**************************************** * LUG meet on 12 Jan. 2003 @ VJTI ****************************************
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 -- _______________________________________________ http://mm.ilug-bom.org.in/mailman/listinfo/linuxers
