On Mon, 2006-05-01 at 06:12 +0200, Marcus Brinkmann wrote: > At Sun, 30 Apr 2006 23:47:22 -0400, > "Jonathan S. Shapiro" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> > Your ability to destroy the storage that I borrow from you does not > > create a moral hazard. I may lose my bits, but I knew that when I > > decided to use your storage. > > If it creates a moral or otherwise hazard depends on the use case. Then please give *one* use case as an example. I haven't seen any, and I am trying to understand it. Insulting me is not an acceptable substitute for actually answering the questions. > > That is all very nice, but I notice you did not address my point at all: > > the party making the loan (and I agree that it isn't quite a loan, > > because it can be instantly reclaimed) requires the right to reclaim, > > but not the right to read. > > I explained to you why I do not think that this is necessarily the > case. Actually, I do not recall that you *did* explain this. You *asserted* it. Strongly. You have not yet given a use case supporting any story that this is required. And no, you really *didn't* answer the painting question. shap _______________________________________________ L4-hurd mailing list [email protected] http://lists.gnu.org/mailman/listinfo/l4-hurd
