1 point😄 😃 What evidence do you have that I am not trying to understand what Gilder says? On the other hand, there is you calling me a shill for Big Brother, making inuendos about government surveillance, Google and Facebook wanting to "rule the world" and "conspiring with government", despite the government starting to investigate Big Tech for anti-trust violations. In addition, you used Gilder's book to try to justify your inuendos, despite Gilder's book providing no support for you.
0 pointsMerlin, Your own words. (sigh...) I tried to discuss the ideas, but you're just too smart for me... My problem is my limited capacity to understand the grandeur of intellectual heights you achieve... Michael
0 pointsMerlin, There is no obligation because there is no rule maker that must be obeyed, and, apparently Gilder forgot to consult you before writing his book... The point is, you can either try to understand what he is saying, or you can congratulate yourself for getting him got good down and dirty by attributing meanings to his words that he doesn't use, then debunking your own meanings. It's a choice. In my world, I seek to identify correctly before I judge. Identifying incorrectly does not allow one to provide good judgments. But, as long as you are at it, you might want to debunk all of Google for not using your meanings, too. That should make you really feel good. Michael