Silicon Investor (SI) -- The First Internet Community

STOCKTALK

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 : The New Qualcomm - a S&P500 company -- Ignore unavailable to you. Want to Upgrade?

To: rvgent who wrote (11901)	6/9/2000 2:11:00 AM
From: Maurice Winn	Read Replies (3) \| Respond to of 13582

rvgent, those old WLL projects never amounted to much. The question, to belabour the point for you, was why does India not seem to be involved with CDMA, meaning mobile networks, like most other countries are? cdg.org Like New Zealand, it shows up as being in the CDMA gang, but in practise there is NONE in NZ until next year and India, as you found, is tenuous at best. Actually, it isn't really most countries, but it sure is most people. I offered reasons why. All of them correct reasons. You seem to think that pointing out poverty, illiteracy, bureaucracy, socialism and stupidly voting to be poor, is racist. You ought to get a dictionary. I know it's supposed to instantly win an argument by using the word 'racist', but how about focusing on the question. Why doesn't India have CDMA? That means mobile. I know we are all supposed to be in love with wonderful democracy, but remember, Hitler was voted into power! People do vote themselves poor. They vote for apartheid [even in the USA there was segregation in living memory]. They vote to keep out evil foreigners with their disgusting capitalist tendencies [and CDMA technology]. So, you tell us, why no CDMA in India, where they could sure use the best technology? My theory is that India is voting itself poor. Mqurice [CDMA in fibre doesn't count either].