[time-nuts] Brooks Shera
EWKehren at aol.com
EWKehren at aol.com
Fri Dec 21 21:52:55 UTC 2012
I send my posting to Mrs. Stoll for approval prior to posting. Lets try
not to start the usual arguments. Brooks deserves better.
In a message dated 12/21/2012 4:28:38 P.M. Eastern Standard Time,
jra at febo.com writes:
And folks, please respect Brooks' privacy -- remember that this list is
archived in many places on the web.
paul swed said the following on 12/21/2012 04:06 PM:
> Kind of defocusing here. I think the thread is about possibly helping to
> release the shera v4.02 software. Several folks appear to be local to
> Brooks wife and may be able to help her recover information she may need
> general and if we are lucky allow the software to be at least gathered.
> On Fri, Dec 21, 2012 at 3:30 PM, David Kirkby
<david.kirkby at onetel.net>wrote:
>> On 21 December 2012 18:11, Chris Albertson <albertson.chris at gmail.com>
>>> I think whatthis says is that if you've worked hard to make a design
>>> available to others and you don't intend to sell it commercially,
>>> PUBLISH the details, the design files and the source code. Yes I
>>> kknow it is never "good enough" for others to see. But in reality it
>>> is likely better than what 99.9% of others can do.
>> I agree if you don't want to sell it, then make it public, even if it
>> is not "finished"
>> That said, some of the **** code that people release, and gets
>> circulated annoys me. Take a look at this unix shell script,
>> or the C code in the same directory
>> But another issue is that sometimes people DO want to make money from
>> their code. In that case, they want to keep it secret (as Bruce did).
>> But I supect in many cases they would probably agree to it being made
>> public in the event of their death or them becoming incapacitated.
>> Code like Bruch wrote is unlikely to be commerically useful to his
>> family, so he might as well make it public. But it may be too late.
>> I wonder if there is a technical solution to this. You encrypt your
>> secret source code, giving the encrypted code to anyone that wants it.
>> You give 3 people you trust part of the decryption key. Any two parts
>> are sufficient to decrypt the code. Would something like that be
>> acceptable to individuals that make money from code, but don't
>> realistically believe it will survice commerically without them.
>> time-nuts mailing list -- time-nuts at febo.com
>> To unsubscribe, go to
>> and follow the instructions there.
> time-nuts mailing list -- time-nuts at febo.com
> To unsubscribe, go to
> and follow the instructions there.
time-nuts mailing list -- time-nuts at febo.com
To unsubscribe, go to
and follow the instructions there.
More information about the time-nuts