Re: [SC-L] Why Software Will Continue to Be Vulnerable

2005-05-01 Thread Crispin Cowan
Greenarrow 1 wrote: >But, the problem I see with this survey is they only polled 1,000 out of >what over 5 million users in the USofA. Political pollsters regularly sample 1000 Americans to get a prediction of 100,000 voters that is accurate to 5% or so. 1000 people should be sufficient to sample

Re: [SC-L] Why Software Will Continue to Be Vulnerable

2005-05-01 Thread Greenarrow 1
But, the problem I see with this survey is they only polled 1,000 out of what over 5 million users in the USofA. Just randomly suppose they accidently picked everyone that has superb software and hardware on their systems (unlikely but probable). On repairing systems for my customers I say 1 of

RE: [SC-L] Why Software Will Continue to Be Vulnerable

2005-05-01 Thread Arian J. Evans
> -Original Message- > From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] > Sent: Friday, April 29, 2005 2:32 PM > To: SC-L > Subject: [SC-L] Why Software Will Continue to Be Vulnerable > > This makes it highly unlikely that software companies are > about to start dumping large quantities of $$ into improving soft

Re: [SC-L] Why Software Will Continue to Be Vulnerable

2005-05-01 Thread Dave Aronson
Crispin Cowan <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > ISPs could also position a non-restricted account as an "expert" > account and charge extra for it. That already happens in many cases, except they call it a "business class" account. The only one I've heard called some kind of "expert" account is t

Re: [SC-L] Why Software Will Continue to Be Vulnerable

2005-05-01 Thread Jeff Williams
What really mystifies me is the anlogy to fire insurance. *Everyone* keeps their fire insurance up to date, it costs money, and it protects against a very rare event that most fire insurance customers have never experienced. What is it that makes consumers exercise prudent good sense for fire insur