mathew <meta(_at_)pobox(_dot_)com> wrote:
- No system is acceptable if it allows me to say what I consider spam.
Any system that blocks "what you consider spam" requires telepathy.
- No system is acceptable if it can be bypassed by completely compromising
machines.
The easier it is to bypass a system, the less useful that system is.
The more this bypassing costs innocent victims (including incompetent
ones), the less useful that system is.
- Systems like SMS where people are billed 10 cents a message are
economically impossible.
They obviously exist. Of course, heavy users pay $5/month for
unlimited messages.
- No system is acceptable unless it will gain widespread adoption
immediately.
No system that provides no immediate benefits to early adopters will
get wide adoption without coercion.
- No system is acceptable unless it is usable by everyone on the
- Internet.
A system that can't be used by a significant fraction of those I
communicate with thereby lacks value to me.
...and so on. Offering nothing positive, these naysayers shoot down
every proposal with the same tired objections that have been
addressed over and over and over as unreasonable or out of touch
with reality.
"Running code and rough concensus" You haven't provided the first,
why worry so much about the second?
Seth
_______________________________________________
Asrg mailing list
Asrg(_at_)irtf(_dot_)org
https://www.irtf.org/mailman/listinfo/asrg