From: Wesley Darlington (wesley at domain yelsew.com)
Date: Thu 09 Aug 2001 - 10:57:42 IST
On Thu, Aug 09, 2001 at 09:24:25AM +0100, Fergal Daly wrote:
> As for taking over the internet, they tried it already with MSN and admitted
> defeat, plus if they just adapt IPv4 by twiddling a few reserved bits,
> they'll run into all the same problems IPv4 is running into now.
The problems IPv4 is running into now do not make headlines in newspapers
nor do they get top billing on CNN et al. AIUI, Cringely's point was that
Microsoft could cause the problem, orchestrate the media circus and Rescue
The Internet with a `solution'.
Who's to say that next time someone that exploits a flaw in a widespread
Microsoft product that tries to `kill the Internet', Microsoft won't
introduce subtly (and perhaps, gradually) nasty flaws in their IP stacks
to slowly subvert the 'net?
MS are in a position to do it too. Cisco, the only other entity that *could*
have the power to do it wouldn't be able to do it because their target
market is uber-technical and would laugh at them, or at worst discuss their
proposals into oblivion. Microsoft's target market is pretty much the
non-technical world. Plus, Cisco have credible competition - Juniper, for
example. Microsoft don't.
> It might be just a flash upgrade to allow routers to route this new protocol
> but if they're depending on all the bandwidth providers to apply it then
> they could be out of luck, firmware upgrades are not done lightly, if it
> ain't broke don't fix it.
Who says it has to require a router upgrade? Perhaps it will only affect
the end points of a TCP transaction, not the mid-points. Anyway, even if
it does, Microsoft *can* get the media to intimidate Cisco into making
their routers compatible with the new protocol and Microsoft *can* get
Pointy Haired people all over the world to scream at their techies until
the patches are applied. Nobody else has the clout to do this, everybody
else would be laughed at and would lose market share if they tried anything
like this. Microsoft are the only ones who stand a chance.
> > The article is certainly less scary and outlandish
> > than RMS' short story on copyright...
> >
> > http://www.fsf.org/philosophy/right-to-read.html
>
> What, the one that's already starting to come true? The one that's a wet
> dream for the enormously rich and powerful lobbying group that just happens
> to control most of what you see and hear on TV, radio and print?
That's the one.
> It's already started to happen,
While Cringely's conspiracy theory is less terrifying than RMS', I don't
see it as anywhere near as outlandish. RMS' will require structural
changes to society and can only really happen over at least a generation.
Cringely's can become substantially true in the next ten years.
As you so rightly point out, RMS' is starting to come true *now*. This is
why the logical extremes of the new laws need to be highlighted *now*,
the Skylarov case is a Good Thing seen in this light. RMS' piece was
written some years ago, Cringely's only in the last few weeks. Give it
some time...
Wesley.
This archive was generated by hypermail 2.1.6 : Thu 06 Feb 2003 - 13:11:31 GMT