>Hmmm. I didn't find that assertion. 'Free' doesn't denote 'no cost', rather it connotates available for public use and, yes, even support, unencumbered by private interests.
>
>>Once the internet opened up the the general masses, it opened the door for free enterprise which does not mean free access to private sites. Just as I have the right to start up my own web server, I am expending my own capital and have the right to charge for access. You, on the other hand, have the right to not patronize my site.
>>
>
>Curious. Who is Microsoft's largest customer?

Anyone on the Government gravy train definitely has gov't as their biggest customer. Unfortunately, these are self-perpetuating and tend to grow out of control.

>>While some of what he says is true, I disagree his basic principals which are socialistic at best.
>
>A typical response from most (myself included once upon a time) who are not familiar with Chomsky. 'Libertarian' is a more accurate assesment by his own admission and concurs with other scholars as well. He actually claims 'anarchist'. He's a linguistics Prof at MIT. Words have impact upon our world views. His schtick is that power tends to coagulate and look out for it's own interests, and then expand them without regard to other interests (i.e. becomes a parasite). (Yep, a gross oversimplfication vulnerable to attack. :-)) The use of word phases like 'free market' come to mean something different in an individuals world view than what may be actually going on. Then we banter unsubstantiated sentiments back & forth (presupposing it's an 'either/or' choice) like gangs retaliating for the most recent drive-by of some other gang. There are lots media resources spent this way. Our emotions get pricked, our eyeball time is captured, then there are a couple of commercials. Then we do it all again. Wow, at least UT Chatter is commercial-free. So I think I'll go pee and have another beer now. Let us toast to distraction and Homer Simpson... ha, ha :-)
>
>Thanks for purusing the article Mark! Later-

A Libertarian, eh? Hmm. Maybe his parasite comment jaded my view of the rest of the interview. I also had a hard time on some of his responses to the questions because he seemed to give indorect answers. Especially the last one. I agree with him on the point of power and self-interest. Power corrupts and absolute power corrupts absolutely.

Thanks for the insight!