Re: Request for Comment - OT

[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]

 



On Saturday 11 Feb 2006 00:49, Craig White wrote:
> On Sat, 2006-02-11 at 00:00 +0000, Tony Dietrich wrote:
> > I have been asked to start a feasibility study into the provision of a
> > particular service.  I am donating my time free of charge.
> >
> > A very short document outlining the background and the requirements of
> > this service can be found at
> >
> > http://www.transcc.co.uk/RFCSecureConferenceService.html
> >
> > I would be grateful if members of this list could take a look at this
> > document and offer their suggestions/comments.  This mailing list is not
> > the forum for this subject, so I'd encourage anyone that is able or
> > wiling to comment on this RFC to post to the address in the
> > above-mentioned document.
> >
> >
> > I would like to stress that this project is not commercial and is never
> > intended to make a profit.  It may however turn out that we cannot keep
> > the project open source, because of its very nature.  It may also be the
> > case that in order to convince the various intended end-users of the
> > security of the project, that the final provider of the service might be
> > a commercial organisation, and that end-users may be asked to pay a
> > contribution towards the upkeep of the service.
> > It is perhaps a sad comment on today's world that there are some people
> > out there that believe that a commercial company is somehow inherently
> > more trustworthy than a non-profit-making organisation!
>
> ----
> Windows thinking is to invent the wheel with each program.
>
> Linux thinking is to recycle what's available.
>
No arguments there

> There are lots of various chat type programs available for Apache or
> Tomcat servers that could require SSL encryption and for all purposes
> capable of providing an encrypted, multi-user conference - some probably
> with file exchange too...I'm not gonna bother researching it.
>
Encryption isn't the problem per se .. authentication via a method that can 
gain acceptance by end-users that are by their very nature highly sceptical 
of anything IT-related is the problem.

> Lot's of open source projects obtain sponsorship by various businesses
> and governmental agencies.
>
Hmmm .. yeeeessss ... we're trying!  We have a lot of half-promises, but 
everyone is sitting on the fence until we can come up with a credible, 
CONVINCING proposal.
Catch 22.

> As to your notion that there may be benefit to being a 'for profit'
> company as opposed to a 'not for profit' company in terms of pubic
> trust...that's probably the nature of things like 'the devil you know
> versus the devil you don't know' and many times, a small 'not for
> profit' agency can get credibility by associating with well known
> non-profit agencies but you have to remember that people tend to trust
> the names they see in the papers, magazines, on television even though
> in many cases, we really know little about them. 'For profit' companies
> have the money to spend to promote their image.

My arguments exactly .. I was trying to carefully put across the arguments I'm 
facing, not put my own point-of-view.

>
> Craig


[Index of Archives]     [Current Fedora Users]     [Fedora Desktop]     [Fedora SELinux]     [Yosemite News]     [Yosemite Photos]     [KDE Users]     [Fedora Tools]     [Fedora Docs]

  Powered by Linux