[MUD-Dev] Re: Unix is a mud (Re: Ugh, IS Diablo a mud?)

[Koster]

> -----Original Message-----
> From: Ola Fosheim Gr=F8stad [mailto:olag at ifi.uio.no]
> Sent: Saturday, September 26, 1998 5:34 PM
> To: mud-dev at kanga.nu
> Subject: [MUD-Dev] Re: Unix is a mud (Re: Ugh, IS Diablo a mud?)
>=20
>=20
> Koster, Raph wrote:

> > Although your term for listmembers at the end end troubles me, your
> > reference to EC's new project intrigues me. Can you explain more or
> > provide a pointer?
>=20
> I can understand how weary you guys in Texas must be for the term
"racist".
> Personally,  I have no trouble with it.  I believe all humans are
racists at
> heart, it is perhaps an integral part of our self protective =
instincts
> approximation and abstraction mechanisms (stereotyping).  In this =
case
it
> seems to fit the bill, I believe a "racist"  is a person who is
connecting
> value and (soft) abilities to genetic relationships in a "hard" way.
The low
> level technical side of a MUD is in some sense its genes.  It's =
(soft)
> abilities is however demonstrated by how users use it.  There is
clearly a
> relation between genes and abilities, but genes does not dictate the
> outcome. The context is an essential and influential factor.

I just have a fair amount of sensitivity to words like that (I'm not
from Texas, either. ;) FWIW, I agree with your *point*, just not so =
much
with the term you used.

> I don't know much more about EC Habitat than what you can find on
their
> website. I am not allowed to participate in their Beta as I am
nonamerican
> (damn racists :). Anyway, the idea is that a server-client model is
> expensive and inefficient for millions of simultaneous users.=20
> A peer model seems to fit their grand vision (JM Jarre??). I believe
they=20
> solve hacking by global keys and encryption, which could explain =
their
blatant
> discrimination of us poor Europeans (as if the suffering from=20
> trans-atlantic lag isn't enough).

Hmm. I've been thinking a lot about encryption and its use for this =
sort
of thing, including distributed systems like what it appears Habitat is
going to use. Mind you, I speak as someone inexpert in these matters...
but it seems the stumbling block is that you can encrypt transmissions
all you want, but if the machine you're on decrypts it, then it's in =
the
clear in memory and you can get at it all you want and even use the
client's built-in encryption capabilities to "legitimize" your changes
to the client's memory. UO has already had a piece of software released
by a pair of hackers that does exactly this in order to send spoof
packets to the server...

Anyone savvier than I who can shed light on this issue?

-Raph