Forgot your password?
Close
typodupeerror

Comment Yes we do need it, just maybe not yet (Score 1) 143

by cwoollard (#41450669) Attached to: Schneier: We Don't Need SHA-3
The thing about security is that it is an on-going fight with those that want to cause mischief (or worse). You always need to do your best. That is why we need SHA3. Maybe it isn't required right now, but I am fairly sure that at some point we will need a new solution. Either because of flaws that have become known in a current system, increases in computing power which mean we need a new solution, or maybe something much worse. I would rather spend time coming up with a new solution now. Ironing out any flaws or issues in an open way. Than having to knock something up quickly to get out of a tricky situation. So we should all support this rather than sticking our head in the sand and thinking everything will be alright.
Government

Light Bulb Ban Produces Hoarding In EU, FUD In U.S. 1080

Posted by timothy from the top-down-is-the-current-paradigm dept.
Lucas123 writes "The very thought of losing that pear-shaped giver of warm, yellow light drove Europeans to hoard Edison's invention [Note: Or possibly Joseph Swan's invention; HT to eldavojohn.] as the EU's Sept. 1 ban on incandescent light bulbs approached. China's ban on incandescent lamps starts Oct. 1. And, in the U.S., the Energy Independence and Security Act (EISA) of 2007 effectively began banning the 100W bulb this year and will ban the most popular bulbs — the 75W, 60W and 40W screw-in incandescent bulbs --over the next two years. The end standard requires bulbs to use 65% less energy by 2020. But Republicans in Congress continue to fight the ban by hamstringing the energy efficiency standards through appropriations legislation, cutting off funds for the enforcement of the light bulb ban."

Slashdot Top Deals

"Our reruns are better than theirs." -- Nick at Nite

Close