10-4.

--- Tim Fournet <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> The same momma and pappa can go to the same Sears and buy an iMac
> loaded
> with MacOS X and have a relatively secure Posix OS, yes. Either
> way, I
> don't think it's the job of the computer-educated to make the
> purchasers
> of computers preloaded with Microsoft operating systems feel good
> about
> their purchase. Cajun Clickers' interest in keeping users feeling
> good
> about MS Windows is an economic one, which I can understand, but
> that
> doesn't apply to me. 
> 
> 
> -Tim
> 
> 
> On Wed, 2002-07-03 at 10:34, Doug Riddle wrote:
> 
>     An Operating System in the hands of a novice is inherently
> unsecure. 
>     Some OS's are worse than others, but it is the wetware that is
> the
>     larger issue at the outset.  And while "forced" is a strong
> term, it
>     doesn't miss the mark by much.  You are not suggesting that
> momma and
>     pappa can go down to Sears and get the Hot Wheels Computer for
> little
>     Johnny or the Barbie PC for little Jill with a secure Posix OS
> and
>     Barney software on it are you?  They're going to buy Microsoft
>     because they don't trust the hippies in the Yurts and Tepees
> that are
>     trying to give their software away, and the MS tortureware
> comes with
>     the cute little box they're buying.`
>     
>     Doug
>     
>     
>     --- Tim Fournet <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>     > I think you're making an incorrect assumption in that any new
>     > computer
>     > user is forced to use an inherently insecure operating
> system. 
>     > 
>     > -Tim
>     > 
>     > 
>     > 
>     > On Wed, 2002-07-03 at 09:42, Doug Riddle wrote:
>     > 
>     >     I want to wade in on this one, because I can see both
> sides.
>     >     
>     >     I'll use my father as an example.  He is very
> intelligent, a
>     > former
>     >     general of the US Army, captain of industry, etc, etc. 
> He is
>     > not, by
>     >     any stretch of the imagination computer literate.  He can
> use a
>     > PC
>     >     and send and recive emails, but if the screen changes
> colors,
>     > he
>     >     calls for help.  To him, a computer is a "blackbox."  At
> almost
>     > 70
>     >     years old he has no interest in trying to learn the
> workings of
>     > said
>     >     box, he just wants to stay in touch and talk to some old
>     > friends.  He
>     >     should be able to do that in reasonable safety.  He
> understands
>     > there
>     >     are security issues, and has accepted the fact that his
>     > ignorance
>     >     will occassionaly lead to his PC being wiped out.  He
> counts on
>     >     keeping a low profile and a decent virus scanner to
> protect him
>     > from
>     >     most problems, and it will.
>     >     
>     >     I, on the other hand run some domains, manage some
> websites and
>     > love
>     >     Linux.  My exposure is a higher, and I have to take more
> steps
>     > to be
>     >     sure that not only am I safe, but that I am not
> unwittingly
>     > used as a
>     >     tool by someone else in a DoS or worse.
>     >     
>     >     Then there is the new user.  Unless they are so dense as
> to
>     > have to
>     >     have someone come over and turn on the PC and use the
> mouse for
>     > them,
>     >     they have to be aware of the basic threats a computer
> user on
>     > the
>     >     internet faces.  However, their skill level does not
> allow them
>     > to
>     >     combat these threats.  Informing them of specifc threats
> on a
>     >     constant and consistant basis does them no good, as they
> cannot
>     >     respond.  It is a sad but true fact that there is more
>     > misinformation
>     >     than factual information available.
>     >     
>     >     It is deplorable that Microsoft doesn't make a better
> effort to
>     >     secure their software and educate their customers.  Given
> the
>     > current
>     >     disasters in the American corporate model it is not
> surprizing
>     > that
>     >     Microsoft treats their customers as non-entities, but it
> is
>     >     unethical.
>     >     
>     >     So, what is a good approach to sending out notices about
>     > security
>     >     flaws?  Probably a new mailing list.  Anyone that wants
> to
>     > suscribe
>     >     and try and protect themselves can subscribe.  Advise the
> new
>     > users
>     >     to tackle the basics before subscribing.  That way it is
> a
>     > self-paced
>     >     system and those that wish to remain blissfully ignorant
> are
>     > welcome
>     >     to do so.
>     >     
>     >     In a perfect world, these would not be issues, we do not
> live
>     > in
>     >     Perfect as the commercial says.  We live in a society
> where
>     > half of
>     >     the people are so failed by the education system that
> they
>     > cannot
>     >     read and write well enough to fill out a job application.
>  We
>     > need to
>     >     cut the new people some slack while they come up to
> speed. 
>     > Besides,
>     >     there is no surer teacher that fire is hot than a scorch
> mark
>     > on your
>     >     hand.
>     >     
>     >     My two cents, US.
>     >     
>     >     Doug Riddle
>     >     
>     >     
>     >     --- Jerald Sheets <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>     >     > But don't you consider it a moral issue that common
> *REAL*
>     > security
>     >     > threats are not discussed freely?
>     >     > 
>     >     > I find that amoral at best and criminal at worst.  In
> any
>     > event, it
>     >     > does
>     >     > a disservice to new folk.
>     >     > 
>     >     > A very palatable method of succeeding at free discourse
>     > without the
>     >     > detriment of speech deprivation :-)  would be to have a
>     >     > "clickers-announce" list where such items are
> "announced" as
>     > they
>     >     > occur,
>     >     > and then in the context of the same message you could
> present
>     > the
>     >     > time
>     >     > and place (and cost if applicable) of the discussion
> "what it
>     > is
>     >     > and
>     >     > what you can do".
> 
=== message truncated ===


=====
Warmest Regards,
Doug Riddle
http://www.dougriddle.com
 
## Firearms are second only to the Constitution in importance; they are the 
Peoples' Liberty Teeth." - George Washington ##


__________________________________________________
Do You Yahoo!?
Yahoo! - Official partner of 2002 FIFA World Cup
http://fifaworldcup.yahoo.com

Reply via email to