On suing Marcy Hamilton for being a bimbo
Dear Dana Taschner, Esq, We'd like to file a class-action suit against MARCY HAMILTON 2804 MCCONNELL DR LOS ANGELES CA 90064 (310)202-6333 For abusing the law, and holding toolmakers responsible for what lusers do with them. You will, of course, get your 1/3 contingency fee. We realize she hasn't anything like the billions you seek, but she is still culpable, right buddy? And anyone can sue anybody for anything, as your career so aptly demonstrates. Maybe we can $ettle out of court... that is what you're after, isn't it? And tell Marcy to buy a fucking firewall, stop clicking on attachments, and stop rendering HTML mail. She makes you wear a condom, right? Same thing. ------ http://www.latimes.com/business/la-fi-micro3oct03,1,1486558.story?coll=la-ho... A Los Angeles woman fed up with computer viruses and malicious worms is using a new California law to try to force Microsoft Corp. to make its software less vulnerable to such attacks. In a suit filed this week in Los Angeles County Superior Court, Marcy Hamilton makes the novel claim that the world's biggest software company has run afoul of the new law, which requires businesses to warn customers when the firms believe personal information has been exposed to hackers or other unauthorized individuals.
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. There is a huge difference between making a bug time to time and release patch as soon as possible, and reckless endangering of the whole world by both lousy code, intentionally wrong key architectural decisions, and keeping everything and the kitchen sink on by default, 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. Not even mentioning the tendency of the patches (and following patches to patches) to break something else. 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. Or when I had to reboot instead of just restarting the updated service. 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.) 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). Or, if we have to talk about tools, selling electric drills that in default configuration tend to shatter to pieces flying around when set to highest rpms. In such cases, a class-action lawsuit is likely to be swift. Though I am not sure if the personal-informations-disclosure venue is the good one.
participants (2)
-
Major Variola (ret.) -
Thomas Shaddack