> >[Crossposting a discussion with Ron, which I know's going to get me into
> >trouble because it's exactly the kind of thing he rails against below...
> Oh you naughty, naughty boy.
You down with O.P.P.? Yeah, you know me.
> Yes, it's a crosspost.
I am the sixty-megabyte core file you cannot find.
> It also publicly releases bits the original author (that would be me)
> specifically chose not to FoRK,
Don't insult the alligator until after you have crossed the river.
> although I did consider doing that.
See, I just anticipated you.
> My my - these piracy issues are real.
Aye, matey.
> This is actually why I think we have to start conditioning ourselves
> for fishbowl existence, since no WoT is ever going to be sufficient.
You don't trust me that those bits were ready for primetime?
> With all the best encryption technology in the world, and
> with strict policies to release access only to known & trusted agents,
> once you start to ship bits you can't stop the hemmorage - they'll
> spread as far as they like.
But Ron, information *wants* to be free.
> Time to start considering every private exchange a public one, for
> better or worse.
Already started doing this. Ever since a few years ago when Rohit
accidentally forwarded an insulting email back to the person the email
was insulting.
> >Going to Israel would be cool. Oy! Eve would be proud of me.
> So would your Bubby. But frankly it's quite overrated.
I hear the falafel is to die for. I'm getting chatchkas in my
schinectigazoint. Aw, now I'm getting a little verklemmt....
> >> And once I'm bothering to respond to something with the outrageous
> >> subject line this thing bears, let me tackle it as well (that's why I
> >> cc:d it to Joe & Tim & Adam).
> >What do I have to do with this?
> Well, (a) you appear to have something to do with just about
> everything FoRK related
That's definitely not true. I don't pay attention to anyone's posts on
this list except my own and Joe Barrera's.
> (b) I knew I could count on you to bounce it to the list, you knave, you
Egads, I've been played like a rogue Ace in No Limit Texas Hold Em.
> (c) You were responsible for the GreenDay adventure, Rohit coaching
> notwithstanding
And also several other forays into nonsense on FoRK such as
http://www.cs.caltech.edu/~adam/LOCAL/faq-fork.html
> (d) Having written the Infospheres ditty at the end, of course I had
> to cc it by you.
Back in the old country we used to say, cross a midget with a computer
and you're likely to get a short circuit.
> >> But dragging the worst of Usenet trash into a supposedly 'clueful'
> >> forum does FoRK a real disservice, imho.
> >Naw. It's specifically there to drive people away.
> Doesn't work, obviously. It's dragging more of them in.
That's what sucks about something that sucks. It sucks things in.
> Which reminds me - my ISP here doesn't carry any heavy-breathing
> alt groups. Bunch a prudes...
Not even news://alt.society.generation-x ?
> >> Unless I'm mistaken, this Robert Malone ain't no FoRKer.
> >Actually, he is. He's a lurker.
> Sorry. My mistake. Hi Bob.
Bobby, actually. Watch out, boy, he'll chew you up.
> >Anarchic sessions composed of ad hoc processes are my PhD thesis topic:
> > http://www.infospheres.caltech.edu/papers/sessions/
> >Man, am I in trouble...
> Indeed, great heaps of it. The technically inclined can check
> http://www.infospheres.caltech.edu/mailing_lists/dist-obj/0294.html
> for my review of Adam's paper & thesis topic.
Luckily, sessions have changed somewhat since then.
http://www.infospheres.caltech.edu/papers/framework/
has a more accurate description of sessions. But obviously we still
have quite a ways to go.
> Btw Adam, I've been reading your XML page too. Want another monstrous
> post showing you the error in your ways there too?
Oh please.
> Or perhaps I'll leave that for Mark; he clearly does better on the
> 'embedded knowledge' stuff; I'll stay with what I know on multicasts
> etc. Let me just say I don't think a measly <OBJECT> tag is what I
> have in mind....
Because you want a revolution. You don't care about entrenched market
forces; you just want to attack, to bring death to the infidels. We're
talking rivers of blood here. We're talking martyrs.
Whereas I think in terms of an evolution. A new system, whatever it is,
must evolve out of currently existing standards. It must take today's
technology and bring it to the next level. As the Web did for the
Internet, so should documents==objects do it for the Web. But you have
to bootstrap. The dustbins of history are filled with Xanadus that
steered clear of the existing technologies, and as a result got swept
away...
----
adam@cs.caltech.edu
We cross our bridges when we come to them, and burn them behind us,
leaving us with nothing but the memory of the smell of smoke, and the
presumption that once our eyes watered...
-- Tom Stoppard, Rosencrantz and Guildenstern are Dead