Independent Institute Response To Phillip Hallam-Baker("network externality")

Phillip Hallam-Baker hallam at ai.mit.edu
Fri Mar 2 15:42:47 PST 2001


Why not read the judges rulling?

http://wood.ccta.gov.uk/courtser/judgements.nsf/054a30dbaca8b75e8025683c004e
82de/45de924a70f2270b802568690055b06c/$FILE/godfrey3.htm

A payment into court of a derisory sum is a standard tactical legal
maneuver. It does not involve any admission of liability.

David Theroux began name calling, specifically everyone who does not accept
his theory must do so out of ignorance.

Matthew's selective editing of my posts deliberately misrepresents my
argument. I simply stated that the following argument is bogus:

   1) I am an expert on X
   2) The subject matter of X is so complex that nobody who is not an expert
can
	legitimately comment on it
   3) Therefore all assertions I make in the field of X MUST be considered
true
   4) Therefore all assertions you make in the field of X MUST be considered
false

Theroux did not even attempt to justify his argument, he merely restated it
and claimed that anyone who disagrees with his is a complete fool.

I don't think that any field has the right to such defference. I can explain
my argument to a lay audience. Theroux either cannot or will not.

I suggest that in either case his argument MUST be rejected.

		Phill

> -----Original Message-----
> From: lizard [mailto:lizard at mrlizard.com]
> Sent: Friday, March 02, 2001 12:27 PM
> To: Matthew Gaylor
> Cc: Phillip Hallam-Baker; fight-censorship at vorlon.mit.edu;
> cypherpunks at cyberpass.net; Colin A. Reed; Ken Brown;
> CYBERIA-L at listserv.aol.com; David Theroux
> Subject: Re: Independent Institute Response To Phillip
> Hallam-Baker("network externality")
>
>
> Yeah, but Godfrey is responsible for forcing a very
> damaging-to-free-speech ruling down the throats of UK ISPs.
> Methinks he
> deserveth what he gets.
>
> And to add more fuel to the fire -- Phill, a PhD in nuclear physics
> makes you no more competant to understand *economics* than a PhD in
> Medevial European History makes you competant to run a nuclear power
> plant. You are one of the last people I'd expect to fall into the trap
> of assuming 'brainz iz brainz' and that achievement in one field makes
> you qualified to pontificate on others. (I, personally, have acheived
> nothing in *any* field, hence, I am equally qualified to
> pontificate on
> all fields.)
>





More information about the cypherpunks-legacy mailing list