Matches for spec, 583 total results Sorted by newest | relevance
Fri Jan 16 23:30:14 UTC 2015 <mircea_popescu> asciilifeform i have no idea, it's an open spec.
Mon Jan 12 00:47:42 UTC 2015 <asciilifeform> "oh, we included code but we had no idea what it does" sort of approach to code-is-spec specwork << this is actually a very serious boojum, beyond what most realize. i'll give example.
Sun Jan 11 23:53:18 UTC 2015 <mircea_popescu> davout if proof was needed that the 'teh-code-is-teh-spec' approach is fundamentally braindamaged, well, look no further <>< clearly. not to mention the recent ecdsa openssl debacle, which is pretty much exactly a replay of the bdb stuff. "oh, we included code but we had no idea what it does" sort of approach to code-is-spec specwork
Sun Jan 11 23:50:03 UTC 2015 <davout> sgornick: an implementation detail in some older client does not count as a protocol rule in my book, if proof was needed that the 'teh-code-is-teh-spec' approach is fundamentally braindamaged, well, look no further
Fri Jan 09 19:18:24 UTC 2015 <mircea_popescu> can you implement the deedbot spec ?
Thu Jan 08 06:38:38 UTC 2015 <BingoBoingo> One crack rock and a text file can test against an actual spec.
Thu Jan 08 02:31:35 UTC 2015 <mircea_popescu> why not ? spec it.
Wed Jan 07 23:25:46 UTC 2015 <mircea_popescu> asciilifeform i thought it's implicit in the spec, in the "receiver decides if to relay" : you can configure a client to pass, to user or other clients, whatever you wish
Wed Jan 07 06:09:26 UTC 2015 <mircea_popescu> artifexd you will notice the spec is broadcast-oriented.
Wed Jan 07 05:50:07 UTC 2015 <mircea_popescu> in both cases, we are discussing user Panopticon, who sees all and says nothing. now, in spec as is, it is true that user P will know... nothing. correct ? whereas in your proposed spec, he would know... everything. correct ?
Wed Jan 07 04:46:06 UTC 2015 <mircea_popescu> spec was simpler on the assumption that since the helo package is keyed to the supposed key of the server, there's no need to challenge
Wed Jan 07 04:44:44 UTC 2015 <mircea_popescu> i don;'t see what in the spec would prevent anyone from so doing.
Wed Jan 07 04:35:07 UTC 2015 <asciilifeform> let's work out, using spec as given in mircea_popescu's article: what does an inquisitor know about a particular utterance
Wed Jan 07 04:34:46 UTC 2015 <mircea_popescu> not with the spec as given, imo.
Wed Jan 07 04:28:44 UTC 2015 <mircea_popescu> there is no such thing as "sign for friends" outside of the model detailed in my spec.
Wed Jan 07 03:53:32 UTC 2015 <artifexd> I still haven't processed the wot part of the spec. I'm still trying to understand why you wouldn't sign the messages. It seems to be asking for evil actors.
Wed Jan 07 03:33:53 UTC 2015 <asciilifeform> when part of mechanism, by spec and by reliable practice sans hand-holding
Mon Jan 05 18:02:42 UTC 2015 <mircea_popescu> o you meant in your signed alt-spec. mkay.
Mon Jan 05 17:42:55 UTC 2015 <mircea_popescu> mebbe "heyo" ? make an argentine joke right in the spec!
Mon Jan 05 10:22:23 UTC 2015 <RagnarDanneskjol> punkman has a newer much more detailed spec