Anonymous to "destroy" Facebook on Nov. 5

[CuttingEdge100]

wamdue

you have a point, too much talk after the riots of the government being able to shut down socail media websitess, when expect for very small areas, it wont have achieved much.

As they say "never let a crisis go to waste"

 

[Robert Maxwell]

wamdue

you have a point, too much talk after the riots of the government being able to shut down socail media websitess, when expect for very small areas, it wont have achieved much.

As they say "never let a crisis go to waste"

Also, "never pass up an opportunity for baseless hysteria."

 

[marillion]

Damn.. Guess I better remember to harvest all my crops on the 4th... *opens up Outlook Calendar*...

 

[Naira]

Okay, now you lost me... Please explain how this is done.

All electronics generate electric fields. A sensitive enough detector might be able to record minute changes in the field corresponding to a computer's activity.

However, that still leaves the problem of determining the actual activity which generated each observation, which is a potentially large state space. And even if you did have some algorithm for determining that, a single operation doesn't tell you much; to get a real picture, you need to record many operations in order, accurately.

It strikes me as unlikely that this technology is very far along.

I do not know the exact physics behind the key concepts of the idea but, like Lindley said, sensitive enough detectors can record changes in electric fields caused by a computer.

That sort of technology is indeed not very far along from the industry. However, I remember seeing a documentary saying that several army researchers around the world have been working on this since the 70s. I guess they must have come up with something, even if not perfect yet.

My main point was that nothing is perfectly safe when it comes to data stored in computers. However, those of us who are not important enough so that other people are seeking to steal our data, should be just fine.