On Mon, 12 Aug 2002, Stephen Sprunk wrote:
Thus spake "Alif The Terrible" <measl@mfn.org>
On Sun, 11 Aug 2002, gg wrote:
Guess my home P.C. will no longer be an intel platform......hello mighty
SPARC
I guess you didn't actually read this, did you? It makes no difference what you use at home, if that machine can't talk to the rest of the world.
1. There will be CPU vendors that won't require Palladium-signed code
2. There will be OSes that won't require Palladium-signed code Again, this will depend completely on non-technical issues at first, however, since Palladium provides a framework in which the execution of such "non-approved" code is [theoretically] controllable entirely by a third party (regardless of intent, which we could all argue back and forth all day long without resolution), this scenario, coupled with DMCA provisions IS
CPU vendors will build cpu's to meet demand. If non-palladium cpu's are not in demand, they will not produce them. As it stands now, x86 (like it or not, and personally, I do not) is rapidly becoming the Lone Platform.B possible. If I were a large monopoly, I would for certain want to do this - it is in my financial self-interest.
3. There will be applications that won't require Palladium-signed code
TCPA as described currently, could well require you or I to submit our own (self-written) code for signing prior to execution. If this signing is financially prohibitive, and for an open source project even a tiny fee for each change IS prohibitive, then these applications will cease to exist.
4. There will be IETF protocols that won't require Palladium-signed code Youre missing the point: this isn't about the IETF requiring Palladium-signed code, this is about Palladium processors requiring signed code.
5. The Net will not require Palladium-signed code
No, but to talk to any Palladium processor across the net WILL require palladium signed code, and therefore...
and most importantly:
6. This article is completely incorrect on how Palladium will work.
I would refer those interested to minds far better informed than you or I for reference: there is a current debate going on between some rather respected cryptographers, and a Palladium proponent using the "AARGH!" anonymous remailer, on the cypherpunks lists. The archives are available to catch up, if you are so inclined. Currently, the consensus is not promising.
S
-- Yours, J.A. Terranson sysadmin@mfn.org If Governments really want us to behave like civilized human beings, they should give serious consideration towards setting a better example: Ruling by force, rather than consensus; the unrestrained application of unjust laws (which the victim-populations were never allowed input on in the first place); the State policy of justice only for the rich and elected; the intentional abuse and occassionally destruction of entire populations merely to distract an already apathetic and numb electorate... This type of demogoguery must surely wipe out the fascist United States as surely as it wiped out the fascist Union of Soviet Socialist Republics. The views expressed here are mine, and NOT those of my employers, associates, or others. Besides, if it *were* the opinion of all of those people, I doubt there would be a problem to bitch about in the first place... --------------------------------------------------------------------