Re: Challenge: Find potential use cases for non-trivial confinement

[Marcus Brinkmann]

At Mon, 01 May 2006 01:25:37 -0400,
"Jonathan S. Shapiro" <address@hidden> wrote:
> 
> I actually find this very curious. RMS has been willing to let the world
> evolve into understanding over time, and this has been greatly
> beneficial. Marcus is trying to take a "giant leap." I don't think it is
> going to work, but it is certainly interesting.

This is really strange.  No operating system in wide use supports the
confinement property as you advocate it.  Not using confinement in the
system design really is the conservative choice.  In another mail you
said that my proposal was radical.  I wish I would have the honor of
finding a radical new operating system design, but that is of course
not the case.

I am not yet sure if your mischaracterization comes from a
misunderstanding about the actual proposal, or because you mix up my
own, very personal, motivations (which I do not hide) with the
technical justifications (which have not been sufficiently described
yet, because from the very start the discussion has focussed on moral
issues and other side topics), or something else.

I will not apologize for taking a moral stance; however, I will also
not hide behind it.  The technical challenge remains open, and in a
couple of weeks I will collect the submissions and answer them as
promised.  I will also address other technical concerns which have
been raised (and some that have not been raised).  I invite you to
hang around for that and form your final opinion about my proposal
based on a more complete picture (and I want to stress that this is
really just my personal proposal at this point).

Thanks,
Marcus