Headline FeedsTechNewsWorld Talkback
|
|
See Full Story
Although its operating system and apps are so buggy that new vulnerabilities are discovered with frightening regularity, Microsoft now wants Internet users to pony up to cover the cost of cybersecurity. The idea was put forth by Scott Charney, Redmond's vice president for trustworthy computing, during a speech at the RSA Conference 2010 security convention earlier this week. His argument is that PC users who don't run antivirus apps or back up their computers or patch their systems regularly are like cigarette smokers who poison other people with second-hand smoke.
This is by far the number one reason I moved to Macs a few years ago. After our third loss of data due to virus', I had our company stripped of PCs and replaced with Macs. Not one single file lost since.
I agree! The folks who put the Internet at risk should pay.
How about a no appeal fine of 2% of gross sales for every incident with a reward program for those who identify the problems. Model it on 'silent witness' type programs with protection of the witness identity to avoid retribution.
And the 'not doing back-ups' issue is a good one too. Make an automated back-up feature a requirement before releasing any OS. Impose healthy fines if they don't work. Ok, give them an out if the user disables it, but that's it.
Whoops! My bad! I just noticed he was talking about the users being made to pay, not the vendors.
Had to reread the article before my mind could wrap around such convoluted reasoning.
Hmmm.... By this logic, we could force Toyota owners to pay a fee to Toyota for buying their cars.
We could also make owners of faulty cars pay the rest of us for having to share the road with them. I mean after all they bought them.... Relying on the manufacturer's to produce safe cars is no excuse!
Well, guess the Toyota thing wouldn't fly even in our Congress. Hopefully, this MS twit will do nothing but stir up antagonism against MS and other reckless vendors.
Of course, lobbyists do write our legislation and MS can buy the best. (Lobbyists, not legislators... well, actually they can buy both I guess.)
Arrgh!
How about a no appeal fine of 2% of gross sales for every incident with a reward program for those who identify the problems. Model it on 'silent witness' type programs with protection of the witness identity to avoid retribution.
And the 'not doing back-ups' issue is a good one too. Make an automated back-up feature a requirement before releasing any OS. Impose healthy fines if they don't work. Ok, give them an out if the user disables it, but that's it.
Whoops! My bad! I just noticed he was talking about the users being made to pay, not the vendors.
Had to reread the article before my mind could wrap around such convoluted reasoning.
Hmmm.... By this logic, we could force Toyota owners to pay a fee to Toyota for buying their cars.
We could also make owners of faulty cars pay the rest of us for having to share the road with them. I mean after all they bought them.... Relying on the manufacturer's to produce safe cars is no excuse!
Well, guess the Toyota thing wouldn't fly even in our Congress. Hopefully, this MS twit will do nothing but stir up antagonism against MS and other reckless vendors.
Of course, lobbyists do write our legislation and MS can buy the best. (Lobbyists, not legislators... well, actually they can buy both I guess.)
Arrgh!
