That's usually what is being done. Timing attacks often work simply by noticing that if a key/message/whatever fails to be accepted at a certain stage in the algorithm, the function returns a little earlier or so. As such, the basic protection scheme just says, never return early when an error/improper packet/etc. is encountered, but take the algorithm all the way through and just return failure at the end. (blatantly simplified for explanatory purposes of course...) But if you just time any encryption to e.g. count the number of squares and multiplys as mentioned in another thread here, I'd suppose it's a bit harder to unify response time for any input.
I like Basri's definition; it makes the most sense so far. But I wonder if one should take into account the shape of the orbit of the object. A highly irregular orbit (as in, "not moving in (or close enough to) the same orbital plane as the majority of objects orbiting the star") might make an object an asteroid. But this definition might not make sense anywhere else but the solar system; also, it might throw out Pluto (but just because we call it "Planet" now doesn't mean we have to make sure the definition fits it).
So for now the characteristics used to define a planet include (1) directly orbiting a star, and (2) having a size large enough to allow gravity to shape it spherical. Maybe there will be (3) its orbit has a certain nature, or (4) its distance from the star is not larger than x, or (5) its density is between x and y (because maybe there might be non-round objects more than 700 km in diameter which are simply not dense enough); (5) might be avoided by defining (2) as above through the shape and not a diameter number.
I haven't seen many posts here trying to define characteristics -- I'd like to see some ideas here, even if it might mean that Pluto isn't a planet anymore, or we suddenly have twelve planets in our system.
...which is a valid argument, but please consider that winXP is _not_ optimized for your machine and would probably still be a bit faster than KDE if optimized. Note that I'm not trying to bash X/whatever - imho the high flexibility, network transparency etc. of X naturally has to come at some sort of a price.
Close Boxes
I actually prefer Galeon's behavior here. Phoenix and Mozilla offer close boxes for the tab strip, but this UI frankly stinks, because the user expectation is that clicking on the X will actually close up the entire tab strip. In effect, the X should map to the "Close Other Tabs" command, but instead it maps to "Close Selected Tab." This is utterly confusing, and at least Chimera avoids the problem by not having a close box at all.
The right way IMO to do this is to have a close box for closing up the tab strip itself in the same place Phoenix and Mozilla have it, but to also have close boxes on the tabs themselves (the way Galeon does it). With this model, it's clear what the different close metaphors are, and you don't end up with user (even power user) confusion.
I absolutely second that. I like the way Galeon handles closing tabs -- Mozilla's way is just disturbing and not very practical. The close button on the tab makes a clear statement as to what will be closed by pressing this button. Mozilla's button is in an awkward location and suggests the wrong action.
Yep; especially nice since on restart, Galeon lets you choose whether you want to reopen all tabs, store them as temporary bookmarks, or start a clean session. Sweet feature.
Galeon does this partly. When closing the window via the window's close button, it will ask for confirmation if there is more than one tab open. I think that is the desirable behavior (especially since you can switch off the confirmation dialog if you want to, which is what Galeon allows you).
Galeon does not ask in every case, though (at least in v1.2.5). Using File->Exit or the equivalent Ctl+Q will not pop up the confirmation dialog, but close right away. This difference is distracting and should be corrected. I'm not sure whether more recent versions of Galeon address this problem.
ISDN data connections are prohibited (no problem there, just look at the service indicator). You could of course do an analog data connection, although it would not be a problem to simply check for well-known local ISP phone numbers.
While SuSE (being a mostly German distribution) is well prepared for German dial-ups (and used to be way ahead of others in ISDN support since ISDN is widely used in Germany), support for Linux users is pretty good from a number of providers such as this one.
Depends. In case you're in the south west, you might use the carrier Tesion. They offer a so-called "Phone&Surf" package in some regions, allowing for free local calls -- not including data connections though (despite the name). Of course you'd have to check the prices for yourself to see whether it is a viable option for you.
Well, if they "get smart and give up after X seconds", then they won't be able to deliver mail to the tarpitted host, right? That's all we want, I suppose...
in connection with an IP number list (much faster, so suitable for busy servers)
Another big advantage of going by IP numbers is simply this: I have an IMAP mail account at my university that I use, but I have some external Email addresses as well, which are configured to forward their mail to the university server. Now, if the university's server will add tar based on the message content, I suppose the external mail provider will not be too happy about being slowed down. I would suppose there are quite a number of users simply forwarding mails from one account to another. Maybe (depending on how many people actually use automatic forwarding capabilities) "innocent" servers could be slowed down due to forwarding mail to a "dynamic tarpit", and maybe there are some providers that would not be too happy about such stuff... on the other hand, tarpitting by IP lists seems a little more practical then. But I suppose only practice will show which works best.
I wonder what happens with an audience who have heard (no pun intended) about this piece. I mean, once most of the audience know "oh, this must be that famous 4'33'' piece..." then the reactions should be quite different; nevertheless the outcome should be interesting on its own.
Hm, I'm actually using my Windows key within the window manager (Super-F1..F8 to switch workspaces etc.), and, more importantly, as a Compose key. Might be useless for the English speaking, but for other nationalities it might just make sense. Now, I of course have direct access to 'ä', 'ö' etc. on my keyboard; but Compose allows me to access things like 'ç' (Compose-,-c), or é (Compose-'-e) in case I should need them. The Windows Menu key I usually have setup to pop up the GNOME main menu or things like that.
The c't IEController (translation attempt here) might be worth looking at... I'm not sure though whether it will prevent the automated installation of crap like this, as I've never gotten around to trying that software myself.
Yep... one approach I really liked was moving in 3-D to access the clipboard - move PDA up, enter clipboard, move back down, back to drawing area. Drag objects into/out of the clipboard to cut/paste them. This seemed extremely practical. And this is the direction a 'space-sensitive' GUI needs to take... WIMP or other too traditional approaches won't work here most definitely...
As I said in another post here, variable-length numbers with the '0' reserved for distinguishing between local/long-distance/international seems to me the better approach.
German numbers have, theoretically, no length limits. Dialing any number not starting with a '0' is local. If it starts with a '0', it's actually (0)-areacode-localpart. Note that some other nearby area codes might be priced with, e.g., local tariffs - check the local phone book for info. Numbers starting with '00' are actually '00'-countrycode-number. As for the length of the numbers, numbers can be practically any length, as long as you have either unique prefixes, or defined fixed-length subblocks. For bigger companies or the like, you order a block of numbers. My student dorm, for instance, has 8695{1-7}xyz, using ISDN point-to-point.
As a consequence, some numbers might be short (my home phone number is area code + four digits, small town), or much longer (some Berlin numbers have eight _local_ digits), but it depends on the setup of the local switching center (in my home town, local numbers prefixed by 9 are actually 6-digit, not 4-digit).
So? Not each number is the same length, you might call that chaotic. But at least it scales to some extent, and if you run out of numbers, you might only have to convert some number blocks to new, longer numbers. And, if you do not start your number with a '0', you _definitely_ know it's local, and priced accordingly.
This is not Germany specific. But it just makes sense, don't you think?
Here's a 'common sense' answer: You could create a 'classical' EPR pair by simply taking two pieces of paper, marking one with a spot, and leaving the other one clean. Then fold them, and take two matchboxes. Throw a coin to decide where to put which piece of paper. Then send the matchboxes apart as far as you want.
As soon as you open one box, you know the content of the other. Did you transmit information instantaneously? No, the information was already implied do to the fact that the two random variables simply correlated, which you knew from the beginning. And since you had to move the two 'particles' apart, which you most likely did at a speed slower than light, nothing went wrong.
SoulSeek has been working pretty nicely for me; the chat rooms actually tend to have people with pretty solid musical interests in them, and you might just find out about new bands in one of the chat rooms, or actually have interesting conversations. Plus, I've occasionally been able to find otherwise rare stuff on there.
The problem with a HFS is just that paths are usually not commutative. That is, I might save some.ogg file as 'Albums/Indie/Slut/Blow Up.ogg', but I can not easily simultaneously access it as 'Indie/Albums/Slut/Blow Up.ogg'.
Why would I want that? The first path is useful when I want to browse all full albums. The second is useful when I'm looking for all Indie songs, including those which belong to collections of full albums.
Another path would be simply '/Slut/Hope.ogg', for getting all songs by Slut, including those not belonging to a full album. I would want to find 'Blow Up.ogg' in that same directory as well.
A nicely sorted ogg/mp3 collection is just one example. There are lots of documents on my computer that I could sort more nicely based on attributes instead of a plain hierarchy.
I'm not saying that newdocms meets my requirements, as I haven't tried it yet. My vision is some way of storing files along with attributes and using paths as a kind of query on attributes or keywords. Something to the effect of '/this/that/file' matching attributes/keywords 'this' and 'that', or maybe advanced queries allowing not only and-type queries, but more general boolean or regex operators.
Users STILL have to create their own type of organization
Of course. Your computer is not going to clean up after you. And I don't want it to. But Manuel's attempt at least seems to be trying to give me a more powerful tool to sort my files. Maybe people don't want to be organized, but some might like more advanced features. A hierarchical system works pretty well, but nobody said it's the ultimate perfection.
Slashdot Mirror
That's usually what is being done. Timing attacks often work simply by noticing that if a key/message/whatever fails to be accepted at a certain stage in the algorithm, the function returns a little earlier or so. As such, the basic protection scheme just says, never return early when an error/improper packet/etc. is encountered, but take the algorithm all the way through and just return failure at the end. (blatantly simplified for explanatory purposes of course...) But if you just time any encryption to e.g. count the number of squares and multiplys as mentioned in another thread here, I'd suppose it's a bit harder to unify response time for any input.
Wouldn't that be 'Game Hypercube'?
Wonder what that design would look like.
I like Basri's definition; it makes the most sense so far. But I wonder if one should take into account the shape of the orbit of the object. A highly irregular orbit (as in, "not moving in (or close enough to) the same orbital plane as the majority of objects orbiting the star") might make an object an asteroid. But this definition might not make sense anywhere else but the solar system; also, it might throw out Pluto (but just because we call it "Planet" now doesn't mean we have to make sure the definition fits it).
So for now the characteristics used to define a planet include (1) directly orbiting a star, and (2) having a size large enough to allow gravity to shape it spherical. Maybe there will be (3) its orbit has a certain nature, or (4) its distance from the star is not larger than x, or (5) its density is between x and y (because maybe there might be non-round objects more than 700 km in diameter which are simply not dense enough); (5) might be avoided by defining (2) as above through the shape and not a diameter number.
I haven't seen many posts here trying to define characteristics -- I'd like to see some ideas here, even if it might mean that Pluto isn't a planet anymore, or we suddenly have twelve planets in our system.
...which is a valid argument, but please consider that winXP is _not_ optimized for your machine and would probably still be a bit faster than KDE if optimized. Note that I'm not trying to bash X/whatever - imho the high flexibility, network transparency etc. of X naturally has to come at some sort of a price.
From the article:
I absolutely second that. I like the way Galeon handles closing tabs -- Mozilla's way is just disturbing and not very practical. The close button on the tab makes a clear statement as to what will be closed by pressing this button. Mozilla's button is in an awkward location and suggests the wrong action.
Yep; especially nice since on restart, Galeon lets you choose whether you want to reopen all tabs, store them as temporary bookmarks, or start a clean session. Sweet feature.
Galeon does this partly. When closing the window via the window's close button, it will ask for confirmation if there is more than one tab open. I think that is the desirable behavior (especially since you can switch off the confirmation dialog if you want to, which is what Galeon allows you).
Galeon does not ask in every case, though (at least in v1.2.5). Using File->Exit or the equivalent Ctl+Q will not pop up the confirmation dialog, but close right away. This difference is distracting and should be corrected. I'm not sure whether more recent versions of Galeon address this problem.
ISDN data connections are prohibited (no problem there, just look at the service indicator). You could of course do an analog data connection, although it would not be a problem to simply check for well-known local ISP phone numbers.
While SuSE (being a mostly German distribution) is well prepared for German dial-ups (and used to be way ahead of others in ISDN support since ISDN is widely used in Germany), support for Linux users is pretty good from a number of providers such as this one.
Depends. In case you're in the south west, you might use the carrier Tesion. They offer a so-called "Phone&Surf" package in some regions, allowing for free local calls -- not including data connections though (despite the name). Of course you'd have to check the prices for yourself to see whether it is a viable option for you.
Well, if they "get smart and give up after X seconds", then they won't be able to deliver mail to the tarpitted host, right? That's all we want, I suppose...
I suppose he needs to brush up on his command line knowledge...
:-))
Another big advantage of going by IP numbers is simply this: I have an IMAP mail account at my university that I use, but I have some external Email addresses as well, which are configured to forward their mail to the university server. Now, if the university's server will add tar based on the message content, I suppose the external mail provider will not be too happy about being slowed down. I would suppose there are quite a number of users simply forwarding mails from one account to another. Maybe (depending on how many people actually use automatic forwarding capabilities) "innocent" servers could be slowed down due to forwarding mail to a "dynamic tarpit", and maybe there are some providers that would not be too happy about such stuff... on the other hand, tarpitting by IP lists seems a little more practical then. But I suppose only practice will show which works best.
Man, they should've just anticipated the coming Slashdotting and used it as a real-life benchmark for the scheduler...
I wonder what happens with an audience who have heard (no pun intended) about this piece. I mean, once most of the audience know "oh, this must be that famous 4'33'' piece..." then the reactions should be quite different; nevertheless the outcome should be interesting on its own.
Hm, I'm actually using my Windows key within the window manager (Super-F1..F8 to switch workspaces etc.), and, more importantly, as a Compose key. Might be useless for the English speaking, but for other nationalities it might just make sense. Now, I of course have direct access to 'ä', 'ö' etc. on my keyboard; but Compose allows me to access things like 'ç' (Compose-,-c), or é (Compose-'-e) in case I should need them. The Windows Menu key I usually have setup to pop up the GNOME main menu or things like that.
Maybe this one is a little nicer.
The c't IEController (translation attempt here) might be worth looking at... I'm not sure though whether it will prevent the automated installation of crap like this, as I've never gotten around to trying that software myself.
See also this article (translation).
Yep... one approach I really liked was moving in 3-D to access the clipboard - move PDA up, enter clipboard, move back down, back to drawing area. Drag objects into/out of the clipboard to cut/paste them. This seemed extremely practical. And this is the direction a 'space-sensitive' GUI needs to take... WIMP or other too traditional approaches won't work here most definitely...
Kinda like IPv4, methinks :)
As I said in another post here, variable-length numbers with the '0' reserved for distinguishing between local/long-distance/international seems to me the better approach.
German numbers have, theoretically, no length limits. Dialing any number not starting with a '0' is local. If it starts with a '0', it's actually (0)-areacode-localpart. Note that some other nearby area codes might be priced with, e.g., local tariffs - check the local phone book for info. Numbers starting with '00' are actually '00'-countrycode-number. As for the length of the numbers, numbers can be practically any length, as long as you have either unique prefixes, or defined fixed-length subblocks. For bigger companies or the like, you order a block of numbers. My student dorm, for instance, has 8695{1-7}xyz, using ISDN point-to-point.
As a consequence, some numbers might be short (my home phone number is area code + four digits, small town), or much longer (some Berlin numbers have eight _local_ digits), but it depends on the setup of the local switching center (in my home town, local numbers prefixed by 9 are actually 6-digit, not 4-digit).
So? Not each number is the same length, you might call that chaotic. But at least it scales to some extent, and if you run out of numbers, you might only have to convert some number blocks to new, longer numbers. And, if you do not start your number with a '0', you _definitely_ know it's local, and priced accordingly.
This is not Germany specific. But it just makes sense, don't you think?
Here's a 'common sense' answer: You could create a 'classical' EPR pair by simply taking two pieces of paper, marking one with a spot, and leaving the other one clean. Then fold them, and take two matchboxes. Throw a coin to decide where to put which piece of paper. Then send the matchboxes apart as far as you want.
As soon as you open one box, you know the content of the other. Did you transmit information instantaneously? No, the information was already implied do to the fact that the two random variables simply correlated, which you knew from the beginning. And since you had to move the two 'particles' apart, which you most likely did at a speed slower than light, nothing went wrong.
SoulSeek has been working pretty nicely for me; the chat rooms actually tend to have people with pretty solid musical interests in them, and you might just find out about new bands in one of the chat rooms, or actually have interesting conversations. Plus, I've occasionally been able to find otherwise rare stuff on there.
The problem with a HFS is just that paths are usually not commutative. That is, I might save some .ogg file as 'Albums/Indie/Slut/Blow Up.ogg', but I can not easily simultaneously access it as 'Indie/Albums/Slut/Blow Up.ogg'.
Why would I want that? The first path is useful when I want to browse all full albums. The second is useful when I'm looking for all Indie songs, including those which belong to collections of full albums.
Another path would be simply '/Slut/Hope.ogg', for getting all songs by Slut, including those not belonging to a full album. I would want to find 'Blow Up.ogg' in that same directory as well.
A nicely sorted ogg/mp3 collection is just one example. There are lots of documents on my computer that I could sort more nicely based on attributes instead of a plain hierarchy.
I'm not saying that newdocms meets my requirements, as I haven't tried it yet. My vision is some way of storing files along with attributes and using paths as a kind of query on attributes or keywords. Something to the effect of '/this/that/file' matching attributes/keywords 'this' and 'that', or maybe advanced queries allowing not only and-type queries, but more general boolean or regex operators.
Of course. Your computer is not going to clean up after you. And I don't want it to. But Manuel's attempt at least seems to be trying to give me a more powerful tool to sort my files. Maybe people don't want to be organized, but some might like more advanced features. A hierarchical system works pretty well, but nobody said it's the ultimate perfection.
...with an especially nice screen shot... :-)