Variola wrote... "So don't use their tools. Don't abuse the law against the maker of a tool which can be used improperly. It is simply wrong to blame a gun or drill or code maker because some evildoer (virus propogator) used the tool against you." Well, although I am willing to agree that a giant corporation does not act very responsibly, I have to say that even though I use their email software here at home, I've never had a problem that I can detect: I don't even open email from folks I don't know, never mind attachments. I also have a firewall and a router, neither of which I have truly geek-levels of intimacy using. The tool analogy may be a weak one, though. Imagine a drill that somehow pollutes the electical supply so much that the guy next door can't use his electronics. Or imagine a car that actually disengages the steering wheel at random while driving: it's one thing to affect the driver, but if he's going to take me out because of his tool then it's time to get that crap off the road. Is that the case with MS? The "Geeks of Consequence" tell me so... -TD
From: "Major Variola (ret)" <mv@cdc.gov> To: "cypherpunks@lne.com" <cypherpunks@lne.com> Subject: Re: On suing Marcy Hamilton for being a bimbo Date: Sat, 04 Oct 2003 14:12:57 -0700
At 05:50 PM 10/4/03 +0200, Thomas Shaddack wrote:
On Fri, 3 Oct 2003, Major Variola (ret.) wrote:
We'd like to file a class-action suit against MARCY HAMILTON For abusing the law, and holding toolmakers responsible for what lusers do with them.
Not exactly good analogy. The mentioned "toolmaker" behaves so recklessly they well-deserve some serious slapping.
So don't use their tools. Don't abuse the law against the maker of a tool which can be used improperly. It is simply wrong to blame a gun or drill or code maker because some evildoer (virus propogator) used the tool against you.
between making a bug time to time and release patch as soon as
There is a huge difference possible,
and reckless endangering of the whole world by both lousy code,
Let me guess: the State gets to decide how many bugs per line of code?
intentionally wrong key architectural decisions,
You mean decisions that don't fit *your* fancy. See below for others' possible motivations.
and keeping everything
and the kitchen sink on by default,
Again, the maker's choice; your choice to purchase.
including services that next to nobody
(except worms) needs - if the users need it, they should be able to click on "Enable" on their own.
You don't understand the convenience vs. security tradeoff too well. Or the importance of convenience to sales.
Not even mentioning the tendency of the patches
(and following patches to patches) to break something else.
And this doesn't happen with other OSes? Please. And every version of *nix has always shipped with everything off, maximally locked down? Right.
Can't remember
when an upgrade of OpenSSH or OpenSSL or any other contemporary bug breeder of the MS-alternative bombed any of my systems.
[Tech: Since when have MS SSL bugs had *anything* to do with worms and virii? And does MS even support SSH? ]
There have been plenty of security and overflow bugs in Open* security apps.
Or when I had to
reboot instead of just restarting the updated service.
Yawn.
If for nothing other than for running scripts in incoming mails by default, MSFT deserves it. (Yes, I admit bias. Having to admin a couple
machines running their software should be enough to justify it.)
Your bias is turning you into something dark. I sort of expected this reaction, since I was defending MS's right to exist. But if MS is treated this way, so is Joe Coder.
Resorting to worn-out car analogies, it's quite like selling cars with safety belts made of paper and with faulty brakes (not talking about the occassional tendency of the mentioned cars to lose their engine, explode in the middle of the road, or shred the luggage in the trunk).
Caveat emptor. Some folks buy cars with no airbags; others buy cars with a dozen. Should everyone be forced to buy the safest car (as defined by the State, of course).
If Marcy clicks on attachments, runs mail clients that run embedded scripts, basically spreads her legs and lets everyone in, how is this different from someone who rolls their SUV because they were clueless as to physics?
Though I am not sure if the personal-informations-disclosure venue is the good one.
Au contraire, I'm sure someone who asserts class-action status is interested in hearing from the public she is so kindly protecting.
Its a real shame when (albeit deserved) MS-hostility/contempt biasses folks into immorality or irrationality. Its like blaming the authors of the SMTP RFC for spam.
_________________________________________________________________ Instant message during games with MSN Messenger 6.0. Download it now FREE! http://msnmessenger-download.com