Skip to main content

$18,048,000 Bill for China

Apparently Microsoft is being accused of abuse in China because it is cracking down on illegal copies of its software. [1]

One excerpt from the article sums up the mentality in China:

More than 80% of the 60,000 Internet users participating in an online survey conducted by Tencent, one of the largest Internet service portals in China, protested the campaign. They complained that it was the high price of a legitimate copy of XP that had forced them to turn to counterfeits. A genuine copy of XP Pro is priced at $376 (2,578 yuan) in the Chinese market.

So if you don't like the price of candy at the local grocery store, you should just steal it. Why should you pay their fair market price when you could just take it and then claim that they forced you to steal it.

China is the single largest offender of global information espionage and currency manipulation. On all of the computer systems that I monitor daily, the vast majority of elicit hacker activity originates from IP addresses in China. Never once have I ever received any response from any complaint that I have filed at a Chinese ISP.

Since China is a communist regime, Microsoft has a legitimate complaint against the government. China has allowed its people to illegally acquire Microsoft's products without any reprocussions, therefore China is subsidizing the cost of said software for its citizens. In short, China owes Microsoft the $376 per copy of illegally installed software, which comes out to $18,048,000 (48,000 users x $376).

A Chinese attorney is quoted in the article asking for $1 Billion in fines for Microsoft. To that, I say, okay. After China pays Microsoft $105,280,000,000 for lost revenue to software piracy. That's assuming 20% of the country are using computers that are running Windows illegally. Even if only 80% of those 20% are illegal, then the fine owed to Microsoft would be $84,224,000,000. I'd be happy to pay $1 Billion to make $84 Billion.

[1] http://scitech.blogs.cnn.com/ "Microsoft Hacking Computer in China"

Popular posts from this blog

Number of Primes

Anderson's Theorem (a) The number of primes in [1,n] is no more than 2+floor(n/2). The probability of n being prime when n is not prime is 1/2 - see Dasgupta,Papadimitriou,Vazirani "Algorithms" page 26. Therefore, the E(pi(n)) is n/2. (b) There does not exist another set of adjacent primes other than {1,2,3} 5: 2 + floor(5/2) = 2 + 2 = 4:=> {1,2,3,5} : 4 <= 4 7: 2 + floor(7/2) = 2 + 3 = 5 => {1,2,3,5,7} : 5 <= 5 11: 2 + floor(11/2) = 2 + 5 = 7 => {1,2,3,5,7,11} 6 <= 7 26: 2 + floor(26/2) = 15 => {1,2,3,5,7,11,13,17,19,23} : 10 <= 15 Lagrange's Theorem is Inaccurate Lagrange's theorem about primes states that pi(x) is the number of primes <= x. The pi(x) is approximately x/ln(x). He postulated that the lim of pi(x)/(x/lnx) as x-> infinity was 1. This is incorrect. if the number of primes is bounded by n/2 then refactoring and reducing Lagrange's Theorem results in the lim of ln(x) as x approaches infinity. This is alwa...

How To Cancel ATT Uverse

I was a subscriber to the AT&T Uverse service for a little over 2 years. In that time, we had experienced good service for the first year, and then it sucked. After 12 months, or there in, the service degraded quickly, and would stop working all together at times. At first it would die for a short period of time, usually when we were not home. Then it would get progressively worst, until there was an entire week of no service. We had technicians at the house trying to fix the service, but it would repeat the behavior quite consistently. On January 15th we finally gave up and switched to a lesser service, COX TV and Internet. In the past we had cable service and it was always reliable, but not as good as the AT&T digital service. COX doesn't have nearly as many HD channels, but that's not enough. We needed internet to be reliable, and AT&T couldn't deliver that. Cancelling the AT&T service was a nightmare. Try to find anything about such things on their web s...

DNS Custom Logs and selinux

If you google "named custom logs selinux" you will find quite a bit of chatter about setting up custom logs outside of /var/log for DNS (named). These posts are interesting, but they tend to be run on posts about learning selinux and becoming an expert on named. What you need to know? If you have setup custom logging locations in your /etc/named.conf file, such as:     channel default_file {         file "/var/log/named/default.log" versions 3 size 5m;         severity dynamic;         print-time yes;     }; Then you will likely see errors like this in /var/log/messages: Oct 26 11:41:13 namedsvr setroubleshoot: SELinux is preventing /usr/sbin/named from write access on the directory /var/named/chroot/var/log/named. For complete SELinux messages. run sealert -l 6eab4aaf-e615-4ade-9e88-4efdc789eaf2 Then you run the sealert command as suggested by the very friendly selinux audit log and yo...