From: Eugene Leitl (firstname.lastname@example.org)
Date: Thu Aug 24 2000 - 00:58:51 PDT
Dave Winer writes:
> His other comments didn't remind me of Winston Churchill.
> "We will develop technology that transcends the individual user. We will
> firewall Napster at source -- we will block it at your cable company, we
> will block it at your phone company, we will block it at your ISP. We will
Of course Gnutella has no single head, and clearly there is no
technical reason that traffic needs to come at a certain filterable
port, nor it to be in clear, nor that it can't use steganographic
channels. This will certainly be addressed even in the next versions
of Freenet. So Sony is either technically ignorant, or, more likely,
is pushing a purely political piece.
> firewall it at your PC."
When the future of Linux was still uncertain, I used to think about
ways Wintel could possibly block its progress. It is clearly possible
to create hardware with built-in secrets allowing only approved OSses
to run it on -- but this appeared silly even then.
But hardware still remains Achilles' heel, because it is being
produced and distributed in facilities which have a presence in legal,
economical and physical spaces. While one can quite easily define a
Forth CPU in VHDL which can run in current FPGAs ~60 MHz, one can in
principle also block that route.
Alas, the intrinsically unregulable desktop nanolithoprinter has not
landed yet, though we seem to be slowly getting there.
This archive was generated by hypermail 2b29 : Thu Aug 24 2000 - 02:11:49 PDT