On the other hand, CCP/PLA ideology stifles the growth of knowledge as well. All you have to do is look at the work of the Red Defense Soldiers[1] (Red Guards). Communist ideology does not ensure that knowledge seeking will not be stifled, as amenable to the science as they may be.
This breaks the site guidelines, and we ban accounts that do it repeatedly, so please don't do it again. Specifically: "Please don't impute astroturfing or shillage. That degrades discussion and is usually mistaken. If you're worried about it, email us and we'll look at the data." https://news.ycombinator.com/newsguidelines.html
The comment was also lazy, since a glance at the history of the account refutes it. Not that they've been great comments, but someone who has been posting about Python, web apps, organic batteries, web assembly, and carbonated soda for over a year is obviously a regular Hacker News user.
I just disable javascript to read full articles from news places like this that force subscriptions.
or maybe I just dont understand why people would subscribe digitally? Are there different articles?
I think people have moved away from what the internet is supposed to be, which is a way to share information, not force people to pay for information :/
There are seven layers according to the OSI model. The TCP/IP model simplifies this into "above layer 4", layer 4, layer 3, and "below layer 3". In practice, TLS/SSL is an implementation of the session layer (layer 5) with other protocols run on top in the application layer. The data link and physical layers don't map particularly well to LLC, MAC, and physical transmission technologies but they serve as a reasonable approximation. The presentation layer (layer 6) doesn't really exist but neither did the session layer until a need for encryption inside of TCP came along. Onion routing could be argued to be another session layer technology. The real world is messy and simplifying it into four (or five) layers of nested protocols puts TCP/IP on a pedestal. So take the title with a grain of salt.
The original article argues that cryptocurrencies are a layer of protocol, wrapping those above it. Looking at NameCoin, it isn't an argument that should be dismissed out of hand.
While the OSI model is commonly referenced it's pretty rare to see the Internet Protocol Suite. In this case, I'd argue the author could have said we need an alternate transport protocol but with his argument I don't think you can say that crypto-currencies aren't just another application (as noted elsewhere).
Bonus points for the Snow Crash quote though - one of my favorite authors!
I find the concepts of session and presentation layers within the OSI model to be quite nebulous today, especially when you try to map TCP/IP concepts onto them - because it's not a like-for-like comparison.
I think I prefer the '5th layer' concept - an extension of the TCP/IP stack between 'Transport' and 'Application'.
It's in the app layer, we dont need a "fifth" layer.
That's raised in the first comment, by Fred Wilson. Naval's response was:
You are correct in that it’s technically another set of application layer protocols – I was just being provocative with the title Although in theory it could be a resource allocation layer on top of SMTP, HTTP, etc. Semantics…
