From owner-freebsd-hackers Wed Jan 22 12:20:21 1997 Return-Path: Received: (from root@localhost) by freefall.freebsd.org (8.8.5/8.8.5) id MAA24643 for hackers-outgoing; Wed, 22 Jan 1997 12:20:21 -0800 (PST) Received: from phaeton.artisoft.com (phaeton.Artisoft.COM [198.17.250.211]) by freefall.freebsd.org (8.8.5/8.8.5) with SMTP id MAA24626 for ; Wed, 22 Jan 1997 12:20:18 -0800 (PST) Received: (from terry@localhost) by phaeton.artisoft.com (8.6.11/8.6.9) id NAA22069; Wed, 22 Jan 1997 13:03:34 -0700 From: Terry Lambert Message-Id: <199701222003.NAA22069@phaeton.artisoft.com> Subject: Re: Commerical applications (was: Development and validation To: chuckr@glue.umd.edu (Chuck Robey) Date: Wed, 22 Jan 1997 13:03:34 -0700 (MST) Cc: terry@lambert.org, jkh@time.cdrom.com, joerg_wunsch@uriah.heep.sax.de, hackers@freebsd.org In-Reply-To: from "Chuck Robey" at Jan 21, 97 11:27:22 pm X-Mailer: ELM [version 2.4 PL24] MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=US-ASCII Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Sender: owner-hackers@freebsd.org X-Loop: FreeBSD.org Precedence: bulk > > How can "thought police" have an effect in a machine-arbitrated > > environment? The point of machine-arbitration is the elimination > > of the possibility (and as a side effect, the perception) of "thought > > police". > > Yes, our development is much more controlled than Linux's is, but putting > further controls on it is going to magnify the perception of FreeBSD's > tighter control. It doesn't matter if the end effect is more or less > freedom, the perception is the only thing of importance. > > We have the "perception of thought police", yes, so we shouldn't move > towards making that perception stronger. It is ridiculous and ineffective to try to "spin doctor" this way. "Never substitute activity for action" -- Seneca, Stoic Philospher, 1st century B.C. Regards, Terry Lambert terry@lambert.org --- Any opinions in this posting are my own and not those of my present or previous employers.