[16370] in cryptography@c2.net mail archive
Re: Financial identity is *dangerous*? (was re: Fake companies, real money)
daemon@ATHENA.MIT.EDU (dan@geer.org)
Thu Oct 28 12:09:58 2004
X-Original-To: cryptography@metzdowd.com
X-Original-To: cryptography@metzdowd.com
From: dan@geer.org
To: cryptography@metzdowd.com
In-Reply-To: Your message of "Tue, 26 Oct 2004 17:27:03 +1300."
<E1CMIvH-0006Bk-00@medusa01>
Date: Tue, 26 Oct 2004 23:07:25 -0400
This is what I love about the Internet -- ask a question
and get silence but make a false claim and you get all the
advice you can possibly eat.
OK, I (quite happily) stand corrected about why Microsoft
bought Connectix -- it was cheaper given their extensive
dependence on the Virtual PC product, including redistribution
to outside parties. That's fascinating, actually.
Now the reason I brought this up was it seemed like a Heaven-
sent bit of circumstantial evidence[1] to inference about a
larger business strategy question. That question still stands,
but I'll have to look harder for corroborating evidence.
--dan, on the road
[1] "Some circumstantial evidence is very strong, like
finding a trout in the milk." -- Henry David Thoreau
---------------------------------------------------------------------
The Cryptography Mailing List
Unsubscribe by sending "unsubscribe cryptography" to majordomo@metzdowd.com
