relic17

5 ms·

1.
by relic17 15y ago
For the sake of those who do not refuse to think for themselves, let me say this: there was no agony in Steve Job's life, only the exaltation of living a full, rich, happy life in the course of which he saw the realization of his highest va
2.
by relic17 15y ago
I do disagree with the anti-trust laws. I have taken a long hard look at anti-trust, both academically and professionally, and I think these laws are among the worst. The whole issue is not economic, it is philosophical, about ethics - i.e.
3.
by relic17 15y ago
Force is at the point of a gun, and only in that case you (or, rather, the government as your agent) should point a gun at it (or in a case of demonstrable fraud). A business which does not defraud you or physically force you to do anything
4.
by relic17 15y ago
Only the government can stop you from speaking (and competing), as the government is the only entity that has the right to initiate force. A company cannot censor you; it can deny you access to its property, which is the proper right of its
5.
by relic17 15y ago
Quoting the quote: "At the heart of common carriage is the idea that certain businesses are either so intimately connected, even essential, to the public good, or so inherently powerful—imagine the water or electric utilities—that they must
6.
by relic17 15y ago
Another honest answer - yes. I read her work only recently and was surprised to find out that she confirmed many of the conclusions I had reached, often quite painfully, myself. She provided the philosophical (theoretical) framework for tho
7.
by relic17 16y ago
Sure, the hardware belongs to the people buying the device. They can sell it, give it as a gift, break it. But they can't use the device every way they want. The device does only so much. The fact is: everyone bought a device in the full kn
8.
by relic17 16y ago
Class action? Alright, let's see what a self-respecting judge would do in such a situation. Especially when your evidence is that Apple's actions "feel hostile" and "leave a bad taste" in your mouth. When a customer purchases an Apple devic
9.
by relic17 16y ago
Apple has the right to do whatever it wants with its first-to-market product, as long as it does not break the law. There is nothing unethical about that. Also, there is no such thing as user rights. The only right a user has is to sue Appl
10.
by relic17 16y ago
"A monopoly", "unethically created"... Apple's platform and its success are the result of the work of Apple's employees - the platform is good, this is why developers like it and use it. Any great innovation that comes first to market is al
11.
by relic17 16y ago
I understand your reasoning and completely disagree with it. The only way I can answer is to urge you to check your premises. That would mean thinking about the meaning of "equal footing" and answering why, in your view, Apple has the oblig
12.
by relic17 16y ago
"Dishonest", "steal", "anti competitive" - these are some heavy accusations. In the context of Apple's relationship with developers, dishonest would mean deliberately lying, cheating, or signing a contract and then reneging on it (in which
13.
by relic17 16y ago
Could you please provide a reference to the sources for these claims? Thanks.
14.
by relic17 16y ago
Thanks for bringing up this good point. Let me explain. I think a government agency should not intervene if there is no law violation. I think this case is very clear - Apple is neither physically compelling nor defrauding anyone. It is off
15.
by relic17 16y ago
I think you may be right. But that would be unfortunate, as I don't think the FTC should meddle in Apple's business. I think Apple's management should have the right to set any policy it considers relevant - after all, this is their platfor
16.
by relic17 16y ago
Very true. Many refuse to think logically and accept whatever happens to be the fashionable idea of the day. My family and I also had to witness a similar experiment. I join you in your wishes.
17.
by relic17 16y ago
Fundamentally, it comes down to the questions "Do you have the right to keep the fruit of your effort? And do you have the right to dispose of it as you see fit?" It appears that your acquaintance agrees with having her government take away
18.
by relic17 16y ago
The article implies that most people in Norway believe that individual rights are less important than the average welfare of all individuals taken together and that personal lives are less important than the well-being of the collective. Th
19.
by relic17 16y ago
I agree with many of your points. However, note that Professor Porter does not technically propose socialism. Socialism would imply seizing private property, such as part of a company's assets, for the alleged purpose of using them to fur
20.
by relic17 16y ago
My intention was not to imply that Ayn Rand's philosophy is the universal truth, though I find it very logical. My intention was to say that the author, who refers to Rand in the opening paragraphs in a manner suggesting philosophical oppo
21.
by relic17 16y ago
"Federal Reserve Chairman Alan Greenspan: iconic libertarian, preeminent defender of the free market, and (at least until recently) the nation’s foremost devotee of Ayn Rand. When the high priest of capitalism himself is declaring the growt
22.
by relic17 16y ago
Sadly, yet another author who either did not bother to read and think about Ayn Rand's work, or, worse, pretends to have NOT understood it.
23.
by relic17 16y ago
Unfortunately, this type of philosophy will do further damage to the country. If any rich person wants to donate his/her wealth, he/she is free and should be free to do so. This would be an admirable act, especially if the person takes gr
24.
by relic17 16y ago
It is one thing to express an opinion in a peaceful manner, and a completely different thing to threaten and physically attack people. Intellectual battles are fought by persuasion, not physical force. Disagreeing with a government action
25.
by relic17 16y ago
Clavell's whole Asian Saga (Shogun, Tai-Pan, Gai-Jin, King Rat, Noble House, and Whirlwind) is amazing. My favorite is Tai-Pan - the book had a tremendous impact on me, and I'd imagine it would appeal to every real entrepreneur. The underly
26.
by relic17 16y ago
The European Commission should be very careful in distinguishing between illegal activity and success as a good service that people overwhelmingly prefer. A company (just like an individual) should not be expected to sabotage itself by pro