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 : MSFT Internet Explorer vs. NSCP Navigator -- Ignore unavailable to you. Want to Upgrade?


To: miraje who wrote (14650)12/5/1997 5:24:00 AM
From: Daniel Schuh  Read Replies (2) | Respond to of 24154
 
James, as I privately wrote to Justin when he objected to me bringing up Rand, everybody is entitled to their own philosophy or religion. If it makes you happy to be an Objectivist, that's fine. But I'm unaware of anything in our Constitution or laws that gives Objectivism any special standing wrt what is legal, or what laws are constitutional. If you think the laws are unjust, you should work to get them changed. To repeat myself as usual, I think far more harm is done by the war on drugs and the fairly obvious constitutional violations that have become commonplace there than could possibly be done by any government action against Microsoft. Not that I have any idea what to do about the drug mess in political terms, but repeal of antitrust laws should be much easier to argue for.

Oh, and about your San Jose Mercury article, one point I forgot to make. The argument being made isn't that it should be illegal to put whatever you want into something called an "operating system". The argument is that a monopolist in operating systems should not use its OS monopoly as a tool to establish domination in other areas. If somebody besides Microsoft gets an OS monopoly any time soon, we'll worry about the OS/application issue again then. Unfair though it may seem, antitrust only applies in monopolistic situations.

Cheers, Dan.