> or is it just very poorly written by a reporter who doesn't know what
> he/she is writing about.
[quoted text clipped - 4 lines]
>
> r b-j
old news.. just a few of the many links and stories on the subject.
http://www.commsdesign.com/news/tech_beat/OEG20021111S0036
http://www.techreview.com/InfoTech/wtr_16505,300,p1.html
http://www.businessweek.com/technology/content/nov2006/tc20061106_302053.htm?cam
paign_id=bier_tcv.g3a.rssm1109z
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Quantum_cryptography
robert bristow-johnson - 17 Oct 2007 18:41 GMT
> > or is it just very poorly written by a reporter who doesn't know what
> > he/she is writing about.
[quoted text clipped - 6 lines]
>
> old news.. just a few of the many links and stories on the subject.
..
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Quantum_cryptography
so, if a single photon is spuriously absorbed in the fiber-optics
somewhere, this system indicates that it's been compromised and the
entire message is lost or corrupted? how can this possibly be robust
enough for practical use?
r b-j
> or is it just very poorly written by a reporter who doesn't know what
> he/she is writing about.
[quoted text clipped - 4 lines]
>
> r b-j
It's accurate, but rather pointless since any fraud will undoubtedly be
perpetrated elsewhere in the chain of events.
Google "quantum cryptography"

Signature
Dirk
http://www.transcendence.me.uk/ - Transcendence UK
Remote Viewing classes in London
patmpowers@gmail.com - 16 Oct 2007 22:05 GMT
On Oct 15, 10:31 pm, Dirk Bruere at NeoPax <dirk.bru...@gmail.com>
wrote:
> > or is it just very poorly written by a reporter who doesn't know what
> > he/she is writing about.
[quoted text clipped - 8 lines]
> perpetrated elsewhere in the chain of events.
> Google "quantum cryptography"
Right. The physics is accurate but it seems silly for this
application. Probably an excuse to use public funds for research.