From: Secret Squirrel <nobody@secret.squirrel.owl.de>
To: cypherpunks@toad.com
Message Hash: 60c697629402d0490d72846bbd2f634b4cc0d2e5d28ee82ce8cebcca663874ad
Message ID: <19970728193101.4574.qmail@squirrel.owl.de>
Reply To: N/A
UTC Datetime: 1997-07-28 20:31:33 UTC
Raw Date: Tue, 29 Jul 1997 04:31:33 +0800
From: Secret Squirrel <nobody@secret.squirrel.owl.de>
Date: Tue, 29 Jul 1997 04:31:33 +0800
To: cypherpunks@toad.com
Subject: NSA cracker - how many TW
Message-ID: <19970728193101.4574.qmail@squirrel.owl.de>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain
iang@cs.berkeley.edu
> seems also unlikely. (Actually, for all I know, terawatt power sources
> may exist; that's out of my field. Please let me know if this is the case.
> I just know that at my rates, 7.12 TW for 33 minutes (at about $.10/kWh)
I've extracted some figures from an industry publication
and arrive at a worldwide electricity generation capacity
of 1.6 TW. Assuming that 1% of that power is smuggled into
the deep space cracker we're not even close to 33 minutes,
and it doesn't matter whether we're looking at a one-off
every so often rather than a continuous 40 a day.
And that's still on optimistic assumptions including
1) testing keys for free
2a) running on earth at 3 K rather than 300 K
or
2b) no bother transmitting power & signals into space
(Like if the cracker had been secretly installed on Voyager 2
that'd be your 33 mins gone waiting for the radio.)
IBM have published a communications scheme that claims to recover
energy normally lost - it was on their website a few months ago.
I skipped reading it at the time because it sounded dotty.
Return to July 1997
Return to “Secret Squirrel <nobody@secret.squirrel.owl.de>”