or Connect
New Posts  All Forums:

Posts by ijoyner

The following excerpt is from The Philosopher's Zone: http://www.abc.net.au/rn/philosopher...07/1923237.htm Alan Saunders: John, let's turn to the modern case for the free market, and this turns on an intellectual construct called the ideal market. What is that, and why is it ideal? John Wright: Well, it's a rather complex notion, but it's composed of a number of different elements. Roughly the idea is that in an ideal market all producers are competing against each...
Without the cooperation of the states you would hardly be in a position to compete. And the US also cooperates with a lot of other countries. The sporting analogy makes sport look pretty pointless, which it is - just a way of keeping people busy without actually accomplishing anything. The opium of the masses. The orchestral analogy is better. Maybe the players are competing with the difficulty of being able to play an entire difficult piece of music. When they succeed,...
Sure. The USA. 50 states have to cooperate to make a federation. States as individuals must compete for resources. When they cooperate, resources are better utilized and contribute to the higher overall wealth of all.
You are looking like you have a very small-minded cynical view of the world of people who only act out of the basest motives. There are many examples where without cooperation nothing would have been achieved. What has been said is that competition is just there. However, where cooperation does not triumph over competition, nothing happens. Take for example the atomic bomb (of course born out of the worst competition). Even in the group the competition between Oppenheimer...
Your earlier post said "And they have only one: to maximize total profits. Everything and anything else is just a means to that end. This is true of every publicly traded company in the world." I'm answering your false conjecture that their only raison d'etre is to maximize total profits. That is simply simplistic and wrong. There is much more to Apple and many companies than that. If that was all they were about, you'd see a mass exodus of talent. Maybe they believe now...
Following on the natural selection theme... it's called adaptation. You try different paths but adapt to external conditions. Once a company stops adapting, it dies. IBM? It don't have a duty to anything, except truth. And I'm still exploring as to what truth is. So I may have to adapt.
Hi Dick, You can link to many Burroughs people at:http://www.linkedin.com/groups?mostPopular=&gid=135833 I also have a Burroughs page:http://www.ianjoyner.name/Ian_Joyner/Burroughs.html There are many links between Burroughs and Apple - not the least of which is that Alan Kay was a student of Bob Barton (did you ever meet him?):http://gagne.homedns.org/~tgagne/con...HistoryST.html Of course Wozniak worked for HP who were "champions" of reverse polish notation. But that was...
Chapter III of On the Origin of Species is entitled "Struggle for Existence". Darwin says 'I should premise that I use the term Struggle for Existence in a large and metaphorical sense, including the dependence of one being on another, and including (which is more important), not only the life of the individual, but the success in leaving progeny. Two canine animals in a time of dearth, may be truly said to struggle with each other which shall get food and live. But a...
Because it degenerates to competition for power with again winner takes all. It's not truly cooperative. All systems have their problems.
That was still a high-risk path. High risk can either pay handsomely as it has done for Apple, or end in disaster. There was no guarantee that Apple's path would work, but they diligently stuck to it and made few mistakes. In this their goals are many. While maximizing profits is one, it is simplistic and wrong to say it is their only goal. That is a side effect of chasing other things, better technology, etc, not vice versa. Great technology rarely or never comes out of...
New Posts  All Forums: