quantumpunk23

Please sayonara, let me know how i flamed anyone. I would love to know. It doesn't really matter anyway because this forum is pretty much a waste of time anyway. From what I gather the majority of it is filled with trekkies asking questions they wouldn't even understand the answer to anyway. And whats worse, the answers they receive are offered up by people not qualified to give them. This site is a joke. There, now I have flamed the entire forum and all its users. Happy now!?

Whatever Sayonara, you give me a logical reason why I should not be entitled to firearms and I would argue against it. However, you didn't do that. I understand that you like to argue and thats great, but I don't like arguing for the sake of it. And again, I'm quite sure it will do no good...

Sayonara, I never said I NEEDED an automatic weapon, I would just like to own one. Take a look around you and tell me if you really need all the sh*t you have. I doubt it. Also, I would think my stance on the issue of the private citizen owning firearms would be pretty clear..... I'm through with this discussion, because regardless of what any pro-gun people say, those of you who think I should defend myself with a freaking baseball bat with never understand. Oh yeah, and a "swift smack in the face?" That is absoulte hilarity. "Oh, excuse me mister robber, don't shoot me with that shotgun, I need to run up to you and slap you now." Get real genius.

Geez, if I choose to refer to a criminal breaking into my home, endangering my life as a crackhead or anything else for that matter who cares. I guess I should offer up an apology to those of you looking into robbing homes for a living. I am very sorry to have offended you. Unless of course you are upset by my reference to "crackheads." Most of them are upstanding citizens who should be praised for their community service right? Man, get real. Great rebuttal by the way. Attacking my intelligence, well done! Do you actually have anything to add to this topic or do you just wish to flame away at individual posters? What is your take on the issue? Answering Cap'n Refsmmat's question, yes. However, one must obtain a Class-III FFL in order to purchase one and most are quite expensive (MP-5 I am looking at cost $10K+ USD)

Tell you what, if the US banned firearms, I would pack my things and move too a country where they are legal. I think that I have a right to protect myself from the scumbags in my community that don't choose to follow the law. If some crackhead breaks into my apartment, he better be ready to deal with my 12 gauge, my Glock 9mm or my FN/FAL .308, whichever happens to be nearby. In my oppinion the best deterrent to burglary is knowing that a high percentage of the local populace has the ability to end the offenders life. As far as no reason to own automatic weapons thats ludicrous as well. In the US it is still legal to purchase certain fully auto weapons. As a matter of fact I am currently looking into purchasing a H&K MP-5, and I don't see whats wrong with that.

I have never seen such confusion over something that has been proven. The only completly secure classical encryption method is the one time pad. It has been mathematically proven and is also quite intuitive as well. As far as quantum key distribution is concerned, it is also theoretically proven to be "uncrackable." The reason for this is, if after comparing a sample of the sifted keys, Alice and Bob can then determine if their mutual (Shannon) information is higher than that of Eve's (by noting the error rate). If it is, they continue, if not, they ditch the key and start over. The simple fact that Eve introduces errors by merely examining the qubits is what makes QKD secure. Too further lower Eve's information about the key, Alice and Bob simply implement well known classical secrecy amplification algorithms. Just check out LANLs preprint server, there are tons of papers that go much more in depth into how it works. However, "photon guns" that shoot out pulses of exactly one photon are not feasable therefore Eve could use beamsplitting techniques to intercept the key, but I am not all that well versed on this method so I'll go no further. Needless to say, cryptologists are working on methods of cracking QKD, but most of these methods attack the flaws in the technology we are forced to used in implementation, not the physics of QKD itself. Also, to the guy who said anything that could be decrypted could be cracked: get real. Someone already explained it, but I'll reiterate. The one time pad makes a message secure because if one attempts to decrypt it one could come up with anything of equal length. If you think you can crack the one time pad by all means, have at it. If I were you, I would stick to things in the realm of the possible.

Actually I was under the impression that Quantum Cryptogrpahy was already commercially available. Check out the following webpage: http://www.idquantique.com/qkd.html I haven't looked into the specs but it seems legit. Another company based in the USA, MagiQ Technologies, has also released a plug and play commercial quantum key distribution device. http://www.magiqtech.com/

Hey there, this is my first post here (as if anyone cares). Just thought you might like to know that MIT has an excellent resource for Linear Algebra. Their Linear Algebra courseware includes video lectures by Prof. Strang, who also wrote the text they use for that course. Here is the link http://ocw.mit.edu/OcwWeb/Mathematics/18-06Linear-AlgebraFall2002/VideoLectures/index.htm Well, I hope this helps. It certainly helped me teach myself the subject.