Olin Lathrop wrote:
> Alan B. Pearce wrote:
> 
>>My suggestion is to put the calculation engine that converts from the
>>original data to the milling machine code into the dongle. There is no
>>encryption/decryption involved. The dongle is part of the data path
>>between the original clear data, and the clear data fed to the mill
>>machine. The dongle does all the data manipulation, not the PC program.
>>
>>By having the dongle do the data manipulation the PC program becomes
>>little more than a file server/transfer mechanism. The dongle HAS to be
>>present for the data manipulation to take place, and cannot be
>>bypassed. The PC program can be copied as many times as anyone likes,
>>but when they disassemble it, all they will find is a data path that
>>goes from the input file to the dongle. Then from the dongle to the
>>output file. The output file could be a disk file or it could be
>>straight to the mill.
> 
> 
> So PCs are now just GUI engines, clickety-click servers, connections to the
> world, and power supplies.  Applications are shipped with their own
> processors since they are small and much cheaper than the IP in the
> application.

And with the capacity of some of the newer processors,  why not?
Then he'd have yet another product to sell. USB dongles with lots of horsepower
to impliment copy protection <G>.

And ironically, the very people who would WANT to use Dwayne's software
are the ones most likely to have the tools to crack it/reproduce it
(circuit designers).

R
-- 
http://www.piclist.com PIC/SX FAQ & list archive
View/change your membership options at
http://mailman.mit.edu/mailman/listinfo/piclist