Re: [9fans] Balancing Progress and Accessibility in the Plan 9 Community. (Was: [9fans] Interoperating between 9legacy and 9front)

"tl;dr: you need people doing the work before you can try to organize them; the way to get people doing the work is to bootstrap it by doing work and showing value." [from Ori]. or "Don't be the kid who can't play [whatever]ball but wants to teach everybody and be the team coach, just because he

Re: [9fans] Balancing Progress and Accessibility in the Plan 9 Community. (Was: [9fans] Interoperating between 9legacy and 9front)

Thanks Jacob for catching the mistake. Vic On Sun, May 12, 2024, at 16:12, Jacob Moody wrote: > You just sent to this to just me, not the list. Shame not everyone > could see this LLM drivel :( > > On 5/12/24 00:46, vic.thac...@fastmail.fm wrote: >> I've noticed the growing divide within our co

Re: [9fans] Balancing Progress and Accessibility in the Plan 9 Community. (Was: [9fans] Interoperating between 9legacy and 9front)

I agree that having a clear vision and charter is essential before forming a team. Regarding building an inclusive Plan 9 community that encompasses multiple groups, it's important to establish common goals and values that resonate with all members. What are your thoughts on creating open channe

Re: [9fans] Balancing Progress and Accessibility in the Plan 9 Community. (Was: [9fans] Interoperating between 9legacy and 9front)

> How can we ensure that everyone feels valued and heard? easy. stop spamming LLM garbage and start contributing concise code and documentation, not this blabber. -- 9fans: 9fans Permalink: https://9fans.topicbox.com/groups/9fans/Tcf128fa955b8aafc-M991bbf5

Re: [9fans] Balancing Progress and Accessibility in the Plan 9 Community. (Was: [9fans] Interoperating between 9legacy and 9front)

Why the fear about collaborating? Wouldn't greater 9legacy and 9front collaboration be something good for the Plan 9 community? Vic On Sun, May 12, 2024, at 20:53, hiro wrote: >> How can we ensure that everyone feels valued and heard? > > easy. stop spamming LLM garbage and start contributi

Re: [9fans] Balancing Progress and Accessibility in the Plan 9 Community. (Was: [9fans] Interoperating between 9legacy and 9front)

The collaboration is already here. You try to create tools that already exist. I'd like to pinpoint why you have this unbelievable need for control and wonder if you're not just working for Microsoft, Google or the guy who stole Freenode and just try to disrupt the plan9 community. -

Re: [9fans] Balancing Progress and Accessibility in the Plan 9 Community. (Was: [9fans] Interoperating between 9legacy and 9front)

Thank you for sharing your thoughts. I want to clarify that my intention is not to exert control or disrupt, but to foster better collaboration between communities. I understand that there may be concerns about redundancy and approaches, which is why I believe a dialogue about our common goals

Re: [9fans] Balancing Progress and Accessibility in the Plan 9 Community. (Was: [9fans] Interoperating between 9legacy and 9front)

what fears? i welcome you making this collaboration greater by helping out the people that already are busy collaborating. thank you. On Sun, May 12, 2024 at 1:58 PM wrote: > > Why the fear about collaborating? Wouldn't greater 9legacy and 9front > collaboration be something good for the Plan 9

Re: [9fans] Balancing Progress and Accessibility in the Plan 9 Community. (Was: [9fans] Interoperating between 9legacy and 9front)

why step back. step forward and put your money where your mouth is. On Sun, May 12, 2024 at 2:42 PM wrote: > > Thank you for sharing your thoughts. I want to clarify that my intention is > not to exert control or disrupt, but to foster better collaboration between > communities. I understand t

Re: [9fans] Balancing Progress and Accessibility in the Plan 9 Community. (Was: [9fans] Interoperating between 9legacy and 9front)

There's no attack, just questions. Let's say we speak with someone who rely on LLMs to get his point but still have a "need" that doesn't seem to be fulfilled by the community. I have real questions: What are your motivations? Why don't you simply ask for what you want personally and stop tellin

[9fans] one weird trick to break p9sk1 ?

I'm using a new subject [was: Interoperating between 9legacy and 9front] in the hope of continuing discussion of the vulnerability of p9sk1 without too many other distractions. mo...@posixcafe.org said: > If we agree that: > > 1) p9sk1 allows the shared secret to be brute-forced offline. > 2) The

Re: [9fans] Balancing Progress and Accessibility in the Plan 9 Community. (Was: [9fans] Interoperating between 9legacy and 9front)

"what you really want"... Fuck, now I have the Spice Girls song in mind : / -- 9fans: 9fans Permalink: https://9fans.topicbox.com/groups/9fans/Tcf128fa955b8aafc-M936ff37e60f8d604f9181726 Delivery options: https://9fans.topicbox.com/groups/9fans/subscription

Re: [9fans] Balancing Progress and Accessibility in the Plan 9 Community. (Was: [9fans] Interoperating between 9legacy and 9front)

On Sun May 12 14:43:17 +0200 2024, vester.thac...@fastmail.fm wrote: > I don't mind the ad hominem attacks. I just hope things improve. I do find > it ironic that I'm addressing the 9front community about collaboration and > inclusiveness when I recall those as being two reasons for the inceptio

Re: [9fans] Balancing Progress and Accessibility in the Plan 9 Community. (Was: [9fans] Interoperating between 9legacy and 9front)

I'm stepping back to listen. Perhaps you're not a software engineer. It is good to discuss before starting. Vic On Sun, May 12, 2024, at 22:11, hiro wrote: > why step back. step forward and put your money where your mouth is. > > On Sun, May 12, 2024 at 2:42 PM wrote: >> >> Thank you for s

Re: [9fans] one weird trick to break p9sk1 ?

sorry for ignoring your ideas about a p9sk3, but is your mentioning of ocam's razor implying that dp9ik is too complicated? is there any other reason to stick with DES instead of AES in particular? i'm not a cryptographer by any means, but just curious. On Sun, May 12, 2024 at 3:17 PM Richard Mill

[9fans] best place to be sent a patch

I have a question: where is the *best* place to be sent a patch for 9legacy? replica? GitHub? or here? I'm motivated, but I don't like to get no feedback as before. -- 9fans: 9fans Permalink: https://9fans.topicbox.com/groups/9fans/T57377acea9350f32-Mc6c4a

Re: [9fans] best place to be sent a patch

> I have a question: where is the *best* place to be sent a patch for > 9legacy? replica? GitHub? or here? You can send it by e-mail to me. -- David du Colombier -- 9fans: 9fans Permalink: https://9fans.topicbox.com/groups/9fans/T57377acea9350f32-M185748

Re: [9fans] best place to be sent a patch

best is here on the mailinglist as you can attach the patches easily, and even if david doesn't have time to respond, others here might help you on the path, others might appreciate taking part in your adventure and others might learn from it, too. i guess you can cc david if getting into 9legacy i

Re: [9fans] best place to be sent a patch

Thank you, David, hiro. I'm going to try to update libsec, if it works, I will send a patch to both David and here. 2024年5月12日(日) 23:39 hiro <23h...@gmail.com>: > > best is here on the mailinglist as you can attach the patches easily, > and even if david doesn't have time to respond, others here

Re: [9fans] Balancing Progress and Accessibility in the Plan 9 Community. (Was: [9fans] Interoperating between 9legacy and 9front)

My understanding is that the initial request came from a 9legacy member to the 9front community, and the responses were quite intriguing. It has led me to ponder how we might bridge the gap between these communities. There seems to be conflict on both sides, and for some reason, I hold 9front to

Re: [9fans] one weird trick to break p9sk1 ?

On 5/12/24 08:16, Richard Miller wrote: > I'm using a new subject [was: Interoperating between 9legacy and 9front] > in the hope of continuing discussion of the vulnerability of p9sk1 without > too many other distractions. > > mo...@posixcafe.org said: >> If we agree that: >> >> 1) p9sk1 allows th

Re: [9fans] Balancing Progress and Accessibility in the Plan 9 Community. (Was: [9fans] Interoperating between 9legacy and 9front)

this is mostly wild speculation. further, the numbers are not representative at all. since the import of the (possibly redundent) 9k amd64 work from "labs" (which in this case might mean geoff+charles?) 2 years ago there were zero active developers contributing to 9legacy. please note, that stuff

Re: [9fans] one weird trick to break p9sk1 ?

23h...@gmail.com: > sorry for ignoring your ideas about a p9sk3, but is your mentioning of > ocam's razor implying that dp9ik is too complicated? > is there any other reason to stick with DES instead of AES in > particular? i'm not a cryptographer by any means, but just curious. My comments are ab

Re: [9fans] Balancing Progress and Accessibility in the Plan 9 Community. (Was: [9fans] Interoperating between 9legacy and 9front)

Thank you, Hiro, for your insights. I apologize to everyone for my intense and fervent approach; I acknowledge that I often overlook subtleties. To add a bit of humor, even my son has saved my contact as "Rambo" in his mobile phone. :-) Vic On Mon, May 13, 2024, at 00:55, hiro wrote: > this i

Re: [9fans] one weird trick to break p9sk1 ?

> I thought of 3DES in the first instance because of this desire to be > minimally disruptive. Support for DES is already there and tested. > 3DES only needs extra keys in /mnt/keys, and because 3DES encryption > with all three keys the same becomes single DES, there's a graceful > fallback when u

Re: [9fans] one weird trick to break p9sk1 ?

Quoth Richard Miller <9f...@hamnavoe.com>: > I'm using a new subject [was: Interoperating between 9legacy and 9front] > in the hope of continuing discussion of the vulnerability of p9sk1 without > too many other distractions. > > mo...@posixcafe.org said: > > If we agree that: > > > > 1) p9sk1 al

Re: [9fans] Interoperating between 9legacy and 9front

to answer my own question: > Who is Eric Grosse? > author = "Russ Cox and Eric Grosse and Rob Pike and Dave Presotto and Sean Quinlan", title ="Security in {Plan 9}", -- 9fans: 9fans Permalink: https://9fans.topicbox.com

Re: [9fans] Balancing Progress and Accessibility in the Plan 9 Community. (Was: [9fans] Interoperating between 9legacy and 9front)

that's not what I said. Quoth vic.thac...@fastmail.fm: > I agree that having a clear vision and charter is essential before forming a > team. Regarding building an inclusive Plan 9 community that encompasses > multiple groups, it's important to establish common goals and values that > resonate

Re: [9fans] one weird trick to break p9sk1 ?

Quoth o...@eigenstate.org: > Quoth Richard Miller <9f...@hamnavoe.com>: > > I'm using a new subject [was: Interoperating between 9legacy and 9front] > > in the hope of continuing discussion of the vulnerability of p9sk1 without > > too many other distractions. > > > > mo...@posixcafe.org said: > >

Re: [9fans] one weird trick to break p9sk1 ?

On Sun, May 12, 2024 at 02:16:47PM +0100, Richard Miller wrote: > > That's quadrillions of years. Not what most people would call "trivial". > And that's generously assuming the implementation of meet-in-the-middle > is zero cost. Without meet-in-the-middle, we're looking at a 168-bit > keyspace a

Re: [9fans] one weird trick to break p9sk1 ?

On Sun, May 12, 2024 at 12:44 PM Richard Miller <9f...@hamnavoe.com> wrote: > 23h...@gmail.com: > > sorry for ignoring your ideas about a p9sk3, but is your mentioning of > > ocam's razor implying that dp9ik is too complicated? > > is there any other reason to stick with DES instead of AES in > > p

Re: [9fans] Balancing Progress and Accessibility in the Plan 9 Community. (Was: [9fans] Interoperating between 9legacy and 9front)

The complexity of communication in this medium often necessitates detailed discussions. You highlighted the need for additional personnel to manage the workload (e.g. do the work). From my perspective, this requires a well-defined vision, clear objectives, and a prioritized list of deliverable

Re: [9fans] Balancing Progress and Accessibility in the Plan 9 Community. (Was: [9fans] Interoperating between 9legacy and 9front)

I don't think this approach has ever worked in the open source world -- it always starts with someone building something useful. The vision and goal is defined by the work being done. After something useful is built, people start to join in and contribute. After enough people join in, it makes se

Re: [9fans] Balancing Progress and Accessibility in the Plan 9 Community. (Was: [9fans] Interoperating between 9legacy and 9front)

On Mon, May 13, 2024 at 09:21:20AM +0900, vester.thac...@fastmail.fm wrote: > unclear who exactly is responsible. Typically, a team of two or more > individuals would focus on these deliverables. nobody is "responsible" and there are no "deliverables" the people who covet bureaucracy have on

Re: [9fans] Balancing Progress and Accessibility in the Plan 9 Community. (Was: [9fans] Interoperating between 9legacy and 9front)

On Sun, May 12, 2024 at 9:33 PM wrote: > I don't think this approach has ever worked in > the open source world -- it always starts with > someone building something useful. The vision > and goal is defined by the work being done. > > After something useful is built, people start > to join in and

Re: [9fans] Balancing Progress and Accessibility in the Plan 9 Community. (Was: [9fans] Interoperating between 9legacy and 9front)

On Sun, May 12, 2024 at 09:46:12PM -0400, Dan Cross wrote: > > So what is it, exactly, that people want? The only people who feel like there's some conflict to resolve are people who do not use the software and have nothing to offer except for social commentary. This "us vs them" shit is only of

Re: [9fans] Balancing Progress and Accessibility in the Plan 9 Community. (Was: [9fans] Interoperating between 9legacy and 9front)

As a very long time lurker to the plan9 mailing list, something occasionally catches my eye strewn amongst the arcana. The very first computer I ever actually touched was in 1979, it had these state of the ark mag stripe cardboard cards which held the enormous amount of 2kb. It wasn't mine, my engi

Re: [9fans] Balancing Progress and Accessibility in the Plan 9 Community. (Was: [9fans] Interoperating between 9legacy and 9front)

9front and 9legacy look very similar to the untrained eye. The way you use them is nearly identical, but there are a lot of small bits of polish added to 9front, as well as a number of larger tools and utilities. Even 9legacy binaries run on 9front. (And vice versa, as long as the binaries don't d

Re: [9fans] Balancing Progress and Accessibility in the Plan 9 Community. (Was: [9fans] Interoperating between 9legacy and 9front)

On Mon, May 13, 2024 at 11:46:59AM +0930, clinton wrote: > I await the scorching flames for my great impudence of interjecting into a > vociferous discussion with such a pragmatic tangent! If you don't intend to have anything hanging out with a direct internet connection, just use whatever looks c

Re: [9fans] Balancing Progress and Accessibility in the Plan 9 Community. (Was: [9fans] Interoperating between 9legacy and 9front)

On Monday, 13 May 2024, at 4:17 AM, clinton wrote: > If I were completely naive to actually  running plan9 but with many clues > about other operating systems and hardware, would it be better for me to > install 9legacy on some mildly obsolescent but still quite serviceable and > reliable hardwa

Re: [9fans] Balancing Progress and Accessibility in the Plan 9 Community. (Was: [9fans] Interoperating between 9legacy and 9front)

Sorry for the double post ... try to use an older version of 9legacy cause after the integration of 9git in the latest CD a full system compile will stop. I don't know why such software which can't be considered a patch to the 4th edition became part of the src tree instead of putting it in a c

Re: [9fans] Balancing Progress and Accessibility in the Plan 9 Community. (Was: [9fans] Interoperating between 9legacy and 9front)

On 5/12/24 20:46, Dan Cross wrote: > On Sun, May 12, 2024 at 9:33 PM wrote: >> I don't think this approach has ever worked in >> the open source world -- it always starts with >> someone building something useful. The vision >> and goal is defined by the work being done. >> >> After something usef

Re: [9fans] Balancing Progress and Accessibility in the Plan 9 Community. (Was: [9fans] Interoperating between 9legacy and 9front)

The approach is effective in open source projects when there are leaders who excel in communication, provide a clear vision, and prioritize objectives. Its effectiveness diminishes in the absence of strong communication and planning. Clear expectations generally facilitate easier collaboration a

Re: [9fans] Balancing Progress and Accessibility in the Plan 9 Community. (Was: [9fans] Interoperating between 9legacy and 9front)

On Monday, 13 May 2024, at 5:09 AM, Jacob Moody wrote: > When people suggest tossing that all out for a minimally patched 4e, I think > some people rightfully feel a bit annoyed. That's a lot of baby that goes out with that bathwater. It's Davids decission what he includes as patches for the 4th

Re: [9fans] Balancing Progress and Accessibility in the Plan 9 Community. (Was: [9fans] Interoperating between 9legacy and 9front)

Thank you, Ibrahim, for your comments. I can see where my suggestions do not make sense. It is too difficult a challenge for the communities to envisage. If no one can envisage it, then no one can do it. Vic On Mon, May 13, 2024, at 12:52, ibrahim wrote: > On Monday, 13 May 2024, at 5:09 AM

Re: [9fans] Balancing Progress and Accessibility in the Plan 9 Community. (Was: [9fans] Interoperating between 9legacy and 9front)

On 5/12/24 22:52, ibrahim via 9fans wrote: > On Monday, 13 May 2024, at 5:09 AM, Jacob Moody wrote: >> When people suggest tossing that all out for a minimally patched 4e, I think >> some people rightfully feel a bit annoyed. That's a lot of baby that goes >> out with that bathwater. > > It's Da

Re: [9fans] Balancing Progress and Accessibility in the Plan 9 Community. (Was: [9fans] Interoperating between 9legacy and 9front)

Some excellent advice so far I have to say. A reasonable assumption is that I am at least a linux user (entirely accurate, I installed slackware from floppies a long time ago when the world was new and 486es were still moderately expensive). Would a BASIC interpreter count as an operating system I

Re: [9fans] Balancing Progress and Accessibility in the Plan 9 Community. (Was: [9fans] Interoperating between 9legacy and 9front)

On Sun, May 12, 2024 at 8:53 PM ibrahim via 9fans <9fans@9fans.net> wrote: > Not a single developer who uses plan9 for distributed systems, commercial > products will dare to use a system like 9front as the sources. The reason > is quite simple : > > You ignore copyrights as you please and distrib

Re: [9fans] Balancing Progress and Accessibility in the Plan 9 Community. (Was: [9fans] Interoperating between 9legacy and 9front)

libttf was one example and because it made its way into 9legacy i inspected it. > Are you implying that a majority of users are using Plan9 in a commercial > setting? That seems a bit absurd. > For personal use I think these license issues (if they do even exist) are of > no concern. I think you

Re: [9fans] Balancing Progress and Accessibility in the Plan 9 Community. (Was: [9fans] Interoperating between 9legacy and 9front)

On Monday, 13 May 2024, at 7:33 AM, ron minnich wrote: > At no time in all this was there any evidence of incorrect behavior on the > part of 9front. None. Zip. Zero. Zed. They have always been careful to follow > the rules.  > > Further, when people in 9front wrote new code, they released it un

Re: [9fans] Balancing Progress and Accessibility in the Plan 9 Community. (Was: [9fans] Interoperating between 9legacy and 9front)

On Sun, May 12, 2024 at 11:52:29PM -0400, ibrahim via 9fans wrote: > > You ignore copyrights as you please and distributed 9front under an MIT > license long before Nokia as the owner of it decided to do so. You did > that at a time when plan9 was placed under GPL. You have apparently not read

Re: [9fans] Balancing Progress and Accessibility in the Plan 9 Community. (Was: [9fans] Interoperating between 9legacy and 9front)

The last post had some paste copy issues : There are many companies who double license code. As the owners of such code they are free to do this. Users can't relicense code as they please especially not GPL licensed code. If you download code that is GPL licensed you can't change the license t

Re: [9fans] Balancing Progress and Accessibility in the Plan 9 Community. (Was: [9fans] Interoperating between 9legacy and 9front)

On Sun, May 12, 2024 at 10:55 PM ibrahim via 9fans <9fans@9fans.net> wrote: > > > Please correct me if I'm wrong. > Permalink > > In my opinion? you are wrong. And that's as far as I will stay involved in this d

Re: [9fans] Balancing Progress and Accessibility in the Plan 9 Community. (Was: [9fans] Interoperating between 9legacy and 9front)

On Mon, May 13, 2024 at 01:54:27AM -0400, ibrahim via 9fans wrote: > > Please correct me if I'm wrong. > Happily. Here's the original revision of /lib/legal/NOTICE: http://code.9front.org/hg/plan9front/file/944787349e93/lib/legal/NOTICE > The Plan 9 software is provided under the terms of th

Re: [9fans] Balancing Progress and Accessibility in the Plan 9 Community. (Was: [9fans] Interoperating between 9legacy and 9front)

> You have apparently not read our licensing document at > /lib/legal/NOTICE, which explicitly names the terms of the original Plan > 9 code, and assigns the MIT license only to changes produced by 9front. > > As the labs-provided code has been made available under different > licenses, we have up

Re: [9fans] Balancing Progress and Accessibility in the Plan 9 Community. (Was: [9fans] Interoperating between 9legacy and 9front)

On 5/13/24 00:45, ibrahim via 9fans wrote: > libttf was one example and because it made its way into 9legacy i inspected > it. > >> Are you implying that a majority of users are using Plan9 in a commercial >> setting? That seems a bit absurd. >> For personal use I think these license issues (if

Re: [9fans] Balancing Progress and Accessibility in the Plan 9 Community. (Was: [9fans] Interoperating between 9legacy and 9front)

On Mon, May 13, 2024 at 02:04:24AM -0400, ibrahim via 9fans wrote: > > There are many companies who double license code. As the owners of such code > they are free to do this. Users can't relicense code as they please > especially not GPL licensed code. At no point did we 'relicense' anything.

Re: [9fans] Balancing Progress and Accessibility in the Plan 9 Community. (Was: [9fans] Interoperating between 9legacy and 9front)

On Mon, May 13, 2024 at 02:18:54AM -0400, ibrahim via 9fans wrote: > You really should read the GPL. Your changes were included with GPL'ed code > even in the same file and not distributed as independent patches so the > modified work as a whole got infected by the GPL license. This is explicitl

Re: [9fans] Balancing Progress and Accessibility in the Plan 9 Community. (Was: [9fans] Interoperating between 9legacy and 9front)

On Sun, May 12, 2024 at 11:01:59PM -0700, Kurt H Maier via 9fans wrote: > [...] > One by one we're getting rid of the third-party software -- I > particularly look forward to the day we can finally ditch Ghostscript -- > but in the meantime these accusations of license violations are > misinformed

Re: [9fans] Balancing Progress and Accessibility in the Plan 9 Community. (Was: [9fans] Interoperating between 9legacy and 9front)

On Monday, 13 May 2024, at 8:21 AM, Jacob Moody wrote: > I was making fun of your bragging because you implicated more installs > equated to higher quality. I never said that more installs equate higher quality and I never said that the quality of your code sucks or my code quality is better. O