Hi,

On 22 Sep 2001, at 13:57, Mike Cheponis wrote:
> Also, it would be sortta cool if people could look at the proposal in
> a non-emotional way, that is, in a cooly professional way.  I happen

let me try it: Many things like the software runs on every hardware 
etc. were the goals of the ACE so they are allmost ten years old.

It is not needed, and unwanted. Most pieces of informtion are not 
intended for everyone. Currently everything is unpublished, until we 
put it in a place accessible by the public. This will not change! So 
using the principles described in the "New Machine/New Network" 
sections, that would imply, that the first thing to be done is to deny 
every access (even for configuration, as this data could eventually 
be dangerous in the wrong hands) to the machine or network, and 
then open the few things wanted for public access.

This is an altruistic approach: if I have ressources for fast 
computation and storage, and others use it, I wanted to benefit 
from that. Or the other way: why should I spend money in a fast 
machine, when I can use the ressources of others? Given that most 
do not have something to spend, there will be a payment system 
neccessary.

If copy protected materials or intellectual properties can be shared, 
a tracking, monitoring and payment system must exist, to keep it 
legal. Otherwise it was just another Napstar.

In such an environment user profiles could be so precise, that other 
biometrical authentification shemes are no longer needed. Such 
environment has the potential of permanent monitoring.

Operating systems have to provide the user with the needed 
applications. The user has to accomplish a task and therfore uses 
an application. Many users I know eg. are not able to save an e-
mail attachment in the right place and open it with the correct 
application, if they cannot doubleclick it and the application pops up 
and they can save the data with this application they are lost. Such 
users cannot be left alone with the possibility to save sensitive data 
in a place where it could be accessible by the public.

The situation described in "Hardware Failure" can be done more 
efficient with terminals and redundant servers and a good backup 
strategy.

The situation described in "Web Service" again is not realistic, as I 
have to pay for bandwidht and or transfer volume. If my servers and 
bandwidht are used for others content I would not want to pay for it. 
Here again a payment system was needed. 

So the majority will have no real advantages, but are under 
permanent surveillance. This will be a costly system (and the cost 
are probably shared between all) but only very few have an 
advantage. Note: no illegal copies of Microsoft products are 
possible in such environment.

> These ideas are, I believe, extremely powerful and timely.  (Never
> mind that a few years ago I strongly argued for some of them on -tech
> and got flamed to a crisp.  The point is: do we stagnate, or do we
> innovate?)

I do not think this is an innovation. It might be seen as the "killerapp" 
the industry is looking for for years. The point of saturation in the 
PC market is close or reached and people do not want to purchase 
a new computer every year. 

mike