I agree with much of what you said about companies serving their markets rather than suing them.
However, when governments, no matter how localized, begin to own (control) the communications infrastructure there exists a significant danger of regulated speech - whether it be of a religious, political, or even entertainment nature.
I would much prefer to see municipalities grant themselves the rights to "fire" infrastructure providers when services are not provided in a timely manner, and offer contracts to new or more aggressive providers.
If no private entities can be enticed to service a market, then real questions exists as to viability of the market. In these few situations, perhaps municipalities could grant incentives to providers to make the markets financially attractive.
In any case, I cannot imagine the situation where government run media is a good idea.
I understand this. however your idea is flawed. Many OSS encryption programs exists, but they are not useless simply because they are OSS. They are less likely to have flaws because of peer review.
It is my hope that the best ideas found here will give me a starting point to develop a better answer.
I really am trying to learn. The "bait" as you say it is just "noise" to confuse or mislead anyone with bad motives who might try to learn more about me by reading between the lines - bunny trails for those who would do harm, ignored by those who offer real help.
Slashdot Mirror
I agree with much of what you said about companies serving their markets rather than suing them.
However, when governments, no matter how localized, begin to own (control) the communications infrastructure there exists a significant danger of regulated speech - whether it be of a religious, political, or even entertainment nature.
I would much prefer to see municipalities grant themselves the rights to "fire" infrastructure providers when services are not provided in a timely manner, and offer contracts to new or more aggressive providers.
If no private entities can be enticed to service a market, then real questions exists as to viability of the market. In these few situations, perhaps municipalities could grant incentives to providers to make the markets financially attractive.
In any case, I cannot imagine the situation where government run media is a good idea.
...but NVidia can't really be expected to sell defective equipment. Why not? Don't we all expect Microsoft to sell defective software?
"strike any one of the keys"...
Advocating violence against innocent keys is repugnant!
I understand this. however your idea is flawed. Many OSS encryption programs exists, but they are not useless simply because they are OSS. They are less likely to have flaws because of peer review.
It is my hope that the best ideas found here will give me a starting point to develop a better answer.
I'm glad you think so. Pepper is still just as spicy when it is hidden amonst dirt.
I really am trying to learn. The "bait" as you say it is just "noise" to confuse or mislead anyone with bad motives who might try to learn more about me by reading between the lines - bunny trails for those who would do harm, ignored by those who offer real help.
sometimes
Thanks for pointing out what I had hoped would seem obvious to people
If that is the only misdirection you encountered in the post, then you didn't look very closely
Thanks for the warning... I'm happy to see how you took my question and the assumptions everyone has made about who I am, what I'm, etc.