Unfortunately, there's a Citation game going on too. Some fine works don't get cited, and silly ones do. There's a little back-scratching going on there.
I think I found my answer. Let's hope I phrase it right.
I was definitely thinking of one time pads but I ended up in 1-time digital Book Ciphers with extra obfuscation using high*er* entropy than a regular Book Cipher.
So the breakability is proportional to the non-randomness of the gobbledygook against the skill of the analyst. I was headed towards Schneier's Multi-Encryption but the better answer is CD/Downloadable 1-time pads.
That's why I put a lot of "weasel word qualifiers". What I have is a couple of very good ideas, based on new possibilities of the Cloud that were not available before, and some general properties of computers I do not believe have been exploited.
There's a couple of good replies - but they're all AC's! THAT's fascinating!
My basic problem is that true per one of the AC's above, I don't have the chops to finish off the job - the best I can do is proof of concept demos. I've glanced over the Schneier stuff before, and it's a fair point too. But then again, below national critical interest, I think there's room here. After all, we can't even be bothered to read articles!
There's a middle ground though, in the obscurity, and that's why my general question was in fact to test myself against a couple of real Pros. I don't think AC can crack my stuff in three hours, but I don't expect it to stand up forever either. In fact I did get a reply from a fellow who works in web security, so I'll see what he thinks.
I've wondered for a long time now about encryption. I think it's time to use "out of the box" approaches to encryption.
I'm certainly not in that Elite-IQ crowd but given the very nature of how the sender has a colossal advantage over the breaker, I think I could create a message that no one but the elite genius at those agencies could break. I think no one at Slashdot is good enough to get it, nor Anonymous. Mensa might have a chance, barely.
This is different from "certifying it unbreakable". I'm avoiding that trap. Just "Sufficiently hard".
Any takers? It might even be fun if someone has Academic connections. My overall concept is so good I think I could stump almost all of the Non-Gov Professors too.
Anyone interested, send me an email. I'll reply with a watered down "easy version" just to be sure someone's not trolling me. (Also it forms a weak version of a test.) On the (slim?) chance that someone gets it, I'll produce a couple of the real corkers. I'd stake up to $100 of my own money through a certified neutral holder. Not that it's "worth that little", just saying I'm not trolling, this concept is so good nobody but the absolute best will figure it out. It's a new METHOD of encryption, so it's probably even NP-Hard (I'm probably using that term wrong) as a class so that "almost unlimited" examples can be created.
"Ethics aside, why should one be stupid enough..."
Oh no, AC, you're square in the middle of it all.
Of course the Pirated copies are "better value". But we have a tricky mix of Ethics and Draconian Law, that leads many people to try desperately to "play by the rules". Then the clear cognitive tension at all the hoops shows up. This is *absolutely* the heart of it all.
Interesting rant but maybe a little off key. The key sentence is"perceived need". Since in fact it is not needed - "https://www.google.com/search?q=warterboard" works just fine, it's that other story about your privacy being worth 60 cents.
I'm tend to think all that junk in there is tracking junk.
More to the point you want "refine and improve", it works for cars, just less nicely for information.
Nice effort, but it's still not quite the way it all shakes out. The way you prove it is use their own new laws/proto-laws against them. (Enforcement is a problem, but that's the next problem.)
"We can neither confirm or deny that we have secret info". "Sudo you stole an iPad and downloaded a Journey album and violated a patent on a method of being a weasel. Now give us your secret info." "Okay, here's our info!"
It's a government agency. Of course they have Non-Zero info about *everything*.
But instead of "remove" anything, leave it all there. Just build your own tab brand new from scratch. With a little work I discovered I only used about 30 features heavy duty, so I put them all on a new Ribbon. And they all have words.
It's actually faster. My best example is (Rightclick) (Paste-Special-Values followed by (Rightclick) Paste-Special-Formats. 6 clicks down to two plus simpler structure.
ONLY if you have the total access to "All Commands" does this work though. That's the key. It wasn't there in Office 2007.
I have lots of hobby apps that I'm not sure are being developed anymore, so even if Win7 scrapesby and loads them, I'm suspicious of Win8 Metro.
But you know what the bigger problem is? Something half-baked about Metro feels like all the other half-baked MS pushes: PlaysForSure -> Zune -> nothing, ____ -> Windows Live -> Nothing, Windows Mobile -> Windows Phone 7 -> Something.
I saved my time and mental energy skipping all of those, because they would have left me as a user (not a consumer!) in the lurch with an abused loyalty.
So a long time ago (about 2006) I had a friend build me a rock solid XP machine hopefully sturdy enough to last another five years until all this hoopla shakes out. It's 50 50 if Metro becomes the next Vista. Or at least if they get the concept right in Windows 9/Something, then that's FOUR generations of info to see where the landscape is going, and then make an intelligent migration decision. But not now. It's "too hot", and it feels so wrong.
The only way Metro will work is if they made a "Customize your Metro" feature like they finally did for Office 2010's Ribbon. And I mean "Customize".
I have sixty five things on my desktop, many of them folders with sixty more things each in them. That's what a desktop is to me. So if Metro has the Office 2010's thematic "select from ALL items on your ENTIRE computer to put on your desktop", then okay. But as long as it's a dumb 10 items that MS picks, 8 of which I don't use, then it's Fail.
MS has given me the impression that *none* of their consumer offerings are worth bothering with, because what was praised elsewhere as "MS kills dead products quick" is "MS first overhypes products that later get dumped, stranding users."
The question is what will become of the whole Metro thing. From this far back it feels like Vista II, but then I felt that way in 1995 about Microsoft Internet Explorer, and even Windows itself in 1994.
You are plenty clear enough for me, so I don't need to mirror your fine point.
System rewarding bastards applies to many levels of politics. I'll also add the economy of synergy effects - all the bastards are within 100 miles of each other, controlling 150+ million of us across the country. It's absolutely the Prisoner's Dilemma because we can't coordinate enough to vote a third party in.
Slashdot Mirror
Unfortunately, there's a Citation game going on too. Some fine works don't get cited, and silly ones do. There's a little back-scratching going on there.
Any finance experts here? What does this buyback do? It probably makes the remaining shares more valuable, but are there any nasty angles to this?
Wait, we got this far (and more?) without the required line?
"Won't someone think of the Children?"
Can we get a wrestling match between Copyright and Think of the Children on opposite sides?
Then again, Children are Terrorists, so I'm getting lost in the New World Order.
I think I found my answer. Let's hope I phrase it right.
I was definitely thinking of one time pads but I ended up in 1-time digital Book Ciphers with extra obfuscation using high*er* entropy than a regular Book Cipher.
So the breakability is proportional to the non-randomness of the gobbledygook against the skill of the analyst. I was headed towards Schneier's Multi-Encryption but the better answer is CD/Downloadable 1-time pads.
That's why I put a lot of "weasel word qualifiers". What I have is a couple of very good ideas, based on new possibilities of the Cloud that were not available before, and some general properties of computers I do not believe have been exploited.
There's a couple of good replies - but they're all AC's! THAT's fascinating!
My basic problem is that true per one of the AC's above, I don't have the chops to finish off the job - the best I can do is proof of concept demos. I've glanced over the Schneier stuff before, and it's a fair point too. But then again, below national critical interest, I think there's room here. After all, we can't even be bothered to read articles!
There's a middle ground though, in the obscurity, and that's why my general question was in fact to test myself against a couple of real Pros. I don't think AC can crack my stuff in three hours, but I don't expect it to stand up forever either. In fact I did get a reply from a fellow who works in web security, so I'll see what he thinks.
I've wondered for a long time now about encryption. I think it's time to use "out of the box" approaches to encryption.
I'm certainly not in that Elite-IQ crowd but given the very nature of how the sender has a colossal advantage over the breaker, I think I could create a message that no one but the elite genius at those agencies could break. I think no one at Slashdot is good enough to get it, nor Anonymous. Mensa might have a chance, barely.
This is different from "certifying it unbreakable". I'm avoiding that trap. Just "Sufficiently hard".
Any takers? It might even be fun if someone has Academic connections. My overall concept is so good I think I could stump almost all of the Non-Gov Professors too.
Anyone interested, send me an email. I'll reply with a watered down "easy version" just to be sure someone's not trolling me. (Also it forms a weak version of a test.) On the (slim?) chance that someone gets it, I'll produce a couple of the real corkers. I'd stake up to $100 of my own money through a certified neutral holder. Not that it's "worth that little", just saying I'm not trolling, this concept is so good nobody but the absolute best will figure it out. It's a new METHOD of encryption, so it's probably even NP-Hard (I'm probably using that term wrong) as a class so that "almost unlimited" examples can be created.
Maybe it's been descending to Tartuffe.
We spent a trillion dollars putting a system in place to check for Apple Juice but if you pay $100 you can get out of it.
"King Louis XIV almost immediately censored the play, probably due to the influence of the archbishop of Paris, Paul Philippe Hardouin de Beaumont de Péréfixe, who was the King's confessor and had been his tutor.... Though Tartuffe was received well by the public and even by Louis XIV, it immediately sparked conflict amongst many different groups who were offended by the play."
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Tartuffe
Wait, so Fruit Flies are Liking Jack Daniels on Flybook?! No wonder Zynga is doing well with Flyville.
"Ethics aside, why should one be stupid enough..."
Oh no, AC, you're square in the middle of it all.
Of course the Pirated copies are "better value". But we have a tricky mix of Ethics and Draconian Law, that leads many people to try desperately to "play by the rules". Then the clear cognitive tension at all the hoops shows up. This is *absolutely* the heart of it all.
You are, in their eyes, The Problem.
"Who said we get to download first and decide at our whim only that we like it?"
No, if you arrange that into a Cellular Automata you will find that he is a pretty smart guy.
Interesting rant but maybe a little off key. The key sentence is"perceived need". Since in fact it is not needed - "https://www.google.com/search?q=warterboard" works just fine, it's that other story about your privacy being worth 60 cents.
I'm tend to think all that junk in there is tracking junk.
More to the point you want "refine and improve", it works for cars, just less nicely for information.
Be careful. You do NOT want an Anti-Asimovian robot/AI being evil. Because we can sometimes be evil, the bot will ALWAYS be efficiently evil.
Nice effort, but it's still not quite the way it all shakes out. The way you prove it is use their own new laws/proto-laws against them. (Enforcement is a problem, but that's the next problem.)
"We can neither confirm or deny that we have secret info".
"Sudo you stole an iPad and downloaded a Journey album and violated a patent on a method of being a weasel. Now give us your secret info."
"Okay, here's our info!"
It's a government agency. Of course they have Non-Zero info about *everything*.
Generally this response has the informal meaning of Confirming something, but it avoids perjury.
No, we're spending lots of $$$ prosecuting people who copy songs.
Not sure about the keyboard commands part.
But instead of "remove" anything, leave it all there. Just build your own tab brand new from scratch. With a little work I discovered I only used about 30 features heavy duty, so I put them all on a new Ribbon. And they all have words.
It's actually faster. My best example is (Rightclick) (Paste-Special-Values followed by (Rightclick) Paste-Special-Formats.
6 clicks down to two plus simpler structure.
ONLY if you have the total access to "All Commands" does this work though. That's the key. It wasn't there in Office 2007.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Apostrophe_(figure_of_speech)
Oh Anonymous Coward, so voluminous yet not part of Anonymous, where is thine wisdom?
Hi Developer!
A minute ago I saw an explosion of parentheses and + signs, then they went away when I looked again.
Was there a bug going on?
Anyway, just for you!
( 11 * ( 4 Developers ) ) + ( 3 * ( 4 Developers ) ) + C mon + ( 8 * C ) + ( 3 * ( 4 Developers ) + LoveThatCity + ( 4 * ( 4 Developers ) ) + I got 4 words for ya + ( C mon * 5 ) + ( 21 * ( 4 Developers ) )
I still haven't moved off XP either.
I have lots of hobby apps that I'm not sure are being developed anymore, so even if Win7 scrapesby and loads them, I'm suspicious of Win8 Metro.
But you know what the bigger problem is? Something half-baked about Metro feels like all the other half-baked MS pushes:
PlaysForSure -> Zune -> nothing,
____ -> Windows Live -> Nothing,
Windows Mobile -> Windows Phone 7 -> Something.
I saved my time and mental energy skipping all of those, because they would have left me as a user (not a consumer!) in the lurch with an abused loyalty.
So a long time ago (about 2006) I had a friend build me a rock solid XP machine hopefully sturdy enough to last another five years until all this hoopla shakes out. It's 50 50 if Metro becomes the next Vista. Or at least if they get the concept right in Windows 9/Something, then that's FOUR generations of info to see where the landscape is going, and then make an intelligent migration decision. But not now. It's "too hot", and it feels so wrong.
The only way Metro will work is if they made a "Customize your Metro" feature like they finally did for Office 2010's Ribbon. And I mean "Customize".
I have sixty five things on my desktop, many of them folders with sixty more things each in them. That's what a desktop is to me. So if Metro has the Office 2010's thematic "select from ALL items on your ENTIRE computer to put on your desktop", then okay. But as long as it's a dumb 10 items that MS picks, 8 of which I don't use, then it's Fail.
Exactly.
MS has given me the impression that *none* of their consumer offerings are worth bothering with, because what was praised elsewhere as "MS kills dead products quick" is "MS first overhypes products that later get dumped, stranding users."
The question is what will become of the whole Metro thing. From this far back it feels like Vista II, but then I felt that way in 1995 about Microsoft Internet Explorer, and even Windows itself in 1994.
Thank you!
I for one view every emerging news story "so sweetly presented" with a gamer's strategy of "how can someone evil abuse the daylights out of this?"
Simple example, in a courtroom scenario, with the "we can raid your comp" rules emerging, they can probably find a way to subpoena your study notes.
Then of course Big Brother style is that "1. You must now keep these records. 2. Turn them over to us."
You are plenty clear enough for me, so I don't need to mirror your fine point.
System rewarding bastards applies to many levels of politics. I'll also add the economy of synergy effects - all the bastards are within 100 miles of each other, controlling 150+ million of us across the country. It's absolutely the Prisoner's Dilemma because we can't coordinate enough to vote a third party in.
A large part of our being nice relies on laws.
But look what happens to people "above the law". Copyright Legislators? Not Nice.