On 5 Apr 2001, at 11:01, David Messer wrote: Date sent: Thu, 05 Apr 2001 11:01:26 -0800 To: Multiple recipients of list ORACLE-L <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> > But, Eric, I'm not out to prove anything. Never said you were. By "proof" I meant when two competing pieces of "factual" information (or references to such) are posted to a public list, then questions can, and perhaps ought to, be raised as to the veracity/legitimacy of the sources of the information, and the nature of the "truth claims" represented by the different perspectives in the argument. >I'm only trying to show Gates in > the worst light possible. My desire to do so derives from working day in > and day out with Microsoft products. I'm not exactly a fan of Gates/MS, and don't consider myself in opposition to your main point, but I would suggest that if one has to lie, deceive, or misrepresent in order to make the point, then one is potentially exposing oneself to valid criticisms about a lack of ethical consistency, and beyond that, the general efficacy of such tactics. For background on tendencies toward dysfunctional (self-defeating) nature of "social change" paradigms (and related tendencies toward ideological/political oppositionality), I would suggest reading Rabbi Michael Lerner's book "Surplus Powerlessness" (related commentary at http://www.tikkun.org/). As I've said before, I think the sociological backdrop to the debate about MS has to do with the conflicts in the value systems and "world views" of: 1) the (old time) industrial strength technical/engineering "purists" and 2) the "populists", unfortunately including Gates, that weren't afraid to do the messy job involved in taking the technology to the masses (cheaply). These "opposites" are obviously an oversimplified representation of the extreme ends of a spectrum containing more complex elements, and also mirror pre-existing elements in broader scientific, technical and business "subcultures". I think that part of the reason that the tech elites and "purists" may hate Gates so much is because they realized, to late, that they lost a great opportunity make a lot of money in the mass market because of the limitations that their "purist" engineering/tech aesthetic placed on their entreprenurial vision & reach. In the era when "big iron" and extremely expensive software reigned supreme, the "purist" aesthetic proved to be very successful, but it wasn't universally competitive once the feasibility of a "mass market" approach emerged. Ironically, the value systems of tech purists tend to align with libertarianism (which I personally think is virtuous, at least when seen from the perspective of a progressive/integrative/univeralist/constructivist evolutionary model of human conciousness based on the emergence of transformational/transcendent archetypes, such as Ken Wilber's), whereas PC technology essentially originally came from the great state sponsored "establishmentarian" science and technology development efforts in the space program and defense establishment. On the other hand, as various people have pointed out, I could be completely full of cr*p. :) (apologies in advance to the old timers for duplication of info) regards, ep -- Please see the official ORACLE-L FAQ: http://www.orafaq.com -- Author: Eric D. Pierce INET: [EMAIL PROTECTED] Fat City Network Services -- (858) 538-5051 FAX: (858) 538-5051 San Diego, California -- Public Internet access / Mailing Lists -------------------------------------------------------------------- To REMOVE yourself from this mailing list, send an E-Mail message to: [EMAIL PROTECTED] (note EXACT spelling of 'ListGuru') and in the message BODY, include a line containing: UNSUB ORACLE-L (or the name of mailing list you want to be removed from). You may also send the HELP command for other information (like subscribing).
