In article ,
says...
In article . net, Java
Man wrote:

Do you consider the subpoena and the loss of share value to be among
Google's advantages? If not, ALL that's left -- according to you -- is
a head start.

As you quoted, I said: "All Google has that you don't is a head start,
a supoena to appear before the US Congress, and $19 billion less share
value than they had a couple of days ago."

Which of those items do you consider to be Google's advantage? The head
start?

I didn't say what I thought Google's competitive advantage is, but I if
think those are the only possibilities, you've oversimplified the
situation so badly that you might even recommend boycotting them for . .
.. oh, wait -- you already have.


Do you know for a fact that Google's "back office" has no know-how
advantage that they want to keep secret?

Yes. Or, uh... No.

A stupid answer for a stupid question... How would I know what Google
wants to keep secret? Don't be an idiot, or play one on usenet.

If you don't know what Google wants to keep secret, why did you say:

------------------------
"Google isn't doing anything proprietary in its web and usenet
aggregating. You or I could start doing it tomorrow."
-------------------------

What does that have to do with anything that Google may have as a
secret?

Are you implying you're unaware that many companies have trade secrets
and similar proprietary knowledge -- companies like, perhaps Google?


So let's recap.

Yes, let's.

- You originally said all Google has is a head start

Yes.

but you followed
up denying you had said it.

I did not do that.

Then what did you mean by the following?

--------------------------
"Where did I suggest that Google's ONLY advantage was anything? That's
bullpuckey."
-------------------------


- You also said Google isn't doing anything proprietary

Correct

but later
admitted you didn't know what Google may be keeping secret.

Is Google keeping things secret? How do you know? If they are, the
secrets are SECRET, no? So if Google is keeping secrets, how would I
know what secrets they're keeping?

Admitting I don't know secret information (or even if it exists)
is damning exactly how? Even if it exists, it's a SECRET.

- Finally, after you said that all Google has is a head start, you
attributed the idea to me.

Where did I do that?

He

----------------------
"So your point is... That they have an advantage because of their head
start?"
----------------------

That wasn't my point, and isn't now. It was yours.

Do you not understand the difference between the
assertive and the interrogative?

I do, and I also understand the use of rhetorical questions.

So, let's recap again. You say:

- Google isn't doing anything proprietary in its web and usenet
aggregating
- All that Google has on me (or you) is a head start

If you don't know Google's trade secrets, how can you expect to have any
credibility asserting that "All Google has that you don't is a head
start, a supoena to appear before the US Congress, and $19 billion less
share value than they had a couple of days ago."?


What I want to know is why you did these things in a simple usenet
discussion. Are you dishonest or just stupid?

No, I'm not. But you certainlly appear to be one of the two.

Ah, the famous Peewee Herman defense -- "I know you are, but what am I?"

Rick