Have you heard of yggdrasil then? It sounds like it would be a better match for your use candidate
yggdrasil is a "greynet". End-to-end encrypted, self-organizing via DHT, but no onion/garlic routing. Has interop capabilities with both Tor and I2P though, and some yggdrasil nodes are I2P- or Tor-only. A world-tree with roots (tunnels) going in all the spheres of existence (nets)
Hands out IPv6 addresses to its users. These addresses are generated automatically from the signature of your public key, so essentially impossible to spoof, and automatic authentication, plus end-to-end encryption. As if IPsec was pervasive and completely transparent
I2P has a community of people that actually use the darktubes, as opposed to Tor. 99% of Tor users use Tor to browse the vanilla internets just. There is no real 'Tor community'
A far more effective way to sabotage the infrastructure would be to plant a bomb there, in the hole. It does not even have to be a functional bomb. It's enough to just make the repair technicians fear for their lives. It will take a lot of time for them to call a bomb disposal unit, and so on.
And then you repeat that a couple of times at random places. If you don't want to kill people, the first bombs should be duds, but occasionally some of the later bombs should be real, so they don't let down the guard, but learn to fear the repair jobs.
Then after that, EVERY SINGLE repair job, even when you didn't actually sabotage it yourself, would become super-expensive and take lots-and-lots of time.
After you trained them, you can lower the number of sabotages with mostly duds, and the occasional real bomb, to just once every couple of months. They still need to handle every single repair job as if you had been there. Minimal cost for you, maximized cost for them.
It also scales up law enforcement's efforts to catch you, and pushes the criminal act you would perform up to terrorism. There are not many who would be willing to throw away their lives for acts that mostly just cause a bit of economic damage.
If you are able of imagining the future, and capable of logical coherent thoughts, the statement "the need for quantum computers remains small" is just... damn narrow-minded and perhaps just plain stupid.
If you can shave off a factor n in O(n^3) then O-B-V-I-O-U-S-L-Y it will change the world. If you don't see the obviousness in this, then why are you working with computers?
Before you hate on me, did you even google "quantum computer"? Did you read the introduction section of the Wikipedia article?
I've read the introduction (and, uh, a lot more). What specific algorithms do you have in mind where quantum supremacy seems a) likely (or even possible) and b) enough of an improvement to be world-changing?
The proportion of comp sci tasks that have practical importance for which a quantum computer can shave off a factor of ~000s seems to be sufficiently small to doubt it will "change the world".
The reason for this is, among other things, systems programmers wrote the UIs in 1983. Today random twenty-years-old web-muppets write the UIs.
The system programmers of 1983 were used to low-level programming, and most of them had probably written code in assembler. Web programmers seldom have that deep understanding of the computer.
At least, this is true from my own personal experience.
The default behaviour of the kernel is no rp filtering at all. Older versions of systems enabled strict to filtering, no doubt causing the same sort of complaints from people who like to complain about that sort of thing. Newer versions relaxed this to loose rp filtering for the reasons explained in the commit message.
The article essentially reads as "we payed lots of monies for a mediocre scanner, and then we discovered that the FOSS nmap did everything we needed. So we took nmap and added a little bit of extra, a web interface, and gave it the name Flan Scanner."
The other side will either know the NATO alphabet or be able to understand it anyway. It was designed to be interpreted and used by non English speakers, since most of NATO doesn't/didn't speak English. I've used it dozens of times, zero errors.
It's really good enough to be considered a sort of spoken language Golay code.
^---- yes, this is exactly it. Especially since most CSRs you're going to be talking about don't have English as their first language and don't have the same cultural background as you.
That's why the people I know who use it at work don't use it while on the phone with Comcast.
I’m reminded of an English comedy sketch, one police operator is saying “Tango Whiskey Foxtrot...” on the phone, the detective next to him “Tango.. Tango.. Diet Coke & Fanta”
Is that first one an "H" or an "E"? Is that second one an "E" or a "V"?
That's the problem with home-made solutions, across any form of lossy medium (aka static or accents), the home-made replacements are not always distinct enough.
To which the recipient might be thinking E, E... no wait the first E must have been something else then... ah H, so: H E... slow down a bit... why isn't this person using the same phonetics as the other callers...?
yggdrasil is a "greynet". End-to-end encrypted, self-organizing via DHT, but no onion/garlic routing. Has interop capabilities with both Tor and I2P though, and some yggdrasil nodes are I2P- or Tor-only. A world-tree with roots (tunnels) going in all the spheres of existence (nets)
Hands out IPv6 addresses to its users. These addresses are generated automatically from the signature of your public key, so essentially impossible to spoof, and automatic authentication, plus end-to-end encryption. As if IPsec was pervasive and completely transparent