Whether you love him or hate him, that act or feeling indicates that you
have been profoundly affected by him. Only those who have never seen a
computer in their lives haven't been directly affected by him. Even they
still have been affected by him indirectly by the changes in the people
they deal with who have been directly affected by him.
> > Absent actual physical coercion,
> Is a hypnotic or subliminal advertisement "physical coercion"?
I personally think so, while others here do not. it could be said that
your volunteering to expose yourself to subliminal coercion by using
media sources that employ them is your own waiver of caveat emptor.
> > absolutely anything one does to
> > cajole as many people as possible to give you money--voluntarily--
> > is, by definition, providing a benefit to them.
> What benefit are con artists to their victims?
A victim of a con artist is merely a student getting an informal,
involuntary, education that they obviously need very badly.
> I see what you are trying to say, but I think you have made too general a
> Maybe you could make a more specific economic statement like : "Humanity
> reaps the greatest benefits when the market is consistently cleared
> (supply=demand) and productive output per capita is maximized."
> > Except to the small
> > extent of MS's government contracts (a /very/ small part of its
> > business) which are not paid for voluntarily, every penny of the
> > world's richest man's fortune came from people who /chose/ to give
> > it because they derived benefit from his products.
> Can't argue with that. I don't really wish death to Microsoft, just
> healthy competition. Maybe Linux will go public? (or has it already?) Of
> course, if I really want competition that badly, I'll have to start
> writing that new OS right now...
> > Regardless of
> > how grudgingly they may have felt about being locked in, or how much
> > they lied to themselves about wanting reliable software (no one
> > really wants reliable software, they just think they do), the fact
> > is that they signed the checks.
> True, but it was for compatibilities sake. Microsoft's domination seems
> to be an example of positive feedback: the more people have Microsoft
> software, the more other people want to buy it so they can have compatible
> software. Do you have any ideas on how this monopoly might be felled?
> (which to me seems inevitable, but I'm not sure how)
I can. If a company, like Corel, would sell competetive software that
wasn't even more bug infested than Microsoft applications.
> > Despite the fact that Microsoft never really invented anything novel,
> > ignores standards, bullies its competitors, and does lots of other
> > things people might not like, the world would be a much darker and
> > poorer place without heroes like Gates,
> But not necessarily Gates. If Gates didn't do it, someone else probably
> would have. The question is: would they have done a better job?
> > who do the Right Thing for
> > whatever reasons. Motives don't count--results do, and Bill Gates
> > gets results.
> > When I awake from my suspension, I'd much rather see a world with
> > Bill Gates than some worthless whiner like Marc Andreesen.
> Pardon my ignorance... who's Marc Andreesen?
Head of Netscape.
> (maybe this is a good example of who has had the better memes?)
-- TANSTAAFL!!! Michael Lorrey ------------------------------------------------------------ mailto:firstname.lastname@example.org Inventor of the Lorrey Drive MikeySoft: Graphic Design/Animation/Publishing/Engineering ------------------------------------------------------------ How many fnords did you see before breakfast today?