Path: utzoo!attcan!uunet!tektronix!percival!gary
From: gary@percival.UUCP (Gary Wells)
Newsgroups: comp.misc
Subject: Ethics of crippler and enhencer circuitry
Message-ID: <1470@percival.UUCP>
Date: 11 Mar 89 00:39:51 GMT
References: <325@bnr-fos.UUCP>
Reply-To: gary@percival.UUCP (Gary Wells)
Followup-To: comp.misc
Organization: Percy's UNIX, Portland, OR.
Lines: 58

In article <325@bnr-fos.UUCP> schow@bnr-public.UUCP (Stanley Chow) writes:
>I am curious as to what people think of the following situations that
>looks to me like crippler circuitry, only different.

A whole mess of situations deleted.

The real question here is: Do we live (or _want_ to live) in a free-market, a
socialist, or a communist (the economic definiton, not necessarily what is
practised in the USSR) society.

In a true free market (which we are pretty close to, but not exactly), the maker
of a product gets to sell it for whatever he can get for it.  If there are 
buyers who want the product, but can't afford it, the maker can ignore the 
potential sale, or lower the price.  Note that there is no _obligation_ on the 
maker to lower the price, other than that produced by the desire to make a sale,
even if at a lower price.

In a socialist society, there _is_ a percieved obligation to provide the best
product to any party desiring it, regardless of price/profit to the maker.
Presumably, the buyer offers as much as he can afford, and the maker will reap
the benefit of similar obligations when acquiring raw materials.

As a good communist, you'd build the best machine and _give_ it to whoever
wanted it.  They, in turn, would _give_ you that Mercedes you want.

Both cummunism and socialism fail on the same point: they depend on the basic
honesty and intelligence of each individual.  All it takes is one selfish
person, and either of these fail.  Unfortuneately, there are more under
educated, self centered, greedy poeple than there are any other kind.

So I think we should all stop flogging ourselves for marking up our products.
If my customers wanted 1/10 the machine at 1/10 the price, I see no problem
in crippling my existing product for them.  I'd also make it _VERY HARD_ to
field modify it back to full power.  And I'd laugh all the way to the bank when
I sold them the field upgrade.

If a visitor provided the idea that made a 100% improvement, I'd pay him a 
stipend (do you know anyone who wopuld not be pleased to recieve a surprise
check in the mail?) for all rights.  Then I'd charge as much as thought I could
get for it.

Call me unenlightened, but I see nothing wrong with making money, lots of money!

>Disclaimer:
>I get paid for technical stuff, what do I know about ethics and marketing?
>Anyone wishing to pay me for my opinions on ethics are invited to contact   
>me [you will be the first].

As pointed out in "Atlas Shrugged", being a philosopher is the hardest calling
of all.  You may not get paid for your ethics, but you obviously have them.
Too bad the same can't be said of more people.


-- 
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Still working on _natural_ intelligence.

gary@percival   (...!tektronix!percival!gary)