Re: Microsoft: A Day Of Satisfaction As Corporate BullyGetsComeuppance
Marcel Popescu wrote: > The whole world is largely socialist, not only Europe, it's just that the > percentage is larger in Europe than in the US. OTOH, Japan is probably even > more socialist. And if we start adding China... [Reese, don't make the > mistake of believing that only the government is socialist; most people > are - even those claiming to be capitalists will tell you that the state > must do this and that.] you must have a pretty... "unusual" ... definition of "socialist". care to share it with me? at the moment you sound like a frightened child that claims "the whole world is evil".
Re: Microsoft: A Day Of Satisfaction As Corporate Bully
Marcel Popescu wrote: > I'm sure others will point out, but I fail to see the contradiction. You > might be a nazi, and nazis are a subset of socialists. [And you definitely > expose socialist ideas.] as I said before, it's even more interesting to see most political views cram all OTHER views into one. nazis believe everyone else is a communist, left-wings say everyone else is a nazi or at least close, and now I learn that (whatever-you-are) say that left and right are the same. interesting. :)
Re: Microsoft: A Day Of Satisfaction As Corporate Bully
Reese wrote: > >that's the point: last year. > > No, the point is that whatever monopoly M$ might have tried to bring to > fruition, if they even did, is crumbling by simple virtue of the market > economy moving in a direction M$ can't go. may I remind you that "last year" means: the year the lawsuit was running ? several of the statements made by witnesses during the trial clearly show fear. > The lawsuit is less about breaking up a monopoly, more about swatting a > very successful firm that hasn't been paying protection money. do we agree that there IS a limit, somewhere? that, say, M$ putting guns to the heads of the dell CEO saying "use windoze or we shoot" would have warranted police/government interference? if you agree on that, all our differences are about defining where the line is. if you don't agree on that, you'll have to accept that I consider you a maniac and/or fanatic.
Re: Crypto-Anarchist Free Market Model
Tim May wrote: > >if you are a company, then going bancrupt is the equivalence of dying. > >someone threatening you - overt or implied - with driving you out of > >business is the equivalent of a murder threat, right? > > You're being foolish. explain that to the 10k people who lost a job at my hypothetical company. or the stockholders, who lost their money. on more factual terms, AFAIK corporations have a certain status in the US, almost that of a natural person. why exactly is using the term "death" foolish in this context? rtmark, for example, once made the suggestion that a corporation (not a specific one) should be sentenced to death by a court, if it commits crimes that would have resulted in a death sentence had a person done it. I'm not the first to use this expression. must by my "socialist gene". :)
Re: Microsoft: A Day Of Satisfaction As Corporate Bully
At 10:24 AM 07/04/00 +0200, Tom Vogt wrote: >Reese wrote: >> >that's the point: last year. >> >> No, the point is that whatever monopoly M$ might have tried to bring to >> fruition, if they even did, is crumbling by simple virtue of the market >> economy moving in a direction M$ can't go. > >may I remind you that "last year" means: the year the lawsuit was >running ? > >several of the statements made by witnesses during the trial clearly >show fear. Phuii. Last year and last year coinciding are all the more reason to see the Just Us actions as a swat down rather than as a monopoly prosecution. Phuii. Define "fear", in a federal courtroom. >do we agree that there IS a limit, somewhere? that, say, M$ putting guns >to the heads of the dell CEO saying "use windoze or we shoot" would have >warranted police/government interference? Is there any evidence to support M$ performing this unnatural act, at the expense of the Dell shareholders? Are the Dell shareholders complaining, or is it just the Nutscrape weinies bitching about Exploder? >if you agree on that, all our differences are about defining where the >line is. if you don't agree on that, you'll have to accept that I >consider you a maniac and/or fanatic. Or the alternative, that you are the manic and/or fanatic. Can we agree that if M$ violated any laws, those laws were unconstitutional in the first place? Reese
Re: Crypto-Anarchist Free Market Model
At 04:51 AM 07/04/00 -0400, Tom Vogt wrote: >Tim May wrote: >> >if you are a company, then going bancrupt is the equivalence of dying. >> >someone threatening you - overt or implied - with driving you out of >> >business is the equivalent of a murder threat, right? >> >> You're being foolish. > >explain that to the 10k people who lost a job at my hypothetical >company. or the stockholders, who lost their money. Show me the corpse, so I can give condolences to the widow/widower/orphans. >on more factual terms, AFAIK corporations have a certain status in the >US, almost that of a natural person. why exactly is using the term >"death" foolish in this context? Show me the corpse. Show me the gravestone. Show me why I should grant unalienable/inalienable rights to an intangible that is formed and dissolved by a government edict (and duly issued license), when this is properly reserved to real persons rather than entities that cannot cry, laugh or walk a dog, in person. Corporations do not have the same status as a US citizen, in any of several, if not dozens of areas. If you are unaware of this, then you are obviously unaware of the US Bill of Rights, and other elements of the US Constitution. >rtmark, for example, once made the >suggestion that a corporation (not a specific one) should be sentenced >to death by a court, if it commits crimes that would have resulted in a >death sentence had a person done it. rtmark? Is this a controlling, legal authority, or an opinion from a competing corporation? Authority? US authority as opinions of rules and laws in other countries as well. Your point? >I'm not the first to use this >expression. must by my "socialist gene". :) More likely, your unoriginal, copycat gene. Lemming See, Lemming Do,,,
Re: Microsoft: A Day Of Satisfaction As Corporate BullyGetsComeuppance
X-Loop: openpgp.net From: Tom Vogt <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> > > The whole world is largely socialist, not only Europe, it's just that the > > percentage is larger in Europe than in the US. OTOH, Japan is probably even > > more socialist. And if we start adding China... [Reese, don't make the > > mistake of believing that only the government is socialist; most people > > are - even those claiming to be capitalists will tell you that the state > > must do this and that.] > > you must have a pretty... "unusual" ... definition of "socialist". care > to share it with me? at the moment you sound like a frightened child > that claims "the whole world is evil". Socialism: the (advocacy of) intervention of the state in voluntary transactions. In extenso, whenever there is a state, or advocacy of a state, there is socialism, for the state cannot exist without interfering with voluntary transactions (otherwise, it would only be a company). The world per se cannot be evil; evil only has meaning wrt persons. Yes, all people are evil. > as I said before, it's even more interesting to see most political views > cram all OTHER views into one. nazis believe everyone else is a > communist, left-wings say everyone else is a nazi or at least close, and > now I learn that (whatever-you-are) say that left and right are the > same. interesting. :) The fact that various forms of socialists don't know squat about economics and politics is of no relevance to the argument. Both those on the left and on the right advocate state intervention in human affairs. Mark
Re: Crypto-Anarchy/Anarcho-Capitalist Errors in Understanding
At 04:47 PM 4/6/00 +0200, Tom Vogt wrote: >David Honig wrote: >> > protection of patent monopolies, >> >> Individual inventors get patents, what extra rights do >> corps get? > >patent portfolios. a long time ago, in a country not very far away (i.e. >the US of A) patents were rare and only granted after extensive >examination for really worthy inventions. but ever since the >micro-patentism started (i.e. "let's go and get a patent on this line of >code, too") Yes, the USPO is, like most in D.C., a whore these days, and patents are expensive to get, but corps have no special protections under them. (similarly) Getting a new drug to market in the US is very expensive, but there are no special rules that make it easier for corps. vs. Joe Shaman..
Re: Microsoft: A Day Of Satisfaction As Corporate Bully
At 09:58 AM 4/6/00 -0400, Tom Vogt wrote: >both nazis and socialists to go GREAT lengths to not be associated with >each other. So do the republicans and democrats here. Some aren't fooled.
Re: Crypto-Anarchist Free Market Model
At 10:47 AM +0200 4/7/00, Tom Vogt wrote: >Tim May wrote: >> >if you are a company, then going bancrupt is the equivalence of dying. >> >someone threatening you - overt or implied - with driving you out of >> >business is the equivalent of a murder threat, right? >> >> You're being foolish. > >explain that to the 10k people who lost a job at my hypothetical >company. or the stockholders, who lost their money. Businesses fail, companies lose out to competitors, all part of the process of "creative destructionism" of capitalism (Schumpeter's term). Nothing surprising here. You're foolish in nearly all of your dozens of posts here in the last day or two. I would ordinarily suggest a kill file for you, but you probably have some tortured belief that "online presences are like people, so killfiles are like murder." --Tim May -- -:-:-:-:-:-:-: Timothy C. May | Crypto Anarchy: encryption, digital money, ComSec 3DES: 831-728-0152 | anonymous networks, digital pseudonyms, zero W.A.S.T.E.: Corralitos, CA | knowledge, reputations, information markets, "Cyphernomicon" | black markets, collapse of governments.
Joint Development of Next-Generation Encryption Algorithm
> >Dear David, > >We thank you for taking an interest in Camellia. >Unfortunately, however, we cannot send the technical paper >to you who maybe live outside Japan, because of Japanese >export controll. > >We plan to present Camellia technical report at an international >security conference, please obtain the report from >the conference proceedings. > >Again, we are very regret that it will inconvenience you. > >Best regards, > >Masayuki Kanda
Re: Disk INsecurity:Last word on deletes, wipes & The Final
At 04:19 PM 4/6/00 -0400, Gary Jeffers wrote: >Jim Choate writes "...Fourier Analysis..." for ressurecting wiped >data. > > This is interesting but a question arises: How do you interrogate the >data? That is: what INT's (pc interrupts) do you use to look at >the data? Actually, maybe I should say the sectors rather than the data. Are >these undocumented DOS? You need access some analog measurements. I think grc.com has info on that. > Also, I hear stories of companies that unwipe data. Who are these >companies? What is the name of the software that they use? Is it >available to cops only? Where can we get it? Access Data does this work on lamely encrypted data. There are many firms that will do clean-room operations to recover data on crashed drives. The spooks can do STM using magnetic probes. Good wipers overwrite data a dozen times with random data. You worry about the little strips left behind when the head doesn't repeat its position exactly. Sandblasting is considered effective.
Re: Microsoft: A Day Of Satisfaction As Corporate BullyGetsComeuppance
X-Loop: openpgp.net From: Colin Rafferty <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> > In the real world, socialism is defined a little more tightly than > that. You failed to show me your definition. > Of course, by your definition, every government is socialist That was the point. > This does not make them the same. Strawman. Hitler and Stalin weren't the same. However, they were both socialists, which was my point. Mark
Re: Crypto-Anarchist Free Market Model
At 04:48 PM 4/6/00 +0200, Tom Vogt wrote: >David Honig wrote: >> I don't think MS ever used violence, or the threat of it. >> Ergo, it ain't nobody's business what they do. > >if you are a company, then going bancrupt is the equivalence of dying. You are confusing meat-violence with abstract metaphors. A company is a lawyer and some paperwork. The corporate organism may well die, but this is not violence.
