From: Fergal Daly (fergal at domain esatclear.ie)
Date: Thu 09 Aug 2001 - 11:09:46 IST
I agree that MS are about the only ones who could pull it off. I just don't
think that even they can do it,
On Thu, Aug 09, 2001 at 05:57:38AM -0400, Wesley Darlington wrote:
> 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...
> Irish Linux Users' Group: ilug at domain linux.ie
> http://www.linux.ie/mailman/listinfo/ilug for (un)subscription information.
> List maintainer: listmaster at domain linux.ie
This archive was generated by hypermail 2.1.6 : Thu 06 Feb 2003 - 13:11:31 GMT