tskaiser

Indeed, but I cannot see how this addresses my question?

If the private key is only used for this purpose, and the cronjob as well as the key only reside on the server, is the security of the key then not a moot point if the server is breached? Genuinely curious.

As a Dane I'm a bit embarrassed to forget Janus Friis. Thank you for the correction and elaboration.

The original quote does fall apart, as most quotes do, upon closer inspection.

Say you can kill a man, but irregardless of the threat to their life said man would refuse any and all of your orders, who can then be said to have 'control'?

In the end control means the ability to influence outcomes. There are many metrics, and for some choice of metric the capability of destruction is control.

Skype (the company) was founded by Niklas Zennström, a swede. Skype (the software) was originally developed by estonians.

The company is what is pertinent to the discussion :)

Insofar none of us would want to suffer the consequences of such acts we cannot truly say we are capable of carrying them out.

It is what we mean when we claim someone is "incapable of <x>" such as murder. It does not mean they do not physically possess the means, but rather that they lack the psychological impetus to do so.

Telmore in Denmark (my current operator) first gave my subscription a price hike to "compensate" for the new roaming rules and then advertised that I could change to a "Denmark only" subscription for the old price.

It seems this option is now gone, however instead I now have separate data limits between Denmark and EU, with the latter being substantially less (only 5 GB, "calculated based on your subscription").

When I'm a bit less stressed I think I'll start shopping around for another operator :^)

iirc 3 introduced this service when it was announced that these regulations were underway.

But can ticking those boxes be mandatory for using a service? ie. "if you don't tick all three boxes you won't have access to Google Search"?

It is private, but it is not securely private, meaning it is a castle made of glass.

1118/1025 yields the multiplication factor, not the relative difference which is 9%.

And "code-staring" is also not simply running your hand over what "must" be right and continually asserting that the bug is "impossible". It is exactly the step of debugging that informs the hypothesis to be tested.

Experimenting and reasoning ("staring") solves two different problems: the "what" and the "why". Both are useful tools that can lift different tasks, and neither should be used to the exclusion of the other.

While it is an outlier it is also proof that it is a poor system of measurement.

Exactly, and the problem with DRM then becomes that, outside making the pirated content a superior product, it outright antagonizes the legitimate consumers.

In short money is poured into making the product less desirable by making it harder to acquire and consume legally.

Of course this is all lamenting how utterly bonkers DRM is conceptually. It still leaves the problem of pirates unaddressed. To survive in the digital age we need a debate about how to make a business model where this problem is a fact of reality rather than putting on blinders and saying it can be prevented.

DRM is fundamentally broken, compared to cryptography, in that by necessity everyone has access to the keys and the content has to be decrypted to be consumed. This makes DRM a client-side security issue with some pretty bad premises.

It is not a question of theory, but practice, DRM gets systematically broken all the time because of this.

The problem is that, at least for stuff like music and video, the "harder" part is an illusion for most popular stuff given the sheer size of the demography watching. Out of so many people there is bound to be quite a few who decides to do this right away anyway. Especially as the methods given can essentially be automated once you got the setup.

This means that DRM is, by all accounts, completely and utterly useless for the given media. Meanwhile people who desires to legitimately consume the content are hit by the side-effects of draconian DRM due to no fault of their own. It becomes easier to consume the pirated rather than the actual content, making the pirated content a superior product. Money doesn't even factor into this equation.

After a few hits at it, the realization dawns on our hero: "I can order cat food with this?"

This is cool, but I have a few criticisms:

- Flipping something over like that looks cool, but confuses the brain. At least it confused mine.

- Inconsistently calculating 1 or 2 elements at a time is confusing. Having 2 results calculated at a time simply put requires the recipient to untangle what is going on. This only gets worse when the recipient tries to do it themselves for examples with more columns in the right matrix.

Disclaimer: I am biased as I already know how to do matrix operations, and I visualize it differently. When multiplying by hand I translate the right matrix up, like in the animation, but do not flip it over. Then I calculate each element one at a time by taking the sum of products of the row and column that intersects over that element. Like so: http://i.imgur.com/D572zOI.png

As you can see I'm not much of a graphics artist.

Edit: actually, I think this would be really good if you "filter down" one column at a time, instead of moving the whole matrix down, so that it only calculates one element at a time, one column at a time. Means the animation will contain more steps, but I think that is actually to its benefit. Does this make sense?

Worse than destruction is undetected malicious modification. Say you decompress a specially crafted archieve which overwrites certain parts of the system enabling a backdoor. As a common user this would be blocked, but as root you'd probably not notice the malicious sideeffect.