... and limit (either through new laws or good judicial common sense) tracking by law enforcement to the same sorts of situations in which they would otherwise install a GPS tracker on your car.
Hell no! Based on recent events I would want a lot more protection that just this.
Hate that last-minute slight swerve to dodge a thrown tyre-tread that I couldn't see until the swerve.
Here's a hint. You're following too closely.
...and they'll figure out a way to make the windscreen blue.
But the windscreen will only turn blue in the case of a crash.
For example, if you want to use your Gmail account with military-grade security that neither NSA can read, just install Penango in your browser and send messages encrypted - this solution is also used by US military and corporations. Penango does not hold any of your private information and/or your keys - so they can not be forced by anybody to give out your secret.. simply because they do not have it!!!! For more info, go to http://www.penango.com/
Except that penango is not really compatible with any current browser releases except Internet Explorer. Firefox is supported, but only up to version 20. The current release is version 23.
What about WebP?
Comparing WebP to APNG is like comparing Apples and Oranges. WebP is an up-and-coming web oriented image format from google. Part of the WebP standard mentions animation. WebP however does not currently have anything more than a sample implementation, and WebP will probably never be backported to older devices and software and may never be ported to a lot of software that already supports PNG. This means that if you start using WebP now you can expect a lot of people to not be able to view your images at all - whereas with APNG they will at worst simply see the first or fallback frame.
WebP solves different issues and has a variety of features, such as lossy compression profiles and filters that simply don't apply to PNG and will not be part of the simple APNG standard [though it could be noted these features and more were in MNG]. APNG and WebP are simply different, and though they solve some of the same problems they are not really competing formats. Ideally we'd like to see wide spread adoption of both formats on just about everything in the future - but we can have and use APNG right now.
What about MNG?
If APNG is a screwdriver MNG is a Swiss Army Knife with all sorts of little tools, one of which being a screwdriver head that is sort of awkward and difficult to use. MNG has a lot of compelling features that sound great but the reality is all these features made MNG difficult to implement. MNG isn't a simple [screwdriver] "frame based" format. Instead it has a bunch of small embedded tools [Swiss Army Knife] to create animations. For example it contains individual image objects/sprites and these are manipulated through some sort of animation instruction system that is embedded in the image - and variations of sprites are stored as delta fragments, and there's additional support for these fragments to be in transparent JPG which is a questionable standard on its own and seems self defeating in a PNG based standard...? If you want just a frame based animated image APNG does the job and is simpler, if you want a complex format that has individual image fragments and scripted action then SVG+SMIL is your solution; MNG is too complex to outdo APNG and too inflexible to outdo SVG+SMIL.
Advances in computation power alone will never break encryption. Ever. There is no boundary. An encryption can always just create larger keys.
Incorrect for the most part. First, algorithms that used fixed length keys, such as DES, can and do fall to increases in computational power. Second, even with algorithms that use a variable length key, improvements in computational power can break it. If I can capture an encrypted file today, it may be that in five years I can brute force that file open due to computational advances. There is nothing that you can do to increase the key length once I have a copy of the file. The important thing when choosing a key length is to make sure that by the time such an attack is feasible, the data protected is no longer valuable. The only exception that I can think of is a One Time Pad. No amount of computational power can help decrypt a OTP in theory. Implementation is always a different story however.
How could Xerox make copiers for this length of time and not have a proofreading algorithm that works with a super-resolution scan & no interpolation to "machine check" the final commercial copier as a way of quickly finding errors?
Internatlly(sic), Xerox engineering had to know they were "correcting" pixels, rather than just "copying" them, so how did they verify their software?
They do know about it.
This campaign will receive all funds raised even if it does not reach its goal. Funding duration: August 03, 2013 - September 10, 2013 (11:59pm PT).
Second, there seems to be a bit of a contradiction on the timeline for this funding. The developers mention the following:
Our goal is to fund two to three man-years of full time work on Mailpile, with our first milestone in January 2014, when we will deliver an alpha version
Yet later they say (emphasis mine)
This is the Mailpile business model. As long as members of our community are willing to fund development (we will ask you to renew your membership in a years' time), we will dedicate ourselves to Mailpile and build the secure web-mail client you want.
Regardless of these inconsistencies, If they stick to the schedule then there should be a stable 1.0 release out during the first year of funding/development.
Following our alpha release, we will spend another 6-9 months fixing bugs, fleshing out features, responding to user feedback and getting the user interface translated to languages other than English. Our goal is to have a stable 1.0 release ready in the summer of 2014.
4. they are trying to justify the massive amount of money that has been put into pointless SWAT teams.
Here is a recent article in the WSJ that discusses this.
"I just want to be a good engineer." -- Steve Wozniak, co-founder of Apple Computer, concluding his keynote speech at the 1988 AppleFest