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 : George Gilder - Forbes ASAP -- Ignore unavailable to you. Want to Upgrade?

To: Zoltan! who wrote (1007)	3/14/1999 3:06:00 PM
From: learnstocks	Read Replies (1) \| Respond to of 5853

Zoltan, re your post 1007, my take on Joel Brinkley's "Defining Vision" is that he leans very heavily toward the Atari Democrat horse-blinder fanatic approval of anything that the current administration has done. On the Sunday morning news programs, especially on "This Week" on ABC, did you see the replay of the comments earlier this week by AlGore? He actually DID try to take credit for starting the Internet concept. As George Will (I believe) said, AlGore should take a page out of Hillary's book and try to distance himself as quickly as possible from Slick Willy. To try to foster an abject lie on the American public that he had started the Internet, when everyone knows he did not, is such a politically stupid thing to try. To think, the Hubris of that approach can only be done by the Liar in Chief. AlGore should not listen to Susan Estrich or whoever is trying to guide his campaign.

To: Zoltan! who wrote (1007)	3/15/1999 5:52:00 AM
From: SteveG	Read Replies (1) \| Respond to of 5853

<..I would not Joel Brinkley all too seriously, he has been a reliable shill for the Dems,..> That may be, but it isn't apparent from his book. IMO he doesn't pull his punches representing the democratic and occasional republican political economic interest in HDTV as pork barrel. And for detailing and skewering the self interested machinations of broadcasters who singledhandedly instigated the US push into HDTV soley as a method to keep the FCC from redistributing significant portions of their unused bandwidth real estate to other commercial applications such as alarm companies and emergency services. As a result, they won their right to keep their excess channels under the guise of the "honorable" pursuit of defending national economic interests, only to balk at the resultant burden this then placed on them to make the necessary upgrades of their station equipment with no obvious immediate way to financially benefit from it (other than their keeping of their publicly granted free spectrum licences). Thus far they have wound up eating their cake and keeping it as well - by lobbying AGAINST the results of their successful ostentatious ploy of government supported industry conversion to digital TV (and eventually to digital HDTV) as being too costly for CONSUMERS. An interesting wrinkle to the "free" market arguments. The analog vs digital argument wasn't waged by democrats vs republicans. A vs D was the battleground of the emergent HDTV industry contenders, and spawned from GIC the once thought impossibility of digital HDTV. Nicholas Negropompous and others were highlighted as rallying these company battle lines. I have no doubt that George had strong and insightful opinions. It would be very interesting to hear from him the technology politics at play as he saw and was involved in them. And regardless of your political inclinations, I highly recommend Brinkley. It's an impressively researched/written and enlightening chronicle of the politics and egos in the public perpetration of this industry scam - and the collateral technology battles (sorry for the dustjacket)