l4-hurd
[Top][All Lists]
Advanced

[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]

Re: Part 2: System Structure


From: Marcus Brinkmann
Subject: Re: Part 2: System Structure
Date: Tue, 23 May 2006 12:32:54 +0200
User-agent: Wanderlust/2.14.0 (Africa) SEMI/1.14.6 (Maruoka) FLIM/1.14.7 (Sanjō) APEL/10.6 Emacs/21.4 (i486-pc-linux-gnu) MULE/5.0 (SAKAKI)

At Tue, 23 May 2006 10:46:34 +0200,
Tom Bachmann <address@hidden> wrote:
> 
> -----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-----
> Hash: SHA1
> 
> Bas Wijnen wrote:
> >> I'd like to encourage everyone to consider this. It sounds like a viable
> >> compromise
> > 
> > What exactly is "this"?
> > 
> 
> The proposal by jonathan:
> 
> >   There are opaque and translucent banks. The difference is that
> >   the opaque bank will not issue a given page more than once. A
> >   translucent bank will, which is how the user gains access to
> >   the content.

Jonathan's proposal achieves technically what he wants to achieve by
it.  However, to me, it's a compromise in the same way that the
feature to run an executable in an e-mail attachment by clicking on
the attachment is a compromise between the interests of virus
developers and the users.

Putting "dangerous" code at the bottom of the system, and then trying
to recover safety by extensions, is not good system design.  I think
everybody agrees with that.  We do not agree on an estimation what
constitutes "danger", but if you read what I wrote in Part 1, you will
understand why the above does not constitute a compromise for me.

Also, please pay attention to what I wrote about the GNU project in
part 1.  Supporting DRM is in direct conflict with the interests of
the GNU project.  Thus, for a GNU project, there can only be
compromises with legitimate (in the context of the GNU project)
interests whose benefit compensates the involved risks (again, for the
GNU project).

Thanks,
Marcus





reply via email to

[Prev in Thread] Current Thread [Next in Thread]