Re: [Anima-bootstrap] Meeting notes from 6/24

["Michael Behringer (mbehring)" <[e-mail]>]

> -----Original Message-----
> From: Anima-bootstrap [mailto:[e-mail]] On
> Behalf Of Michael Richardson
> Sent: 25 June 2015 20:10
> To: [e-mail]
> Subject: Re: [Anima-bootstrap] Meeting notes from 6/24
> 
> 
> Michael Behringer (mbehring) <[e-mail]> wrote:
>     > A high level question up front: When we wrote draft-pritikin, we
>     > started from the premise that the draft should describe the most secure
>     > model as a reference, then in section 6, explains alternative models
>     > which may be less secure, but more useful for certain environments. Are
>     > we still sticking to this philosophy "describe best possible, and
>     > separately less secure alternatives"? (I hope so ;-)
> 
> I think that this is the best way.

Good - we're on the same page. 
 
> I wanted to describe the less secure ways as "mitigations" --- things you do
> because you are unable to do a secure(r) thing.  Brian Carpenter did not like
> that term, and I'm still trying to understand why.

That term doesn't sound right to me either. From dictionary.reference.com: 

1. the act of mitigating, or lessening the force or intensity of something unpleasant, as wrath, pain, grief, or extreme circumstances: 
Social support is the most important factor in the mitigation of stress among adolescents.

2. the act of making a condition or consequence less severe: 
the mitigation of a punishment.

3. the process of becoming milder, gentler, or less severe. 

4. a mitigating circumstance, event, or consequence.

bottom line: to me "mitigation" is a positive thing (see definition 3). It's making something bad feel less bad. I think if you take any of the less secure options, you SHOULD feel bad :-) 

Call it "less secure options" - that's what it is. 

Michael