On Jun 10, 8:30pm in "Re: D.Phil project funding", C.Mcknight wrote:
>Kevin,
>In the absence of any argument on your part, I'm with Tony on this one!
>Would you care to expand...?
This debate has gone on for several emails now. I refute the allegation
that there is no argument on my part. If one cannot see my argument then
they have either missed some emails, not read my proposal, or not thought
clearly about it. I am not being arrogant about this, but I have had
some very good responses about my proposal from respected academics who
have thought and considered the proposal.
That said, I progress to the expansion:
Electronic Journals pay for articles. To cover this cost and the cost
of the machines, people and maintenance, etc. they gain advertising and
charge for the journal. Therefore, they only wish the journal to be
distributed to their subscribers, otherwise they are potentially losing
revenue, which could force their closure. The proposal is about protecting
the distribution by restricting authorised users from copying the material.
The comments of 'Blinkered' and 'Incorrect' were a little silly on my part
as they do not convey any argument. The reasons for these comments was
due to Tony's (in my mind) narrow approach to this field. I always
thought that the idea of research and education was to ask 'Why?' and
not be restricted by convention. If noone has new ideas and searches
for new methods, then how does the world ever progress?
In attempting to explain the (presumably) confusing aspects of my
proposal, I was met with a brick wall of 'I can't see how to do it so it
can't be done'-type comments from Tony. I don't profess to understand
everything about computer science, and I recognise that there are many
fields that I do not understand. I do, however, understand a reasonable
amount about computer security (from both a theoretical and practical)
stance.
Operating Systems evolve, we know this. One point that the project
may throw up are features that should appear in the next generation
of operating systems. It may also find methods of 'fixing' current
operating systems in order to make it possible to do what I propose.
Lastly, Trusted Operating Systems: I feel that I should explain a little
here because no-one seems to know what I am on about (Tony's comment of
'I trust my operating system.') Trusted OS attempt to provide a secure
environment for many applications where control of information is
important. As I stated, it is not possible to screen-grab certain
windows in a Trusted OS. Users do not have access to the underlying
hardware, except through methods defined by the OS. Simply, you can
get the information that the producers allow you to, in a method that
they allow. (Query 'Trusted Operating Systems' in AltaVista for more
information.)
I hope this clears up matters a little, and I also hope that comments
will be mature, considered, arguments (accepting that I fell foul to
this in my last message.) I am happy to answer questions about this
topic, should further clarification be needed.
Kevin Sheldrake
[log in to unmask]
[log in to unmask]
%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%
|