From mboxrd@z Thu Jan  1 00:00:00 1970
X-Spam-Checker-Version: SpamAssassin 3.4.4 (2020-01-24) on polar.synack.me
X-Spam-Level: 
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-1.9 required=5.0 tests=BAYES_00
	autolearn=unavailable autolearn_force=no version=3.4.4
Path: 
 border2.nntp.dca3.giganews.com!backlog4.nntp.dca3.giganews.com!border1.nntp.dca.giganews.com!nntp.giganews.com!usenet.blueworldhosting.com!feeder01.blueworldhosting.com!feeder.erje.net!eu.feeder.erje.net!weretis.net!feeder1.news.weretis.net!feeder4.news.weretis.net!news.teledata-fn.de!newsfeed.arcor.de!newsspool4.arcor-online.net!news.arcor.de.POSTED!not-for-mail
Date: Tue, 27 May 2014 21:57:14 +0200
From: Georg Bauhaus <rm-host.bauhaus@maps.futureapps.de>
User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (Macintosh; Intel Mac OS X 10.9;
 rv:24.0) Gecko/20100101 Thunderbird/24.5.0
MIME-Version: 1.0
Newsgroups: comp.lang.ada
Subject: Re: A way to do a huge Ada promotion
References: <lm01r6$g7a$1@speranza.aioe.org>
 <CJVgv.324742$1w1.112189@fx03.iad>
 <5384a502$0$6663$9b4e6d93@newsspool3.arcor-online.net>
 <jX4hv.484649$TT7.148637@fx02.iad>
In-Reply-To: <jX4hv.484649$TT7.148637@fx02.iad>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=windows-1252; format=flowed
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Message-ID: <5384ee1c$0$6703$9b4e6d93@newsspool2.arcor-online.net>
Organization: Arcor
NNTP-Posting-Date: 27 May 2014 21:57:16 CEST
NNTP-Posting-Host: 3f6adac1.newsspool2.arcor-online.net
X-Trace: DXC=; [m[7nPQ33:U`5g[@c]@J1A9EHlD; 3Yc24Fo<]lROoR18kF<OcfhCO;
 D<=Jh[b_HG3PCY\c7>ejV8FRI=6; 0U; ]=]hM_7L7kdf9
X-Complaints-To: usenet-abuse@arcor.de
X-Original-Bytes: 2608
Xref: number.nntp.dca.giganews.com comp.lang.ada:186665
Date: 2014-05-27T21:57:16+02:00
List-Id: <comp.lang.ada>

On 27/05/14 20:37, Shark8 wrote:
> On 27-May-14 08:45, G.B. wrote:
>> On 27.05.14 07:51, Shark8 wrote:
>>> IMO, the two items which [if adopted] would profoundly change the web
>>> are the following:
>>
>> IMO, in view of apps and browser plugins, the only thing that
>> can actually change the web is a mathematically proven algorithm
>> that addresses this part of HTTP:
>>
>> "10.4.3 402 Payment Required
>>
>> "This code is reserved for future use."
>>
>> http://www.w3.org/Protocols/rfc2616/rfc2616-sec10.html
>>
>>
>> Is this problem more difficult to solve than Fermat's last
>> conjecture? (Perhaps not to be discussed in an Ada newsgroup.)
>>
>
> I fail to see how this would not be addressed by (a) a generalized, protocol for describing state-machines [recursive & modularizable], *and* (b) formally verified security modules.
>
> Granted, (a) is a move away from HTTP and likely to be shunned because it's not building on existing technology. Even if that were forgone, (b) is needed independently of the underlying networking protocols.

Verified state will, I think, require hardware, at least
whenever high assurance is necessary. I suppose that
organized distribution of media and phone based behavior
mining are already looking into further possibilities.

So, yes, it can't be HTTP.