From: nobody@soda.berkeley.edu
To: cypherpunks@toad.com
Message Hash: 002273eeea3531de37f074920858fb2f35c36cb4bb4f24b8a480f1d2f8516de4
Message ID: <199403232126.NAA00899@soda.berkeley.edu>
Reply To: N/A
UTC Datetime: 1994-03-23 21:27:11 UTC
Raw Date: Wed, 23 Mar 94 13:27:11 PST
From: nobody@soda.berkeley.edu
Date: Wed, 23 Mar 94 13:27:11 PST
To: cypherpunks@toad.com
Subject: Controlling the Internet
Message-ID: <199403232126.NAA00899@soda.berkeley.edu>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain
[It shouldn't be too hard to figure out who "nobody" is:]
Blanc writes...
>I can't say that everything that billg does or makes arrangements for
>with his clout will be defensible; I can point out that any
>arrangements which he makes with others depends upon those individual's
>consent, their agreeableness, and not to coercion or the elimination of
>choice altogether. (I don't know all of the details of how the closing
...
>The threat of a monopolization of power which (someone) mentioned
>as being presented by Microsoft's dominance in the market is not of the
>same type as is presented by the government's. From what I know about
>"intellectual property", this concept is supposed to establish the
>source of what has been produced (software) as belonging to its
>creator, and therefore as something akin to an object or service which
>can be traded and from which one can receive payment. It's a way to
>make a living, in other words, based on the recognition of a value.
I think we agree philosophically. Where we diverge is in our understanding
of things-as-they-are. I contend that large companies, MS being one
example, often enlist the government and its coercive powers in their
service.
One issue where I think I've seen MS's hand is "intellectual property".
My concern about "intellectual property" is that MS and some others have
changed the terms of the debate ["property" is protected more than
"privilege"] and the law to further their own interests, to the detriment
of the rest of us.
>The only way that I can think of to counter the dominance of one
>company in the free exchange of goods is to desist from the purchase of
>that company's offerings, or better yet to produce better ones and make
>a better case for them with the buying public.
We need to reduce the power of government so that it cannot be enlisted
in any company's service.
That said, I am following your advice: With the exception of the
ubiquitous DOS/Windows operating systems, I've gotten rid of every MS
product on my machines. If OS/2 ever grows up [can handle a 14.4k
faxmodem for example], I'll be MS free.
--------------------------------------------------------------------
One example of why I'm ticked at SPA folks ...
>Date: [Recently]
>To: [Us]
>From: [Them]
>Comprehensive Computer Inspection
>Beginning [Soon], [We] will conduct a comprehensive inspection ...
>...[T]the sofware inventory and licensing compliance issue will be
>emphasized. Each user should make certain that the report from the
>latest sofware inventory list is up-to-date and is readily
>available for the inspector. (...)
>When confronted by potential inspectors... No "smart" remarks ...
I'm tired of this shit.
Now, imagine if SPA owned the internet....
Return to March 1994
Return to “nobody@soda.berkeley.edu”
1994-03-23 (Wed, 23 Mar 94 13:27:11 PST) - Controlling the Internet - nobody@soda.berkeley.edu