El Corazon wrote:

The average computer you go down to the store to buy comes with "free" 30 day licenses of commercial applications.

It's a very common practice outside the computer industry, for instance "Free 30 day subscription No strings attatched" except after those 30 days they start billing you without even letting you know and then make cancellation a pain.

El Corazon wrote:

The system is designed never to tell the user about the free versions.

Well of course... "Here is our product but if you go here[^] you can get a similar product for free" isn't going to be getting any marketing exec a raise. Free market and capitalism baby.

El Corazon wrote:

The free ones are aimed at those who have the smarts to sniff them out, search them out. A user, for all their vaunted wisdom you seem to think they have, on the average doesn't search for something they don't know exists.

So you really don't think the average user is capable of thinking "Hmm, I don't want to pay for antivirus... maybe I'll google Free Antivirus and click the first non sponsored link that's returned" Doesn't seem so illogical or improbable does it? Point is that a lot of people prefer to pay, yeah sounds nuts don't it, it's something to do with percieved value (one of the reasons why some people think the whole world isn't using linux already). The thinking goes something like this "Of what worth if something that is free?" People who actually want to pay can't be victims of racketeering.

El Corazon wrote:

The system is still designed for a racket

Uhm, no it's designed for a profit. Granted there is quite a bit of exploitation of ignorance but that's true of most business, for instance I'm ignorant of how to fix my car, that's I pay someone else to do it for me. I'm also lazy which is why I don't learn how to do it myself.

El Corazon wrote:

But if you try too hard to advertise the free alternatives, I'll lay you odds you will be forcibly quieted before too long.

Linux is still around. So are all it's tireless promoters. No anticompetitive suits against them. What th

I can see that paying for antivirus is really pissing you off, thought I'd just point out that free antivirus is available and works just fine, theres a lot of good anti-spy programs available for free as well as personal firewall software. So there goes your racketeering argument right out the window

As far as I'm concerned if Granny knows to use virus scans, spy blockers etc. or knows by proxy (like your wife) then she knows the basics of computer safety

I thought I might get a reply along those lines so let me clarify. First of all your comparison is not really accurate is it? What you are saying is that we should blame the makers of the computers that are used in botnets. What I'm saying is that the posession of something potentially destructive carries with it a certain responsibility. I'm not saying we should start issuing computer licenses (although I know some service techs who would love that) but if I leave a weapon (or some other dangerous object) lying around where anyone can get to it and that object is used in the commission of a crime should I not be reprimanded or at least given a stern talking to for my negligence? And if granny can't be bothered to learn even the very basics of computer safety she probably shouldn't be using one (identity theft via phishing is a very real problem).

What do you guys think? Should people who through their own inaction or ignorance let their computers become a part of a botnet be made responsible for part of the damage their computers help to cause? It's a pretty tricky question because obviously the people themselves are not doing anything illegal (at least for now). Also, what do you think of making it mandatory for ISP's to cut off internet service temporarily (until they get rid of the infection) to those computers that are being used to attack businesses and cause millions of dollars worth of damage? What other ways do you see for stopping the proliferation of botnets? --Edit: Typos

modified on Tuesday, May 6, 2008 10:30 AM

I just really hope you have a good antivirus program that you keep up to date and a strong firewall because you've missed some pretty critical security updates. People who never/hardly ever apply updates are a serious problem because they are basically begging for their computers to be exploited and recruited into a botnet. So here's hoping you are responsible enough to not let your computer become a zombie.

For me longevity, power consumption (since I live in a country with 100% pollution free energy) and such are not big issues. What convinced me to go with LCD is the fact that Plasma flickers and I HATE flickering, since for some reason I am very sensitive to it.

I think Gary's right, considering the way TCP works (sending whole messages and not returning until the whole thing has been ACK'd) it seems to me that you have a pretty good guarantee right there. If you had to use UDP for whatever reason you'd have to do some thinking involving maybe embedding serial numbers into your messages but since UDP doesn't guarantee delivery it would be pretty useless I think. So to sum up: Yeah TCP should guarantee you get the messages in the right order. I took a computer networking course last semester so this stuff is still pretty fresh in my head :cool: hth

I'd love to see someone try though.

I live on a volcanic island, maybe I want to live on a plain too. However if the plane crashed it might do so on a plain. Perhaps because some plaindwelling pilot was planing on the plane and thinking of the plains. However if the plane made a water landing it might aquaplane. Plainly that would be a bad thing. Hi Bob X ;P

What if the plane crashed... I'd be right out of luck with coding help. Methinks it would be better to split up on many planes and then meet up after everyone has landed, you know kinda like VIP's and heads of state do. ;P Haw haw bob x -- modified at 11:33 Friday 12th May, 2006

To me this text:

dan neely wrote:

personal and non-commercial use

completely prohibits any commercial use. And this text:

dan neely wrote:

create derivative works from, transfer, or sell any information, software, > products

prohibits any selling or repackaging. Of course IANAL but decyphering lawyerese is kind of a hobby of mine.:) -- modified at 11:09 Friday 12th May, 2006