On Sunday 2005-02-06 23:09, David Land wrote: > Trent Shipley wrote: > > I really do not get that angry with spammers. They are just rational > > entrepreneurs. > > I take from this it that you are some kind of extreme libertarian that > rejects both property and privacy.
It would not be incorrect to label me an extreme libertarian. I do not believe that privacy can be protected by legal means. Like the entrepreneur said, "Privacy: it doesn't exist. Get over it." I do not, however, reject property. (For one thing, if I did that would mean I was more of an anarcho-socialist than a libertarian.) > What would you say to the overt act of stealing a speaker truck (with > the intention of returning it after using it for your entrepreneurial > purposes) and driving around neighborhoods hawking sexual enhancements > at all hours? Would that, too, be "rational entrepreneurship?" Assuming that one obtained the truck by legal means (like an obscure clause in the bill of sale or lease), and one could make a profit driving around hawking whatever, then yes, by definition that would be "rational entrepreneurship". > Spam -- especially this "adaptation" -- is theft and harrassment. Spam is harassment and might be theft. So what? If someone can make a buck with spam they are going to do it ... and more power to them. Nevertheless, radical libertarianism isn't why I have trouble getting angry at spammers. I have trouble getting angry at my cat for scratching the furniture. I have trouble getting angry at my dog for barking. Likewise, I have trouble getting angry at developers for converting beaches to high rent developments or at spammers for distributing junk mail. It is the nature of the human species, they are greedy. Getting angry with spammers makes as much sense as getting angry with waves or the wind. _______________________________________________ http://www.mccmedia.com/mailman/listinfo/brin-l
