Encryption is ALWAYS breakable by brute force. Question is how long does it take? Seconds? Hours? Months? Years? Decades? This is usually determined by key sizes. The longer the key, the longer it takes to brute force. (generally)
Chuck Norris can brute force a 256-bit key in the time it takes to blink his eyes.
I have no clue what all the above really means.... If you are saying that 256 bit keys are hard to break, I would concur. If you are saying that it would take a long time, I would again agree. However, if you look at "possible" it is totally possible to brute force a 256 bit key, it just takes TIME to do, LOTS of time OR lots of computers. Either way, it is perfectly possible... Now it may take a LOT of computers (more than are physically possible) or it may take a LONG time (more than we likely have before the sun destroys the earth) but that is all about being practical and not about being possible.
It's mathematically possible. It's humanly impossible. No human will ever build a machine using normal matter that is capable of it.
sugar: 50% fructose, 50% glucose
HFCS: 55% fructose, 45% glucose
zomg, clearly hfcs is the reason people are getting so much fatter.
It's not that simple.
Do a little reading about it. Your body has to expend energy/effort to break sugar into fructose + glucose, whereas with HFCS, the fructose and glucose are already separated and your body has immediate use of them. This is the kicker, and why HFCS is worse than sugar. Of course, even worse than HFCS is fruit juice that's high in fructose.
But it isn't linear, it is exponential...
It'd only be nice if you have a filing fetish. It's not useful. Any minor pleasure it might bring filing fetishists would be vastly outweighed by those ordinary phone users who lose applications.
That's a rather naive thing of you to say. Some of us have a hundred apps installed, and it's very useful to have them organized and be able to select them quickly with just a couple or three taps, rather than scrolling through dozens of pages of grids.
A good Waterfall approach gets 4x more done than any version of Agile
More to the point, when people use, "Google," as a verb, they mean to actually use Google, as opposed to using any brand of facial tissue available when saying, "Kleenex."
Exactly! You can't google something using Bing, for example. Not that you'd want to anyway. You can only google something using Google.
(Now I feel like I need to go wash my hands after mentioning Bing. Eww.)
Existing POS software for school cafeterias already can cross-reference the enrollment records and photos.
What exactly makes you think it's piece-of-shit software?
In reality, it turns out, 9:30 and 3:30 are safer.
Oh yeah? 9:30 and 3:30 are not mirror-opposites. Did you mean 9:30 and 2:30?