[RC5] OGR motivations/achievements in general

Blain Nelson blainn13 at earthlink.net
Sat Oct 5 14:57:27 EDT 2002

10/5/2002 10:58:48 AM, "Jack Beglinger" <jackb at guppy.us> wrote:

>Bruce wrote why with the method they are using it is not feasible.  
>Why is the method they are using even right any more?

I'll tag in here for a round:

Because it's available without expending further effort, and nobody is willing to expend the effort 
necessary to do what you are asking, so it's not going to happen.

>The increasing the size of the blocks is because of their server issues.  Not 
>for the good of project.  Maybe by using a little different methods you get 
>a better system?  We are a distributed system -- so may be distribute the 
>work load.

Maybe.  Maybe not.  

>So why not?  What would it take?  Large systems, better use of existing 
>resources? Better use of client resources?

Programming time, debugging time, distributing time, transition time, other people's time that they 
don't want to spend.

>These are what is not being answered.  Instead we get we can't. we don't 
>do that way. it's in secure.

It's been answered -- nobody wants to spend the time it would take to do it the way you are describing.
>> You may want to remember dnet is a volunteer organization.  If your 
>ideas are
>> well suited to dnet, and logical, feasible, and reasonable, why not join up
>> and help implement them? 
>Once the drop they NDA requirement.  

They're not going to.  

So either deciding to sign the NDA or dropping the issue would seem reasonable responses.  If you're 
not willing to sign the NDA, you're not willing to do what it takes to make what you want happen.  They 
don't value what you're offering sufficiently to drop the NDA requirement.  I don't how to make that 
more complicated.

>I read even one.  It been the same reply for two multiple years.  Tech has 
>changed, system have changed but DNET can't for the same reasons I get 
>from local programmers that are entrenched with their past or sys admins 
>who keep fixing the problem over and over but never fix the issue.

If it's such a burning issue for you, sign the NDA and show them how to do it right with real code.   

>> I've not seen a single post from you that praises dnet, at all.
>> If you don't like the project, and don't want to help,   find another
>> project.  Dnet was the first distributed computing organization of it's
>> kind.   But currently there is a broad scope of choices available to
>> you.
>DNET is the choice for me.  Crypto is what I prefer.  OGR is not.  If I 
>was do that math type... I would prefer prime or pi calculations.  I would 
>like to see DNET be better.

Dnet is not going to be what you wish it to be.  It might become more the way you want it to be if you 
sign the NDA and put some sweat behind your words.  Until that point, they're just words, and they're 
not persuading people to put their sweat behind your words.  

>Yes, they volunteers - that is thrown at us too.  And so are we. 

That means that we can come and go.  It doesn't mean we get to run the show.  

> It is hard 
>to get new people to join these project when what is visible is so out of 
>date at the official site.  When after 3 years, it is still being done the "old 
>way" so it limits client machine choice.  When suggestions dumped upon 
>for being to hard or insecure - when we are testing / showing security 
>being insecure in a time frame... yet we leave blocks in the open 

If it hampers the project, that's a consequence the people making that choice will have to face.  But 
that doesn't take the power to make those choices away.  If you want to make more choices in how the 
project works out, the path is clear -- sign the NDA and get busy.  Posting here won't make it happen.

>I have - I just wish they would grow and not be stuck in 1998.   RC5 is 
>the grounds to talk about RC5, to talk about ways to improve, manager, 
>use, issues with, or any else RC5.   It does break down from time - like 
>talking about my kids and their enjoyment of press buttons that make 
>lights blink--- and network/machine crash.  But even that started with 
>> Having said my peace, I'll happily add this thread to my procmail
>> filters.
>> If that doesn't suffice,  I'll just add JackB to it.
>{ref Jeff - please do. }
>{ref Jeff - please do. }Please do what you fell you need to.  I will continue with what I feel I 
>need to do.

Whether you feel like you need to do it or not doesn't change whether it's effective or not.  I'm 
watching the reactions from the dnet folks, and they're not buying what you're selling.  They have 
offered you an opportunity to put your sweat where your mouth is, and that's pretty reasonable of them.  
You are free to develop your own distributed project if you wish and run it as an alternative to this, 
but you're not going to get the power you are asking for here without satisfying their concerns that 
you're not going to be harmful to the project.  You can slice and dice it anyway you want, and it's not 
going to come out differently than that.


Okay, I tag back out again.  

Take care,
( ) ASCII ribbon campaign
 X  against HTML e-mail
/ \

To unsubscribe, send 'unsubscribe rc5' to majordomo at lists.distributed.net
rc5-digest subscribers replace rc5 with rc5-digest

More information about the rc5 mailing list