On Sat, Dec 06, 2003 at 06:25:17PM -0600, Hoyt Bailey wrote:
> > I heard somewhere: He who is ignorant of History is doomed to repeat
> > it. I've heard, attributed to Newton, "If I have seen further than
> > other men, it is because I have stood on the shoulders of giants."
> > Existing computer
> I heard somewhere: He who is ignorant of History is doomed to repeat
> it. I've heard, attributed to Newton, "If I have seen further than
> other men, it is because I have stood on the shoulders of giants."
> Existing computer designs are built on ideas of mathematical logic and
> mathematical r
On Sat, Dec 06, 2003 at 02:25:05PM -0700, Paul E Condon wrote:
> philosophist. But, where there is life there is hope. You may, I hope,
> outgrow your current rhetorical position.
God, I hope not.
>From 1996-2000 everybody I met thought I was absolutely crazy because I
kept saying "look, if the
On Sat, Dec 06, 2003 at 10:01:04AM -0800, Tom wrote:
> On Sat, Dec 06, 2003 at 10:09:29AM -0700, Paul E Condon wrote:
> >
> > The initial rant was about making computer software conform to a
> > specification.
>
> You're giving me too much credit. :-) I really was advocating something
> like Ar
On Sat, Dec 06, 2003 at 10:09:29AM -0700, Paul E Condon wrote:
>
> The initial rant was about making computer software conform to a
> specification.
You're giving me too much credit. :-) I really was advocating something
like Arthur Koestler suggested in "Ghost in the Machine" -- evolution
doe
On Sat, Dec 06, 2003 at 02:39:38AM -0800, Tom wrote:
> On Fri, Dec 05, 2003 at 10:55:23PM -0700, Paul E Condon wrote:
> > > [This rant is probably full of shit] :-)
> > >
> > Yes. ;-)
>
> The reason it sounds so dumb is everybody would be out of a job.
> I've never met a single person yet who c
Tom wrote:
On Fri, Dec 05, 2003 at 11:43:23PM -0500, Joey Hess wrote:
[great stuff which is absolutely correct]
However, I "Tom Ballard" have figured it all out.
The problem with all of computer science is the left hand doesn't know
what the right hand is doing. All of these problems are finite a
On Sat, Dec 06, 2003 at 01:34:06PM +0100, Björn Lindström wrote:
> Tom <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
>
> > What the fuck are you talking about? I'm talking about privilege levels
> > between kernelspace and userspace, not this "community of people".
>
> It's all the same, maaan ... space out ...
>> 20 years from now somebody will suggest the same thing and win a
>> nobel prize.
Yay ill probably still be here in 20 years time i hope i win it.
--
To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to [EMAIL PROTECTED]
with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Tom <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
> What the fuck are you talking about? I'm talking about privilege levels
> between kernelspace and userspace, not this "community of people".
It's all the same, maaan ... space out ... woah! ...
--
Björn Lindström <[EMAIL PROTECTED]
http://bkhl.elektrubadur.se
On Sat, Dec 06, 2003 at 07:53:04PM +0800, David Palmer. wrote:
>
> There are levels here, but they aren't really associated with the normal
> concept of 'privilege.' It's like any other community, you establish
> your own level within the community in the way in which you conduct
> yourself.
What
On Sat, 6 Dec 2003 02:29:29 -0800
Tom <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> On Sat, Dec 06, 2003 at 03:04:22PM +0800, David Palmer. wrote:
> >
> > For a start, please allow me to refer you to Emmanuel Kant with
> > reference to 'a priori.'
>
> 'a priori' means you know how to do it independent of experie
On Sat, 6 Dec 2003 02:39:38 -0800
Tom <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> On Fri, Dec 05, 2003 at 10:55:23PM -0700, Paul E Condon wrote:
> > > [This rant is probably full of shit] :-)
> > >
> > Yes. ;-)
>
> The reason it sounds so dumb is everybody would be out of a job.
> I've never met a single per
On Fri, Dec 05, 2003 at 10:55:23PM -0700, Paul E Condon wrote:
> > [This rant is probably full of shit] :-)
> >
> Yes. ;-)
The reason it sounds so dumb is everybody would be out of a job.
I've never met a single person yet who can truly look at statements like
this and say "yes, let's do that.
On Sat, Dec 06, 2003 at 03:04:22PM +0800, David Palmer. wrote:
>
> For a start, please allow me to refer you to Emmanuel Kant with
> reference to 'a priori.'
'a priori' means you know how to do it independent of experience.
But I'm like Alice: when I used a word it means what I mean it to mean.
On Fri, 5 Dec 2003 20:58:40 -0800
Tom <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> On Fri, Dec 05, 2003 at 11:43:23PM -0500, Joey Hess wrote:
> [great stuff which is absolutely correct]
>
> However, I "Tom Ballard" have figured it all out.
> The problem with all of computer science is the left hand doesn't know
On Fri, Dec 05, 2003 at 08:58:40PM -0800, Tom wrote:
> On Fri, Dec 05, 2003 at 11:43:23PM -0500, Joey Hess wrote:
> [great stuff which is absolutely correct]
>
> However, I "Tom Ballard" have figured it all out.
> The problem with all of computer science is the left hand doesn't know
> what the r
On Fri, Dec 05, 2003 at 11:43:23PM -0500, Joey Hess wrote:
[great stuff which is absolutely correct]
However, I "Tom Ballard" have figured it all out.
The problem with all of computer science is the left hand doesn't know
what the right hand is doing. All of these problems are finite and can
be
Dave wrote:
> Recent discussions in this group have raised as many questions for me as
> they have answered, and raised doubts in my mind that the security of the
> Linux kernel will ever be as good as I would like it to be. Is there a
> fundamentally simple and 100% effective way to stop kerne
Recent discussions in this group have raised as many questions for me as
they have answered, and raised doubts in my mind that the security of the
Linux kernel will ever be as good as I would like it to be. Is there a
fundamentally simple and 100% effective way to stop kernel exploits, or
will
20 matches
Mail list logo
