Archive of UserLand's first discussion group, started October 5, 1998.

Re: snowballs (Anti-Microsoft sentiment)

Author:David McCusker
Posted:9/19/2000; 7:26:17 AM
Topic:Debunking the OSS Bazaar?
Msg #:21496 (In response to 21493)
Prev/Next:21495 / 21497

I'm just responding to a few things that caught my eye most. I know this is lightweight, but I'm just riding on the AC power discussion.

Josh Allen: incentivize

That words makes me squirm. I think 'incent' means the same thing.

Josh Allen: "standardization" often proves that monocultures are not always bad

How does that look with some of the counteracting superlatives removed? Perhaps the following. Standards are like monocultures we often accept as good. The question is whether it's time for a standard. You suggest no in the following (and I agree with this).

Josh Allen: I can't actually imagine a time in the future that would be good to stop advancing the platform.

I think everyone agrees with this, and it's the primary reason for rage over any one company sequestering the tactical ability to dictate this advance as part of doing business.

Josh Allen: And this not through ability to block out competitors, but because intellect attracts intellect and success attracts success, and there is nothing physical to dampen the process.

The snowball effect story is the main place I see arrogance in the Microsoft position. This story says, we're winning because you're all losers, because all the winners join us. Uh, thanks.

Anyway, I agree the "snowball effect" has been used as the primary intellectual defense against monopoly infringements. It claims that the increase in monoculture is due to rampant fabulous genius instead of methodical mundane tactics.

One of the problems with this topos in debate is that it salts the wounds of your competitors. You effectively say, we have more money proves we're smarter than you, because the snowball effect says we are winning because our snowball collected smarter people. Ooh.

Josh Allen: (You may disagree. I could write a book about this; I really think it is a supportable thesis)

No, the thesis is not supportable. Physical effects are not needed to dampen the process. Intellectual systems are self dampening because the one true way thesis is not true.

There are responses to this message:

This page was archived on 6/13/2001; 4:56:46 PM.

© Copyright 1998-2001 UserLand Software, Inc.