Disney and Sun Microsystems to team up on a new reality based television program.
Disney and Sun Microsystems have just announced a deal to create a show called TRON vs. The MCP. In preparations, Sun has undertaken a project to create a "real-life" MCP, so as to add to the realism of the show. The beta version of this MCP has been labeled N1. Details at 11.
C# allows you to do this very thing. Basically the comments/documentation can be embedded right in the code itself in XML format. You can then compile the source code into documentation, as opposed to compiling it into binaries.
Why is this subject any different than, say, encrypted e-mail? To me it seems to follow the same sort of model.
I know people who will only read e-mails that have a valid digital signature. Everything else they toss. Are they "constrained"? Well, yes. But that's their choice. They enjoy the security of knowing that the e-mail they read is actually from the person who sent it.
Why would a hardware-based system be any different? You download a program, it has no signature, you say "I don't care, install it anyway" and that's it. Or, you download a program and it says "this signature comes from Joe Pirate" and you choose not to install it. Or you choose to install it anyway.
I may be missing some key piece of information here, but I'm just not seeing why this is such a big deal when the same exact situation exists already with encrypted e-mail.
Slashdot Mirror
Disney and Sun Microsystems to team up on a new reality based television program.
Disney and Sun Microsystems have just announced a deal to create a show called TRON vs. The MCP. In preparations, Sun has undertaken a project to create a "real-life" MCP, so as to add to the realism of the show. The beta version of this MCP has been labeled N1. Details at 11.
C# allows you to do this very thing. Basically the comments/documentation can be embedded right in the code itself in XML format. You can then compile the source code into documentation, as opposed to compiling it into binaries.
Why is this subject any different than, say, encrypted e-mail? To me it seems to follow the same sort of model.
I know people who will only read e-mails that have a valid digital signature. Everything else they toss. Are they "constrained"? Well, yes. But that's their choice. They enjoy the security of knowing that the e-mail they read is actually from the person who sent it.
Why would a hardware-based system be any different? You download a program, it has no signature, you say "I don't care, install it anyway" and that's it. Or, you download a program and it says "this signature comes from Joe Pirate" and you choose not to install it. Or you choose to install it anyway.
I may be missing some key piece of information here, but I'm just not seeing why this is such a big deal when the same exact situation exists already with encrypted e-mail.