Microsoft VP Suggests 'Net Tax To Clean Computers
Ian Lamont writes "Microsoft's Vice President for Trustworthy Computing, Scott Charney, speaking at the RSA conference in San Francisco, has floated an interesting proposal to deal with infected computers: Approach the problem of dealing with malware infections like the healthcare industry, and consider using 'general taxation' to pay for inspection and quarantine. Using taxes to deal with online criminal activity is not a new idea, as demonstrated by last year's Louisiana House vote to levy a monthly surcharge on Internet access to deal with online baddies."
Most of the major ISPs in the US are providing a free brand-name anti-virus product if users will just download it. Even if you don't get that, it's about $15/year to stay up to date at Best Buy. The problem here isn't that people can't afford anti-virus... it's that they can't be bothered to use it.
Maybe the route some universities have taken of fines and downtime for those caught spreading malware or spam, knowingly or not, is what we need.
Taxes are already being paid on online transactions and a cut of every bill from your ISP.
The government can't handle the internet due to incompetence, not lack of money,
Do Mac or Linux users get a tax credit?
Who do they think they are, bankers?
Considering 99% of all infected machines out there in userland are running some Microsoft product; Microsoft SHOULD be taxed for each and every one of them, It is fortunate we have such an industry leader as Microsoft, fessing up to their own damn foolishness and offering to make good.
- Minutus cantorum, minutus balorum, minutus carborata descendum pantorum.
A special "insecure software" levy on software responsible for more than 10% of "owned" machines on the net would be more appropriate.
It's not so much the principle of the thing as it is writing into law Microsoft's PR message that bugs in their software are "Computer Problems" or "Internet Problems."
On the other hand, if the charges were discounted for running non-MS systems, I might change my mind.
Lacking <sarcasm> tags,
1. Start a new program
2. Institute a new tax
3. Collect the tax, but don't put it in a lockbox.
4. Taxes are thrown into the general fund, where they're used to buy favors from senators and congressmen.
5. Program has no funding, is cut back and made useless except for an overpaid bureaucracy that does nothing.
6. When fiscal conservatives propose scrapping the program, they are instead blamed for the shortfall and taxes are raised to "fix" it.
7. Repeat from step 3.
Gamingmuseum.com: Give your 3D accelerator a rest.
Police: "This is a fine store you have here"
Shop Owner: "Yes, I'm quite proud of it."
P: "It would be a shame if something happened to your store... But for only 20% of your gross, we could protect it."
SO: "But, I have no crime in my store. I have state of the art security cameras, proximity alarms, private security guards. I've spared no expense and made sure my store is secure"
P: "True, but you see there's another shop down the street and it gets broken into every week. Someone has to pay for that."
Everyone benefits from an internet largely free of infected machines. Just as everyone benefits from an educated and healthy society.
Why is it if you drive a car that's unsafe to operate and something happens, nobody thinks twice about the fact that it's the owner's responsibility and when they are hit with a fine everyone just nods, but if it's a computer that's in poor condition (ie: infected), it's an issue that the community must bear to clean up. I realize that not everyone is technically adept and able maintain their machines adequately themselves, but I don't want to pay for them. They can hire someone to maintain their machines for them, much like most people do for their cars now, and perhaps the fine could be waved or reduced if they prove that they were current on their maintenance and somehow still got hit. Hell, it'd be a potentially decent revenue stream for repair-shops and even ISPs that want to offer some kind of maintenance package.
Of course, the problem here is that people don't feel they should pay for anything to do with a computer other than the price-tag they see when they go to BestBuy. They'll scream blue-murder if they're told that they actually have a responsibility, both financially and in how they operate their machine. Most people want to treat a computer the way they do their microwave oven, buy it, and if it breaks, replace it, but never, ever have to spend any time or money on maintenance.
Some bring out the best in others, some the worst. Some bring out far more.
I support it if I get a tax credit for not having any windows machines.
But I DON'T benefit from an educated and healthy society! Have you seen our society? It's only healthy and educated by society's standards. But not MINE. Fuck you and your Internet tax I know how to freshly install a damn operating system when I need to.
What day is it? Could you please tell me?
The company who is nearly single handedly the reason why there is an anti-virus industry wants a tax to pay for malware removal? F#$% off.
We should fine MS $1000 for every infection on systems running their software. IE and Outlook exploits could probably pay off the US national debt in 10 years.
Actually the registry was a rather benign concept. It was originally designed to host OS settings in a convenient central location (with redundancy ofcource) to enable easier migration from PC to PC, easier group policy management, etc
Apps ofcource were too lazy to come up with their own damn 'INI files'-equivalent and abused the registry to store their own mess. System "tweaker" and other "cleaner" programs started to fuck with internal windows settings that Microsoft had no plans to expose to the end user causing even more problems. Thus its became this giant cluster-fuck that it is now, primarily because of backwards compatibility and previous strategic mistakes on the part of MS.
They should have kept the registry API hidden and not allowed apps to write their shit all over the place (ofcource 95 was a shitty OS and didn't have ACL like features, therefore forcing MS to have XP run as Admin by default to allow access to the entire object manager namespace for all programs)
This backlog of poor decisions finally caught up with them and they had to 'take a hit' (PR wise) finally with vista and the draconian UAC forcing app vendors to write apps w/o assuming admin privileges. Better late than never I'd say...
You know, I was going to point out that most people have some idea of how their car works, and how to do so safely, even if not the actual details, but then I recalled all the crazies driving down the freeway putting on make up, or shaving (I saw some guy doing that last week, talk about asking for a 'close shave'!), etc.
And then there's my wife, whose car's engine seized a couple of months after we moved into together. When I asked her when her last oil change was, she said (with a straight face), "Two years ago, I think." So I guess I can't really argue with you at all. Sadly.