goodle Earth, Quicken, online gaming, etc.)? The boundaries are not as simple as Web Page or Software Application anymore. You can fight it.. but the desire to distribute will win in the end. Who knows what it will look like.. I'm sure the fabbled Web 2.0 will play a big role in all of this.
I like how you continually and deliberately spin this into something negative in your questions.
Why do you want to continue deliberately hating something you have no interest in understanding? You do realize that is not only ignorance, but it is deliberate ignorance.
Before labelling something you don't understand as "idiot" or "stupid", maybe you should consider being a bit more open minded and try to understand why you do not understand.
I tell ya.. my sig proves itself right at least once every day...
"I'm getting really sick of this "software as a service" crud, but at the same time, I'm also getting scared that companies might actually convince the mainsteam to use it."
I highly question the article's validity. It is a requirement that protected information be on an physically isolated network and not connected to the Internet. If they got something.. it's a deliberate honey pot or not of any tactical value.
I'm not convinced but I really don't want to get into this aspect of the discussion because no one on this forum can have any hard facts, or if they do have cold hard facts they are breaking an agreement or law that could land them in prison for a long time. Especially since any discussions on this are going to be politically motivated regardless of how honest anyone thinks they are being with themselves. I just don't want to get into it. It can be just like the Linux vs Microsoft security and stability wars.
True, but hunting securities fraud is not part of NSA's bidness. If they the various intelligence communities are actually trying to be more open with each other.. then it could lead to something.
My guess is there are some serious firewalls with the work NSA is doing to make sure the other agencies don't learn something they can't know legally. This is starting to edge into a somewhat political debate that I don't want to get into. Since it involves the Department of Homeland Security and the Patriot Act.
I never bothered to check into it. I can't believe people are stupid enough to do it. You'd hope they realize that whoever is sending these things already bought their shares before the email went out.
Can't wait until the FTC gets involved. It probably won't take very long to figure out who's working in syndicate on this SPAM scheme. They're going to get hurt pretty hard. I mean.. after a while they will be able to figure out who is buying just before these SPAMs go out and start putting together the syndication. It may take a while, but they're going to get hurt pretty hard unless they stop it before it becomes noticeable enough for the FTC to get involved. Hmm.. maybe I should stop reporting these messages to spamcop.net and start reporting them to the FTC?
We all get it and I'm sure we mostly delete it on the spot with all other SPAM. But I have to admit, if they were to give just a few "freebies" in the SPAM message itself they might be more effective. I mean.. I see a stupid head line, deliberately poor English and a cryptic URL that is typically broken by Outlook Express. Don't make me work for it!:-)
Seriously.. I've been getting more high risk stock SPAMs lately. Almost seems like a securities fraud case waiting to happen.
My view of a hack is an implementation without a design. Typically hacks are done by very intelligent people that can many times succeed without doing any design work at all. The doesn't mean doing a design is for dumb people, or hacking is necessarily bad. There are times when hacks are legit, and times they should be avoided. I'd get into those topics but they are getting a pinch off topic and would be long winded.
I truly was given a speeding ticket at 3am on a Tuesday morning for driving 1MPH over the speed limit, cop was sitting right at the reduced speed sign where the speed dropped from 55MPH to 25MPH, and there was a light that was red immediately after the sign he was at. I was the only car on the road. I tried being nice.. he acted like a prick to me about it.
Aluminum is conductive and can carry a current induced by a changing magnetic field. Probably not a lot compared to typical conductors we use for shielding, but I'm sure a thing aluminum hat would provide some protection. Probably not much more than not washing your hair for a couple of weeks though.:-)
Intersting. I've seen those but didn't realize their intent was for quick access and this very purpose. I'll have to look at the more. The only down side is you gotta make sure you really are familiar with getting into it quickly. Maybe routine practice just to get in the habit. Paranoid? Maybe.. but it's like insurance. You hope you never need it.
Let's not get into the political debate of guns and self defense. That's not my purpose. Assuming you're cool with a firearm for home defense read on...
My wife and I feel strongly about having firearms for personal hobby but also home defense. We do not have children yet. We both agree we'll lock up our firearms when we do have children. I've long considered the firearms that will only fire if you're wearing a special encoded ring on your finger. This is another prospect for having a firearm for self defense that can't be used by the wrong person.. like a child in the home.
I hope they can make it work reliably and productize it. Just so long as it isn't required.
Let's not mince words. I very carefully said archival quality discs.. not discs. There is a huge differene between these products.
You should do some reading on archival of digital media unless you don't care that much about the data you believe is protected so well. Magnetic media has always been terrible and the increasing densities on the platters is only going to make the problem worse. People don't know it.
You can roll the dice if you want. It's your data. But I do encourage you to research archiving digital data before putting too much faith in your current approach.
BluRay may not have archival quality media *yet* which is precisely why I noted when it's available.
It took a long time until they produced archival quality DVD-Rs, but they now exist. The same is true for archival quality CD-Rs. I have used about 1200 archival quality CD-Rs for my image archive. I'd like to move this to significantly fewer of something else that is reliable.
By the way.. what's up with this holographic SPAM on every forum on the planet whenever a new media product has been announced? Your web page hasn't changed in over five years. Are you still trying to IPO or something?
The problem is that magnetic media has a significantly shorter data integrity than what optical media *can* provide. The cheap media most people buy is about as reliable a hard drive.
Slashdot Mirror
I have an ignorant question about these encryption schemes. If the hardware can decrypt it, why can't software decrypt it? They are deploying this hardware, so someone can determine what the algorithm is. Using brute force techniques we should be able to crack the keys, right? I'm curious what makes this encryption so challenging to crack compared to other encryption schemes.
My crystal ball wasn't working back then.
Is Nostradamus in your lineage?
I think some of us that were actually using the Internet back then know the difference between WWW/HTML and the Internet. I was a heavy user of Gopher, Archie, WhoIs, Threaded Internet News, and FTP. Those web pages back then didn't hold any content I couldn't already get using those other tools. Since most sites I was hitting then were using either microwave relay or satellite relay (I had a strong interest in POV Ray then which had a lot of content in Australia at the time) the whole wasteful WWW thing seemed pretty stupid to me when I first saw it. But of course.. I actually lived back then to see it.. and *yes* my crystal ball was definitely broken when I said "I'll never use that." when I first say Mosaic 1.0 when it was first released.
It's unfortunate that you and other posters feel the need to judge people in hindsite to make yourself feel important or smart. It's also unfortunate that you're focusing on a single statement taken out of context and not the message itself I was sending. This topic is about Internet OSs, and not why I couldn't predict the future acurately. The other poster is saying why Internet OS's are stupid. The very same reasons I thought Mosaic 1.0 was stupid back in 1993. So given your and the other poster's vitrol toward me.. can I pre-emptively call you guys stupid for thinking Internet OS's are stupid using my crystal ball to predict the future that they indeed are part of our future solution to computing?
Yes.... I thought about that shortly after posting. Look at Vista's release date(s)
When they say by Christmas, do they mean RC1, RC2, SP1, SP2? :-)
LOL.. Mircosoft doesn't even understand those differences! :-)
I suspect the concept is like an app server. Not too different than a local JVM or a remote Tomcat. Since our apps are blurring the lines between remote and local, it only makes sense that other concepts that are required to enable capabilities may also be blurred.
Slashdot is more than a web page. It is an Internet Application. Although this particular app would be immensely boring to use on a disconnected PC if a heavy client were created.
The boundary between web page, web application, internet application, distributed application, and dedicated heavy apps are blurring very heavily. These Internet OS's may or may not be a wise way to enable a better future for merging all of these into something more cohesize to the end user, but whether or not these Internet OSs will play any roll in our future, does not invalidate that someone is trying to make progress toward our future of computing.
When I first saw Mosaic 1.0 I thought it was stupid and a waste of bandwidth. I said no one would ever want to use the World Wide Web. This was in 1993. Obviously I was way wrong in my assessment for how wasting currently valuable resources would become irrelevant for a greater good in the future. I *could* have been right. But the point is.. what makes sense to us today by our measures today, will not apply tomorrow as these new concepts will enable things we cannot do at all today.
There are lots of examples of distributed and online applications that you use all of the time. But you see them as a web page. Does it really matter where the source code lives, if it is statically compiled or dynamically interpretted, if it is rendered on the server from one form into another (say PHP to HTML) or rendered on your desktop (Flash), or even used with an locally installed heavy application (Goodle Earth, Quicken, online gaming, etc.)? The boundaries are not as simple as Web Page or Software Application anymore. You can fight it.. but the desire to distribute will win in the end. Who knows what it will look like.. I'm sure the fabbled Web 2.0 will play a big role in all of this.
I like how you continually and deliberately spin this into something negative in your questions.
Why do you want to continue deliberately hating something you have no interest in understanding? You do realize that is not only ignorance, but it is deliberate ignorance.
I can see how objective you're going to be.
Before labelling something you don't understand as "idiot" or "stupid", maybe you should consider being a bit more open minded and try to understand why you do not understand.
I tell ya.. my sig proves itself right at least once every day...
"I'm getting really sick of this "software as a service" crud, but at the same time, I'm also getting scared that companies might actually convince the mainsteam to use it."
You use Slashdot, don't you?
I highly question the article's validity. It is a requirement that protected information be on an physically isolated network and not connected to the Internet. If they got something.. it's a deliberate honey pot or not of any tactical value.
I'm not convinced but I really don't want to get into this aspect of the discussion because no one on this forum can have any hard facts, or if they do have cold hard facts they are breaking an agreement or law that could land them in prison for a long time. Especially since any discussions on this are going to be politically motivated regardless of how honest anyone thinks they are being with themselves. I just don't want to get into it. It can be just like the Linux vs Microsoft security and stability wars.
True, but hunting securities fraud is not part of NSA's bidness. If they the various intelligence communities are actually trying to be more open with each other.. then it could lead to something.
My guess is there are some serious firewalls with the work NSA is doing to make sure the other agencies don't learn something they can't know legally. This is starting to edge into a somewhat political debate that I don't want to get into. Since it involves the Department of Homeland Security and the Patriot Act.
I never bothered to check into it. I can't believe people are stupid enough to do it. You'd hope they realize that whoever is sending these things already bought their shares before the email went out.
Can't wait until the FTC gets involved. It probably won't take very long to figure out who's working in syndicate on this SPAM scheme. They're going to get hurt pretty hard. I mean.. after a while they will be able to figure out who is buying just before these SPAMs go out and start putting together the syndication. It may take a while, but they're going to get hurt pretty hard unless they stop it before it becomes noticeable enough for the FTC to get involved. Hmm.. maybe I should stop reporting these messages to spamcop.net and start reporting them to the FTC?
We all get it and I'm sure we mostly delete it on the spot with all other SPAM. But I have to admit, if they were to give just a few "freebies" in the SPAM message itself they might be more effective. I mean.. I see a stupid head line, deliberately poor English and a cryptic URL that is typically broken by Outlook Express. Don't make me work for it! :-)
Seriously.. I've been getting more high risk stock SPAMs lately. Almost seems like a securities fraud case waiting to happen.
My view of a hack is an implementation without a design. Typically hacks are done by very intelligent people that can many times succeed without doing any design work at all. The doesn't mean doing a design is for dumb people, or hacking is necessarily bad. There are times when hacks are legit, and times they should be avoided. I'd get into those topics but they are getting a pinch off topic and would be long winded.
What if the cop is the dirt bag?
I truly was given a speeding ticket at 3am on a Tuesday morning for driving 1MPH over the speed limit, cop was sitting right at the reduced speed sign where the speed dropped from 55MPH to 25MPH, and there was a light that was red immediately after the sign he was at. I was the only car on the road. I tried being nice.. he acted like a prick to me about it.
Cops are pricks.
"but I have found that if you respect the police, they will respect you."
I've never had such experienced. They are pricks to you by default.
Aluminum is conductive and can carry a current induced by a changing magnetic field. Probably not a lot compared to typical conductors we use for shielding, but I'm sure a thing aluminum hat would provide some protection. Probably not much more than not washing your hair for a couple of weeks though. :-)
Intersting. I've seen those but didn't realize their intent was for quick access and this very purpose. I'll have to look at the more. The only down side is you gotta make sure you really are familiar with getting into it quickly. Maybe routine practice just to get in the habit. Paranoid? Maybe.. but it's like insurance. You hope you never need it.
Let's not get into the political debate of guns and self defense. That's not my purpose. Assuming you're cool with a firearm for home defense read on...
My wife and I feel strongly about having firearms for personal hobby but also home defense. We do not have children yet. We both agree we'll lock up our firearms when we do have children. I've long considered the firearms that will only fire if you're wearing a special encoded ring on your finger. This is another prospect for having a firearm for self defense that can't be used by the wrong person.. like a child in the home.
I hope they can make it work reliably and productize it. Just so long as it isn't required.
Let's not mince words. I very carefully said archival quality discs.. not discs. There is a huge differene between these products.
You should do some reading on archival of digital media unless you don't care that much about the data you believe is protected so well. Magnetic media has always been terrible and the increasing densities on the platters is only going to make the problem worse. People don't know it.
You can roll the dice if you want. It's your data. But I do encourage you to research archiving digital data before putting too much faith in your current approach.
BluRay may not have archival quality media *yet* which is precisely why I noted when it's available.
It took a long time until they produced archival quality DVD-Rs, but they now exist. The same is true for archival quality CD-Rs. I have used about 1200 archival quality CD-Rs for my image archive. I'd like to move this to significantly fewer of something else that is reliable.
By the way.. what's up with this holographic SPAM on every forum on the planet whenever a new media product has been announced? Your web page hasn't changed in over five years. Are you still trying to IPO or something?
Believe what you want.. it's your data to loose.
Before you so quickly make charges, have you done any studies on media reliability?
The problem is that magnetic media has a significantly shorter data integrity than what optical media *can* provide. The cheap media most people buy is about as reliable a hard drive.