Readers' Comments

Reader Comments on Aardvark Daily 1 Mar 2001
Note: the comments below are the unedited submissions of readers and do
not necessarily reflect the opinions of the publisher.
From: Rob K
For : The Editor (for publication)
Subj: invest in dead trees & ink, and Hooters

You hit it on the money.  Copyrights and Intellectual
Property *MUST* adjust to a new business model compatible
with Ecommerce (I hate that expression... all expressions,
of E-anything).  It's not E-Commerce.  It's Commerce.
Period.  That's the way you *HAVE* to look at it.  Because
it *IS* commerce, it must be approaced as commerce.

Example:  Did you follow the "Hooters" suites from
Washington DC about Hotters Guys?  Hooters is a well known
national chain resteraunt in the US with ... shall we
say "Ample" waitresses that flaunt their wares for tips.
Washinton sued because men couldn't be Hooters girls.
Hooters defended by saying, "Use your own money to invest
in a business model that won't make money."  Hooters lost.
Not because of a bad business model, but because LAWYERS
and POLITICIANS were driving the train and didn't *THINK*.

Relationship to the current problem? Commerce has changed.
Business models must change.

Rob K
Baton Rouge, LA




From: Michael
For : The Editor (for publication)
Subj: e-library and e-ip

I think your idea of having e-libraries for 'all of the
music and books you eat' is good.  However the revenue
required to keep such ventures going might not come very
easily.  I may subscribe to such a service for quick
reference and searching capabilities.

I find it much easier to pick up a book and sit down next
to the pool on a deck chair than the alternatives.  If you
are using the e-library for your mainstream reading you
will end up either spending hours hunched over your pc in a
dark room, or you will enjoy the expense of hooking up your
laptop via your trusty vodafone mobile and sitting outside.
Either way it is not going to be so good for your eyes, or
painless on your pockets.

There is definitely a market there, but the material needs
to be easy to access and read, and it needs to be a cheap
alternative to picking up a hard cover or paper back book
and going to the beach.




From: Nick Krajancic
For : The Editor (for publication)
Subj: Amazon Bankrupt?

I just love the way Corporate Heads and their spin doctors
think we are stupid.

20 years in the Banking and Financing industry have
taught me that the more a company denies that they are in
financial trouble, the more likely it is that they are.

As far as having $900 million in cash, its a bit useless if
you are in debt $2 billion, and your core business is a
proven loss maker. If I was a shareholder I would also be
concerned that the net cash loss of $200m in just 12 months
is tossed off by the companies CEO as not being a problem as
they still have $900m left! Lets see, $200m of cash
disappearing a year, probably no net reduction in debt
(probably a net increase!), no positive cashflow from the
companys core business, gives the company a maximum of 4.5
years to live, if the Banks let them. NOT!

Amazon in its present incarnation is doomed, they will
either have to change the business model or die.




From: Peter Harrison
For : The Editor (for publication)
Subj: New Spooks Stratagy

The Spooks appear to have a new stratagy to ensure their
ability to intercept the communications of everyone on the
planet.  For years the US and other countries have limited
export of Crypto, but last year the privacy folks rejoiced
in the freeing up of Crypto export regulations.  It looked
like the Spooks were giving in...

At the time I thought the victory was too easy.  Why would
the Spooks give up so easily.  They had strongly opposed
freely available encryption for years, and attempted to
undermine it with various ploys such as the clipper chip.

The Spooks needed a new stratagy in order to circumvent our
ability to maintain our privacy.  The new stratagy is to
discredit encryption.  They are doing this by creating a
link in the public perception between encryption and
crime.  Note the recent huge increase in newspaper articles
and TV programs about how criminals are using the Internet
and Encryption for evil.  The stratagy is to create a
public perception that Encryption is used only by evil
people.

They don't need to make a logical argument - all they need
to do is keep bringing up encryption in the context of
criminal use in order to drive public perception of towards
a view that encryption is evil.

Once this is complete people who support privacy and
encryption will be perceived by the public as supporting
the rights of evil people - and therefore will be
discredited.

It won't be long after that the spooks will be able to
actually pass laws that undermine encryption - insisting
that we have our keys stored by the government for
example.  They will do this with huge public support - as
who wants evil people using this dangerous new technology.

With these laws in place we can welcome the police state.
Now Have Your Say