It is inferred that all Time Lords fighting in the Time War were given a full set of Regenerations. Hence we can expect to see more Doctors in the future. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Time_War_(Doctor_Who)#Progression
Encryption isn't falling to Moore's Law, it's falling to weaknesses in the encryption algorithm (the bit that mere humans came up with). AFAIK all the recent in-roads to DES, 3DES, WPA with TKIP have been through faults in the encryption.
What I'm saying is that from a weakness being found, within a few years (or even months), you have scripts that can be run on Amazon EC2 and soon the question is how much money do you want to spend on getting the SSD cracked in a reasonable time.
Agree completely (and I should have RTFA better rather than skimming it); any volume of encrypted data is vulnerable to cryptanalysis. You only defense is time and strength of the encryption.
If the data is really sensitive (should never see the light of day) then destruction IS the only defense. If the data is sensitive but in a few years will be meaningless (commercial details etc) then most modern crypto should suffice to keep it secure for the next few years if configured correctly.
I think the main fear is with SSDs entering mainstream then data that shouldn't be publicly available is being stored on them (personal details from banks and government) that might be lost/stolen with the laptop.
Encryption is a solution that would work. However one of the main reasons for people using SSDs is the performance boost. (Software) Encryption would give a (slight) overhead which might cancel out the benefits of the drive.
Also you need to encrypt the drive FROM THE START. Once data is put down unencrypted in the drive it is potentially retrievable even if you've then encrypted the volume on top.
(Hate to use wikipedia as a resource but... http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Solid-state_drive#Comparison_of_SSD_with_hard_disk_drives )
So your encryption choices are either software encryption right from the first build or an SSD with hardware based encryption built in (which is available but not sure how common it is).
Hello Joe Tie. (567096), sorry I'm a bit late to this conversation.
I'm one of the idiotic persons shipped in for the studio audience of Red Dwarf (Series 6 Episode 6).
I will say it was my first and only time in the audience in a comedy show providing the laughter track. (I was in the audience for a few other shows but nothing comedy).
Firstly the episode we saw was significantly different to the episode that was screen on TV. They replaced the cliff hanger ending with a mild joke about recycled urine giving you limescale on the top lip. I estimate that around 20-30% of the episode was changed for broadcast. They got us in for the laughs and they obviously switched bits around, re-edited for broadcast.
A large percentage of the audience had actually been in the audience for all 5 previous episodes in the series.
Do I object that we didn't see the finished episode? No, what we saw was really funny.
Do I object that my laughter was possibly reused for scenes I never saw (e.g. the cliffhanger)? No,
Something that maybe Robert Llewellyn has missed out was the internet was well established around the geek community (key audience group of Red Dwarf) alt.tv.red-dwarf newsgroup (and others) was popular and subscribed to (though I can't confirm there was a Red Dwarf based newsgroup at the time of my studio audience experience)
The information we went away with was enough for us to give someone a "TV guide" style synopsis of the episode, and we did! We got all our friends to watch it because "we'd been in the audience!"
Will things like Twitter & mobile camera phones upset the jokes... I suspect filming will be frowned upon and actively policed & the jokes will not really translate across to Twitter. Well except one...
They are dead Dave all dead. Dave they are all dead. Dead all they are Dave etc. etc..
I feel sad for his family as well. The guy was a magnificent patron to charities especially local ones in his area and Help For Heroes. He donated well above his weight from what I've read.
Bicycles do at least as much as a Segway does for most people, and they're a lot cheaper. The Segway tried to fill a niche that didn't really exist -- it isn't the lack of a small, exposed personal transport machine that keeps people in their cars.
It's pity that the useful spin off of the Segway. The iBot mobility system, likewise didn't take off. It might have changed dramatically the life of disabled people. However there wasn't the demand. That was a case of the Segway technology filling a niche.
These vacuum delivery systems for cash are quite often decades old. I remember seeing them in the 70s as a kid (in other stores). We could be talking about a legacy system here. In 1956 they had 199 stores (according to their company history translated by Google).
We're looking at an old system that someone is exploiting a inherent weakness in and creating a solution/fix for it would cost a lot or require the retiring of the system. Similar to the problems with legacy old IT systems.