I can see it now: "The New York Times is reporting that a Class-action lawsuit filed in San Jose, California, demands that internet search engine SearchKing repay millions in lost revenue to all sites not indexed by SearchKing, because its lawsuit against Google caused an upswing in hits for SearchKing-related websites, which drove customers away from the plantiff's websites. In a related note, a lawsuit filed in federal court in New York today by businesses which are indexed by SearchKing, demanding that SearchKing sue Northern Light, AltaVista, Yahoo, and all other internet search engines to require that SearchKing hits be listed first in all returned search results."
They can't be serious. They CAN'T be f*****g serious. People wonder why innovation in this country is at a standstill virtually everywhere... (commercially, anyway).
*ahem* Silly TRS80, that Ubermac will probably be based on a Pentium. *shudder*
Nah, couldn't be. Steve Jobs still thinks that Moore is a Moore-On, and that Andy Grove guy is just plain stupid. He'd never allow Apple to move to the Pentium... would he?
Actually, I do this all the time. Maybe I misled, but it's a Logitech three-button trackball/thumbball, and I use it in cramped conditions just about every day (bus, coffee shop, etc.).
3. or go use your two button mouse
4. or go play your games we won't get for 6 months (if we're lucky...)
Hm. I have a two-button... er, three button... mouse for my iBook... sure, I had to buy it.
I was also smart enough to know when I bought it that I actually needed one. Probably 99% of PCs (and most Macs, anymore) don't come with RCA Composite out cables for directly connecting with a VCR... so, if you need to do that, you buy the tool you need. You know if you need it or not.
Newbie users and two button mice? You've never done phone support for newbies, have you? You'd know better. Two button mice is an intermediate concept, and not a good idea for new users. Since one of the Macintosh's primary audiences is, and always has been, new users, shipping with single-button mice makes a lot of sense.
Oh, and if the game comes out late, that's unfortunate. What difference does six months make in the overall scheme of life? What kind of a spoiled, demanding brat are you if you can't wait six months for a new way to detach from reality? I would say that if six months is too long for you to wait for a new escapist activity, you should seek therapy.
IIRC, the only thing Motorola makes is the PPC chips, and then only most of them (Apple does, apparently, buy PPC chips from IBM, as well). The rest of the box is, like most PCs, OEMed by Apple but definitely assembled by Apple. Just like, say, Gateway or HP or Dell, they buy graphics chips &/| cards from ATI, ethernet chips from TI or 3Com or who the hell ever, etc.
Maybe this is a troll... but... keep in mind that Apple is a hardware vendor. Actually, for that matter, so is Microsoft, they just don't make their own PCs, whereas Apple does. Apple's opposition to DRM as a hardware vendor is significant, IMO.
How long has the Itanium been out? And HP has sold, what, 25 IA-64 servers in that time? Plus an additional 10 by Compaq, 15 by IBM, 6 by Dell. Hm. Lots of Itaniums, there. Does anybody even use Pentiums anymore?
Ratch? Did I miss another slang term while I was asleep?
No, Hemos missed using the correct word, "ratchet" (as in, to proceed up or down by steps or degrees), possibly due to failing high school English (note: I didn't say "due to him failing"... I think high school English in this country is a joke, anymore. For the record: I worked for a public school district, in a high school, just a couple of years ago, and have seen it with my own eyes).
[/offtopic]
[ontopic]
Price. When broadband is affordable, people will buy it. It isn't any more, or less, simple than that. As long as the providers charge too much money, the only people who will have it are those who believe they need it (rightly, or wrongly), and those who can spare the money whether they believe they need the service or not.
What is that magic barrier? I think it's $15.00/month. When carriers can get to that price point, and can actually offer it to 95% or better of customers in their service area, then broadband use by consumers will skyrocket. Until then, it will hover in this never-land.[/ontopic]
I agree that the analogy is broken.
A panhandler breakdancing to music playing on a device powered by an outlet that Nokia pays for might be Larceny, albeit a petty one.
Warchalking is probably, as you point out, grafitti, and nothing more.
If "Phil" actually uses the warchalk diagram to connect to Nokia's unsecured wireless network, what have they done that qualifies it as a theft? It's not a buglary unless Phil enters inhabited private property, so staying on the sidewalk (which is almost certainly a public right-of-way) prevents it from being burlgary.
To be a Larceny, it would have to involve taking something away from the location where it is obtained, which is senseless in the case of wireless networks, since you can't take radio/micro/x/gamma/whatever waves with you when you leave, and even if you could, they wouldn't be part of the network for long afterward.
Robbery, then? Not unless "Phil" uses force or the threat of force to take the wireless network, and then only in the presence of the person who is victimized by the taking.
Of course, that doesn't preclude legislators from creating new language to cover "warsurfing"...:-(
(This does not constitute Legal Advice. Don't rely on the content of this post to perform any act. If you do, you're stupid.)
... I think, is to interview people who are in each, and some who do both.
I have worked in both public and private sectors, and there are, as anywhere, good and bad of each. I don't have any experience in a startup, though, so that might affect some things about the private sector.
I currently work for a huge worldwide corporation, and have some stability and certainly higher pay, but for less decision-making authority and less work environment control than I had in the public sector. I have access to much better benefits, more up-to-date hardware (in some cases, hardware that's not publicly availble, even from other companies), and a much larger budget than in the public sector, but less leeway with what I can and can't do with them.
Other people's experiences may vary, but I would say this: In general, public sector work is a great place to get started, in just about any field (not just IT/MIS/software/whatever), and can provide a richness both in breadth and depth of experiences, often at lower (much, sometimes!) pay, and with smaller bene packages. Private sector work is a good place to get paid, to get your teeth fixed on the company's dime (more or less), get some brutally repetative, but nevertheless deep, exposure to a handful of experiences, and get those conference passes and flights to/from them for free, or pretty close to it.
This reminds me of song lyrics ...
on
Want Freedom?
·
· Score: 1
"Life's fantasy:
To be locked away,
And still to think you're free."
-- Black Sabbath, "Die Young" (Heaven and Hell).
Well, because it's not a common acronym. From now on, of course, I can use the acronym at will, because all humanity understands it.
In addition, the last time I tried to light myself on fire, I didn't catch like one would expect of a stick bundle. How could you possibly make such a drastic mistake as to the nature of my being?
Maybe because you don't know me! AH HA! Real Men don't post as AC.
Some chemical reactions are not reversible. In particular, IIRC, denatured protiens are irrevocably altered, and can't be re-assembled into their original state. Also, take wood, for example. Once you've burned out all of the actually flammable elements from wood, you are left with charcoal. Charcoal can't be re-constituted into wood; however, if you let it sit long enough, it will eventually break back down, be re-integrated into other compounds, and may become part of another tree... but the lump you've got in your hands can't be made into a same-sized piece of wood without the process to break it down completely. Unfortunately, IANAC (I am not a chemist), so this is all just based on what I remember from physics class and _Good Eats_ episodes.:-)
Additionally, if you have access to the source of the basic front-end of the UI, it would be pretty easy to create a module that will feed events to the event loop. Stub out calls to RunApplicationEventLoop() or ReceiveNextEvent() and direct them to your module, which then generates a random (or, sequentially un-random, or pre-determined un-random) relevant event, and pass that event back to the event handler.
Morality and religion are not equivalent; in fact, it can be successfully argued that religion inhibits morality. Calling the requirement for schoolchildren to participate in the recitation of the Pledge of Allegiance a ripping of "the moral fabric" of America implies that the Pledge, itself, embodies some kind of morality. It does not, in fact, speak to any moral good, morally laudable (or repugnant), or morally interesting behaviors whatsoever. It does, however, reveal a preference for a God, which is expressly the problem the court has with the Pledge. Justifying one's point of view shouldn't be necessary; justifying ramming one's point of view down someone else's throat should be necessary. Just because 99 of 100 people may believe in the Tooth Fairy doesn't mean that the remaining 1 in 100 can be forced to.
The court's take had it right: if the Pledge said "one nation, under Satan" or "one Nation, under the Aesir," there would have been a hailstorm of critisism (probably during the debate for adding the language in 1954). Clearly, inserting any relgiously overtoned language generates quite a bit of controversy; ergo, it should all be removed.
Unless you have a predominance of even numbers, in which case you run into the reverse of this problem.
6.5, 8.5; mean = 7.5
Rounding with conventional rules,
7, 9; mean = 8
Rounding with these "new" rules,
6, 8, mean = 7
Both rounding types introduce errors. Why would either have an advantage over the other?
They're both wrong.
The data, in the aggregate, or the datum, in the individual, represent me. They are part and parcel of my being who I am, and as such are inseparable from me, regardless of how you define "me." In the US, at least (and, at least in theory), "[t]he right of the people to be secure in their persons, houses, papers, and effects, against unreasonable searches and seizures, shall not be violated[.]" This, of course, only really applies to the Federal and State governments (via the 14th Amendment), but seems pretty clear: a person's "person" is inviolate. "We hold these truths to be self-evident: that all men are created equal, endowed by their Creator with inalienable rights; among these are life, liberty, and the pursuit of happiness." (Emphasis Added.)
It is the person who is (or, perhaps, should be) most sacred. Kant reminds us that people cannot be used as means to any end, but only always as ends unto themselves; Rousseau points out that liberty cannot be given away, even if one wants to do so. Liberty::Human as Attraction::Gravity. You can no more separate the tendency of masses to attract one another from the masses themselves than you can remove freedom of the individual person from the individual person.
With that in mind, it seems pretty clear that my iris, my fingerprints, my voice patterns, are mine. The FBI or state police may have a compelling interest to keep a database of criminals, and how to identify them, but it's pretty well established that these are pretty limited-use activities, and not available to the general business population. It is also pretty well established that those fingerprint records are not the property of the FBI, or any other agency, but that the FBI and other agencies can collect them as part of their routine criminal investigation activities. The FBI certainly doesn't own the fingerprints. Why would private companies be able to "own" retinal or iris scans?
... we would loved to have let the students play games after school was out. There are two basic problems with that approach:
First, students who have gaming permission often spend most of their time during classes trying as hard as they can to hack around whatever security procedures are in place in order to play those games during class. Booting from floppies (right in front of the teacher... who, come on, is almost certainly unaware that it's a hazard to do that), doing whatever they can. Oh, and it's not limited to the Mac or PC, either. Even if the student is unsuccessful, they've wasted an entire period when the could have learned how to conjugate Spanish Verbs instead learning how to... what, do nothing?
Second, the computers were purchased with state or county monies. Try explaining to a County Board member or State Legislator why students should be allowed to play games on a school-owned computer.
All the way around, it's a bad idea IMO. The students who are going to spend the hour trying to break around the security software may try anyway, but why give them a reward for doing it?
There are those who will argue that most of those students, especially any successful ones, are "exploring"... in a word: Bullshit. I've done my share of exploring and hacking and cracking in my day, but the fact is that if you're breaking into a system for the data on the hard drive (whether it's a game or source code or encrypted passwords), you're leaving behind trojaned binaries of whatever you need to get back in, later. That may very well cause tremendous problems for other, as legitimate, users later, and prevent the use of a limited, state-funded resource for those same, again at least as legitimate, users. Just Don't Do It!(tm).
Actually, a lot of sites are still using gopher, in particular education, library, and government sites that simply make gopher:// accessible through an html file. I have run across a number of them while doing various kinds of academic research.
Sure, it's not as prevelant now as it was in 1991, but it still provides access to a fair amount of 'Net-accessible information.
Actually... I say that the missing piece in the article is that Palpatine manipulated the entire thing. The "breakaway" republics didn't break away of their own accord, Palpatine (through Dooku) separated them without them even knowing it. The fight of the Rebel Alliance isn't, at its root, about restoring an old, ineffective Republic, but about removing Emperor Palpatine from its helm, and _then_ restoring the Republic. Luke and Leia and the rest of the Alliance members may not be completely aware of that, but awareness does not change the underlying reality. Obi-Wan and Yoda, in Eps. IV-V-VI are also manipulating events to some (much less) degree than Palpatine, and (IMO) do so out of their knowledge that Palpatine intends to, it seems, make slaves out of all the people in the Universe. That is certainly a cause to Rebel.
I never once said that buying shelf space is semantically, legally, or logically equivalent to preventing competing products from being visible. It is at best wrong, and at worst illegal, to buy shelf space in order to prevent your competitors from being visible. You are right to point out that what I do not want to advocate is that it be illegal for Coke to buy endcaps just in case Pepsi wants to buy them. What it is, IIRC, illegal to do (to the best of my knowledge. IANAL) is buy more shelf space than you need to sell and stock your product in order to prevent competing products from even being on the shelves. What Microsoft has done, at least in the past, is buy up more shelf space than necessary specifically to keep competing products off the shelves entirely, which is very much what they've done with these anti-trust experts.
Note that I didn't say that the buying of shelf space is wrong, but that it is wrong to buy it to prevent competing products from being visible and from being purchased. Microsoft has been doing that for a long time, and IIRC that very activity was part of the 1995 consent decree that they violated to land themselves in court this time. Both of you should read more carefully.
Slashdot Mirror
D000d! That is such a good idea!
... (commercially, anyway).
I can see it now: "The New York Times is reporting that a Class-action lawsuit filed in San Jose, California, demands that internet search engine SearchKing repay millions in lost revenue to all sites not indexed by SearchKing, because its lawsuit against Google caused an upswing in hits for SearchKing-related websites, which drove customers away from the plantiff's websites. In a related note, a lawsuit filed in federal court in New York today by businesses which are indexed by SearchKing, demanding that SearchKing sue Northern Light, AltaVista, Yahoo, and all other internet search engines to require that SearchKing hits be listed first in all returned search results."
They can't be serious. They CAN'T be f*****g serious. People wonder why innovation in this country is at a standstill virtually everywhere
*ahem* Silly TRS80, that Ubermac will probably be based on a Pentium. *shudder*
... would he?
Nah, couldn't be. Steve Jobs still thinks that Moore is a Moore-On, and that Andy Grove guy is just plain stupid. He'd never allow Apple to move to the Pentium
Actually, I do this all the time. Maybe I misled, but it's a Logitech three-button trackball/thumbball, and I use it in cramped conditions just about every day (bus, coffee shop, etc.).
3. or go use your two button mouse
... er, three button ... mouse for my iBook ... sure, I had to buy it.
... so, if you need to do that, you buy the tool you need. You know if you need it or not.
4. or go play your games we won't get for 6 months (if we're lucky...)
Hm. I have a two-button
I was also smart enough to know when I bought it that I actually needed one. Probably 99% of PCs (and most Macs, anymore) don't come with RCA Composite out cables for directly connecting with a VCR
Newbie users and two button mice? You've never done phone support for newbies, have you? You'd know better. Two button mice is an intermediate concept, and not a good idea for new users. Since one of the Macintosh's primary audiences is, and always has been, new users, shipping with single-button mice makes a lot of sense.
Oh, and if the game comes out late, that's unfortunate. What difference does six months make in the overall scheme of life? What kind of a spoiled, demanding brat are you if you can't wait six months for a new way to detach from reality? I would say that if six months is too long for you to wait for a new escapist activity, you should seek therapy.
IIRC, the only thing Motorola makes is the PPC chips, and then only most of them (Apple does, apparently, buy PPC chips from IBM, as well). The rest of the box is, like most PCs, OEMed by Apple but definitely assembled by Apple. Just like, say, Gateway or HP or Dell, they buy graphics chips &/| cards from ATI, ethernet chips from TI or 3Com or who the hell ever, etc.
Maybe this is a troll ... but ... keep in mind that Apple is a hardware vendor. Actually, for that matter, so is Microsoft, they just don't make their own PCs, whereas Apple does. Apple's opposition to DRM as a hardware vendor is significant, IMO.
You're kidding. You must be.
How long has the Itanium been out? And HP has sold, what, 25 IA-64 servers in that time? Plus an additional 10 by Compaq, 15 by IBM, 6 by Dell. Hm. Lots of Itaniums, there. Does anybody even use Pentiums anymore?
The Itanium is stillborn, and will never recover.
Ratch? Did I miss another slang term while I was asleep?
... I think high school English in this country is a joke, anymore. For the record: I worked for a public school district, in a high school, just a couple of years ago, and have seen it with my own eyes).
No, Hemos missed using the correct word, "ratchet" (as in, to proceed up or down by steps or degrees), possibly due to failing high school English (note: I didn't say "due to him failing"
[/offtopic]
[ontopic]
Price. When broadband is affordable, people will buy it. It isn't any more, or less, simple than that. As long as the providers charge too much money, the only people who will have it are those who believe they need it (rightly, or wrongly), and those who can spare the money whether they believe they need the service or not.
What is that magic barrier? I think it's $15.00/month. When carriers can get to that price point, and can actually offer it to 95% or better of customers in their service area, then broadband use by consumers will skyrocket. Until then, it will hover in this never-land.[/ontopic]
I agree that the analogy is broken.
... :-(
A panhandler breakdancing to music playing on a device powered by an outlet that Nokia pays for might be Larceny, albeit a petty one.
Warchalking is probably, as you point out, grafitti, and nothing more.
If "Phil" actually uses the warchalk diagram to connect to Nokia's unsecured wireless network, what have they done that qualifies it as a theft? It's not a buglary unless Phil enters inhabited private property, so staying on the sidewalk (which is almost certainly a public right-of-way) prevents it from being burlgary.
To be a Larceny, it would have to involve taking something away from the location where it is obtained, which is senseless in the case of wireless networks, since you can't take radio/micro/x/gamma/whatever waves with you when you leave, and even if you could, they wouldn't be part of the network for long afterward.
Robbery, then? Not unless "Phil" uses force or the threat of force to take the wireless network, and then only in the presence of the person who is victimized by the taking.
Of course, that doesn't preclude legislators from creating new language to cover "warsurfing"
(This does not constitute Legal Advice. Don't rely on the content of this post to perform any act. If you do, you're stupid.)
My next door neighbor has an old box that I will probably put Drake on inside of a week. Try to do that with the Macs.
I actually have an old Mac (Power Mac 7600) running Mandrake PPC on it right now.
Oh, you were joking? My mistake.
... I think, is to interview people who are in each, and some who do both.
I have worked in both public and private sectors, and there are, as anywhere, good and bad of each. I don't have any experience in a startup, though, so that might affect some things about the private sector.
I currently work for a huge worldwide corporation, and have some stability and certainly higher pay, but for less decision-making authority and less work environment control than I had in the public sector. I have access to much better benefits, more up-to-date hardware (in some cases, hardware that's not publicly availble, even from other companies), and a much larger budget than in the public sector, but less leeway with what I can and can't do with them.
Other people's experiences may vary, but I would say this: In general, public sector work is a great place to get started, in just about any field (not just IT/MIS/software/whatever), and can provide a richness both in breadth and depth of experiences, often at lower (much, sometimes!) pay, and with smaller bene packages. Private sector work is a good place to get paid, to get your teeth fixed on the company's dime (more or less), get some brutally repetative, but nevertheless deep, exposure to a handful of experiences, and get those conference passes and flights to/from them for free, or pretty close to it.
"Life's fantasy:
To be locked away,
And still to think you're free."
-- Black Sabbath, "Die Young" (Heaven and Hell).
Well, because it's not a common acronym. From now on, of course, I can use the acronym at will, because all humanity understands it. In addition, the last time I tried to light myself on fire, I didn't catch like one would expect of a stick bundle. How could you possibly make such a drastic mistake as to the nature of my being? Maybe because you don't know me! AH HA! Real Men don't post as AC.
Some chemical reactions are not reversible. In particular, IIRC, denatured protiens are irrevocably altered, and can't be re-assembled into their original state. Also, take wood, for example. Once you've burned out all of the actually flammable elements from wood, you are left with charcoal. Charcoal can't be re-constituted into wood; however, if you let it sit long enough, it will eventually break back down, be re-integrated into other compounds, and may become part of another tree ... but the lump you've got in your hands can't be made into a same-sized piece of wood without the process to break it down completely. Unfortunately, IANAC (I am not a chemist), so this is all just based on what I remember from physics class and _Good Eats_ episodes. :-)
Additionally, if you have access to the source of the basic front-end of the UI, it would be pretty easy to create a module that will feed events to the event loop. Stub out calls to RunApplicationEventLoop() or ReceiveNextEvent() and direct them to your module, which then generates a random (or, sequentially un-random, or pre-determined un-random) relevant event, and pass that event back to the event handler.
Seems plausible to me. Maybe I'm weird.
Ya know, I can't think of a single person that I know that runs Turbolinux. Maybe that has something to do with their problems.
Just because you aren't personally aware of something does not mean that it doesn't exist.
CmdrTacoKnowledge != { SumAllHumanKnowledge(); }Morality and religion are not equivalent; in fact, it can be successfully argued that religion inhibits morality. Calling the requirement for schoolchildren to participate in the recitation of the Pledge of Allegiance a ripping of "the moral fabric" of America implies that the Pledge, itself, embodies some kind of morality. It does not, in fact, speak to any moral good, morally laudable (or repugnant), or morally interesting behaviors whatsoever. It does, however, reveal a preference for a God, which is expressly the problem the court has with the Pledge. Justifying one's point of view shouldn't be necessary; justifying ramming one's point of view down someone else's throat should be necessary. Just because 99 of 100 people may believe in the Tooth Fairy doesn't mean that the remaining 1 in 100 can be forced to.
The court's take had it right: if the Pledge said "one nation, under Satan" or "one Nation, under the Aesir," there would have been a hailstorm of critisism (probably during the debate for adding the language in 1954). Clearly, inserting any relgiously overtoned language generates quite a bit of controversy; ergo, it should all be removed.
Unless you have a predominance of even numbers, in which case you run into the reverse of this problem. 6.5, 8.5; mean = 7.5 Rounding with conventional rules, 7, 9; mean = 8 Rounding with these "new" rules, 6, 8, mean = 7 Both rounding types introduce errors. Why would either have an advantage over the other? They're both wrong.
For the sake of argument: there is no advantage. GNOME is a kludge. Use KDE.
It is the person who is (or, perhaps, should be) most sacred. Kant reminds us that people cannot be used as means to any end, but only always as ends unto themselves; Rousseau points out that liberty cannot be given away, even if one wants to do so. Liberty::Human as Attraction::Gravity. You can no more separate the tendency of masses to attract one another from the masses themselves than you can remove freedom of the individual person from the individual person.
With that in mind, it seems pretty clear that my iris, my fingerprints, my voice patterns, are mine. The FBI or state police may have a compelling interest to keep a database of criminals, and how to identify them, but it's pretty well established that these are pretty limited-use activities, and not available to the general business population. It is also pretty well established that those fingerprint records are not the property of the FBI, or any other agency, but that the FBI and other agencies can collect them as part of their routine criminal investigation activities. The FBI certainly doesn't own the fingerprints. Why would private companies be able to "own" retinal or iris scans?
... we would loved to have let the students play games after school was out. There are two basic problems with that approach:
... who, come on, is almost certainly unaware that it's a hazard to do that), doing whatever they can. Oh, and it's not limited to the Mac or PC, either. Even if the student is unsuccessful, they've wasted an entire period when the could have learned how to conjugate Spanish Verbs instead learning how to ... what, do nothing?
... in a word: Bullshit. I've done my share of exploring and hacking and cracking in my day, but the fact is that if you're breaking into a system for the data on the hard drive (whether it's a game or source code or encrypted passwords), you're leaving behind trojaned binaries of whatever you need to get back in, later. That may very well cause tremendous problems for other, as legitimate, users later, and prevent the use of a limited, state-funded resource for those same, again at least as legitimate, users. Just Don't Do It!(tm).
First, students who have gaming permission often spend most of their time during classes trying as hard as they can to hack around whatever security procedures are in place in order to play those games during class. Booting from floppies (right in front of the teacher
Second, the computers were purchased with state or county monies. Try explaining to a County Board member or State Legislator why students should be allowed to play games on a school-owned computer.
All the way around, it's a bad idea IMO. The students who are going to spend the hour trying to break around the security software may try anyway, but why give them a reward for doing it?
There are those who will argue that most of those students, especially any successful ones, are "exploring"
Actually, a lot of sites are still using gopher, in particular education, library, and government sites that simply make gopher:// accessible through an html file. I have run across a number of them while doing various kinds of academic research.
Sure, it's not as prevelant now as it was in 1991, but it still provides access to a fair amount of 'Net-accessible information.
Actually ... I say that the missing piece in the article is that Palpatine manipulated the entire thing. The "breakaway" republics didn't break away of their own accord, Palpatine (through Dooku) separated them without them even knowing it. The fight of the Rebel Alliance isn't, at its root, about restoring an old, ineffective Republic, but about removing Emperor Palpatine from its helm, and _then_ restoring the Republic. Luke and Leia and the rest of the Alliance members may not be completely aware of that, but awareness does not change the underlying reality. Obi-Wan and Yoda, in Eps. IV-V-VI are also manipulating events to some (much less) degree than Palpatine, and (IMO) do so out of their knowledge that Palpatine intends to, it seems, make slaves out of all the people in the Universe. That is certainly a cause to Rebel.
I never once said that buying shelf space is semantically, legally, or logically equivalent to preventing competing products from being visible. It is at best wrong, and at worst illegal, to buy shelf space in order to prevent your competitors from being visible. You are right to point out that what I do not want to advocate is that it be illegal for Coke to buy endcaps just in case Pepsi wants to buy them. What it is, IIRC, illegal to do (to the best of my knowledge. IANAL) is buy more shelf space than you need to sell and stock your product in order to prevent competing products from even being on the shelves. What Microsoft has done, at least in the past, is buy up more shelf space than necessary specifically to keep competing products off the shelves entirely, which is very much what they've done with these anti-trust experts.
Note that I didn't say that the buying of shelf space is wrong, but that it is wrong to buy it to prevent competing products from being visible and from being purchased. Microsoft has been doing that for a long time, and IIRC that very activity was part of the 1995 consent decree that they violated to land themselves in court this time. Both of you should read more carefully.