SI
SI
discoversearch

We've detected that you're using an ad content blocking browser plug-in or feature. Ads provide a critical source of revenue to the continued operation of Silicon Investor.  We ask that you disable ad blocking while on Silicon Investor in the best interests of our community.  If you are not using an ad blocker but are still receiving this message, make sure your browser's tracking protection is set to the 'standard' level.
Technology Stocks : Qualcomm Incorporated (QCOM) -- Ignore unavailable to you. Want to Upgrade?


To: Maurice Winn who wrote (37725)8/5/1999 5:08:00 PM
From: Murrey Walker  Read Replies (1) | Respond to of 152472
 
Maurice...have you been smoking Ayn Rand? <g>



To: Maurice Winn who wrote (37725)8/5/1999 7:10:00 PM
From: Clarksterh  Respond to of 152472
 
**OT** Maurice - Last post on ye olde MSFT debate (for a while anyway):

You start out reasonably enough

We have reached a philosophical impasse.,

but then you work further afield to

The other extreme, where the individual has maximum freedom with protection of private property and themselves against others, has never been tried anywhere though the USA pretends to have that philosophy.

which is not, IMO, true. The situation you describe is very close to the one in the US in the late 1800's. It was not pretty. Company owned towns. No raises; almost all increased profits went to the monopolists. Routine occurrence of depressions (every 10 to 20 years). ...

And yet further afield to the complete mis-statement of my position:

So you think a state-run pricing system is desirable and by logical extension, that would be for everything because all sales with profits higher than bank rates are derived from a transient monopoly.

I can only hope that you confused my 'statement of fact' (that Microsoft and Ma Bell are both good examples of economically inefficient monopolies.) with my somehow believing in general state run pricing. The state shouldn't be in the business of punishing people or individuals for being inefficient. But for abuse of power? - absolutely!

Also, a comment on the logic. Profits higher than bank rates occur for two very different reasons. The first is that even with everyone working efficiently and flat out they cannot produce enough to meet supply because some component in the economy is constrained. The second is where there is plenty of supply but the workers relax, and via collusion the supply is artificially constrained to keep up the price. Although both are 'monopolies' by your definition, the latter is economically inefficient (see DeBeers et al), while the former is true capitalism and efficient. To apply some of my own position twisting, you are in favor of a form of company communism (centralized control of a whole market segment for the good of the workers who get to work inefficiently - those workers are very happy just like the US sheep farmers.), while I am in favor of maximum capitalism.<g>

Finally, a last comment

Maybe $ill Gates prices can be set by Janet Reno or somebody instead of an infinite variety of decisions by a billion people. Good luck!

No price setting since it doesn't address the problem (abuse of monopoly power). I'm reasonably confident Bill consciously chose to run the risk of intervention by abusing his monopoly power. Now it is time to pay the piper. If someone uses a gun to rob you, the first thing you do is take away the gun, or at least disassemble it. (Note that I have no objection to the 'mugger' keeping the economic benefits of the pieces as long as he cannot use the gun to rob again.) The second is to give back the things that were robbed. Most of these solutions are impractical or unethical in this case, but the point is that it isn't regulation which is the answer. It is inefficient and big-brotherish to be monitoring every potential mugger 24 hrs per day and it is an equally bad idea, IMO, to try to monitor and control Microsoft every day. Punish them and get rid of their weapon and be done.

I don't see alpha males and their courtiers, even if voted in, as the best deciders of my life.

Neither do I. They are a solution of last resort.

As I said, my last rant on this OT topic. It's hard work. All in good fun and for enlightenment.

Clark



To: Maurice Winn who wrote (37725)8/6/1999 1:18:00 PM
From: qdog  Read Replies (1) | Respond to of 152472
 
Microsoft to Hackers: Crack This!

David Raikow, ZDNet

In an attempt to burnish its tarnished reputation for network security, Microsoft issued an open challenge
on Tuesday to the hacking community. But potential testers barely got a chance to attempt to break
Windows 2000's security system, as the test server Microsoft offered crashed and stayed down for most
of the past 24 hours.

Microsoft placed a web server running the latest beta of Windows 2000 and Internet Information Server (IIS) outside its
firewalls, and invited the public to go after target files and user accounts it placed there. The company's reason for doing so?
"We hope that this kind of open testing will allow us to ship our most secure OS yet," said a Microsoft spokesperson.

The hacking community was and is largely unimpressed, however. In its posted coverage, the Hacker News Network called the
challenge "an obvious ploy to get free publicity...It is hoped that this is not a primary testing method."

Members of the Linux-enthusiast site Slashdot for the most part concurred, accusing Microsoft of using anti-Microsoft sentiment
for free auditing.

Meanwhile, the Linux community created a counter-challenge of its own. Tuesday afternoon, LinuxPPC, the developers and
distributors of a PowerPC-native version of Linux, challenged hackers to crack one of its servers. Unlike Microsoft, which did
not offer any kind of incentive or award to hackers, LinuxPPC is giving the machine to the first person to break in.

Whoops!

If it was meant as a publicity stunt, the Microsoft security challenge may have backfired. As soon as the site went online,
Microsoft ran into technical difficulties with the test server. Early visitors reported problems with the home-page HTML and
Javascript, some serious enough to prevent them accessing the page at all. Posted status logs indicate that the server had to be
rebooted at least once because the system log was full, and some services were unavailable at reboot.


Most significantly, the server was offline for most of Tuesday due to what Microsoft described as "router problems". Though
intermittently available Wednesday morning, the site was down at press time, and appears to have been pulled from DNS
servers entirely; ping tests indicated the MS router was functional. Some Slashdot contributors reported seeing a notice that the
site had been withdrawn, but no such notice is currently posted on any publicly accessible MS server.


At this point I'm going to weigh into your debate about my buddy Billion $ill. As we can clearly see, the 90's version of P.T. Barnum and Elmer Gantry, is hoodwinking the unassuming public yet once again. The usual fingerpointing, "router problem", but not a buggy software. Here is a perpetual ripoff artist that has never invented a thing. HE didn't invent the OS he sold to IBM, he bought it! He didn't invent GUI interface or mouse, he stole it from Jobs, who got it from Xerox. Spreadsheets and word processors, HA!! Internet Browser, nope, that was another shameless hustle of Spyglass, who was a part of the Mosaic project at the Supercommuting Center Univeristy of Illinois (a US federal government land grant college. Damn evil government), funded by the National Science Foundation, that dreaded federal government agency of uselessness. Hell his business model is more akin to the Japanese of the '70's, so he can't even claim to developing a unique business model. He nothing more than a carpetbagging snakeoil salesman.

As to this overhyped clowns attempts at "curing Malaria" I might remind you that in the Southeast United States was ravaged with malaria all the way to the swamps around Washington D.C, early in this nation history. Who precisely irradicated malaria from the US? Panama Canal was a doomed project started by the French and abandon because of malaria and yellow fever. A US Army Colonel Doctor, wiped it out and completed the canal. United States Army Signal Corp did alot of experimentation and R&D in the 60's and 70's with a theory developed by a Bell Labs scientist by the name of Shannon. That technology is CDMA. So get off the kick that government is all evil. You are enjoying a media that has it's origins was for ensuring the delivery of nuclear weapons. That was why TCP/IP was developed. CDMA and OFDM are communication techniques for the sole purpose of killing the enemy, by ensuring secure and interference resistance battlefield communications.

That OK, BEWARE OF THE PENGUIN IN A RED HAT!!! Armeggedeon is upon thee billion $ill!!! Bow to the True OS, The SuperOS, Linux, you shameless believers of multiple blue screens and gluttons of precious resources!!!

A Microsoft spokesperson attributed some of the difficulties to thunderstorms in Seattle on Tuesday, but had no comment on the
site's status at press time.


Does the fingerpointing ever stop, now it's Mother Natures Fault!!!! The shameless excuse making is absolutely amazing. What you are telling me that when there is a thunderstorm we will have to shutdown computing until it passes?

Forget the FBI, I worry more about the private sectors invasion of my privacy and Microsoft goonsquads assassinating those that oppose them and fail to prostrating themselves 6 times a day (usually after a Blue Screen calling) towards Redmond banging there heads on wallet before them (or credit card as an exceptable substitute), chanting "Trillion $ill, your a god and savior of productivity!! PLEASE SELL US MORE BUGGY, OVERBLOATED SOFTWARE AT A HIGH COST. We are unworthy, we need to be parted with more of our money".

PSU #4