Friday, March 04, 2005

Virtual Security: Think of the Children! While the Intel marketeers did provide a couple of useful suggestions, they didn't have answers for some of the more difficult questions posed by the IDF crowd. Things like, "Do we really need separate partitions for our evil children? Doesn't a separate login do the trick today?" "What happens when Microsoft wants us to pay for four licenses for our four partitions?" "Do we install Norton four times?" "How about Service Pack 3?" I'll take on the last questions that stumped the marketers: Yes. No. Ubiquitous malware + everyone=admin culture + privilege escalation makes Windows a single user system security-wise for the foreseeable future, and certainly with MS myopic focus w/only locking down XP. Ha. Who says Windows runs on your child's partition? See answer #3 See answer #3 10:32:55 AM      comment []  trackback []

I'm Entralled with Pug Ok. The story is that I hacked SVK for many months with clkao. SVK worked, except it is not very flexible. There is a VCS named darcs, which is much more flexible, but is specced using quantum physics language and written in a scary language called Haskell. So, I spent one month doing nothing but learning Haskell, so I could understand darcs. Which worked well; I convinced a crazy client (who paid me to develop Parse::AFP) that Perl 5 is doomed because it has no COW (which, surprisingly, it now has), and to fund me to develop an alternate library using Haskell. That's quite a genesis. Interesting take-aways from chromatic's interview: PUGS is attracting participation from both Haskell people and perl people, and making it much easier to write tests for Perl 6 for people who can't get parrot to run on their platform. I believe they're at ~20+ committers after 1 month. Also, by jumping ahead of Parrot, PUGS helps test out compiler corner-cases and raising them while Parrot people have time to do something about it. 8:28:05 AM      comment []  trackback []