On Thu, Jul 3, 2008 at 10:45 AM, William Pearson <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > > Nope. I don't include B in A because if A' is faulty it can cause > problems to whatever is in the same vmprogram as it, by overwriting > memory locations. A' being a separate vmprogram means it is insulated > from the B and A, and can only have limited impact on them.
Why does it need to be THIS faulty? If there is a known method to prevent such faultiness, it can be reliably implemented in A, so that all its descendants keep it, unless they are fairly sure it's not needed anymore or there is a better alternative. > I don't get what your obsession is with having things all be in one > program is anyway. Why is that better? I'll read knowability of FAI > again, but I have read it before and I don't think it will enlighten > me. I'll come back to the rest of your email once I have done that. It's not necessarily better, but I'm trying to make explicit in what sense is it worse, that is what is the contribution of your framework to the overall problem, if virtually the same thing can be done without it. -- Vladimir Nesov [EMAIL PROTECTED] http://causalityrelay.wordpress.com/ ------------------------------------------- agi Archives: http://www.listbox.com/member/archive/303/=now RSS Feed: http://www.listbox.com/member/archive/rss/303/ Modify Your Subscription: http://www.listbox.com/member/?member_id=8660244&id_secret=106510220-47b225 Powered by Listbox: http://www.listbox.com
