[rc5] Stats solution? (long)
gindrup at okway.okstate.edu
Tue Nov 11 09:37:00 EST 1997
Perhaps it was somewhat a troll. But it was more a statement of
perception. I'm not attacking anyone's personal life. I'm attacking
their appearance of involvement, and I think I said so.
You want a spec. ...
Win16, identical interface with Win32 GUI, identical network
interfaces. Preferably before the RC5-64 effort is a month old. I
expect this will be pointless, because
1) All the users who would have run it will be gone before it happens.
2) The heavy duty perproxy network won't have any traffic to carry.
3) The coders are busy developing clients that maybe a couple of dozen
users will run.
And further, you suggest that I write it. I don't see that I get
anything out of that as I can't attach it to your proprietary proxy
network. I have made it perfectly clear that with some sort of proxy
spec I would have been *more* than willing to have gotten a couple of
clients out the door.
The claim has long been: "Write the thing and then maybe we'll let you
into our circle." But now, you say, the delay in v3 clients "is
proper planning before the first line of code is written." Notice
that these two statements are strongly at odds. You want us to write
spec-less code while waiting for you to write completely spec-ed code.
How much time has been wasted on low-volume clients? How many of
these users could have been kept with the much-maligned Java client?
Why is there no appearance of giving a damn?
And to address your v3 claims: v3 specs are 4 to 6 weeks away. Code
won't happen until after that. And, since you ask, I've been toodling
around with an RC5-56 Java client. Since it's almost entirely network
and core code, it's as cross-platform as the JVM implementors will let
it be and the basic property of requesting Java cores from the server
makes it multifunctional. It's not done. Why? No motivation.
Bovine is doing nothing for me but blowing smoke at me.
<cough> <cough> moo.
Now for your trolls: I believe that Microsoft will innovate a
whole new slew of crippling bugs and trivial logic errors in Word98.
Judging by the amount of "when we finish this" traffic, I can't
believe that the end wasn't in most people's minds when the key was
found. At the point the key was found, there was a greater than 2%
chance per day that the key would be found.
Let's assume that the key hadn't been found. The keyspace was
estimated to be exhausted less than three weeks from now (because
participation had not topped out). v3 specs aren't going to be done
by then. Why would they have been if the key had not been found?
-- Eric Gindrup ! gindrup at okway.okstate.edu
______________________________ Reply Separator _________________________________
Subject: Re: [rc5] Stats solution? (long)
Author: <rc5 at llamas.net > at SMTP
Date: 1997/11/11 06:39
was this an obvious troll?
You are pretty much incorrect in almost all of your assumptions. Version
3 clients are happening, but what slows the developement cycle is proper
planning before the first line of code is written. you develope a cross
platform, multifunctional application right now... sit down, own vi and
get cranking. see how far you get.
The conversion from RC5-56 to R5-64 was a shoe-in. We weren't ready for
RC5-56 to come to an end. There was a fair amount of stress over getting
something together to keep people involved. Just like you said, we
tweaked up a little code, and bang! we got an rc5-64 client/proxy network
going. This doesn't mean we are lazy, it means we are mazimizing the
resources at hand, on all levels.
1. at the client level we want to keep users involved.
2. at the proxy level we wanted the current core proxies to upgrade, and
also recruit more. we expect this to get much bigger than it is now.
3. at the coder level, we needed to maximize time and efficiency.
Adam has let his personal life *suffer* to make this contest
happen. *DO NOT* abuse him for what he has or hasn't done. To make the
most efficient time of software writers time, you must first know what you
want him to write. How do you do that? explain in detail, and on paper,
everything you want the software to do from the inside out. Document
packet sizes, expected behaviors, modularity, etc. Then after you have
the utmost clear picture of what you want, you write it.
you can complain about the said 'Inner Circle' and thier failure in
communication, but do not attack our whole hearted devotion to this
On Tue, 11 Nov 1997, Eric Gindrup wrote:
[snip -- a whole lot]
To unsubscribe, send email to majordomo at llamas.net with 'unsubscribe rc5' in the body.
More information about the rc5