<?xml version="1.0" encoding="UTF-8"?><rss version="2.0"
	xmlns:content="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/content/"
	xmlns:dc="http://purl.org/dc/elements/1.1/"
	xmlns:atom="http://www.w3.org/2005/Atom"
	xmlns:sy="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/syndication/"
		>
<channel>
	<title>Comments on: Nicely handled, Thawte!</title>
	<atom:link href="http://www.markshuttleworth.com/archives/155/feed" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml" />
	<link>http://www.markshuttleworth.com/archives/155</link>
	<description>Planetary perspectives</description>
	<lastBuildDate>Mon, 06 May 2013 07:56:07 +0000</lastBuildDate>
	<sy:updatePeriod>hourly</sy:updatePeriod>
	<sy:updateFrequency>1</sy:updateFrequency>
	<generator>http://wordpress.org/?v=3.4.2</generator>
	<item>
		<title>By: Blog de Bernard Opic &#187; Archives du Blog &#187; Bien joué, Thawte !</title>
		<link>http://www.markshuttleworth.com/archives/155/comment-page-1#comment-309748</link>
		<dc:creator>Blog de Bernard Opic &#187; Archives du Blog &#187; Bien joué, Thawte !</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Thu, 14 Aug 2008 09:16:10 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.markshuttleworth.com/archives/155#comment-309748</guid>
		<description>[...] française de l’article “Nicely handled, Thawte!“. Auteur : Mark Shuttleworth - Traducteur : Bernard [...]</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>[...] française de l’article “Nicely handled, Thawte!“. Auteur : Mark Shuttleworth &#8211; Traducteur : Bernard [...]</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: spillz</title>
		<link>http://www.markshuttleworth.com/archives/155/comment-page-1#comment-305005</link>
		<dc:creator>spillz</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Tue, 24 Jun 2008 14:26:49 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.markshuttleworth.com/archives/155#comment-305005</guid>
		<description>&quot;I just think that in general, capitalists, such as yourself, tend to blind themselves to certain realities - the most basic one that competing and being better than your competitors is a good thing. Open source has shown, and is showing, that this just isn’t the case - co-operation is far superior, when you can convince yourself to forgive your counterparts their failings.&quot;

nonsense. successful capitalism and successful open source combine both competition (generally across companies/projects) and cooperation (generally inside companies/projects). without competition you have cooperative mediocrity. do you views forks and competing libs/apps/frameworks as a bad thing?</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>&#8220;I just think that in general, capitalists, such as yourself, tend to blind themselves to certain realities &#8211; the most basic one that competing and being better than your competitors is a good thing. Open source has shown, and is showing, that this just isn’t the case &#8211; co-operation is far superior, when you can convince yourself to forgive your counterparts their failings.&#8221;</p>
<p>nonsense. successful capitalism and successful open source combine both competition (generally across companies/projects) and cooperation (generally inside companies/projects). without competition you have cooperative mediocrity. do you views forks and competing libs/apps/frameworks as a bad thing?</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: evanc</title>
		<link>http://www.markshuttleworth.com/archives/155/comment-page-1#comment-304918</link>
		<dc:creator>evanc</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Mon, 23 Jun 2008 20:12:47 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.markshuttleworth.com/archives/155#comment-304918</guid>
		<description>Naugt101, I sympathize with your &quot;competing/brand&quot; views but when you develop them completely and apply them to the broader picture, you might realize that being against &quot;competing&quot; is being against evolution. 

So thats there to start with, the universe is dynamic - the fit things survive, that we can not stop. What we can affect is the defenition of &quot;fit&quot; and the winning criteria. Our brands/values/images, in a way (as superficial as they might be, they are a good base to start with) are the conditions commonly defined and redefined of what is &quot;fit&quot;, and therefore good for society/humanity. 

And co-operation is certainly not opposed to competing/evolution nor should be impaired by it. But in fact, in order to cooperate we need to be competing to achieve something (with what is currently existent or non existent). It is the area where we can do something and choose in WHICH DIRECTION THE COMPETITION IS GOING. Thawte or Ubuntu are good for the long term of humanity and hopefully consumers choose them as &quot;fitter&quot; than non-open source and less consumer concerned brands. And there is your not so evil competition with socially good (or better) winners.</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>Naugt101, I sympathize with your &#8220;competing/brand&#8221; views but when you develop them completely and apply them to the broader picture, you might realize that being against &#8220;competing&#8221; is being against evolution. </p>
<p>So thats there to start with, the universe is dynamic &#8211; the fit things survive, that we can not stop. What we can affect is the defenition of &#8220;fit&#8221; and the winning criteria. Our brands/values/images, in a way (as superficial as they might be, they are a good base to start with) are the conditions commonly defined and redefined of what is &#8220;fit&#8221;, and therefore good for society/humanity. </p>
<p>And co-operation is certainly not opposed to competing/evolution nor should be impaired by it. But in fact, in order to cooperate we need to be competing to achieve something (with what is currently existent or non existent). It is the area where we can do something and choose in WHICH DIRECTION THE COMPETITION IS GOING. Thawte or Ubuntu are good for the long term of humanity and hopefully consumers choose them as &#8220;fitter&#8221; than non-open source and less consumer concerned brands. And there is your not so evil competition with socially good (or better) winners.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: naught101</title>
		<link>http://www.markshuttleworth.com/archives/155/comment-page-1#comment-304635</link>
		<dc:creator>naught101</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Sat, 21 Jun 2008 10:04:39 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.markshuttleworth.com/archives/155#comment-304635</guid>
		<description>Mark: That definition is pretty unique. At best, when speaking of values, a brand is an image put forth of the values of the group behind the brand - regardless of whether that image is an accurate picture of the real values the group holds.

Don&#039;t get me wrong, I don&#039;t have anything against Thawte - I&#039;m glad you were involved, else ubuntu wouldn&#039;t be so we resourced. I just think that in general, capitalists, such as yourself, tend to blind themselves to certain realities - the most basic one that competing and being better than your competitors is a good thing. Open source has shown, and is showing, that this just isn&#039;t the case - co-operation is far superior, when you can convince yourself to forgive your counterparts their failings.</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>Mark: That definition is pretty unique. At best, when speaking of values, a brand is an image put forth of the values of the group behind the brand &#8211; regardless of whether that image is an accurate picture of the real values the group holds.</p>
<p>Don&#8217;t get me wrong, I don&#8217;t have anything against Thawte &#8211; I&#8217;m glad you were involved, else ubuntu wouldn&#8217;t be so we resourced. I just think that in general, capitalists, such as yourself, tend to blind themselves to certain realities &#8211; the most basic one that competing and being better than your competitors is a good thing. Open source has shown, and is showing, that this just isn&#8217;t the case &#8211; co-operation is far superior, when you can convince yourself to forgive your counterparts their failings.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: naught101</title>
		<link>http://www.markshuttleworth.com/archives/155/comment-page-1#comment-304419</link>
		<dc:creator>naught101</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Wed, 18 Jun 2008 12:24:19 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.markshuttleworth.com/archives/155#comment-304419</guid>
		<description>&quot;it’s great to see that the brand has been preserved&quot;

Uh, why, exactly? Isn&#039;t a &quot;brand&quot; bascially an advertising gimmick to convince gullible customers that your product is better than your objectively comparable competitor&#039;s product?

&lt;strong&gt;Mark Shuttleworth says:&lt;/strong&gt; No, a brand is a set of values that you stick to, and which people can expect from you. You have a brand whether you like it or not. Your blog, for example, is a very clear statement of your values - it&#039;s your brand - and it will define what people expect from you when they interact with you.</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>&#8220;it’s great to see that the brand has been preserved&#8221;</p>
<p>Uh, why, exactly? Isn&#8217;t a &#8220;brand&#8221; bascially an advertising gimmick to convince gullible customers that your product is better than your objectively comparable competitor&#8217;s product?</p>
<p><strong>Mark Shuttleworth says:</strong> No, a brand is a set of values that you stick to, and which people can expect from you. You have a brand whether you like it or not. Your blog, for example, is a very clear statement of your values &#8211; it&#8217;s your brand &#8211; and it will define what people expect from you when they interact with you.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: Gideon</title>
		<link>http://www.markshuttleworth.com/archives/155/comment-page-1#comment-304311</link>
		<dc:creator>Gideon</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Tue, 17 Jun 2008 10:12:08 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.markshuttleworth.com/archives/155#comment-304311</guid>
		<description>It&#039;s interesting that the problem received a huge amount of coverage, and the solution got so little - this is the only post I&#039;ve seen on it.</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>It&#8217;s interesting that the problem received a huge amount of coverage, and the solution got so little &#8211; this is the only post I&#8217;ve seen on it.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: Mel</title>
		<link>http://www.markshuttleworth.com/archives/155/comment-page-1#comment-304306</link>
		<dc:creator>Mel</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Tue, 17 Jun 2008 06:50:33 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.markshuttleworth.com/archives/155#comment-304306</guid>
		<description>Thawte also informed customers, yes. As far as I know they sent out mails to anyone who had said that they were using Apache or &quot;other&quot; software at the time of purchase.</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>Thawte also informed customers, yes. As far as I know they sent out mails to anyone who had said that they were using Apache or &#8220;other&#8221; software at the time of purchase.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: Joachim Kluge</title>
		<link>http://www.markshuttleworth.com/archives/155/comment-page-1#comment-304302</link>
		<dc:creator>Joachim Kluge</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Tue, 17 Jun 2008 06:09:20 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.markshuttleworth.com/archives/155#comment-304302</guid>
		<description>&quot;Alle von c&#039;t befragten CAs erklärten, man könne bei ihnen schwache Zertifikate kostenlos widerrufen und durch neue ersetzen lassen.&quot;
--&gt; All questioned CA responded that they will revoke and replace certificates for free.
(http://www.heise.de/newsticker/Viele-schwache-Web-Server-Zertifikate-gefaehrden-Online-Shopping--/meldung/109196/)

So is sounds a little like advertising for Thawte ;)

&lt;strong&gt;Mark Shuttleworth says:&lt;/strong&gt;
Ah, I wasn&#039;t aware that it was a common practice. I was simply proud of the way they handled it, regardless of what others were doing. I&#039;m no longer related to, invesdted in or involved with any CA&#039;s, though it was a great business and a fun way to meet a lot of start-up entrepreneurs at the time :-)</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>&#8220;Alle von c&#8217;t befragten CAs erklärten, man könne bei ihnen schwache Zertifikate kostenlos widerrufen und durch neue ersetzen lassen.&#8221;<br />
&#8211;&gt; All questioned CA responded that they will revoke and replace certificates for free.<br />
(<a href="http://www.heise.de/newsticker/Viele-schwache-Web-Server-Zertifikate-gefaehrden-Online-Shopping--/meldung/109196/" rel="nofollow">http://www.heise.de/newsticker/Viele-schwache-Web-Server-Zertifikate-gefaehrden-Online-Shopping&#8211;/meldung/109196/</a>)</p>
<p>So is sounds a little like advertising for Thawte <img src='http://www.markshuttleworth.com/wp-includes/images/smilies/icon_wink.gif' alt=';)' class='wp-smiley' /> </p>
<p><strong>Mark Shuttleworth says:</strong><br />
Ah, I wasn&#8217;t aware that it was a common practice. I was simply proud of the way they handled it, regardless of what others were doing. I&#8217;m no longer related to, invesdted in or involved with any CA&#8217;s, though it was a great business and a fun way to meet a lot of start-up entrepreneurs at the time <img src='http://www.markshuttleworth.com/wp-includes/images/smilies/icon_smile.gif' alt=':-)' class='wp-smiley' /> </p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: Nathan Haines</title>
		<link>http://www.markshuttleworth.com/archives/155/comment-page-1#comment-304300</link>
		<dc:creator>Nathan Haines</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Tue, 17 Jun 2008 05:48:47 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.markshuttleworth.com/archives/155#comment-304300</guid>
		<description>Wow, I&#039;m really impressed.

It&#039;s really nice to know that some companies go the extra mile for their customers.</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>Wow, I&#8217;m really impressed.</p>
<p>It&#8217;s really nice to know that some companies go the extra mile for their customers.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: Stefan Potyra</title>
		<link>http://www.markshuttleworth.com/archives/155/comment-page-1#comment-304281</link>
		<dc:creator>Stefan Potyra</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Mon, 16 Jun 2008 22:39:39 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.markshuttleworth.com/archives/155#comment-304281</guid>
		<description>hm... this may be fake advertising I&#039;m doing right now, but due to a heise newspost (which I can&#039;t recall right now), German cert providers actually informed customers of weak keys, rather than just offering free replacement.. Or did Thawte also inform customers? *shrug*.</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>hm&#8230; this may be fake advertising I&#8217;m doing right now, but due to a heise newspost (which I can&#8217;t recall right now), German cert providers actually informed customers of weak keys, rather than just offering free replacement.. Or did Thawte also inform customers? *shrug*.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
</channel>
</rss>
