🚀 go-pugleaf

In article <fts.62.0149E8E1@cris.com> fts@cris.com (Chester Karma) writes:
|In article <3vqp21$9ms@coranto.ucs.mun.ca| Kevin MacNeil <kmacneil@morgan.ucs.mun.ca| writes:
|
||You are wrong:
|
||1.  The issue is *privacy*
|
|True, it's a clear-cut violation of privacy. That wasn't the point. In ANY 
|case where you could feasibly be caught for doing something (such as pirating 
|software), the people that complain the loudest are usually the people who 
|would get burned by it. (USUALLY, I stress, I'm not saying everyone against 
|Microsnooping is a pirate)
	Yes you are. Despite your protestations to the otherwise, you
	are using one's fundemental liberties against them by implying
	to demand their protection implies wrongdoing. No different with
	McCarthy than it is with you.
|
||2.  There is a big difference between what is unethical and what is
||illegal.  MicroSoft will get around the problem of lawsuits by putting one
||of those insipid "OK?" dialog boxes on the screen before it goes scroung
||-ing.  They'll likely have great success with the new or otherwise naive
||users who'll flock to MS Network when it opens. 
|
|True, but new or naive users don't know any better anyway, and Microsoft won't 
|get the demographics they want.


-- 
When the crew of the USS Voyager were given the Turing test,

					Only the doctor passed...