From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Message-Id: <200305181438.h4IEcr524912@augusta.math.psu.edu> To: 9fans@cse.psu.edu Subject: Re: [9fans] Re: Free Plan 9 "shell" accounts? In-Reply-To: Your message of "Sun, 18 May 2003 09:26:23 CDT." From: Dan Cross Date: Sun, 18 May 2003 10:38:53 -0400 Topicbox-Message-UUID: af7b8a58-eacb-11e9-9e20-41e7f4b1d025 > > I know I shouldn't get into this.... > > You're such an ass Dan. ...and this is why. We can't expect anything but an attack after questioning your views. This isn't a particularly good way to advance your argument or start dialogue, Jim. > > Yes. It's executing on that machine. > > No, only -part of it is 'on that machine'. Your archaic viewpoint is > showing. So, what's missing? It's memory image is stored on that machine: all the program text, data, and the stack; the processor state including the PSL and all the machine registers, etc is local. Even the I/O devices it does I/O through are local. The fact that it gets the data it manipulates from someplace else isn't relevant to the fact that it's running on that machine. > > It's effectively the same situation as a program running on a diskless Unix > > machine with the filesystem served by NFS. > > No, it's not. Okay, then. Why not? > > So you agree that you will allow someone to run code on your machine, > > Absolutely, go read the whole point of Hangar 18 at, > > http://open-forge.org > > http://einstein.ssz.com/hangar18 > > What do you think 'distributed processing', 'community', and 'tit for tat' > mean? You cut off the rest of my sentence, which explained what I was getting at. Here's the rest: ...you just won't provide them with a filesystem. So they can run a copy of /bin/rc on your machine if they like. > Oh yeah, you don't have a clue. Wow, insults. That's a great way to advance your viewpoint. > You're a perfect example of what is wrong with the Plan 9 community here. So, Jim, can we expect you at the BoF in San Antonio? Looking forward to meeting you! - Dan C.