Comment Re: It's even easier than that (Score 1) 110
They may not be chosen randomly, but they are indistinguishable from random if you don't have the encryption keys.
They may not be chosen randomly, but they are indistinguishable from random if you don't have the encryption keys.
This.
Ironically, saying people matter more than process is pretty much what the Agile manifesto says.
In the UK at least, turns out there is no amazon prime on the roku. There's a lengthy forum filled with annoyed customers cancelling prime because of that. I was one of them.
And I'm not installing their app store to watch it on Android.
Bye bye prime!
You're welcome. And you're doing a better job than most of the EA forums I lurked on for years
Just want to say thank you for your clear and patient explanations of what an Enterprise Architect does. Getting informed and intelligent comments seem to be increasingly rare these days. It gives me hope there is a reason to keep reading this site.
Well, OTP also ultimately requires a *very* classical basis of trust to authenticate communication partners!
Keeping a smaller secret you can re-use to establish an extremely secure session seems a better proposition than keeping a very large amount of difficult to transport data which, if compromised also breaks all prior and future communications.
But we have pretty reasonable key agreement protocols right now... I'm wondering how vulnerable they are to quantum computers...
I believe hidden variable theories still aren't entirely ruled out, but you'd have to have non-local variables.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/...
Either way, the experiments show that reality isn't explained by a deterministic bunch of particles bouncing around space in time.
It doesn't work like that, the parent poster is right - you cannot send information using quantum entanglement.
If you measure a property of an entangled particle, then *you* know the other particle has the complementary property. This doesn't help the man on the submarine, or vice versa. He will measure his property and see a value, and know that *you* have the complementary property to his.
But since you can't fix the result of the measurements in any way, each measurement is just an independent random value for both of you. You just know what the other guy will find when he looks.
While I agree with a lot of what you say, the obvious solution is that installers should *not* run as Admin, but as a user with only the permissions required to install software for a normal user. Certainly not with permissions to do anything it likes on the system, and particularly not to change existing security settings.
This is actually one of the biggest potential advantages of the Windows security model over Unix and Linux. There is no god-like root user with a complete pass to do anything it likes. Even Admin's permissions can be altered (although Admin can put them back again if it likes). And the security model is much more fine-grained (and therefore complex, so nobody uses it to its full advantage).
Of course, it won't surprise me to learn that most installers do run as Admin, as you claim. I'm mostly on Linux these days, so I'm not fully up to speed on the Windows world any more...
I didn't know you, but I felt I did.
Yes, my son has an Android tablet, and we use the restricted account for him. He can't install software, pay for things in apps, or access youtube or a web browser. It's safe for him to play the games I've set up for him - many of which require internet access. And he can't run up a huge bill accidentally.
Before Restricted accounts existed, I used a thing called Kids Mode for a while. This also worked quite well, but the interface was much less usable than vanilla Android.
First actually helpful post!
As a parent of a 5 year old who currently has no unsupervised web access, I'm painfully aware that this will not last. He can currently access curated content from the internet in some games without my supervision. He will need web access in the not too distant future. Trust, showing them how to be safe, and how to find things that actually interest them, is clearly the way forward.
(As an aside to those who think parenting equals full time supervision... I don't think any of you actually have kids.)
I actually spent quite some time recently looking for non-smart TVs... and couldn't find any at all I wanted. So I bought an LG smart TV.
During the install, I had to agree to the Terms and Conditions and the Privacy Policy. There was also a Viewing agreement that says I agree to them monitoring what I watch, what buttons I push, and so on. I didn't agree to that one. There was also another one I can't recall, which I also didn't agree to. I think that one was about letting them insert advertising.
The TV itself is lovely, and the smart features are actually nicely designed, responsive, and worth having. But not worth giving up my privacy for and certainly not to let them foist more adverts on me.
So I disconnected it from the internet, and so it shall remain.
"Gravitation cannot be held responsible for people falling in love." -- Albert Einstein