From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Path: news.gmane.org!not-for-mail From: "Stephen J. Turnbull" Newsgroups: gmane.emacs.devel Subject: Re: C file recoginzed as image file Date: Wed, 10 Jan 2007 13:23:35 +0900 Message-ID: <87vejfse60.fsf@uwakimon.sk.tsukuba.ac.jp> References: <87mz4sx16i.fsf@uwakimon.sk.tsukuba.ac.jp> NNTP-Posting-Host: lo.gmane.org Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii X-Trace: sea.gmane.org 1168402602 24668 80.91.229.12 (10 Jan 2007 04:16:42 GMT) X-Complaints-To: usenet@sea.gmane.org NNTP-Posting-Date: Wed, 10 Jan 2007 04:16:42 +0000 (UTC) Cc: dooglus@gmail.com, c.a.rendle@gmail.com, emacs-devel@gnu.org, monnier@iro.umontreal.ca, lekktu@gmail.com Original-X-From: emacs-devel-bounces+ged-emacs-devel=m.gmane.org@gnu.org Wed Jan 10 05:16:38 2007 Return-path: Envelope-to: ged-emacs-devel@m.gmane.org Original-Received: from lists.gnu.org ([199.232.76.165]) by lo.gmane.org with esmtp (Exim 4.50) id 1H4UtA-0002f5-8j for ged-emacs-devel@m.gmane.org; Wed, 10 Jan 2007 05:16:36 +0100 Original-Received: from localhost ([127.0.0.1] helo=lists.gnu.org) by lists.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.43) id 1H4Ut9-0007xe-Rl for ged-emacs-devel@m.gmane.org; Tue, 09 Jan 2007 23:16:35 -0500 Original-Received: from mailman by lists.gnu.org with tmda-scanned (Exim 4.43) id 1H4Usz-0007xG-UI for emacs-devel@gnu.org; Tue, 09 Jan 2007 23:16:25 -0500 Original-Received: from exim by lists.gnu.org with spam-scanned (Exim 4.43) id 1H4Usy-0007wf-07 for emacs-devel@gnu.org; Tue, 09 Jan 2007 23:16:25 -0500 Original-Received: from [199.232.76.173] (helo=monty-python.gnu.org) by lists.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.43) id 1H4Usx-0007wc-U4 for emacs-devel@gnu.org; Tue, 09 Jan 2007 23:16:23 -0500 Original-Received: from [130.158.97.224] (helo=mtps02.sk.tsukuba.ac.jp) by monty-python.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.52) id 1H4Ust-0005iW-98; Tue, 09 Jan 2007 23:16:19 -0500 Original-Received: from uwakimon.sk.tsukuba.ac.jp (uwakimon.sk.tsukuba.ac.jp [130.158.99.156]) by mtps02.sk.tsukuba.ac.jp (Postfix) with ESMTP id D12338000; Wed, 10 Jan 2007 13:16:17 +0900 (JST) Original-Received: by uwakimon.sk.tsukuba.ac.jp (Postfix, from userid 1000) id 5A9FA1A25C6; Wed, 10 Jan 2007 13:23:36 +0900 (JST) Original-To: rms@gnu.org In-Reply-To: X-Mailer: VM 7.17 under 21.5 (beta27) "fiddleheads" (+CVS-20060716) XEmacs Lucid X-BeenThere: emacs-devel@gnu.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.5 Precedence: list List-Id: "Emacs development discussions." List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , Original-Sender: emacs-devel-bounces+ged-emacs-devel=m.gmane.org@gnu.org Errors-To: emacs-devel-bounces+ged-emacs-devel=m.gmane.org@gnu.org Xref: news.gmane.org gmane.emacs.devel:65106 Archived-At: Richard Stallman writes: > stephen wrote: The right one is the > cumulative probability that one of many images displayed over the > period of use of Emacs will realize the threat. > > There is no way to estimate this probability. I apologize for contradicting you, but there are many ways of estimating any probability, some more accurate than others, some quantitative, some qualitative. Getting qualitative estimates need not require any expertise at all. In fact, several people have made implicit estimates in this thread already. Eg, Chris Moore's and Lennart Borgman's are evidently "too high to ignore". Granted, those are not very precise estimates. But such qualitative estimates are the ones that are relevant to decision-making. Here the salient estimate is "much higher than the probability that any single image will realize the threat", which implies that your implicit estimate of the risk of single images is a large underestimate of the relevant risk. That still may not be enough to make it worth committing substantial Emacs resources to address the issue before the release, but it would be sad if the decision were made on the basis of a severe underestimate of the risk.