[brlug-general] Nobody should be liable

[willhill]

And I am the eggman.   

I think John has cynically decided that, for issues like this, his opinion is 
valueless and nonsensical but potentially amusing.  That's sad.  What we 
think influences what others think, what they do and ultimately decides the 
kind of world we live in.  

That's politics, pure and simple.

Innovation is less important than freedom, but you don't get one without the 
other.  Anyone who promisses that you will have better toys if only you do as 
they say, is lying.  

The coming debate should be if Microsoft should be held responsible for losses 
due to their gross negligence.  They are uniquely responsible for the problem 
in the software world and should be forced to pay.  They are a monopoly, they 
pushed their flawed products in the face of fierce criticism and stifled 
better software.  This has nothing to do with individual programmers or 
anyone outside of Microsoft.  Blame and cost recovery arguments should be 
couched in those terms, to avoid the issue from being spun into something 
that will help perpetuate the Microsoft monopoly.   


On Monday 22 January 2007 12:21, michael dolan wrote:
> I don't get it.  What does Lewis Carroll have to do with this?  What did I
> miss?
>
> As for the discussion at hand,
> 1.  holding individual programmers responsible will only stifle innovation
> 2.  It's not politics
>
> ps - gmail put an "i am the walrus" t-shirt ad link on this page, which I
> thought was kind of cool.