I'm afraid we will have to agree to disagree. If you think things like "patent enforcement" == "government protected monopoly", we are at an impasse. I guess having the police keep people from breaking into their offices and stealing their computers is another form of government medaling we would all be better off without? -- TTFN, patrick On Apr 25, 2014, at 18:47 , Larry Sheldon <LarrySheldon@cox.net> wrote:
On 4/25/2014 8:23 AM, Patrick W. Gilmore wrote:
On Apr 25, 2014, at 00:57 , Larry Sheldon <LarrySheldon@cox.net> wrote:
I just posted a completely empty message for which I apologize.
Larry is confused. He can claim he is not, but posting to NANOG does not change the facts. Then again, just because I posted to NANOG doesn't prove I'm right either. Worst of all, this thread is pretty non-operational now.
In a private message I asked if he could name a single monopoly that existed without regulation to protect its monopoly power.
I answered in a private message: Microsoft.
Kinda obvious if you think about it for, oh, say, 12 microseconds.
"OK, so you are a troll.
Microsoft is among the most heavily protected-by-regulation companies I can think of.
Have you ever seen their patent collection? Can you guess at the size of their infringement-enforcement staff? Do you have any idea how many court-room hours are spent each day protecting their monopoly?"
-- Requiescas in pace o email Two identifying characteristics of System Administrators: Ex turpi causa non oritur actio Infallibility, and the ability to learn from their mistakes. (Adapted from Stephen Pinker)