Bruce, why not change the license to something more agreeable with the general public. At least that way, you'd help keep the honest guys honest.... and also make using and modifying busybox related stuff all that more easier and inviting.
I'm guessing you live in Coonabarabran
I think he should fix the monstrosity that is Freenet before he jumps onto other things.
As a member of the NPT Iran is well within its rights to posses the outlined technologies. The article clearly omits the fact that such capabilities can also lead to better yeilds from civilian/peaceful uses of nuclear technology.
I believe the adage of "it takes one to know one" can be attributed to people claiming Iran intends to use such technologies for aggressive non-peaceful purposes.
Because some men tend to take "a lot" of coffee breaks in their cars, each time taking a shoe full of $1 and $2 coins with them....
or else the problem is not truly resolvable. The other way is to
assume all the similar images come from the same source, if so then
its as simple as looking at the compression level in the file format
and the various levels of scaling applied to the lossy images.
Compatibility and conformance with standards (TR1), also going that extra step forward and implementing some of the upcoming 0x features I can truly say that since VS05 MS has gone a long way. WRT Language/IDE/Debug integration nothing comes close in the OSS world for the C++ language (and please don't say CDT, I've tried using 5 and it can't even do the simple C++ syntax properly let alone templates or even simple metaprograms).
Disappointing/sad thing with VS10 is that a lot of the interesting source code metric/analysis stuff is only available for C++\CLI. For pure C++ code metrics I've been pinning my hopes for the past 5 years on someone getting around to implementing to-do #6 of doxygen.
I believe they sold more Delphi licenses than turbo pascal. Furthermore I think Delphi was the the impetus at Microsoft for things like the MS developing a true IDE, J++/visual J and finally C# which btw was architected by the very same guy that did Delphi.
The biggest shame was when at the end Borland tried to sell their compiler business for roughly $1b no one wanted it, eventually some veritably unknown company called Embarcadero made an offer for $24m for the business and that was the end of that.
Lesson of the day: Regardless of how good/essential the products you deliver may have been, bad management and poor future insight can make you crash and burn.
I'm interested in knowing how these numbers like $250m and $700m come about. I see absolutely no monetary value in such services, even the so-called ad-revenue or social data mining models all seem like big loss harbours rather than sources of profit.
Are we back to the late 90s "no business model yet possible future earning potential" view of businesses?
B) that it still worked that way even with Ted's idiotic workaround. It's mathematically impossible to code a hash there which doesn't cause the same collisions anyway, and sure enough Ted's produced them too.
ever heard of perfect hash functions for specific sets of data? - not practical in most cases but definitely mathematically possible.
Does no one remember the trouble those guys go into in their last episode...?
Some of the most fundamental materials used in creating ICs and LCDs are beginning to run out in their natural form (some expected to be depleted as early as 2015), hence recycling old parts and R&D into using other materials may set, as far as manufacturing is concerned, some technologies back to the early 90s.
How can any rational person assume future computing technologies will be "Ultra Cheap"? Case in point, we've been making cars for nearly 100 years, the "ultra cheap" cars are the rust buckets from 2 decades ago. In most of the 1st world a new small hatchback like vehicle is roughly 25% the average annual salary, and this has been the case for the last 40+ years regardless of all the manufacturing and design advances that have come about and increase in demand for such simple models.
they should try thinning out the form factor a bit, at least something on the scale of an iphone or or better, with a screen the size of a piece of a4 with no more than 3mm case border.
Mathematically anything is feasible, however if you place a real-world constraint such as it requiring an implementation then that greatly narrows the field down.
Furthermore one of the judging factors is the speed and portability of the algorithm upon a wide variety of commonly used platforms - it doesn't make sense to come up with a super-cool hash function that only works well on say an x86.
The short of it is that people make mistakes from time to time, and it is true that perfection is an important factor in crypto-code so the submitters should have been more thorough, From the article it seems that the overwhelming majority of them were - which is a positive.
Waste not, get your budget cut next year.
