Except of course it never is.
Let's see: over-unity energy generation, the infinite compression algorithm, beamed energy using audio, batteries that can charge in a second, they flying car and so on. All of these would be great things to have if not for those pesky laws of physics. And they are total investor bait, investors can't help but share the dream, they too would use this product if only it existed, therefore the market must be huge.
Typically the entrepreneur(s) are well meaning but clueless and that is what makes them all the more dangerous: they totally believe that their idea is possible and anybody saying otherwise is just out to get them.
I've written about this phenomenon here:
"I’m a little busy these days. Do any of you have time to put this lossless, infinite compression algorithm, together? If you get it to work, I’ll split the royalties with you."
I can't work out if it is a joke or not....
You don't go all the way in one go, the algorithm just does 1% compression each time so it leaves something for the next rounds. You then keep on doing that until you reach the desired size. It's not super fast but first let's get it to work. I already have a patent!
There is just this one minor technical problem that I still need to overcome, but once that's done the sky is the limit.
Presumably that would be decompression? ;-)
Turned out to be a huge security nightmare though, because it kept decompressing into other people’s files!
Another problem was telling the compressed bits apart.
On another note, I have this protocol that can transfer any file in just 64 bits. It needs a rather large dictionary on both sides but other than that it 'just works'. Interested?
One of the very first tech DDs I ever did was a totally rigged demo. I don't think I ever wrote about it. Those people must have really hated me for puncturing their balloon. Some other investors took the bait and lost tons of money.
The problem, of course, is that you have to decompress the file a large number of times. (The length of that number looks suspiciously similar to the length of the original file.)
def compress(input, threshold):
decompressor = lambda: 0
while code_size(decompressor) > threshold or input != decompressor():
decompressor = randomize_code()
I see this regularly on my e-commerce businesses: Some company says they want to purchase $XX,XXX of our products, they have a shipping company they want to use that will pick-up from our warehouse, they ask us to get a quote from this company and then bill the original purchaser for the full-amount.
Of course, the shipping company wants the payment first, and then the purchaser will disappear.
Never fallen for it. Seen it a thousand times. Had to train my support agents to recognize it so they don't even bother bringing them my way.
Edit: Yes, looks like it is.
The person he accuses in the first post (Chaewon) is one of the three charged.
>In March 2018, he came under fire from users of a German image board pr0gramm.com after he revealed details about several admins and moderators in an article which claimed to identify who was behind the cryptocurrency mining service Coinhive.
>In April last year, Krebs was again slammed by security researchers after he doxxed two of them on Twitter, apparently because he disagreed with them about the operations of Spamhaus.
Krebs certainly covers some interesting stories, but I do not hold him in high regard.
Maybe, maybe not. Personally, when I see wrongdoing, I like to expose it.
He did it under his own name on his own blog, taking on significant personal liability in doing so. This is not at all the same as an anonymous person doxxing someone.
If you have irrefutable proof, you should be going to the appropriate LEA. If you don't have that proof, you should not be posting someones home address to the masses to do with as they please and masquerading it as irrefutable proof.
We have all heard horror stories of innocent people being mistaken for criminals (sharing a common name, case of mistaken identity, malice or negligence of the person doing the doxxing, etc.) and having their lives threatened or ruined due to overzealous internet-warriors playing vigilante. Recall the 'Boston Bomber' + Reddit/4chan debacle? Innocent people being doxxed left and right to a vengeance hungry crowd. Not to mention that other innocent people who happen to live at the same address are subject to the punishment you unilaterally decided to hand out.
If you think that is an acceptable risk in the name of your personal sense of justice, I doubt we'll ever see eye to eye on the matter.
>This is not at all the same as an anonymous person doxxing someone
If Krebs doxxed you or I doxxed you, the result for you is the same. I fail to see your point here.
Sure. All the horror stories involve doxxing by anons. This is not the same at all.
> If Krebs doxxed you or I doxxed you, the result for you is the same. I fail to see your point here.
Well if he was wrong to doxx me, I'd be able to sue him into oblivion. If you doxxed me, there'd be no repercussions for you. That personal liability pretty much ensures that Krebs isn't going to doxx me unless he's absolutely certain that he's right.
[edit: removed a snooty anecdote]