Posts by STOP_FORTH 746 posts • joined 21 Dec 2018
That doesn't really address the point. Even if two different hashes are compromised, using them both as separate hashes still gives some measure of assurance that the file has not been tampered with. If only one is compromised file integrity is guaranteed by the other. If both are compromised it may still be extremely difficult to find a hash collision for both.
I was merely using MD5 as an example.
My question really is - are two hashes more secure than one?
Some time ago I noticed that some Linux ISOs were being signed with two different types of hash - usually an MD5 and some type of SHA. Whilst I realise that this is not really applicable to OpenSSH, surely this is still a reasonable defence against hash collisions?
I'm not trying to minimise the inconvenience these things cause to astro-photographers but.....
Since there are going to be lots of them and we know their shape, size, altitude, velocity and position at any given time (OK, last one is less certain, they're LEOs)....
Could they be used for transit/occultation studies?
Unlike asteroids, they are not all whizzing around the ecliptic.
387 and 663 cover error correction. There may be some merit in these, but a few companies tried patenting Turbo codes for broadcasting some years ago and got their fingers burnt. (That clever bloke from Cambridge who wrote the alternative energy report showed that all Turbo codes were a subset of an existing error correcting scheme.)
283 seems to be a way of efficiently transmitting video encoding data. This may actually be novel.
The rest look rather over-broad, basically how do you get high bandwidth, time-critical stuff over a network. (DVD bitstreams? What?)
Look like typical US patents to me. Not sure this would fly in Europe. DVB standards are all FRAND based. Compression standards are a bit more confusing, because of the sheer number of researchers, overlapping ideas and not everybody agrees to licence stuff as FRAND.
Edit David MacKay was the prof. He showed that LDPC codes (invented/discovered by Gallager in 1960) were a superset of all Turbo codes. This wiped out a promising business model/technical blackmail scam overnight.
I don't have to answer your "one question". I don't live in a theocracy, you don't get to frame compulsory questions, or burn to death anyone who refuses to answer or who gives the wrong answer.
Your time is over. Take your absurd death cult with you. You are not forgiven.
I'm glad He understands predator/prey cycles. If His solution is the same as that produced by millions of years of evolution it just comes down to deciding which is the most likely explanation. Then we just have to decide which of the thousands of gods is the correct one.
They all seem pretty unconvincing to me, what is special about yours?
Here's the thing, putting the word "logical" into a sentence doesn't necessarily make it true.
God created everything, logically He is therefore nothing. See? Sounds profound, but means nothing.
You still haven't explained why he stuck nipples on most male mammals.
The Guy is obsessed with the things.
Also, why did He make so many types of beetle?
Yeah but, some folks say that without all that Wintel upgrade obsolescence nonsense there wouldn't have been so many discarded PCs for us to put Linux on!
In 1995 he wrote a book called "The Road Ahead". I read it. IIRC he didn't mention The Web at all, although there was some mention of the "information superhighway". It was hastily re-issued with extra sections on the information superhighway.
I saw Tim's first webpage in about 1992. I'm not saying I realised how big The Web was going to get (I had been working mostly in comms and was aware of LAN and WAN technologies and point-to-point protocols - it just looked like another damn' thing to learn about.)
By 1995, however, it was pretty clear that NetBEUI wasn't going to last.
Visionary, no!
Annoying, isn't it? Took me a few seconds to realise what they were, the skin colour helped.
I think this may be a UK thing. In Southern Europe they seem to be less squeamish. In Portugal and Italy their name for these things seems to be comprised of the local words for blood and orange.
Incidentally, why hasn't some boffin/plant-breeder developed a blood orange that is as easy to peel as a tangerine?
I've upvoted you anyway, but your body can certainly detect some forms of electromagnetic radiation. Microwaves will cause it to heat up, frequencies used for RADAR can give you cataracts (admittedly these could be very high power), gamma rays will just kill you deader than dead.
Not suggesting that these frequencies are anything like those used for mobile telephony. I also accept that the closer you are to a cellphone mast the less RF will be pumped into your head by your 'phone.
(Not claiming to be an RF guru but I have replaced the occasional "twit" in PCM transmitters.)
The Register - Independent news and views for the tech community. Part of Situation Publishing
Join our daily or weekly newsletters, subscribe to a specific section or set News alerts
SUBSCRIBE
Biting the hand that feeds IT © 1998–2020
