The biggest trick the Catholic church ever pulled was convincing the world he does.
Back on topic: I'm surprised that, as a society, we're gullible enough to believe that anything is "safe." I'd be very surprised if ANYONE had such superior knowledge to be able to bring down ANY technology. At the same time though, I would be even MORE surprised if NO ONE had knowledge to bring down ANY ONE piece of technology.
The point isn't that the ID tag isn't the only potential difference, it's that IF the ID tag WERE the only difference, it still wouldn't recognize that anyway.
The problem might be inherent to MP3's though. Header information is still stored as binary information in the file, changing the amount of bits in the file, therefore the hash (as read by any hashing system I'm aware of.) If there were a way to store the header text such that it doesn't affect the filesize, current P2P protocols/software might already be able to do this...
errrrr...sorry. I need to proofread better. Instead of saying "I think this is just the next natural extension for Bittorrent..." I meant to say "next natural extension for Gnutella."
I read this as being less effective for bittorrent (as your assumption is correct, DHT basically does this on its own already) and more effective for Gnutella. While the gnutella network is maturing to a level past the Bearshare/Limewire days, there are still inherent problems with download speeds simply because a mechanism like DHT (or as the article calls it SET) doesn't currently exist. Are there problems with DHT? Absolutely, I get node errors all the time in Bittyrant. I think this is just the next natural extension for Bittorrent (or distributed FTP, etc)
The idea is that the song "Girl Talk - Once Again" might be represented as "girltalk-onceagain" "girl talk - once again" "GirlTalk - Once Again" "01-once again.mp3" "OnceAgain.mp3"
Being that the only difference is just the text (ID3, ID3-2) tags, the rest of the song is exactly the same, so why can't you use that as a download source too? I personally organize all of my music, and because of this P2P programs believe that it's an entirely new file, when really it was just renamed and the header information was changed (generally to be grammatically correct.)</summary>
Unless you're being dropped yourself, I doubt you'd have to worry about it too! I had a 30 gb Creative Xen MP3 player that, after having dropped it from my lap to the ground ONCE (getting out of my car), busted it. (It now rattles and won't boot...) So personally I've had to use flash drive mp3 players, I can't afford to bust another one!
it's extremely rare to come across anyone on any forum...</lie>
<truth>it's extremely rare to come across anyone on any forum that starts with an S and ends with a "lashdot"</truth>
I was mostly referring to their home environments. No one uses Vista here at work, even in Virtual Images. Hell, we're still paying Server 2003 licensing fees...
That's my point, but with those same numbers that means 40% of the populace has run Vista in a virtual environment (which clearly can't be the case!) I was just looking for anyone else's insight as to the accuracy of my inquiry!
Meanwhile, Vista is rising, the article says, with just over 2% of computers connected to the Internet using the new Windows OS. I wonder how many of these are just virtual images... Realistically it's probably a negligible number, but of the more than 20 people in my department here at work that I just polled, 1 of them uses Vista as their production environment, and 8 of them said they've dabbled with it in a virtual image. Granted I work in the tech industry so my percentages are probably a bit skewed...
What are you talking about? This REAL guy wants to sell me viagra! This REAL chick totally wants to bone me, now that that other REAL guy sold me some p3n15 3Nl4Rg3m3nt and that OTHER REAL dude is going to teach me how to buy and sell priceless trinkets! I also heard those two guys REALLY wanted a REAL PSP for Xmas (and it's all they wanted!) Who says they're not real? They're certainly real to me!
This wasn't an accusation. I don't read anything indicating they are confident that it would work on the general release of Vista, but common sense says that (at least this part of) the software has not changed enough between RC2 and general release to warrant making anything outside of minor changes in the application for it to work. As this exploit wasn't discovered before Vista was released generally, MS hasn't had time to issue a new "security patch" (which they will ultimately do.) I'd be very surprised if they even knew this loophole existed until someone read it on Slashdot this morning.
because that's how much volume of space would be required to store all possible combinations/arrangements of matter that exist in the known/visible universe - at about 10^100 light years you'd have a duplicate arrangement.
Slashdot Mirror
What grammar? I had grammar?
Basic Algebra:
x = 100x
x/x = 100
as 0/0 = [-infinity,infinity]
and [-infinity,infinity] contains 100
x can = 0
So, it's doable! Just make sure you get the speed of light to be perfectly 0 and I'll up that speed limit for you in a snap.
You're punctuation is wrong. You wrote:
Girls on the plus side you can walk all over them and get anything you want.
What you meant to write:
Girls (on the plus side), you can walk all over them and get anything you want.
The biggest trick the Catholic church ever pulled was convincing the world he does.
Back on topic: I'm surprised that, as a society, we're gullible enough to believe that anything is "safe." I'd be very surprised if ANYONE had such superior knowledge to be able to bring down ANY technology. At the same time though, I would be even MORE surprised if NO ONE had knowledge to bring down ANY ONE piece of technology.
The point isn't that the ID tag isn't the only potential difference, it's that IF the ID tag WERE the only difference, it still wouldn't recognize that anyway.
The problem might be inherent to MP3's though. Header information is still stored as binary information in the file, changing the amount of bits in the file, therefore the hash (as read by any hashing system I'm aware of.) If there were a way to store the header text such that it doesn't affect the filesize, current P2P protocols/software might already be able to do this...
errrrr...sorry. I need to proofread better. Instead of saying "I think this is just the next natural extension for Bittorrent..." I meant to say "next natural extension for Gnutella."
--beckerist
I read this as being less effective for bittorrent (as your assumption is correct, DHT basically does this on its own already) and more effective for Gnutella. While the gnutella network is maturing to a level past the Bearshare/Limewire days, there are still inherent problems with download speeds simply because a mechanism like DHT (or as the article calls it SET) doesn't currently exist. Are there problems with DHT? Absolutely, I get node errors all the time in Bittyrant. I think this is just the next natural extension for Bittorrent (or distributed FTP, etc)
The idea is that the song "Girl Talk - Once Again" might be represented as "girltalk-onceagain" "girl talk - once again" "GirlTalk - Once Again" "01-once again.mp3" "OnceAgain.mp3"
Being that the only difference is just the text (ID3, ID3-2) tags, the rest of the song is exactly the same, so why can't you use that as a download source too? I personally organize all of my music, and because of this P2P programs believe that it's an entirely new file, when really it was just renamed and the header information was changed (generally to be grammatically correct.)</summary>
Unless you're being dropped yourself, I doubt you'd have to worry about it too! I had a 30 gb Creative Xen MP3 player that, after having dropped it from my lap to the ground ONCE (getting out of my car), busted it. (It now rattles and won't boot...) So personally I've had to use flash drive mp3 players, I can't afford to bust another one!
Do I hear 100$?
Unless you work for a company that doesn't allow external web-browsing during hours... In which case I recommend ANYTHING by O'Reilly.
it's extremely rare to come across anyone on any forum...</lie>
<truth>it's extremely rare to come across anyone on any forum that starts with an S and ends with a "lashdot"</truth>
(Score: 4, Funny)
The RIAA has modpoints?
I was mostly referring to their home environments. No one uses Vista here at work, even in Virtual Images. Hell, we're still paying Server 2003 licensing fees...
That's my point, but with those same numbers that means 40% of the populace has run Vista in a virtual environment (which clearly can't be the case!) I was just looking for anyone else's insight as to the accuracy of my inquiry!
Meanwhile, Vista is rising, the article says, with just over 2% of computers connected to the Internet using the new Windows OS.
I wonder how many of these are just virtual images... Realistically it's probably a negligible number, but of the more than 20 people in my department here at work that I just polled, 1 of them uses Vista as their production environment, and 8 of them said they've dabbled with it in a virtual image. Granted I work in the tech industry so my percentages are probably a bit skewed...
You mean THIS dang thong?
:-)
...or THIS one?
...or blue, or purple, or orange, or brown, or yellow, or pink, or camouflage, or transparent...
Unfortunately (or fortunately), this might give the MPAA ideas about courtesy in theaters...
you support polymorphism?
What are you talking about? This REAL guy wants to sell me viagra! This REAL chick totally wants to bone me, now that that other REAL guy sold me some p3n15 3Nl4Rg3m3nt and that OTHER REAL dude is going to teach me how to buy and sell priceless trinkets! I also heard those two guys REALLY wanted a REAL PSP for Xmas (and it's all they wanted!) Who says they're not real? They're certainly real to me!
This wasn't an accusation. I don't read anything indicating they are confident that it would work on the general release of Vista, but common sense says that (at least this part of) the software has not changed enough between RC2 and general release to warrant making anything outside of minor changes in the application for it to work. As this exploit wasn't discovered before Vista was released generally, MS hasn't had time to issue a new "security patch" (which they will ultimately do.) I'd be very surprised if they even knew this loophole existed until someone read it on Slashdot this morning.
How is that at all relevant? And still has nothing to do with water!
Google has tons of dupes...