What do you think is the best technological advance of 2004.

[Bo]

wasn't the discovery of the pentaquark also in 2004? my vote would go there then :hihi:

 

Bo

[Tim_Lou]

wait, pentaquark has been discovered in 2003,

got ya Bo :( :D :hyper: :D

http://physicsweb.org/articles/news/7/7/1/1

[simpleman]

I agree they are all worthy.but the one that tickles my fancy is the map of the 6 digrees. quantum physics is some what of a boggle to me and if they can some how simplify the complexity therum,I'm all ears. I still hold a high regard for the dreamer that says..." it has a pattern!"If you can believe that chaos has structure then what is chaos compared to the archaic whole? Hey I don't really claim to know, I'm still trying to achieve the backdoor effect(horrilbe at arithmetic actually,horrible! :eek: ) suggested books:" NEXUS" by Mark Buchanan, and Kaluza's"the fifth dimention,time and the complexity theory" .all that can be will be and if it exist here then why not there. Oh and by the way Kudos to the advocators of this web page , you are all my heroes. :)

[alexander]

looks like quantum cryptography is ahead of everything else on the list, i have myself finally voted. I think that quantum cryptography, even though not yet proved to be very safe, or very reliable, demonstrates the leap the the science has made in the 2004...

[TINNY]

I finally understood what quantum cryptography is all about after reading The Code Book. hehe..

but it still does not convince me about it's importance compared with the rest...

the see-saw battle between codemakers and codebreakers is never-ending. Though quantum cryptography is possibly absolutely secure, you just never know when someone springs up with some new dimension to code-breaking... some sort of wacky idea.

What I'm saying is that we should focus on correcting world society's worldview to that of peace and love where people do not bother about wiretapping and hacking etc. It is the worldview of quantum-relativistic reality where everything is one and one is everything... some sort of Monism I guess. but there'll be no need for secrecy and backstabbing. We'll live in a virtual utopia where every act is toward the perfection of all existence such that people would not want to sabotage anything etc. THAT'S MY IDEAL (typical of me eh?). But this is the truth. You have to realize that there is no future for humanity if we keep with the present worldview of competition, conflict and self-centredness. We are together as one, a unified whole of existence... blablabla..(Tinny wanders into his world of fantasy and utopia)

 

 

Ok. back to the topic. What I am getting at is, only those things that move toward perfection and harmony of existence is deemed the best technological advancement. A bit radical eh?

If my position is agreed upon, what wuld make the list of best technological advancements? ANy suggestoins? I think it would be more on ideas rather than objects... what think?

[alexander]

oh, no quantum cryptography is not absolutely, absolutely secure Tinny. You can still break it, but in order to do that, you need acess to one of the machines and capture the first generated key. Yes you might not be able to capture packets now, but having access to a machine you can surely save them and then decrypt them at your convenience using the primary key :confused:

[C1ay]

oh, no quantum cryptography is not absolutely, absolutely secure Tinny. You can still break it, but in order to do that, you need acess to one of the machines and capture the first generated key. Yes you might not be able to capture packets now, but having access to a machine you can surely save them and then decrypt them at your convenience using the primary key :confused:

 

Might I suggest you read this article. You will find quantum crytography much more secure than you realize. You cannot capture packets undetected in quantum crytography. The very act of tapping the line makes your presence known to the sender and the receiver. There is a short white paper here that explains this.

[alexander]

Might I suggest you read this article. You will find quantum crytography much more secure than you realize. You cannot capture packets undetected in quantum crytography. The very act of tapping the line makes your presence known to the sender and the receiver. There is a short white paper here that explains this.

I know how quantum cryptography network operates, i know what sister atoms are and why it is impossible to capture packets, while transferring, without being seen, but it does not mean that whatever information you send is 100% safe. Having a little trojan running on a machine that is sending or receiving data allows you to safely capture every packet going out, before it actually goes out, but after it is already encrypted and every packet coming in, before it is to be decrypted, and having the first generated key will allow you to decrypt the message at your convenience at home, but in order to do that that final computer needs to be connected to the insecure network, and have a volnurability that will allow to implement the sniffer program. Of course if you were to start capturing packets in the middle of the transfer, or anywhere in between the 2 systems sharing them, will not be of any help to you and might, and chances are will allow others to track you fairly easily, oh and you will not be able to decrypt the packets for the life of you :)

You also have to realize that QC networks have still not undergone much testing, and you have to understand that even though the idea sounds like it is supposed to be super secure, it does not mean that there could not be a simple volnurability in it that will allow you to tap in and listen without ever being seen. The only protection that hasnt been broken thriough code so far is the write protection on the floppy, but QCN night be the next big thing, not arguing, just saying :)

[C1ay]

and having the first generated key will allow you to decrypt the message at your convenience at home

 

Not necessarily true. Some of these systems change the key a 1000 times a second. Hundreds of thousands or millions of keys might be used to send just one message of the most secret of data. Having only the first key would not help.

[Babbler]

What about the Robot Sciencist? It sound the most impressive too my ear, it is sound the most disturbing as well...

[alexander]

Not necessarily true. Some of these systems change the key a 1000 times a second. Hundreds of thousands or millions of keys might be used to send just one message of the most secret of data. Having only the first key would not help.

I heard somewhere that the keys they generate are all generated from a big key generated at the very beginning of the encryption process, course they one machine can send out the key to another, but if that is so, having a sniffer on the receiving side will provide you with a reasonable answer. Actually, thinking out loud here, if you broke into the transmitting machine, you would have all the data anyways, so i guess what i was talking about should only apply to a client machine that is exchanging information...

[C1ay]

I heard somewhere that the keys they generate are all generated from a big key generated at the very beginning of the encryption process.

 

No, they actually generate key pairs on the fly that are not related to the previously generated keys. I think there's a white paper on this at Magiq's web site but you have to register with them to access it.

 

Actually, thinking out loud here, if you broke into the transmitting machine, you would have all the data anyways, so i guess what i was talking about should only apply to a client machine that is exchanging information...

 

That's not necessarily true either. The data on the transmitting machine could already be encryted by some other means. It could even be encrypted by multiple methods before being stored on the machine that is to transmit it. I have files on my laptop that were encrypted on one of my home boxes. Occasionally I me decrypt them to view them but I never store the decrypted file on my laptop. My password file is one of these for example.

[alexander]

No, they actually generate key pairs on the fly that are not related to the previously generated keys. I think there's a white paper on this at Magiq's web site but you have to register with them to access it

so the protection has increased since the last time i looked at QE, great, but remember that nothing is uncrackable yet...

That's not necessarily true either. The data on the transmitting machine could already be encryted by some other means. It could even be encrypted by multiple methods before being stored on the machine that is to transmit it. I have files on my laptop that were encrypted on one of my home boxes. Occasionally I me decrypt them to view them but I never store the decrypted file on my laptop. My password file is one of these for example.

yeah it is, no matter how hard you encrypt something, even if you use something like crypt function in PHP(one way encryption) you can still decrypt the message, it just takes a bit longer :cup:

As to the password file, well you better make sure that no cracker gets it or your passwords are open to the public domain. Even if you put your file through an MD5 encryption a few times, its still a metter of a few weeks before your passwords are out and open (that is if that cracker has access to a few systems at least, and can run his cracker util 24/7).

And lastly the speed of decryption goes down all the time, its a matter of getting enough information to decrypt. For example wireless (secure wireless) used to take forever to decrypt, then airsnort came out and it only took starting from 50 to 200,000 packets to decrypt and get the key (in seconds i might add), now there is a tool called aircrack that needs 2,000 packets (takes literaly minutes to get if someone is browsing the net for example) and gets you the key in seconds after that. MD5 hashes that windows stores its passwords in, used to take upwards from a few days to weeks to crack, now if the password is from 1-11 letters in length, having the hash, you can find out the password (its nonrestrictive of upper/lower letters, numbers, special chars) in a matter of seconds, having an internet connection and knowing where to go...

[Kirk Gregory Czuhai]

NONE of the above!

It was the improvement in the microsoft code that could speed up ANY PC by 187%!

http://hardware.mcse.ms/archive6-2004-8-62220.html

love and peace,

and,

peace and love,

(kirk) kirk gregory czuhai ===========> @ ;)

[alexander]

this looks awfully suspicious, can you provede a link to an article that was not written by you or can you perhaps describe it a little better, more detail. Faster donwload speeds again compared to what? can you give us the variables and how you tested it all so we can test that ourselves, plus compared to the stuff above thats almost not a technological advance at all, put that nexst to quantum encryption network, or DNA-assembled carbon nano tubes or even a mechanical memory cell, and its miniscule... something that you could argue is cell processors, but they really werent developed in 2004, its been a work in progress since 02 and first prototype will appear in PS3 either later this year or early next.

[Kirk Gregory Czuhai]

Sure!

http://church.here.ws

love and peace,

and,

peace and love,

(kirk) kirk gregory czuhai

p.s.

http://GeorgeWBush.tk

http://Britney.here.ws

[Kirk Gregory Czuhai]

well Alexander I apologize to you!

Now may I ask Tormod, in addition to your deleting my links in the last post did you also make

my last name appear in the color red? I prefer blue or green!

Alexander, we all have our preferences, different strokes for different folks they say, right?

But do accept my sincerest apologies if I have offended or upset you in some fashion; I really mean it!

love and peace,

and,

peace and love,

(kirk) kirk gregory czuhai

050429 9:23 AM EDT