More Microsoft Mischief

Discussion in 'NZ Computing' started by Matthew Poole, Jun 2, 2004.

  1. In article <>, Peter <> wrote:
    *SNIP*
    >Microsoft has stated it funds AdTI;
    >"A Microsoft spokesman confirmed that Microsoft provides funding to the
    >Alexis de Tocqueville Institution."
    >http://www.wired.com/news/linux/0,1411,52973,00.html
    >

    I loved reading Tanenbaum's critique of his interview with Brown, where
    as soon as he asked Brown about funding it was like a tape player had
    started: "We have multiple funding sources."
    It must be some kind of mantra within AdTI, maybe even something which
    is hung on walls.

    --
    Matthew Poole Auckland, New Zealand
    "Veni, vidi, velcro...
    I came, I saw, I stuck around"

    My real e-mail is mattATp00leDOTnet
    Matthew Poole, Jun 2, 2004
    #1
    1. Advertising

  2. Matthew Poole

    Peter Guest

    Another Microsoft-funded "research" institute (the Alexis de Tocqueville
    Institute) has been reported making false claims against one of Microsoft's
    competitors.
    http://www.zdnet.com.au/news/0,39023165,39148210,00.htm

    Ken Brown's claims have been strongly criticised as just plain wrong.
    http://www.linuxinsider.com/story/34069.html
    http://www.cs.vu.nl/~ast/brown/followup/
    http://www.cs.vu.nl/~ast/brown/codecomparison/

    It rather looks as though Microsoft realises it can't compete on price &
    value, it can't compete on performance and it can't compete on quality of
    software, so it has to resort to unethical or unlawful means to discredit
    its competitors (in this case, funding lies about Linux).

    Microsoft has stated it funds AdTI;
    "A Microsoft spokesman confirmed that Microsoft provides funding to the
    Alexis de Tocqueville Institution."
    http://www.wired.com/news/linux/0,1411,52973,00.html


    Peter
    Peter, Jun 2, 2004
    #2
    1. Advertising

  3. Matthew Poole

    SteveM Guest

    (Matthew Poole) wrote in
    news:c9lbeu$4pn$:

    > In article <>, Peter
    > <> wrote: *SNIP*
    >>Microsoft has stated it funds AdTI;
    >>"A Microsoft spokesman confirmed that Microsoft provides funding to
    >>the Alexis de Tocqueville Institution."
    >>http://www.wired.com/news/linux/0,1411,52973,00.html
    >>

    > I loved reading Tanenbaum's critique of his interview with Brown,
    > where as soon as he asked Brown about funding it was like a tape
    > player had started: "We have multiple funding sources."
    > It must be some kind of mantra within AdTI, maybe even something which
    > is hung on walls.
    >


    Have a look on Groklaw www.groklaw.net. It has a good breakdown of the
    suituation.

    SteveM
    SteveM, Jun 3, 2004
    #3
  4. Matthew Poole

    steve Guest

    Peter wrote:
    > Another Microsoft-funded "research" institute (the Alexis de Tocqueville
    > Institute) has been reported making false claims against one of Microsoft's
    > competitors.
    > http://www.zdnet.com.au/news/0,39023165,39148210,00.htm
    >
    > Ken Brown's claims have been strongly criticised as just plain wrong.
    > http://www.linuxinsider.com/story/34069.html
    > http://www.cs.vu.nl/~ast/brown/followup/
    > http://www.cs.vu.nl/~ast/brown/codecomparison/
    >
    > It rather looks as though Microsoft realises it can't compete on price &
    > value, it can't compete on performance and it can't compete on quality of
    > software, so it has to resort to unethical or unlawful means to discredit
    > its competitors (in this case, funding lies about Linux).
    >
    > Microsoft has stated it funds AdTI;
    > "A Microsoft spokesman confirmed that Microsoft provides funding to the
    > Alexis de Tocqueville Institution."
    > http://www.wired.com/news/linux/0,1411,52973,00.html


    You're right.....It's the usual crap from the usual source.

    I pity nice guys like Nathan Mercer and Brett Roberts having their good
    efforts to support their products and their users undermined in this way
    by their dishonest employer.
    steve, Jun 3, 2004
    #4
  5. "steve" <steve@mozilla-tbird0.6.org.nz> wrote in message
    news:...
    > Peter wrote:
    >> Another Microsoft-funded "research" institute (the Alexis de Tocqueville
    >> Institute) has been reported making false claims against one of
    >> Microsoft's
    >> competitors.
    >> http://www.zdnet.com.au/news/0,39023165,39148210,00.htm
    >>
    >> Ken Brown's claims have been strongly criticised as just plain wrong.
    >> http://www.linuxinsider.com/story/34069.html
    >> http://www.cs.vu.nl/~ast/brown/followup/
    >> http://www.cs.vu.nl/~ast/brown/codecomparison/
    >>
    >> It rather looks as though Microsoft realises it can't compete on price &
    >> value, it can't compete on performance and it can't compete on quality of
    >> software, so it has to resort to unethical or unlawful means to discredit
    >> its competitors (in this case, funding lies about Linux).
    >>
    >> Microsoft has stated it funds AdTI;
    >> "A Microsoft spokesman confirmed that Microsoft provides funding to the
    >> Alexis de Tocqueville Institution."
    >> http://www.wired.com/news/linux/0,1411,52973,00.html

    >
    > You're right.....It's the usual crap from the usual source.
    >
    > I pity nice guys like Nathan Mercer and Brett Roberts having their good
    > efforts to support their products and their users undermined in this way
    > by their dishonest employer.
    >


    Oh puleeeeease.... from my reading it's hardly a secret that Microsoft funds
    these guys, this topic has popped up a number of times on Slashdot over the
    years e.g. this post which is exactly 2 years old
    http://slashdot.org/article.pl?sid=02/06/04/228240&mode=thread&tid=109 and
    I am not aware of Microsoft actively using or promoting AdTI research (I
    know we haven't here in NZ). I'm genuinely pleased to hear that Nathan and I
    are perceived as nice guys (remember, I'm the good-looking one) but I fail
    to see where Microsoft has been "dishonest" in any of this.

    Brett Roberts
    Microsoft NZ
    Brett Roberts, Jun 4, 2004
    #5
  6. Matthew Poole

    Divine Guest

    On Fri, 04 Jun 2004 13:00:45 +1200, Brett Roberts wrote:

    > but
    > I fail to see where Microsoft has been "dishonest" in any of this.


    FUD...

    QED


    Divine

    --
    Niels Bohr: "The opposite of a correct statement is a false statement. But
    the opposite of a profound truth may well be another profound truth."
    Divine, Jun 4, 2004
    #6
  7. Matthew Poole

    Peter Guest

    Brett Roberts wrote:
    > I fail to see where Microsoft has been "dishonest" in any of this.


    1. AdTI is funded by Microsoft.
    2. AdTI is telling damaging lies about Microsoft's competition.

    You might say this is an innocent coincidence, but that's rather hard to
    believe on the available evidence.
    As you point out, this has been going on for years, so it is not exactly an
    accident, is it? No, Microsoft knows exactly who it is funding and what
    they are doing. It all looks pretty deliberate.


    Peter
    Peter, Jun 4, 2004
    #7
  8. Matthew Poole

    Brendan Guest

    On Fri, 4 Jun 2004 13:00:45 +1200, Brett Roberts wrote:

    > Oh puleeeeease.... from my reading it's hardly a secret that Microsoft funds
    > these guys, this topic has popped up a number of times on Slashdot over the
    > years e.g. this post which is exactly 2 years old
    > http://slashdot.org/article.pl?sid=02/06/04/228240&mode=thread&tid=109 and
    > I am not aware of Microsoft actively using or promoting AdTI research (I
    > know we haven't here in NZ). I'm genuinely pleased to hear that Nathan and I
    > are perceived as nice guys (remember, I'm the good-looking one) but I fail
    > to see where Microsoft has been "dishonest" in any of this.
    >
    > Brett Roberts
    > Microsoft NZ


    And if you DID know of dishonesty, and DID publically say they were
    dishonest, would your remaining employment be measured in minutes or hours
    ?

    Brett, you may very well be correct. I do not believe it, but you may well
    be. But because of where your livlihood comes from, it is very hard for
    people to believe you are entirely unbiased.

    --

    .... Brendan

    The only difference between me and a madman is that I am not mad.
    Salvador Dali

    Note: All comments are copyright 4/06/2004 2:01:25 p.m., and are opinion only where not otherwise stated, and always "to the best of my recollection". www.computerman.orcon.net.nz.
    Brendan, Jun 4, 2004
    #8
  9. Matthew Poole

    steve Guest

    Brett Roberts wrote:

    > .....but I fail
    > to see where Microsoft has been "dishonest" in any of this.
    >
    > Brett Roberts
    > Microsoft NZ


    I can understand that.

    I see it in a broader context:

    MS funds SCO to the tune of $80M through a 3rd-party company....and SCO
    runs intereference in the courts spreading FUD about Linux - for which
    it has no proof....for almost a year and a half now.

    MS funds AdTI and they spread fud....and it is re-cycled regularly as
    you point out.

    ....and so on.

    I call that dishonesty. You don't have to agree.

    You and Nathan still do good work for your users and the products you
    sell and support....
    steve, Jun 5, 2004
    #9
  10. Matthew Poole

    steve Guest

    Brendan wrote:
    > On Fri, 4 Jun 2004 13:00:45 +1200, Brett Roberts wrote:


    > Brett, you may very well be correct. I do not believe it, but you may well
    > be. But because of where your livlihood comes from, it is very hard for
    > people to believe you are entirely unbiased.


    I wouldn't be too hard on Brett.

    When you work for any corporate, you give up some of your freedom to
    speak the truth.

    Corporations aren't democracy. If anything, they are fascist in the
    sense you are there to serve the purposes of the corporation and they
    will unilaterally dipsense with your services if they deem them to be
    surplus to requirements.

    In the meantime - while employed - you are expected to say nothing in
    public that is contrary to the interests of your employer.....whether
    your employer is right or wrong is irrelevant from the corporations'
    point of view.

    There are many good and inteligent people who are not allowed to speak
    openly on their areas of expertise or participate in broader public life
    because their "fealty" (terms of servitude) to their corporation
    requires them to remain silent.

    Abraham Lincoln was strongly opposed to corporations and considered them
    to be anti-democratic and enemies of freedom.

    .....and so they are.
    steve, Jun 5, 2004
    #10
  11. In article <hvdhhqwpv1ip$>,
    Brendan <> wrote:

    >And if you DID know of dishonesty, and DID [publicly] say they were
    >dishonest, would your remaining employment be measured in minutes or hours?


    I thought we had laws in this country to protect whistleblowers. Wasn't
    that an outcome of the Neil Pugmire case?
    Lawrence D'Oliveiro, Jun 6, 2004
    #11
  12. Matthew Poole

    Brendan Guest

    On Sun, 06 Jun 2004 14:27:54 +1200, Lawrence D'Oliveiro wrote:

    >>And if you DID know of dishonesty, and DID [publicly] say they were
    >>dishonest, would your remaining employment be measured in minutes or hours?

    >
    > I thought we had laws in this country to protect whistleblowers. Wasn't
    > that an outcome of the Neil Pugmire case?


    Microsoft has lots of money to pay for lawyers to tie it up for years in
    Court.

    --

    .... Brendan

    "A government that is big enough to give you all you want is big enough to take it all away." -- Barry Goldwater

    Note: All comments are copyright 6/06/2004 3:48:03 p.m., and are opinion only where not otherwise stated, and always "to the best of my recollection". www.computerman.orcon.net.nz.
    Brendan, Jun 6, 2004
    #12
  13. Matthew Poole

    brundlefly Guest

    Brendan wrote:
    > On Sun, 06 Jun 2004 14:27:54 +1200, Lawrence D'Oliveiro wrote:
    >
    >>> And if you DID know of dishonesty, and DID [publicly] say they were
    >>> dishonest, would your remaining employment be measured in minutes
    >>> or hours?

    >>
    >> I thought we had laws in this country to protect whistleblowers.
    >> Wasn't that an outcome of the Neil Pugmire case?

    >
    > Microsoft has lots of money to pay for lawyers to tie it up for years
    > in Court.


    Are you still talking about the Ken Brown report ?
    brundlefly, Jun 6, 2004
    #13
  14. In article <40c17008$>, steve@mozilla-tbird0.6.org.nz
    says...
    > Brett Roberts wrote:
    >
    > > .....but I fail
    > > to see where Microsoft has been "dishonest" in any of this.
    > >
    > > Brett Roberts
    > > Microsoft NZ

    >
    > I can understand that.
    >
    > I see it in a broader context:
    >
    > MS funds SCO to the tune of $80M through a 3rd-party company....and SCO
    > runs intereference in the courts spreading FUD about Linux - for which
    > it has no proof....for almost a year and a half now.


    Just like there is no proof that MS funded SCO's campaign
    Patrick Dunford, Jun 6, 2004
    #14
  15. In article <>, steve@mozilla-tbird0.6.org.nz
    says...
    > Brendan wrote:
    > > On Fri, 4 Jun 2004 13:00:45 +1200, Brett Roberts wrote:

    >
    > > Brett, you may very well be correct. I do not believe it, but you may well
    > > be. But because of where your livlihood comes from, it is very hard for
    > > people to believe you are entirely unbiased.

    >
    > I wouldn't be too hard on Brett.
    >
    > When you work for any corporate, you give up some of your freedom to
    > speak the truth.
    >
    > Corporations aren't democracy. If anything, they are fascist in the
    > sense you are there to serve the purposes of the corporation and they
    > will unilaterally dipsense with your services if they deem them to be
    > surplus to requirements.


    Still working for AT&T are you?
    Patrick Dunford, Jun 6, 2004
    #15
  16. Matthew Poole

    Brendan Guest

    On Sat, 05 Jun 2004 18:57:04 +1200, steve wrote:

    >> Brett, you may very well be correct. I do not believe it, but you may well
    >> be. But because of where your livlihood comes from, it is very hard for
    >> people to believe you are entirely unbiased.

    >
    > I wouldn't be too hard on Brett.
    >
    > When you work for any corporate, you give up some of your freedom to
    > speak the truth.
    >
    > Corporations aren't democracy. If anything, they are fascist in the
    > sense you are there to serve the purposes of the corporation and they
    > will unilaterally dipsense with your services if they deem them to be
    > surplus to requirements.
    >
    > In the meantime - while employed - you are expected to say nothing in
    > public that is contrary to the interests of your employer.....whether
    > your employer is right or wrong is irrelevant from the corporations'
    > point of view.
    >
    > There are many good and inteligent people who are not allowed to speak
    > openly on their areas of expertise or participate in broader public life
    > because their "fealty" (terms of servitude) to their corporation
    > requires them to remain silent.
    >
    > Abraham Lincoln was strongly opposed to corporations and considered them
    > to be anti-democratic and enemies of freedom.
    >
    > ....and so they are.


    I agree with pretty much all of that.

    --

    .... Brendan

    An unhurried sense of time is, in itself, a form of wealth.
    (Seen in a self-service gas pump display)

    Note: All comments are copyright 6/06/2004 10:54:03 p.m., and are opinion only where not otherwise stated, and always "to the best of my recollection". www.computerman.orcon.net.nz.
    Brendan, Jun 6, 2004
    #16
  17. Matthew Poole

    Brendan Guest

    On Sun, 6 Jun 2004 20:08:20 +1200, brundlefly wrote:

    >> Microsoft has lots of money to pay for lawyers to tie it up for years
    >> in Court.

    >
    > Are you still talking about the Ken Brown report ?


    I was never.

    --

    .... Brendan

    Toynbee Idea in Movie 2001 -
    Resurrect Dead On Planet Jupiter -
    J.R. "Bob" Dobbs

    Note: All comments are copyright 6/06/2004 10:52:00 p.m., and are opinion only where not otherwise stated, and always "to the best of my recollection". www.computerman.orcon.net.nz.
    Brendan, Jun 6, 2004
    #17
    1. Advertising

Want to reply to this thread or ask your own question?

It takes just 2 minutes to sign up (and it's free!). Just click the sign up button to choose a username and then you can ask your own questions on the forum.
Similar Threads
  1. Dragon

    Mischief Dvds

    Dragon, Sep 13, 2005, in forum: DVD Video
    Replies:
    0
    Views:
    467
    Dragon
    Sep 13, 2005
  2. Au79
    Replies:
    0
    Views:
    433
  3. Lawrence D'Oliveiro

    Google mischief

    Lawrence D'Oliveiro, Sep 29, 2006, in forum: NZ Computing
    Replies:
    4
    Views:
    657
    David
    Oct 2, 2006
  4. none
    Replies:
    0
    Views:
    358
  5. none
    Replies:
    0
    Views:
    437
Loading...

Share This Page