Re: Where *IS* Tom?

herald wrote:
> Like I said I'm not going to keep coming up with things you can just
> Google yourself but...
>
> This is you bullying Zoltak over some interesting discussion about
> VMPC.

VMPC is crap though. It's unacademic and there are attacks against it
far faster tan the original work factor claimed by the dude.

> Everytime the discussion got going you would sweep through and hurl
> out non-truths to put the smackdown on Zoltak.

Well he REALLY doesn't have any science behind it. He REALLY couldn't
justify the design. He REALLY didn't have a clear motivation for it,
etc.

> It was getting so bad then even Mike Amling (sorry to get you into
> this, Mike) said something:

So what?

Keep in mind Zoltak was the "3 cycle patent guy" from a few years ago.
Then he plagued the group with his design. He then proceeds to make a
file encryption tool around it, etc...

Like the average troll.

> >Who am I bullying? And more importantly who have I bullied in the last
> >6 months? I want citations.
>
> And we want you to quit being a bully and a coward.

You keep saying that but I don't think you know what that means.

> Very recently you went totally off the scale on Truecrypt.

Yeah, because their design strategy IS crap. Why did they not just
link against a crypto library?

Brians comments on that are also retarded. A good cross-platform
crypto library REDUCES the chances of bugs and allows parallel
development from more than one team.

E.g. they can feed off each other. Keep in mind Brian has a motivation
to encourage "pick and choose" development models. He gets his name
all over the source for it.

Now I'm not saying Brian hasn't contributed to the field. He's
certainly a good implementor of crypto algorithms and he knows his
stuff. Just his software development [development != coding] decisions
need rethinking.

> Yes I'm pretty sure. I read it in a thread with you and Dr. Gladman
> and it was mentioned specifically in this thread.
>
> It is a good question.
>
> "Why do you repeatedly find it necessary to cast others in a negative
> light in order to promote your own views on how things should be
> done?"

First I've read of it. Are you sure you're not misrembering it?

Tom

.

Relevant Pages

  • Just a comment about manned flight.
    ... agreement as to the best way to do things in this area. ... how it will slow down enough in the design I heard about goodness knows. ... The Nasa ideas are basically time buying ones, ... Brian Gaff....Note, this account does not accept Bcc: ...
    (sci.space.shuttle)
  • Re: Retrospec
    ... Hold on there, good quality? ... Brian Gaff....Note, this account does not accept Bcc: ... > Well at least they are selling Spectrum chairs. ... > carefully balanced form and proportion of the design. ...
    (comp.sys.sinclair)
  • Re: Seeing A Design
    ... Brian S. Smith wrote: ... It is heavy on analysis and design, ... > and for some projects it may, indeed, be an optimal methodology. ...
    (comp.object)
  • Re: Oil-spaced quadruplet - anybody made one??
    ... > brian wrote: ... >> Note that I'm using a custom modelled version of fluorite based on the ... For some strange reason I can't ... I haven't yet found a good design strategy ...
    (sci.astro.amateur)
  • Re: Important BRAM safety tip ( was: Adding "super-LUTs" to FPGA, good idea ?)
    ... I have to agree with Brian. ... I was amazed to find out that violating address timing could ... So I've got a design that I ... no one at Xilinx seemed to know that when RAMs don't ...
    (comp.arch.fpga)