From: Shawn Leas <sleas@ixion.honeywell.com>
  To  : ggi-develop@eskimo.com
  Date: Mon, 21 Sep 1998 17:15:47 -0500 (CDT)

Re: [VERY offtopic] Re: NVidia is a horseshit company

On Mon, 21 Sep 1998, Stefan Mars wrote:
> On Mon, 21 Sep 1998, Christian Reiniger wrote:
>
> [we don't know who the hell started this subthread] 
> > >> You might not have as much freedom in that respect as you think, at least
> > >> not in the US.  The *freedom* is held in the hands of the buyer, for the
> > >> most part, and not the seller.  If I make widgets, can I choose only to
> > >> sell them to blacks, or only to white folk?
> > >
> > >Yes I thought that was the case.
> > 
> > Here in Germany such a practice is seen as "discrimination of ethnic
> > groups" (or so) and really, really illegal.
> > Fortunately.
> 
> No, that is UNfortunaly. You and I might agree that discrimination and
> rasism is something very bad, something that really should not exist.
> However, should I have rasistical feelings, then that is my right to have.

Feelings, but not business practices.  This thread is getting tiresome.
You can have any child-porn racist murderous thoughts you damn well
desire, but the real world involves interaction with other people, and you
have to observe the rights of others.  Your so-called freedom becomes the
subversion of the rights of your peers, and it violates the premise by
which your freedom exists.

> When I develop something, it must be my right, and mine only, to say to
> what and to whom I will sell, regardles of _why_.

It is a product like anything else, and no ya don't.  Once it's offered to
the *public* for a price, it's out there.  It's like charging men and
women different prices for cars, and though it is done, it IS illegal, and
wrong.

> You see, freedom is one of the most advanced concepts in the world, and it
> takes a lot to live up to the ideals of it. One of the things that lives
> most closely to my heart, is my belief that the inventor has the right to
> what he invents. That he controls it, that he decides for what his
> invention is to be used. If I had developed the ideas and equipment
> necessary for nuclear fission, got them patented, then they are mine,
> because I spent the time, the money, the energy to come up with those
> ideas.

The labor of the mind, or the labor of the backbone, they're the same
under the law.  You make it, you own it.  However, if you offer it for
sale, you must obide by rules of sale.  By the way, the only concept that
freedom needs be based on is the assumption that "all men are created
equal".  Isn't complicated at all.

> Would I allow it to be used by arabs who are such wellknown terrorists
> that the US must immediatdly rush out and bomb them whenever they do
> something the US don't like, and hence could build terrorbombs with this
> knowledge? Of course I wouldn't, but luckily most arabs aren't what I
> described above.

But you reserve the right to.  Sorry, you loose.  I think we can all agree
that this is treason, and violates the rights of every citizen that is
potentially going to get bombed.  Morally and legally bad.

> And the same principle applies here. Right or wrong, NVidia thinks that if
> they release the register specs for there chip, then that enables the
> competition to gain an advantage over them. Considering that this is a
> market with quite a lot of money in it, is it really a suprise to you that
> they value this information so much that they won't give it away?

I'm not going to waste time arguing, but I still simply think that
releasing specs to Windows-only developers is against the law and
discriminatory, and furthermore, discriminatory on a basis that they have
not business knowing/caring about.

> And by no moral right in this world should we be able to force them. Right
> or wrong they have made their choice, and I have made mine. I do _not_
> want a Riva based card so badly that I will accept a chip that doesn't
> come with full specs, not even under NDA. Rather I will stay with S3, but
> that's just me.

Well, let's say we agree to disagree.  Hmm...  Even if releasing the
*specs* DID release them into the public domain, would it not be easier to
prove that some competitor copied your proprietory information in
manufacture of a competing architecture?  If they work out in the open,
they/us/everybody is BETTER protected.

-Shawn
<=========== America Held Hostage ===========>
   Day 2070 for the poor and the middle class. 
   Day 2089 for the rich and the dead.
   852 days remaining in the Raw Deal.
<============================================>