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

To: Daniel Schuh who wrote (15295)	12/21/1997 7:51:00 PM
From: Daniel Schuh	Read Replies (2) \| Respond to of 24154

Microsoft hops through the loophole, making a joke of OS stability infoworld.com Well, some would say Microsoft making a joke of OS stability long predates their current legal adventures, but never mind. After all, what could be more stable than the vintage Windows release on the store shelves? Let me summarize the most recent Windows saga: The upgrade to Windows 95 started as Windows 97. It became Windows 98. Then the Department of Justice returned with its request for million-dollar fines. Next, the federal judge issued a preliminary injunction: Stop the bundling. Microsoft then appealed and responded. Justice then asked for a "civil contempt" penalty for Microsoft's seemingly pompous response. Confused? You're not alone. Figuring out the future of Windows -- and how this battle affects corporate decisions -- isn't easy. And, we aren't done -- in fact, we have just begun. We should prepare for instability around Windows 95, Windows 98, and the many variants. But, big deal, everybody is supposed to move on to NT2K, the OS for the next millenium. Real Soon Now. In light of Microsoft's responses to the judge's ruling, I was staggered that Microsoft released OSR 2.5 to OEMs just days before. That's right, the most current OS with Explorer 4.01 integrated. Somehow, Microsoft can accelerate this new release by two months yet can't offer a current version of Windows without Explorer. I guess it's a matter of motivation. Go figure. Well, sheesh, I thought OSR2.5 was just OSR2+IE4, to make good and sure the Roach Motel California of browsers assumed its proper place of honor on all new PCs, as early and often as possible. But who can say? I got to go dig up a Fred Moody column or something, poor Bill & co. can't seem to find a kind word anywhere. Except among the technically expert fellow travelers here, of course. Cheers, Dan.

To: Daniel Schuh who wrote (15295)	12/21/1997 11:40:00 PM
From: Gerald R. Lampton	Read Replies (1) \| Respond to of 24154

Here's an e-mail I got from Chaz: Jerry, from the Lessig excerts you sent me: "In cyberspace, because code is so plastic and so powerful, and because law is so feeble and (on an international scale) so rigid, code has a comparative regulatory advantage over law. A gap in legal regulation will therefore emerge, and code will fill that gap. Structures of regulation get codified in the architecture of the net, and these structures of regulation entail important values choices. Whether information will be kept private, whether encrypted speech is allowed, whether anonymity is permissible, whether access is open and free - these are all policy choices made by default by a structure of code that has developed - unaware at times, and, generally, uncritically of the politics that code entails. Some argue that this shows that government should simply get out of the way. That government should let code regulate, and defer to its regulations in this space. [FN25] But this is quite unlikely. We shouldn't expect government simply to cede jurisdiction over cyberspace to Barlowtypes. [FN26] Instead, government will shift to a different regulatory technique. Rather than regulating behavior directly, government will regulate indirectly. Rather than making rules that apply to constrain individuals directly, government will make rules that require a change in code, so that code regulates differently. Code will become the government's tool. Law will regulate code, so that code constrains as government wants. [FN27]" ****** I think that says it all. He has no problem with dictating code design to achieve policy. Period. Also, he obviously understands the whole technical and business problem domains as they apply here. No snowing this cat! I think what Bill Gates and company have understood is the first paragraph quoted, but not the second. I think your take on Lessig is correct, even conservatively stated. Chaz P.S. Feel free to post our sideband conversation if you want, I think it is directly to the point. Gerald R. Lampton wrote: > As someone else who has taken the time to read Lessig's work, I'd be > curious to know what you think of him. > Do you agree with my assessment? > If not, I'd like to hear why, as I could be missing something. > Jerry >