Please Scroll Down to See Forums Below
Matt - lets talk about Bill Gates and
- Thread starter velvett
- Start date
avenirup
New member
velvett said:
Such BS---When you are at the top--everyone comes after you......
niceyou sure you don't want me to turn this into a thread about how government interferes with business to the detriment of the citizens?
Or talk about how Steve Jobs took back all the stock options he had granted to his employees and kept them for himself when he sold his last company?
Or how Jobs groveled to Gates when Apple almost went tits up,and Gates bailed him out with money and developers (yes. microsoft geeks wrote a lot of apple's best shit).
Wait, what were we talking about?
velvett said:
when ya have a chance. evenings are best....but for you, I'll find the time.
atlantabiolab
New member
velvett said:
The "freedom" of socialism..HA!
the nature boy
New member
Testosterone boy
New member
The problem is the nature of man.
Matters not if it is private or governmental.....we will all get shafted on a regular basis.
Matters not if it is private or governmental.....we will all get shafted on a regular basis.
atlantabiolab
New member
Razorguns said:
Can anyone tell us what MicroSoft has done that has harmed the consumer or other businesses?
Razorguns
Well-known member
created CRAPPY VIRUS-PRONE software that has made me lose TONS of data and TONS of time.
Imagine if cars and tv's worked as horribly as software. The government should force software manuf. to put on their products the % of defects are reported per product.
I mean you can't even RETURN software!
Imagine if cars and tv's worked as horribly as software. The government should force software manuf. to put on their products the % of defects are reported per product.
I mean you can't even RETURN software!
collegiateLifter
New member
MattTheSkywalker said:
you sure you don't want me to turn this into a thread about how government interferes with business to the detriment of the citizens?
the funny thing I am noticing is the lack of humility.
Much like people who believe in God are certain that they are right, I am noticing your absolute confidence in your von Hayek like beliefs.
With economists the jury is still out though. The Economist mentioned something about anti-trust being legit in very specific cases like where there is a real threat of no competition Microsoft but not being applicable in cases like with Oracle and People soft.
I am going to take a class on the pros and cons of anti-trust laws a year from now, so we may be able to go over some finer points then.
i'm happy
he's made it impossible for other competitors to get an 'in' for the market, and its resulted in less competition and probably less inovation
i'm always irritated in the way it trys (windows) to sign you up to MSN internet, and makes it hard for you to disable that, or use anything other than IE or media player (though they;ve both gotten better of late)
he's made it impossible for other competitors to get an 'in' for the market, and its resulted in less competition and probably less inovation
i'm always irritated in the way it trys (windows) to sign you up to MSN internet, and makes it hard for you to disable that, or use anything other than IE or media player (though they;ve both gotten better of late)
atlantabiolab
New member
collegiateLifter said:
You have presented nothing, merely the idea of some shadowy group of economists who have said "something" that is not in agreement with Matt's assertion.
If you can show that Microsoft has harmed customers and businesses, in any immoral or unethical manner, even if it is the quote of others, please present it. Business contracts are not immoral nor illegal. This is all about competitor companies utilizing government to acheive a goal which they are unable to accomplish in the market. It has been done numerous times in the past.
collegiateLifter
New member
atlantabiolab said:
my point was not to disprove Matt's assertion, but to shed light on the fact that there is no absolute certainty as to which is better.
Matt's assertion would have to pass a utilitarian analysis interestingly enough as he has just shown that he does not believe in knowable objective morals.
On the utilitarian side, there is no consensus.
I know enough to know that, but not to argue it againt Matt yet. As such I haven't put up any arguements yet.
"shadowy group of economists." LoL.
atlantabiolab
New member
collegiateLifter said:
Ahhhh...yes, the irrationalist idea that there are no absolutes and this is certain. One cannot know anything for certain, because reason is fallible and we know this absolutely. The mind is impotent in regards to truth and this has been determined with certitude using the mind.
I do not accept the idea that consensus equals truth, so this does not prove anything.
Liked that one, didn't ya?
Similar threads
