[e2e] Borat Science. Was: Re: Are we doing sliding window in the Internet?

[Detlef Bosau]

Once again: NO!

<Bad Flame>

First of all: What is Linux?

A job application of mine once was rejected, one question was: Do you 
know Linux?

When it came to Unix, I mentioned several flavours of Linux-clones, I´m 
familiar with - I forgot about Linux. Therefore, in the eyes of that 
employer,  I was an idiot.

Excuse me, I use Linux in my home since 1993, that´t not that long but 
it´s perhaps longer that many kids in some human ressources
department use computers at all.

</Bad Flame>

O.k. For a even more bad flame on this issue, please refer to RMS´ well 
known talk on Linux and Free Software.

I just remember that one day even in some university allegedly a 
department´s chair had said that Linux were more realistic than the NS2.
Here in Germany, we have a "joke". Roughly translated: At night, it´s 
colder than outside.
That´s the same scientific level.

What is "realistic"? What is _reality_?

I only can talk about standards and whether a software is compliant to 
them or not.

The problem with Linux is, that it is "positioned" on the market as a 
competitor for M$ products and that their are growing commercial 
interests behind it - and no adequate commercial responsibility and 
accountability at the same time. So, Linux lost its virginity when it is 
taken as a scientific research system and it never achieved maturity 
when it comes to a commercial accountability.

I use Linux because it is free, it is sufficient for my purposes. But I 
don´t accept this "Linux religion" which appears to be continously 
spreading.

The very point is a different one.

As I said some days ago, scientific research starts with a problem 
statement, than we investigate whether there exist solutions or whether 
the problem can be solved at all and evaluate solutions and approaches. 
Perhaps we consider new ones if they are better than existing ones or 
even the first ones to exist.

That is, to my understanding, proper science.

And it absolutely doesn´t matter whether wie run TCP/IP on Linux, M$ 
systems, AIX, HP-UX, SunOS or even the KA9Q stack.

So, what are we talking about here?

Should we do advertising for certain operating systems?

Or should we talk about end to end issues in distributed systems?

Here in Germany standards sometimes are respected the same way as an act 
of parliament. E.g. we have something called "Technischer 
Ueberwachungsverein", roughly: Technical Supervisory Association. If you 
own a car, you have to persent this to this association every two years 
in order to make sure that your car complies to the technical 
regulations here in Germany. And if you don´t do so, you are not allowed 
to use this car in the public road traffic otherwise it would be a 
criminal offense. And it absolutely doesn´t matter in this context if 
you use a Volkswagen or a BMW. (Thanks to Professor Schrempp 
Mercedes-Benz does not exist any longer. There is some nostalgic trade 
mark which remembers us at these cars.) So, even you have a "star" at 
your hood this won´t help you if the test badge is missing.

So, we do not experiment with different brake, steering wheels etc. in 
the public road traffic and count the victims of deadly accidents 
afterwards.

Instead we _first_ define standards, _then_ we make sure that cars used 
in Germany comply to these. Otherwise these cars must not be used. Period.

I once talked to a colleague who told me how this is handled in some 
country where he spent his vacation. IIRC they had an extemely 
scientific way for brake testing there: The experiment. Roughly spoken: 
Put a child against a wall, tell the driver to brake timely before the 
wall - and if the child is still alive afterwards the brake may have 
worked sufficiently fine.

Sometimes, this approach is called "Borat Science".


Lynne Jolitz wrote:
> Yes, Greg. You're right. Buy-in is difficult to achieve and maintain, especially in open source. As I also went on to say in that same email you quote:
> "But if it's not worth the time and effort for the academic side to take on this charge, the marketplace will have to serve instead."
>
> People are very good at finding reasons to justify inaction on their part, and it is frustrating to even try for something better. That takes vision and risk.
>   

Excuse me, but what exactly do you call "inaction" here? I always see a 
vivid discussion here. Many papers are published - much more than I can 
read. Problems are identified and solved. Where is "inaction" here? In 
addition: When will the first M$-guy come to this discussion and will 
claim that the academic community has to fix what they don´t get handled 
in Redmond? Do you happen to mix up the task of industrial / commercial 
implementation and proper academic research?
> If one were to set up such an arrangement with any eye towards the long-term, wouldn't it be wise to find an approach that would bring in parties and allow them to all benefit from an accord? Isn't it in the best interests of OS and networking 

Of course! That´s to my understandig the purpose of the IETF. _That´s_ 
the venue.
> developers, academics, and scientists to make sure things work well?
>
> But that would require people to reach out to others, put skin in the game, and take a risk. It requires trust and mutual respect. It's much easier to complain and expect someone else to do the work. And it's much easier to ignore complaints because there is too much work to do already.
>   

Excuse me, I have no one to do my work. I´m a single unemployed male and 
I have to do _any_ of my work on my own. And perhaps, some day this is 
reckognized. If not? Bad luck.

So, _please_ don´t tell me anything about risks before yo know what 
you´re talking about.

I try to take part in the academic discussion _without_ any help or 
assistance. When I try to publish a paper, I even don´t know who will 
pay to possbible conference fees. That´s all my own risk. Perhaps, some 
time this will pay. For the moment, it doesn´t. Howver, there is no 
opportunity for me to get a job, so I try to do some scientific work.

_Without_ any help by the IETF or any others.

Perhaps, this requires to do some homework. When something does not 
work, you will even have to spend a night on it or a weekend.

But please don´t talk about taking a risk here.

> And that's why the marketplace is the default. It's not the best solution, but it is a solution.
>
>   

The marketplace has thrown me out.

I´m a single male, unemployed for 3 years now, aged 43. For the 
marketplace, I´m not longer a human being. I graduated in 1992, so for our
employment centre and our human ressources departments I´m regarded as 
an "unskilled worker".

So, I take a risk, i.e. that Joe throws me out of this list when I say 
this, but is my honest opinion: Please leave me alone with this McKinsey 
attitude!