Register for free to join our community of investors and share your ideas. You will also get access to streaming quotes, interactive charts, trades, portfolio, live options flow and more tools.
Register for free to join our community of investors and share your ideas. You will also get access to streaming quotes, interactive charts, trades, portfolio, live options flow and more tools.
Great find. Maybe the Open Source guys can discipline M'soft. Did you notice that they want to deploy the open source architecture in parallel with the deployment of TC deliverables by the non-open source industry players.
Query: Was someone from the staff of the Justice Department, Anti-trust Division at this EFF Nashville meeting ...?
The answer, to be fair, would have to involve more than looking at the burn rate. Projected cash flow, based on convincing evidence, such as executed contracts tangibly being fulfilled, would have to be a part of the share price valuation calculus. Your guess is as good as anyone's.
I'm sure 'the Street' knows exactly who we are, and exactly what we do. 'The Street' does not push $0.80 per share stocks of companies with 100 - 200 person employee rosters (unless their ROI is some DEMONSTRATED incredibly HUGE number). Does that spell it out for you, yet?
Waiting for all laptop users to convert to using laptops that employ hard drives like the Seagate FDE drives, which are on the way to market, even as you ask your pointless rhetorical question ("Where was Wave").
Cisco will NOT 'secure the internet' to use your unfortunate phraseology, because not every enterprise that connects to 'the internet' will be using a Cisco router. End of story... no additional technical complexities need to be explained... so, try again, maybe you'll get lucky the next time, this morning.
What does 'OT' mean? It means it has no relevance to Wave. It does have relevance to informed Wave investors....
So, we need to 'make hay' while the sun is still shining on us. I hope SKS has absolutely NO illusions, re: Microsoft. His 'gee golly, this is really cool' demeanor sometimes makes me wonder nervously.
Don't jump to premature conclusions... the absence of mention of a TPM does not equal the absence of the thing of interest, the TPM.
Free speech, please... anyone, Snackman included, is free to prognosticate, but we all here are adults, and can credit, or deprecate, what anyone says, as we please.
Somebody's getting SERIOUS! This looks like the frontal assault at Normandy.
A small problem of definitional semantics reveals itself in this otherwise relevant article: the aurthors' use of the term. 'trusted computing' should really be called, 'trustABLE computing', a concept which is related to the mathematical idea of a provably correct solution to a mathematical problem. [OT - My girlfriend was a programmer/systems developement manager for the old AT&T, and she drives me crazy, because I can't posit any conversational proposition without her demanding that every element of my statement be able to be incorporated into a conclusion that meets the 'provably correct' logical test. The other programmers and telco engineers loved her code, because it was the antithesis of spaghetti code. She's a Wavoid, but I hope she never sees this post.]
OT - Is everbody recovering from the grilling? Where is everyone??
you describe the phenomenon of new technology adoption with thoughtful constructs, so let me offer another. As i am at heart, an empiricist, i found the following empirical observaotion useful. A study asked what factors, if any, are useful in predicting whether a technology innovation will be adopted, or not. the answer was then derived from looking at a myriad of novel technologies and was stated with this (empirical) conclusion: "A new technology or technique or innovation will be adopted if its intended users or beneficiaries PERCEIVE it to be at least 60% (or so) more effective in AT LEAST ONE important measure of utility of the technology it is INTENDED to replace. The study yields some interesting insights into novel technologies that experienced a 'tipping point' and those (which are legend) that did not. For example, steam locomotives are actually thermodynamically more efficient in most operational uses than are diesel-electric locomotives, yet diesel-electric locomotives completely supplanted steam locomotives. This analysis gives insight into this apparent conundrum. Thermal efficiency is not the PERCEIVED IMPORTANT MEASURE of UTILITY or MERIT that railroad owners based their technology adoption (i.e.. 'tipping point') decision on. What caused their 'tip' to diesel-electrics was two things: absence of polluting smoke in the urbanized areas of railroad operations and the need, if diesels were to be used in urban areas, to not maintain duplicative engine maintainance operations and assets. Similarly with laser scapels. Most surgeons were reluctent to adopt laser scapels... sharpened edged instruments woked well enough in all aspects deamed important in their intended surgical use... a 'tipping point' seemed unlikely. But something happened to change the PERCEPTION OF AN IMPORTANT BENEFIT. Surgeons who tried the laser scapel REALIZED that they cauterized the interface area of the incision, thereby drastically reducing bleeding and promoting a much less difficult recovery. In short the predicates for a 'tipping point ranged from problematic (i,e., doubtful) to non-existent until an unanticipated benefit or utility emerged from actual use and experience. In the case of trusted computing our hob-goblin has been the perceotion-of-benefit issue. We have mis-perceived the liklihood of adoption, as well as the rate of adoption because our appraisal of the most salient benefit has differed radically from that of all of the relevant decisional actors, for example, the incumbent hardware and software OEMs, the regulatory policy-makers, and most importantly, investment institutions and the non-technical user/consumer community.
Yes, and with Wave's trusted computing infrastructure, it will be the tipping point followed by, and amplified by, the network effect, just as it was with the fax machine, or broadband internet, or broadcast television.
Did the DSL company force you to use it. I had to mothball my 260z when I worked at GM.
Did we have three employees fluent in Nihongo???
Uunfortunately, you're counter-cultural with that perspective.
Agree 100% Dig. NOBODY who has observed M'Soft since its inception circa 198? is that credulous.
Microsoft is a monopoly. The open standards approach of the TCG is both an immediate, and a long-term threat to their monopoly, hence they have made a deal with a TCG loser (Infineon) to offer a more marketable alternative to the purely TCG-compliant solution(s). BTW, this FlexGo thing is just the opening gambit in a long-term strategy, if Softie is acting true to form.
"scratch cards" as the payment modality, not TPMs with secure
monotonic counters, will be used for FlexGo.
OT - Could this be a 'killer app'? --
I heard a blurb on the "Wall Street this Morning" radio program about a software program that encrypts computer to computer (VoIP) phone calls to ensure privacy. This indicates a growing security consciousness on the part of the average business user and consumer, IMO.
A 3 billion euro kitty would buy a lot of WAVX shares.... Uuugh!
You can file your returns on-line, already, using a digital signature and an ordinary home computer. This has been possible for some years now.
From the article:
"The question I have now is whether Milberg Weiss is just as corrupt as the people it sues."
This bespeaks the prevailing anti-corporate bias that pervades the general media and popular culture. Unfortunately, it is this anti-corporate popular bias that allows the sharks of the class action (and personal injury and medical malpractic, etc.) bar to thrive and prosper. The legal 'Robin Hoods' of society are not disinterested altruists who work for chump change.
Follow the security clearances... I'm willing to bet that secretaries and accountants [ ] who don't have a security clearance will be the personnel who will do their work on the Lenovo machines.
i think the Japanese origin proportion of the total Brazilian population is 25%, and that they are the largest single national origin group. Also, there are very active business linkages with Japan and Brazil. Lot's of potential, if not yet actual, business synergy for trusted computing infrastructuren between Brazil and Japan exists, as you surmise. Wave is gonna be just awesome, and I'm no vacuous valley girl talking.
OT - I love Brazil too... did some work down there (sobre caisses de volantes for cars, and such) and would love to buy a WAVE-y condo on the beach, after Vegas, of course!
i suspect the answer will revolve around the question of whether the integrated TPM+?chip provides for or does not provide for hardware isolation of the TPM functions (recall TrustZone, versus previous CPU architectures).
Weby, slow down a bit. You are writing new law law. You have the basic idea, but you are mis-stating some things. Non-repudiation, for example, is not about mutual identification
and authentication, either in the real world or the cyber-
world, although that is a basis, in most cases, of it. Legally, 'non-repudiation' simply means the inability of one contracting party to repudiate his contract-forming act (exemplified for example by a signature, but it could be something else ( "I do." in a wedding...), coupled with the ability of the other party to enforce or rely on the contract-forming act of the other contract-forming party. This might sound like nit-picking, but it's not. Just think of the last time you formed a contract with a tele-marketing person during a phone call... non-repudiation is involved, but it is not exactly congruent with MUTUALLY VERIFIED identities.
They are calling for the development and submission of proposals for a reference architecture for a Brazilian system for interactive communication of (the various forms of)
digital 'content', including digital HD TV, e-ccommererce, games, etc. It is clear from the document that they expect that the terminal device (which will be not merely an 'STB') will utilize the TPM functionality as of the art,teta an essential and enabling feature of the overall system architecture(s) that will be proposed. They are soliciting proofs-of-concept for an entire NATIONAL system for innovative, state of the art, secure, interactive digital communication, not just an STB. ... e obrigado Chr
Vacuous or tedious DD? We need something to do while we wait.
barge, semantics are interesting... is your answer a 'business model' or a 'vision'? Or, perish the thought, an 'objective'?
two phases: 1. derive revenue first (as TPMs proliferate) from licensing fundimental proprietary IP and selling the softeware, software tools, and basic applications that enable the primary TPM benefits of data security and platform security through platform attestatation and user authentation (IP bundaling). 2. After ubiquitous TPM deployment, to sell end user applications and services that require the TPM and trusted computing and which generate recurring transactional revenue. This is the idealized model. There will be cases where, for instance, some transaction-based applications will be developed and not run by Wave, but be licensed by Wave to others for their own use (EBay, the Electric Utility, on-line ticket agencies, etc.)
The revenue model is 'explainable', it's just not 'comprehensibile' to most.
One question to ask: "When do you expect that sales reps at your level will receive sales training on selling the Wave Systems security software?".
awk, e-mail me at <al-waliid@sbcglobal.net> on patent question.
'functional equivalency' -- Unfortunately, that is not the test of a patent's validity. Aspirin is 'functionally equivalent' to many patented anti-inflamatory pain medications, but aspirin has no patent protection, which was the point of Matt's and my posts. Of course you are correct about the issue of LT/VT and its associated network technologies being the functional equivalent of a programmable coprocessor. Even so, the presence or absence of patent protection does have some commercial strategic consequences. Just look at the Research In Motion (Blackberry) patent entanglement, if you you get too complacent in relying on 'functional equivalency'.
absolutely!
Employ the trust server architecture without a PROGRAMABLE security coprocessesor and this patent is circumvented. The TPM is not PROGRAMMABLE. End of story!