Date: Fri, 29 May 2009 18:27:51 +0200 (CEST) From: Wojciech Puchar <wojtek@wojtek.tensor.gdynia.pl> To: freebsd-questions@freebsd.org Subject: Re: Canon printer and TurboPrint Message-ID: <alpine.BSF.2.00.0905291816550.12347@wojtek.tensor.gdynia.pl> In-Reply-To: <20090529111326.17638be5@scorpio> References: <23711563.post@talk.nabble.com> <200905290934.36220.j.mckeown@ru.ac.za> <20090529064800.7c0c10d3@scorpio> <200905291550.45971.j.mckeown@ru.ac.za> <20090529111326.17638be5@scorpio>
next in thread | previous in thread | raw e-mail | index | archive | help
>> Microsoft. > > Look up the definition of 'socialism'. Then look at who comprises the > EU. Their attempts to 'level the playing field' is nothing more than no sense to explain again things that are clear to anyone that do observe, instead of living in virtual world created by TV. > The original suit was a bogus and transparent attempt at protecting > Netscape. Funny, when Netscape was #1, nobody said a word. Once > Microsoft surpassed them all of the socialist came out of the woodwork > and bitched. these all suit about netscape and that microsoft are playing unfair because it adds web browser to windows just ROTFL! What's wrong that they add web browser. They could even add 100 rolls of toilet paper to windows bundle - and so what? They would sell a product "parody of OS and 100 rolls of toilet paper", the same as now it sell parody of OS with browser included. Everybody can sell whatever they want. If people want to buy it, or not, is their problem. > about product safety here. As far as I know, Microsoft does not produce > food products. even with food product it's not government job to check and control food. Competitors could be much better in it, and without getting tax money for it. > However, I did see an article recently regarding OpenSSL > and a defect in their product. Are you saying that anyone who was > effected by the 'bug' has a right to sue the authors of that software. Everybody has right to sue everybody for anything. The question is if they win. > Now that is a true socialist. Attack and regulate a company until you > put it out of business. And then make few huge companies all controlled by government, and zero competition. withing few years whole country falls, unless government fall first. > The basic premise of your argument is that any company or entity that is > success should be regulated. I find that concept pure socialistic > bullshit. If he really think that way he is just dangerous. >> strategy that's likely to stand up in court in a shareholder suit. > > One again, you want 'big brother' aka the government to protect you. The problem is that there are quite a lot of people that like it. And others then suffer from it. > Come on now. Are you saying that you do not publicly post any code > that you create for anyone to use sans payment? Or are you implying > that it is perfectly OK to steal code from any company/individual whose > profits exceed yours sans fees? Maybe I should get some government > intervention here to see what you are hiding? good idea! > There are many truisms in business. Two of my favorite ones are: > > 1) No legitimate business ever benefited from government intervention. No legitimate business ever benefited from government intervention, UNLESS they paid to someone from government.
Want to link to this message? Use this URL: <https://mail-archive.FreeBSD.org/cgi/mid.cgi?alpine.BSF.2.00.0905291816550.12347>