You should have finished your post with stupid ebonic phrases like 'dogg' and 'flat schooled' instead of began it with them.
Where as you may have had an argument before, I doubt anyone will take you seriously now. Maybe you should revise your hip vocab not to copy something associated with the extremely uneducated.
I think bash.org said it right here:
<Sabboth> what the fuck does that mean in english? you should understand that having a day job precludes me from 'keeping it real' and as such, I lack a certain familiarity with the language of the 'streets' as it were.
No but skype IM does rock. The IM's are encrypted. The file transfers are also, in addition to beeing a direct connection. Excellent NAT traversal...really a good client on the whole. I dont group my contact list except for online/offline so not such a big deal for me...plus it is for linux!
With encryption for msn/gaim i've always used simp, as have my friends. So it works out (www.secway.fr no affil)
South beach i suggested because it is a milder atkins style diet. Low carbs but much more variety and some more carbs so your body doesnt go into total shock.
No doubt i will be moderated down for this because of all the fat moderators who cant lose weight and love to blame it on genetics but its gotta be said..
If you use up more energy than you are takin in, you lose weight, it is that simple. There are a million excersizes you can do that dont involve your knees or goes very easy on them... it really just sounds like an excuse to be lazy and not work off the weight.
Try an atkins/south beach style diet with a light excersize regiment (push ups? sit ups? those circular motion cross country style machines? make yourself sweat..lots!)
Metabolism will affect how fast energy might burn, but doing certain things takes certain amounts of energy. Eat less and excersize more and quit making up excuses.
(ps im not a guy who cant put on weight...i'm at 190lbs and ive been heavier and lighter..food and excesize does make a big difference)
Is this a standard of some kind? Or just something that the firefox devs decided to throw in? Because it seems to me that it really isnt that much different than proprietary IE tags that break cross-browser compatibility to use.
Actually I was kind of misleading. As long as it is conducting it will short the signal and make it bounce, grounded or not. A faraday cage, grounded or not, will shield signals in both directions. At my friends work (electronics technologist) their faraday cage is a double design. Both are floating at different electrical potentials because of the way the lighting is set up inside.
A faraday cage typically has holes so air and stuff can get in, and you can see in/out. Low frequencies will allow larger holes. The exact percentage of the wavelength escapes me now, but I believe the permiability becomes signifigant when the holes are 1/20th the wavelength.
And yes, the attenuation as seen from the other side of the cage from the transmitter is a factor of (basically) how conductive the cage is. So a thicker metal will see more attenuation (more volume, less resistance..therefore more conductivity) This also means an aluminum cage would be less effective than a copper or silver cage, but you will find in terms of RF that unless the power is very high, the attenuation is near total.
You are mostly correct. There are both active and passive RFID technologies. The passive RFID has no power source of its own, and draws its power from the incoming signal. So yes if faraday cages were unidirectional then RFID would still not work. Since faraday cages allow NO rf in any direction, it doubly wouldnt work:)
I am not sure how it works relative to Gauss's law, it has been a long while since school and working in RF is sometimes a lot of guesswork to go with the theory, but I will try to explain it this way...
In the RF world if you have a perfect short circuit between the transmitting element and ground, or a perfect open circuit, you will have a perfect 100% reflection. Free space has a certain resistance to RF, and to avoid reflections, antennas match resistances between your system and free space (and back again).
If you have a grounded metal surface, this acts like a (near) perfect short to ground. So in RF it will act like a mirror, reflecting any RF that hits it. This is the reason something like a satellite dish works. It is an antenna with a grounded reflector behind it reflecting all the energy in one direction.
In the case of the faraday cage, the whole thing is grounded. If you transmit RF inside of it, the energy will just keep bouncing off the walls untill free-space loss and other losses reduce the signal to nothing. Outside of the cage you will not see any energy. Basically it creates the worst possible translation from the transmitter to free space and is therefore the worst antenna you could build.
In practice I've seen numerous uses of faraday cages built inside buildings to keep tests involving high powered RF from damaging or interfering with property in other parts of the building. So theory aside, I can attest that they do work to isolate equipment in both directions.
Also, there is a faraday cage inside every microwave oven keeping the 2.4 GHz RF from getting out. And every piece of waveguide transmission line is also the same thing. The signal bounces around untill it reaches the other end.
Actually, beeing an electrical engineer, I can tell you that aluminum or tin would be an equally effective shield for RFID or any other frequency in which it is relativly large enough. (Relative to the wavelength used by the transmitting device..in the case of RFID it can use anything from 52 mm to 2398 m. No matter the frequency, encasing an entire object in metal foil will block its RF output as explained loosely below.)
If you wrap any RF transmitting device in tin OR aluminum foil, you are going to completely shield the device and no RF will get in or out because the foil would act as a farady cage.
This is because aluminum conducts electricity just fine, and as RF is composed of electro-magnetet waves, a solid conducting surface will act as a ground (short) and bounce the signal. If there is no way for the signal to escape, it wont.
Any electrically conductive material would have this property. You could (and it has been done many times) make a faraday cage out of aluminum just as easily as steel or tin. Aluminum of course only has about 60 percent of the electrical conductivity of copper so copper (actually silver but obviously too expensive) would be the ideal material, but for weak signals like RFID it is irrelivant and both would work fine.
Of course they arent using diffie hellman exchange because they are using a pub/priv RSA key system to exchange the symetric AES keys. This is much more secure than a DH exchange. (not vuln to man-in-the-middle like DH can be)
Been said once, and now i've got to say it again...the maker of skype had NOTHING to do with the kazaa you are thinking of. They sold Kazaa long before any of the spyware etc was put into it.
From wikipedia:
In November 2001, the court ordered Kazaa's owners to take steps to prevent its users from violating copyrights or else pay a heavy fine. Consumer Empowerment responded by selling the Kazaa application to a complicated mesh of offshore companies, primarily Sharman Networks, headquartered in Australia and incorporated in Vanuatu.
"Skype uses AES (Advanced Encryption Standard) - also known as Rijndel - which is also used by U.S. Government organizations to protect sensitive information. Skype uses 256-bit encryption, which has a total of 1.1 x 10^77 possible keys, in order to actively encrypt the data in each Skype call or instant message. Skype uses 1536 to 2048 bit RSA to negotiate symmetric AES keys. User public keys are certified by Skype server at login."
So, assuming the skype server has not been compromised, and the implementation isnt horribly wrong somehow...skype is neither vulnerable to man in the middle attacks, nor is it using any kind of weak or propriatary encryption.
Both of you have very obviously been trolled. Not a single one of those statements is true (except maybe the last one:) )
Skype is for windows as well as a few other OS's, but does NOT support alsa (but they recently said they were wokring on it in the skype linux forum)
For audio it uses one of two codecs, decided at the time the call is placed, and none of them are that bad. I would put the quality quite a bit better than any 'nice clear phone line' since the bandwidth is much higher.
The troll is obviously someone who uses and likes skype, hes just having a bit of fun with you guys.
True but as the post above mentions, it will probably be used to exchange a symmetric key with total security then not be used again untill next time a key needs exchanging. So a DOS -could- be effective but by the time the thing is needed again, engineers, fbi, whoever can be sent to remove the device to exchnage another key.
Considering some forms of encryption cannot realistically be broken in any kind of human time-frame, this is a pretty good overall idea i think:)
Sure the scheme itself loosely does this, but you can also use the public key to encrypt anything, without even distributing it.
With quantum 'encryption' all you are doing is sending photons down a optic line in such a way that if they are intercepted, you will know about it. There is no actual encryption going on..at all.
Funny i was going to reply, but you situation is IDENTICAL to mine (9800 pro...perf sucked, got 6600 gt...amazing difference even thought the windows benches on most games are fairly close..not so in linux) with an identical result..so ill just say...
Slashdot Mirror
You should have finished your post with stupid ebonic phrases like 'dogg' and 'flat schooled' instead of began it with them.
Where as you may have had an argument before, I doubt anyone will take you seriously now. Maybe you should revise your hip vocab not to copy something associated with the extremely uneducated.
I think bash.org said it right here:
<Sabboth> what the fuck does that mean in english? you should understand that having a day job precludes me from 'keeping it real' and as such, I lack a certain familiarity with the language of the 'streets' as it were.
No but skype IM does rock. The IM's are encrypted. The file transfers are also, in addition to beeing a direct connection. Excellent NAT traversal...really a good client on the whole. I dont group my contact list except for online/offline so not such a big deal for me...plus it is for linux!
With encryption for msn/gaim i've always used simp, as have my friends. So it works out (www.secway.fr no affil)
So will a athlon X2. At least it has all the technical requirements. Runs fine on a hacked OSX86.
Total agreement to everything you said :)
South beach i suggested because it is a milder atkins style diet. Low carbs but much more variety and some more carbs so your body doesnt go into total shock.
Read this post he explains it very well:
5 &cid=14136592
http://science.slashdot.org/comments.pl?sid=16962
No doubt i will be moderated down for this because of all the fat moderators who cant lose weight and love to blame it on genetics but its gotta be said..
If you use up more energy than you are takin in, you lose weight, it is that simple. There are a million excersizes you can do that dont involve your knees or goes very easy on them... it really just sounds like an excuse to be lazy and not work off the weight.
Try an atkins/south beach style diet with a light excersize regiment (push ups? sit ups? those circular motion cross country style machines? make yourself sweat..lots!)
Metabolism will affect how fast energy might burn, but doing certain things takes certain amounts of energy. Eat less and excersize more and quit making up excuses.
(ps im not a guy who cant put on weight...i'm at 190lbs and ive been heavier and lighter..food and excesize does make a big difference)
mram
Is this a standard of some kind? Or just something that the firefox devs decided to throw in? Because it seems to me that it really isnt that much different than proprietary IE tags that break cross-browser compatibility to use.
True, but a case could be made that calling is a CD when it clearly doesnt conform to the standard is some kind of false advertising etc.
Oh, of course I am not refering to DC. I am speaking strictly RF.
Actually I was kind of misleading. As long as it is conducting it will short the signal and make it bounce, grounded or not. A faraday cage, grounded or not, will shield signals in both directions. At my friends work (electronics technologist) their faraday cage is a double design. Both are floating at different electrical potentials because of the way the lighting is set up inside.
A faraday cage typically has holes so air and stuff can get in, and you can see in/out. Low frequencies will allow larger holes. The exact percentage of the wavelength escapes me now, but I believe the permiability becomes signifigant when the holes are 1/20th the wavelength.
And yes, the attenuation as seen from the other side of the cage from the transmitter is a factor of (basically) how conductive the cage is. So a thicker metal will see more attenuation (more volume, less resistance..therefore more conductivity) This also means an aluminum cage would be less effective than a copper or silver cage, but you will find in terms of RF that unless the power is very high, the attenuation is near total.
You are mostly correct. There are both active and passive RFID technologies. The passive RFID has no power source of its own, and draws its power from the incoming signal. So yes if faraday cages were unidirectional then RFID would still not work. Since faraday cages allow NO rf in any direction, it doubly wouldnt work :)
I am not sure how it works relative to Gauss's law, it has been a long while since school and working in RF is sometimes a lot of guesswork to go with the theory, but I will try to explain it this way...
In the RF world if you have a perfect short circuit between the transmitting element and ground, or a perfect open circuit, you will have a perfect 100% reflection. Free space has a certain resistance to RF, and to avoid reflections, antennas match resistances between your system and free space (and back again).
If you have a grounded metal surface, this acts like a (near) perfect short to ground. So in RF it will act like a mirror, reflecting any RF that hits it. This is the reason something like a satellite dish works. It is an antenna with a grounded reflector behind it reflecting all the energy in one direction.
In the case of the faraday cage, the whole thing is grounded. If you transmit RF inside of it, the energy will just keep bouncing off the walls untill free-space loss and other losses reduce the signal to nothing. Outside of the cage you will not see any energy. Basically it creates the worst possible translation from the transmitter to free space and is therefore the worst antenna you could build.
In practice I've seen numerous uses of faraday cages built inside buildings to keep tests involving high powered RF from damaging or interfering with property in other parts of the building. So theory aside, I can attest that they do work to isolate equipment in both directions.
Also, there is a faraday cage inside every microwave oven keeping the 2.4 GHz RF from getting out. And every piece of waveguide transmission line is also the same thing. The signal bounces around untill it reaches the other end.
Actually, beeing an electrical engineer, I can tell you that aluminum or tin would be an equally effective shield for RFID or any other frequency in which it is relativly large enough. (Relative to the wavelength used by the transmitting device..in the case of RFID it can use anything from 52 mm to 2398 m. No matter the frequency, encasing an entire object in metal foil will block its RF output as explained loosely below.)
If you wrap any RF transmitting device in tin OR aluminum foil, you are going to completely shield the device and no RF will get in or out because the foil would act as a farady cage.
This is because aluminum conducts electricity just fine, and as RF is composed of electro-magnetet waves, a solid conducting surface will act as a ground (short) and bounce the signal. If there is no way for the signal to escape, it wont.
Any electrically conductive material would have this property. You could (and it has been done many times) make a faraday cage out of aluminum just as easily as steel or tin. Aluminum of course only has about 60 percent of the electrical conductivity of copper so copper (actually silver but obviously too expensive) would be the ideal material, but for weak signals like RFID it is irrelivant and both would work fine.
Hey, slashdot looked deep into my soul, and assigned me a number based upon the order in which i joined.
Actually, it is only needed to run Rosetta. (The ppc emulation layer for OSX86. SSE2 will run everything else fine.
I agree with you except for some stuff.
If they got my private key they would still need my password, which i think is reasonably strong.
What i agree with you on is that skype's server is totally an unknown so who knows how they implemented their key exchange etc.
Of course they arent using diffie hellman exchange because they are using a pub/priv RSA key system to exchange the symetric AES keys. This is much more secure than a DH exchange. (not vuln to man-in-the-middle like DH can be)
Been said once, and now i've got to say it again...the maker of skype had NOTHING to do with the kazaa you are thinking of. They sold Kazaa long before any of the spyware etc was put into it.
From wikipedia:
In November 2001, the court ordered Kazaa's owners to take steps to prevent its users from violating copyrights or else pay a heavy fine. Consumer Empowerment responded by selling the Kazaa application to a complicated mesh of offshore companies, primarily Sharman Networks, headquartered in Australia and incorporated in Vanuatu.
Actually, skype does use AES-256.
From the site:
"Skype uses AES (Advanced Encryption Standard) - also known as Rijndel - which is also used by U.S. Government organizations to protect sensitive information. Skype uses 256-bit encryption, which has a total of 1.1 x 10^77 possible keys, in order to actively encrypt the data in each Skype call or instant message. Skype uses 1536 to 2048 bit RSA to negotiate symmetric AES keys. User public keys are certified by Skype server at login."
So, assuming the skype server has not been compromised, and the implementation isnt horribly wrong somehow...skype is neither vulnerable to man in the middle attacks, nor is it using any kind of weak or propriatary encryption.
Both of you have very obviously been trolled. Not a single one of those statements is true (except maybe the last one :) )
Skype is for windows as well as a few other OS's, but does NOT support alsa (but they recently said they were wokring on it in the skype linux forum)
For audio it uses one of two codecs, decided at the time the call is placed, and none of them are that bad. I would put the quality quite a bit better than any 'nice clear phone line' since the bandwidth is much higher.
The troll is obviously someone who uses and likes skype, hes just having a bit of fun with you guys.
True but as the post above mentions, it will probably be used to exchange a symmetric key with total security then not be used again untill next time a key needs exchanging. So a DOS -could- be effective but by the time the thing is needed again, engineers, fbi, whoever can be sent to remove the device to exchnage another key.
:)
Considering some forms of encryption cannot realistically be broken in any kind of human time-frame, this is a pretty good overall idea i think
Sure the scheme itself loosely does this, but you can also use the public key to encrypt anything, without even distributing it.
With quantum 'encryption' all you are doing is sending photons down a optic line in such a way that if they are intercepted, you will know about it. There is no actual encryption going on..at all.
Not positive here, but I am not sure there really is such a thing as 'quantum encryption'
At least when most people say it, they seem to talk about using the laws of quantum physics to detect eavesdroppers on a fiber optic line.
Wikipedia's article on quantum cryptography seems to agree.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Quantum_cryptography
Funny i was going to reply, but you situation is IDENTICAL to mine (9800 pro...perf sucked, got 6600 gt...amazing difference even thought the windows benches on most games are fairly close..not so in linux) with an identical result..so ill just say...
;)
Mod parent up.