I don't know what is a "restriction maximalist system", but I am definitely not saying that Microsoft is an unwitting victim of capitalism. And I am not implying that either. I am saying no more than I did. And the purpose of my point was not to exonerate Microsoft or any other company, but to underline that it is important to understand why bad things sometimes happen within complex systems. Since understanding the cause can help fix the situation.

Going as far as saying that capitalism is a problem or corporations in general are a problem or money are a problem - these are the type of statements I find unhelpful and stemming from a very superficial analysis of the problem. (Not saying anyone in this thread had implied any of those statements, just explaining the context I am coming from).



On Sat, Jun 2, 2018 at 6:04 PM, David Kastrup <dak@gnu.org> wrote:
Louigi Verona <louigi.verona@gmail.com> writes:

> I think my argument was misconstrued as saying "they are just doing their
> job". This is not what I am saying (and I agree that "just doing their job"
> is not an excuse).
>
> What I am saying is that in large organizations it is difficult to see what
> the sum of all actions would ultimately be. And it is possible to try to do
> your job in the best manner possible and still end up with a damaging
> result.
>
> In other words, I am talking about generally focusing on the system rather
> than individuals.

Microsoft is not an individual.  And it is very very far from being an
unwitting victim of capitalism and corporate cronyism and lobbyism.
Very, very, very far.  It is a centerpiece of the capitalist and
restriction maximalist system it drives via business and legal decisions
and corporate structures and political influencing.

--
David Kastrup



--