["Followup-To:" header set to comp.infosystems.search and
from Roy Schestowitz <newsgroups@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>
in message <de8pmq$22to$1@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>
posted at 2005-08-21T01:06
> On Saturday 20 August 2005 09:42, Total Brain Delete wrote:
>>> Linux is heroic, for instance. Using Windows is certainly
>>> unfortunate. For some people I'm sure using Windows is cowardly.
>> what about the pirate versions...?
> Piracy is said to be one of the factors that allowed Microsoft to grow
> decades ago, thus disseminating their proprietary.
Really? I had no idea that Microsoft was into the business of robbing
ships on the high seas.
If you mean to say unauthorized copying of Microsoft proucts, that's
not surprising, unfortunately; the desire to help one's neighbor
usually means that attempting to enforce fascist restrictions against
making copies is a losing battle. Even printing "Do Not Make Illegal
Copies Of This Disc" didn't really help.
I'll get closer to topic in a moment, but I should note here this is
the exact same reason that Microsoft (or any software company that
sells binaries only and prohibits copying) should not be allowed to
pay off a judgement against them for illegal activity in merchandise.
Getting back to the topic at hand, there are few parallels to be
drawn. I guess you could call Scroogle and/or routing Google queries
via Tor the rough equivalent of making unauthorized copies of Windows.
However, the business model is entirely different; Google does
not charge the end users per query, they make their money through
advertising (and possibly, by selling information about what their
users search for, but I won't open that can of worms). For a while, I
exclusively used other search engines, such as Alltheweb and Altavista
(which I think are now owned by the same company that owns Yahoo).
___ _ _____ |*|
/ __| |/ / _ \ |*| Shawn K. Quinn
\__ \ ' < (_) | |*| skquinn@xxxxxxxxxxxxx
|___/_|\_\__\_\ |*| Houston, TX, USA