26 Dec
2002
26 Dec
'02
4:03 p.m.
On Wed, 25 Dec 2002, Bhargav Bhatt wrote:
<analysis>
Lets consider that applications A_w, B_w .... Z_w are the 26
most popular windows applications with a_w, b_w,...z_w users
respectivey. Also let A_l, B_l .... Z_l be the 26 most popular linux
applications with a_l, b_l,...z_l users respectively. Lets further
assume, grossly incorrectly, a_w=a_l =a, b_w=b_l=b,.... z_w=z_l=z.
Call this assumption D.
let me guess... u love Mathematics?.. ;)
that was really novel and fun way of explaining
thx
The point of this analysis is that, when we talk about a "typical" windows'
user, we cannot ignore the program "dependencies" that Windows brings
alongwith it. Hence, a majority of Windows users are legal offenders( or
criminals) guilty of more crimes than their linux/(whatever) counterparts.
Yes that's what my argument was.
A criminal is a criminal no matter how many crimes he commits
Yes, there cannot be some"thing" less/more
legal. But there can a person who
has broken more/less laws than another, which is what we are talking about
here.
Again I feel that since a (pirated) Windows user and Linux user satisfying
one of the criteria have committed a crime ( of denying someone his
rightful money ) they are morally on the same level.
Nikhil