Just adding the Python test I used:
Hello, World
101–110 of 121 posts
Re: Hello, World
#102Earlier quoted context omitted.
If Windows started sucking, people would switch. Demand would arise for a better alternative. In the long run, companies and consumers are not going to choose a significantly inferior product. There are no specific examples that will get you out of this. Actually, it Windows already kinda does suck, which is why so many people (even companies) use Apple. And there are lots of other alternative OSs.
>There are no specific examples that will get you out of this. So you're saying that no amount of evidence to the contrary will change your mind?
No, I'm saying that there is no example possible that will negate the point. Because the point is true.
I mean, you can keep taking it out one level, and competition can happen there. For instance: Can't compete due to OEM agreements with MS? Have to get an OEM to capitulate, or start your own OEM, or find another way to get your competing OS on machines. There is no specific example that will make the argument that competition is impossible go through.
Why didn't you try to understand what I said instead of taking the cheapest opportunity to pick on it?
Re: Hello, World
#103Earlier quoted context omitted.
If Windows started sucking, people would switch. Demand would arise for a better alternative. In the long run, companies and consumers are not going to choose a significantly inferior product. There are no specific examples that will get you out of this. Actually, it Windows already kinda does suck, which is why so many people (even companies) use Apple. And there are lots of other alternative OSs.
So according to you, it's alright for a company to hold a monopoly position and erase their competitors, as long as they provide the bare minimum its customers need?
No. I said that there is no such thing as a monopoly except legally-created monopolies.
Those are, in effect, government created. I am totally against that. I am totally against government passing laws to favor certain people over others, treating people unequally.
Re: Hello, World
#104Earlier quoted context omitted.
There's an easy solution to the last-mile problem, which is for communities to own the infrastructure and operate it as a non-profit. Believe me, people would do that if they were getting sufficiently screwed by telcos and if it were legal. Actually, the former condition is already satisfied, but the latter is (basically) not. Though there have been lots of municipal broadband efforts, which is a point in my favor, h…
The solution is for the lines to be operated prioritizing the community before profit, yes. We've agreed on the fundamentals but now differ in imagination of the size of the community. Why not extend such egality to all citizens? And why do people have to get "screwed by telcos" first before it can happen?
No, we differ in that you want to do it by force and government authority, and I don't.
Arbitrary government exercise of power is incredibly dangerous.
Re: Hello, World
#105Earlier quoted context omitted.
Absolutely. That makes him even worse. "Antitrust" is a bogus concept. It is never and was never in the public interest. It is also a massive violation of the rights of companies and their shareholders. Consider that if Windows/IE were really that bad, people would have just switched more readily to a Microsoft competitor. Desktop-quality Linux would have come about/come about sooner, or something equivalent. This is…
I agree with you, but perhaps for a slightly different reason. I worked for Microsoft in 2001 and 2003, and recently rejoined the company. I have had enough time away from Microsoft that I feel safe in saying that I have perspective both from the inside and from the outside. The biggest drawback that I saw from the DOJ decision was that Microsoft was not allowed to innovate. Windows 98 and Active Desktop can be consi…
Thank you very much for bringing an insider's perspective to this. Very interesting. I had not thought about it that way, in terms of the specifics.
Re: Hello, World
#106Earlier quoted context omitted.
Absolutely. That makes him even worse. "Antitrust" is a bogus concept. It is never and was never in the public interest. It is also a massive violation of the rights of companies and their shareholders. Consider that if Windows/IE were really that bad, people would have just switched more readily to a Microsoft competitor. Desktop-quality Linux would have come about/come about sooner, or something equivalent. This is…
Thank you for your comment. It shows a lot of insight and has given me a few things to think about.
Really nice to know my comment was appreciated, since it was such an uphill battle.
If you want further reading, here [1] are some short excerpts about antitrust laws from one of my favorite authors.
Re: Hello, World
#107Re: Hello, World
#108OK, we get it, most HN readers were able to solve the puzzle in a minute or two. Most of us have done interview problems much more difficult.
I'm more interested to know what people think about Obama's proselytizing of computer science. It seems like a great move to me. Is he going about this in a smart way? Do you think he'll get the results that he's looking for?
Re: Hello, World
#109Spoiler: Bob always chooses the same as his flip, Alice always chooses the opposite of her flip. B A H H - Bob chooses heads, Win H T - Alice chooses heads, Win T H - Alice chooses tails, Win T T - Bob chooses tails, Win
Downvoted because I don't think this should be at the top of the discussion. I always read comments first, especially with a title like "Hello, World" that doesn't give any clue about the content; and now I don't get a chance to think about this puzzle because the spoiler was the first thing I saw.
EDIT: To be clear, I am not downvoting because I think that this comment is unconstructive; clearly it is a useful contribution. At least as good as, and probably better than, having it appear later would be having more whitespace between the spoiler warning and the actual spoiler.
Re: Hello, World
#110Earlier quoted context omitted.
If Windows started sucking, people would switch. Demand would arise for a better alternative. In the long run, companies and consumers are not going to choose a significantly inferior product. There are no specific examples that will get you out of this. Actually, it Windows already kinda does suck, which is why so many people (even companies) use Apple. And there are lots of other alternative OSs.
Unfortunately the example given and the "windows tax" is a perfect example. Microsoft had such size and control over the industry they could strangle competitors at birth. Who knows what they would have done without this tiresome legislation.
If that were true, Linux, BSD, and Apple OS would not exist.
The only strength that is strong enough to strangle competitors at birth is the long arm of the law.
In other words, the only way to keep out competition is to use force.
That is precisely what is disallowed in a free market, i.e., in a rights-respection nation.