On Wed, 02 Feb 2005 01:27:17 +0000, Ian G wrote: > Simon Anderson wrote: >>"Verisign paid for Webtrust, so they will be included no matter how many >>times their security is breached or their processes are shown to be >>insecure. CA-Cert in contrast, cannot be included without paying for >>WebTrust." I think that you will consider this an oversimplification but I >>contend that this is the root of the matter, based on eighteen months >>of watching MF prevaricate. >> >> > > MF takes WebTrust. Yes it costs. So what? Your point is > that people who can't afford to pay the piper should get > a free ride? Perhaps we should go to the government and > ask for a handout? > > You would be much better off concentrating on why a > costly model like WebTrust doesn't serve the browser > user ... rather than throwing out hand-me-down socialistic > misconceptions about The Man and his evil Dollar.
Ah, here we have it; Everyone must pay to play and anyone who wants free software is a communist. Gates paraphrased here, in a newsgroup for an OSI approved free software project, by you. Despite your protestations otherwise elsewhere in this thread, we can conclude now that you have illustrated the essential point. -Simon. _______________________________________________ mozilla-crypto mailing list [email protected] http://mail.mozilla.org/listinfo/mozilla-crypto
