Re: Getting on with Things

[Stewart Bryant <[e-mail]>]

On 09/03/2016 16:53, Adrian Farrel wrote:
> Eliot,
>
> Picking one piece out of your MUD...
>
>> I've floated an idea in draft-lear-mud-framework-00.txt which talks a
>> little about this.  The idea is to learn what the Thing is and then have
>> its manufacturer communicate to a deployment how the thing is intended
>> to be used.
> This approach worries me. While the manufacturer might not object to this, the user and the system integrator should. The fact that a device was manufactured for foo should not stop it being used for bar.
>
> Adrian
>

Indeed, and too often manufactures already  do this as part of their 
business model.

A classic example is where performance is throttled, or features are 
enabled only by
licence.

It is but a short step to application specific restriction, although if 
an application has
third party IPR there can be a liability that rests with the 
manufacturer, in which
case you can understand the concern.

As distasteful and frustrating as this is, restriction of application 
may be an unfortunate necessity.

- Stewart