4 ms·

> EEE No. This has nothing to do with a statement made 20+ years ago. There is no "Embrace" involved. There is no "Extend" involved. There is no "Extinquish" i

by yodon 4y ago

> EEE No. This has nothing to do with a statement made 20+ years ago. There is no "Embrace" involved. There is no "Extend" involved. There is no "Extinquish" involved. There is an obvious business and competitive step involved, and a major business relationship with OpenAI involved. It's time to grow up and stop acting as if using terminology and aspersions from the era of Fax machine is somehow hip and insightful. Every single person involved in the EEE era retired from Microsoft years ago. Most HN readers weren't even born in those days.

rvz 4y ago
> No. This has nothing to do with a statement made 20+ years ago. Yes it does. The methods are different but the strategy is the same. You can’t compete against free, and Microsoft can foot the bill for their services without charging for it for years to suffocate competitors. > It's time to grow up and stop acting as if using terminology and aspersions from the era of Fax machine is somehow hip and insightful. Anyone who thinks Microsoft has changed their ways and stopped their past tactics has just bought into their lies and ‘Microsoft Loves Open Source’ nonsense. If the exclusive OpenAI licenses and the acquisition of GitHub and other market leaders are not an indication of great EEE candidates to squeeze out competitors for offering their services close to free, then I don’t know what is.
kkielhofner 4y ago
EEE is from an internal Microsoft memo in 1994 - so closer to 30 years. I agree with your sentiment - anyone who holds a grudge from 30 years ago and can’t update or change their thinking and perspective (especially in light of new data and experiences) is living a disadvantaged life. For perspective - the United States and Vietnam normalized relations in 20 years! After a war in which 1.6m people were killed. In 1996 GM released the EV1 and eventually crushed them and pulled them off the market, largely due to a cabal in the audio industry and all other kinds of shenanigans[0]. In 2011 GM released the Volt, with the Bolt in 2016 and now they have roughly half a dozen all electric models on the market. It seems as though people, corporations, and the people that make up corporations can change in several decades. With some notable exceptions these kinds of examples can be found throughout history and at this point I’d argue they’re more the norm than the exception. [0] - https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/General_Motors_EV1 https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/General_Motors_EV1
heleninboodler 4y ago
Especially considering EEE is specifically a strategic attack on standards used by your competitors. Microsoft's strategy was based on seeing open standards as a threat to their dominance. You embrace the standard by providing compatibility with it. Once established in the marketplace, you extend the standard so your product is better in some nonstandard way that breaks compatibility with competitors. Then you use your differentiation to assert market dominance and extinguish the competitors. I'm not sure how this allegedly applies to OpenAI.

by yodon 4y ago

rvz 4y ago

> No. This has nothing to do with a statement made 20+ years ago. Yes it does. The methods are different but the strategy is the same. You can’t compete against free, and Microsoft can foot the bill for their services without charging for it for years to suffocate competitors. > It's time to grow up and stop acting as if using terminology and aspersions from the era of Fax machine is somehow hip and insightful. Anyone who thinks Microsoft has changed their ways and stopped their past tactics has just bought into their lies and ‘Microsoft Loves Open Source’ nonsense. If the exclusive OpenAI licenses and the acquisition of GitHub and other market leaders are not an indication of great EEE candidates to squeeze out competitors for offering their services close to free, then I don’t know what is.

kkielhofner 4y ago

EEE is from an internal Microsoft memo in 1994 - so closer to 30 years. I agree with your sentiment - anyone who holds a grudge from 30 years ago and can’t update or change their thinking and perspective (especially in light of new data and experiences) is living a disadvantaged life. For perspective - the United States and Vietnam normalized relations in 20 years! After a war in which 1.6m people were killed. In 1996 GM released the EV1 and eventually crushed them and pulled them off the market, largely due to a cabal in the audio industry and all other kinds of shenanigans[0]. In 2011 GM released the Volt, with the Bolt in 2016 and now they have roughly half a dozen all electric models on the market. It seems as though people, corporations, and the people that make up corporations can change in several decades. With some notable exceptions these kinds of examples can be found throughout history and at this point I’d argue they’re more the norm than the exception. [0] - https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/General_Motors_EV1 https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/General_Motors_EV1

heleninboodler 4y ago

Especially considering EEE is specifically a strategic attack on standards used by your competitors. Microsoft's strategy was based on seeing open standards as a threat to their dominance. You embrace the standard by providing compatibility with it. Once established in the marketplace, you extend the standard so your product is better in some nonstandard way that breaks compatibility with competitors. Then you use your differentiation to assert market dominance and extinguish the competitors. I'm not sure how this allegedly applies to OpenAI.