On Mon, 2007-04-02 at 16:31 +0200, Eugen Leitl wrote:

What might get Microsoft to play ball is a promise to stop hammering them on antitrust, but hey, they have to worry about the next administration and the one after that - companies outlive governments.

Being subject to the whims of Microsoft in exchange for not being subject to some of the whims of the US Government is, IMO, a bad tradeoff, and in fact makes some things worse. Microsoft has incentives to censor certain types of speech as well. How long do you think gnu.org, fsf.org, badvista.org, defectivebydesign.org, freebsd.org, openbsd.org, netbsd.org, xiph.org, vorbis.com, speex.org, theora.org, eff.org, et cetera (I'm sure the list goes on and on) would last on a Microsoft-controlled Internet?

And even if Microsoft didn't put the new roots in, it's really easy to distribute a root replacement add-in or to add it to the NAT boxes.

Assuming we even get that far, Microsoft should not be who we trust with the new roots. They have already violated our trust many times over. -- Shawn K. Quinn <skquinn@speakeasy.net>