dosent sound so bad to me. Kill off the lazy and the stupid that way, thus insuring the success of generations to come, by reducing headcount and "chlorinating the gene pool" as it were.
>>>Look, a lot of the posts I see out here are saying well, what about www.sexwith.kids but wouldn't it be just as easy for a child pornographer to register www.sexwithkids.com if he really wanted to. Don't tell be those 3 extra keystrokes make a difference.
you miss the point.
If parents just hear "oh, the.kids domain is safe for your kids, now its even EASIER to take care of your children" and simply turn their backs, this facet of social engineering will rapidly become an easy way to prey on children as vehicles of, for example, virus proliferation, sexual advances, you name it. Even if the.kids domain were TIGHTLY controlled and regulated, it's a laughably easy manner to fool someone into clicking a link that -appears- to direct you to one domain, but in reality directs you to another.
The point you're missing is that since children will be more likely to have unsupervised access to.kids domain sites, the extra keystrokes make a whole world of difference. of course, giving children unsupervised access to anything is a risk, but it -will- happen anyway, and the only logical answer to the problem is to simply educate our children
Usually, im merely amused when beurauchrats try to decide how technology should work.
Was it Ben Franklin who once said "Those who surrender freedom for security end up with neither"? The ones loosing the freedom here, of course, are the kids.
Bear with me a moment.
The more rediculous measures (like filtering programs, parental controls, even this half-baked alternate domain suffix ploy) that become implimented, the more complacent the parents get. The "Safer" they beleive their children are. Safety dosent come from rediculous countermeasures, it comes from educating children how to respect themselves and their safety, and how to correctly operationalize concepts they are perhaps too young to understand. The tighter the regulations and safeguards get, the uglier it is when something goes wrong. Parents should be responsible for what their children are exposed to, and the thought of an entire generation of parents trusting some arbitrary standard of what is "Acceptable" in what their children are exposed to is absolutely horrifying.
Sometimes i wonder what we would all do without thousands of users habitually correcting spelling and grammar anomolies. Surely, if such people dissapered, it would lead to the destruction of clear thought worldwide.
Or perhaps it would result in more bandwidth and more concise discussions..
Let's not forget that cheat codes are the stepping-stone to reverse-engineering the game, and inspiring children to learn how to do that is more valuable than parental warning labels or coma-inducing arrays of statistics
What does a child learn when he/she skips to the last chapter of a novel and tosses it aside?
What does a child learn when he/she passes a class by cramming?
what does a child learn when he/she takes 8 years of music lessons and never practices?
Should we then infer that all of these things are equally useless?
Don't pretend that the games of yester-year are more intrinsically worthwhile than today's games. Sure, there are lots of great classics, but you only get OUT of something what you put INTO it, this applies to games as much as it does anything else.
An individual incapable of self-discipline with all the tools for greatness will accomplish nothing
Surely the two paths of development and research are related, scientific paralellism's a real thing.
Of course these script-generated viruses aren't elegant or smart...but they're a shapeless yet powerful force that exploits user stupidity, something i aplaud. If -your- time is being wasted by these viruses, you are either doing business with the wrong people (if they are the ones being hit by these virii), or you need to be educated (if you are the one infected).
The exploits viruses use to infect machines are security issues. Period. They need to be adressed. If viruses didn't exploit them, no one would notice them, and they would be used over and over until the damage got great enough for them to be fixed. Companies don't fix security issues like this until it becomes a problem.
I never said developers didn't cut corners. quite the opposite. They do, and viruses take advantage of that fact, leading to improvements in development paradigms.
OS choice has little to do with the kinds of virus problems we're talking about. Sure, lots of viruses exploit microsoft-specific vunerabilities...but there STILL has to be a sucker at the other end not keeping their software up to date or running willy-nilly downloading software attachments like some kind of idiot. these people simply dont deserve computers. bandwidth is too good for them, it should be conserved for the educated.
Among the many reasons CBB is far superior to Lupin:
Although cowboy bebop has many humerous moments, it is a "serious" anime, with a great tragic storyline and compelling characters with richly detailed backstories. CBB is much better visually, and has a superior soundtrack. I wonder if you actually saw all 26 episodes, i highly doubt it ("seems like" followed by a storyline judgement sounds pretty weak to me). Comparing it to Lupin is downright silly
Although it's true that antivirus expenditure wouldnt be nessisary without viruses, viruses challenge an important aspect of modern computing: Security. Do you think security is important at all? I mean, it would be nice if we didn't need things like encryption and intrusion countermeasures, but the fact of the matter is, we have a -right- and an -obligation- to utilize software to protect our privacy. If people don't exploit sloppy programming, it will remain sloppy, and have no reason to innovate or improve.
Your ISP succumbed to a virus attack? Switch to one not operated by morons. Your business was hit by a virus? Either fire the dumb users or force them to educate themselves. Your home computer was trashed by a virus? Learn rudimentary computer principals.
I'm thankful for virus attack's propensity for weeding out the weak software, hardware, AND wetware in modern computing. It allows software developers who are dilligent and don't cut corners to prosper by having a superior product, and it gives the advantage to the users who are responsible enough to educate themselves and others.
These supposed millions of manhours wasted on cleaning up after virus attacks are worth the price to continue the evolution of software and user-education.
As for where we would be without advances in anti-virus and security software, i would suspect:
1) No one but theoretical computer scientists would know what "Heuristics" are, and why they're useful
2) We would be using laughable encryption (if any at all)
3) Anyone with a telnet client and opposable digits would be able to steal your funds and identity
A well written computer virus (as opposed to a script) can be a sparkling example of code optimisation and ingenuity. Without the freedom to explore every algorithm, push every button, and Test every Case, the envelope cannot be pushed.
Although perhaps it's a stretch to imply that software development as a whole would simply lie stagnant if viruses never occured, every innovation, every well written algorithm prooven and plastered in plain view somehow advances software development as a science.
(i may have repeated myself a bit here, since my earlier post -appeared- to have errored out, and did not appear in searches later on)
Hardly any way to thank the people who expose sloppy programming and the "our users are stupid so they dont need well-written programs" mentality that today's corner-cutting implimentation processes inhabit.
Of course, If i were uneducated about computers, and had a propensity to using them irresponsibly and foolishly (say, for example, infecting myself with a virus), i would probably try to cover this up with a lot of loud, angry ranting, calling for the virus' creator to be violently punished.
Seeing as that's not the case, i'm horrified at the unenlightened comments by the person mentioned in the article here on slashdot. Who's to say that the next development in virus implimentation won't lead to advancements in remote-administration (as an example)?
Only when complex systems are challenged and forced to innovate can they truely be improved. Complacent users who don't care enough to educate themselves as to the proper use of the equipment they've been priviliged to use are getting what they deserve. Likewise, Businesses who allow uneducated users to use company resources also get what they deserve.
Viruses help promote education and innovation, and while i'm not arguing that people who malliciously attack computers should -not- be punished to the full extent of the law, that certainly does not include torture and execution.
The fact that authors of virii are being verbally attacked is equally horrifying. More and more precident is being set for computer programming being protected as free speech (DeCSS comes to mind, although i think the media is strongarming the reasonable away from justice regardless), and this seems like a BIG step in the wrong direction. Imagine what kinds of software and logic innovations we would be missing out on, if a computer scientist trashed his work files for fear of criminal prosicution?
We don't murder gun manufacturers when a shooting takes place, therefore it would be foolish to propose that a programmer be killed for writing a program that is used irresponsibly by someone else, or even to propose that a user be violently punished for using a peice of software maliciously.
I can use SMS (a useful remote administration tool used by many businesses to automate and remotely perform administration tasks) to spy on people, crash systems, and steal information. Does that mean SMS's author should be held accountible? SMS, after all, is nothing but a trojan with a large footprint.
Slashdot Mirror
dosent sound so bad to me. Kill off the lazy and the stupid that way, thus insuring the success of generations to come, by reducing headcount and "chlorinating the gene pool" as it were.
>>>Look, a lot of the posts I see out here are saying well, what about www.sexwith.kids but wouldn't it be just as easy for a child pornographer to register www.sexwithkids.com if he really wanted to. Don't tell be those 3 extra keystrokes make a difference.
.kids domain is safe for your kids, now its even EASIER to take care of your children" and simply turn their backs, this facet of social engineering will rapidly become an easy way to prey on children as vehicles of, for example, virus proliferation, sexual advances, you name it. Even if the .kids domain were TIGHTLY controlled and regulated, it's a laughably easy manner to fool someone into clicking a link that -appears- to direct you to one domain, but in reality directs you to another.
.kids domain sites, the extra keystrokes make a whole world of difference. of course, giving children unsupervised access to anything is a risk, but it -will- happen anyway, and the only logical answer to the problem is to simply educate our children
you miss the point.
If parents just hear "oh, the
The point you're missing is that since children will be more likely to have unsupervised access to
Usually, im merely amused when beurauchrats try to decide how technology should work.
Was it Ben Franklin who once said "Those who surrender freedom for security end up with neither"? The ones loosing the freedom here, of course, are the kids.
Bear with me a moment.
The more rediculous measures (like filtering programs, parental controls, even this half-baked alternate domain suffix ploy) that become implimented, the more complacent the parents get. The "Safer" they beleive their children are. Safety dosent come from rediculous countermeasures, it comes from educating children how to respect themselves and their safety, and how to correctly operationalize concepts they are perhaps too young to understand. The tighter the regulations and safeguards get, the uglier it is when something goes wrong. Parents should be responsible for what their children are exposed to, and the thought of an entire generation of parents trusting some arbitrary standard of what is "Acceptable" in what their children are exposed to is absolutely horrifying.
Sometimes i wonder what we would all do without thousands of users habitually correcting spelling and grammar anomolies. Surely, if such people dissapered, it would lead to the destruction of clear thought worldwide.
Or perhaps it would result in more bandwidth and more concise discussions..
Let's not forget that cheat codes are the stepping-stone to reverse-engineering the game, and inspiring children to learn how to do that is more valuable than parental warning labels or coma-inducing arrays of statistics
what a laughably short-sighted point of view.
What does a child learn when he/she skips to the last chapter of a novel and tosses it aside?
What does a child learn when he/she passes a class by cramming?
what does a child learn when he/she takes 8 years of music lessons and never practices?
Should we then infer that all of these things are equally useless?
Don't pretend that the games of yester-year are more intrinsically worthwhile than today's games. Sure, there are lots of great classics, but you only get OUT of something what you put INTO it, this applies to games as much as it does anything else.
An individual incapable of self-discipline with all the tools for greatness will accomplish nothing
Surely the two paths of development and research are related, scientific paralellism's a real thing. Of course these script-generated viruses aren't elegant or smart...but they're a shapeless yet powerful force that exploits user stupidity, something i aplaud. If -your- time is being wasted by these viruses, you are either doing business with the wrong people (if they are the ones being hit by these virii), or you need to be educated (if you are the one infected). The exploits viruses use to infect machines are security issues. Period. They need to be adressed. If viruses didn't exploit them, no one would notice them, and they would be used over and over until the damage got great enough for them to be fixed. Companies don't fix security issues like this until it becomes a problem. I never said developers didn't cut corners. quite the opposite. They do, and viruses take advantage of that fact, leading to improvements in development paradigms. OS choice has little to do with the kinds of virus problems we're talking about. Sure, lots of viruses exploit microsoft-specific vunerabilities...but there STILL has to be a sucker at the other end not keeping their software up to date or running willy-nilly downloading software attachments like some kind of idiot. these people simply dont deserve computers. bandwidth is too good for them, it should be conserved for the educated.
Among the many reasons CBB is far superior to Lupin:
Although cowboy bebop has many humerous moments, it is a "serious" anime, with a great tragic storyline and compelling characters with richly detailed backstories. CBB is much better visually, and has a superior soundtrack. I wonder if you actually saw all 26 episodes, i highly doubt it ("seems like" followed by a storyline judgement sounds pretty weak to me). Comparing it to Lupin is downright silly
Although it's true that antivirus expenditure wouldnt be nessisary without viruses, viruses challenge an important aspect of modern computing: Security. Do you think security is important at all? I mean, it would be nice if we didn't need things like encryption and intrusion countermeasures, but the fact of the matter is, we have a -right- and an -obligation- to utilize software to protect our privacy. If people don't exploit sloppy programming, it will remain sloppy, and have no reason to innovate or improve.
Your ISP succumbed to a virus attack? Switch to one not operated by morons. Your business was hit by a virus? Either fire the dumb users or force them to educate themselves. Your home computer was trashed by a virus? Learn rudimentary computer principals.
I'm thankful for virus attack's propensity for weeding out the weak software, hardware, AND wetware in modern computing. It allows software developers who are dilligent and don't cut corners to prosper by having a superior product, and it gives the advantage to the users who are responsible enough to educate themselves and others.
These supposed millions of manhours wasted on cleaning up after virus attacks are worth the price to continue the evolution of software and user-education.
As for where we would be without advances in anti-virus and security software, i would suspect:
1) No one but theoretical computer scientists would know what "Heuristics" are, and why they're useful
2) We would be using laughable encryption (if any at all)
3) Anyone with a telnet client and opposable digits would be able to steal your funds and identity
A well written computer virus (as opposed to a script) can be a sparkling example of code optimisation and ingenuity. Without the freedom to explore every algorithm, push every button, and Test every Case, the envelope cannot be pushed.
Although perhaps it's a stretch to imply that software development as a whole would simply lie stagnant if viruses never occured, every innovation, every well written algorithm prooven and plastered in plain view somehow advances software development as a science.
(i may have repeated myself a bit here, since my earlier post -appeared- to have errored out, and did not appear in searches later on) Hardly any way to thank the people who expose sloppy programming and the "our users are stupid so they dont need well-written programs" mentality that today's corner-cutting implimentation processes inhabit. Of course, If i were uneducated about computers, and had a propensity to using them irresponsibly and foolishly (say, for example, infecting myself with a virus), i would probably try to cover this up with a lot of loud, angry ranting, calling for the virus' creator to be violently punished. Seeing as that's not the case, i'm horrified at the unenlightened comments by the person mentioned in the article here on slashdot. Who's to say that the next development in virus implimentation won't lead to advancements in remote-administration (as an example)? Only when complex systems are challenged and forced to innovate can they truely be improved. Complacent users who don't care enough to educate themselves as to the proper use of the equipment they've been priviliged to use are getting what they deserve. Likewise, Businesses who allow uneducated users to use company resources also get what they deserve. Viruses help promote education and innovation, and while i'm not arguing that people who malliciously attack computers should -not- be punished to the full extent of the law, that certainly does not include torture and execution. The fact that authors of virii are being verbally attacked is equally horrifying. More and more precident is being set for computer programming being protected as free speech (DeCSS comes to mind, although i think the media is strongarming the reasonable away from justice regardless), and this seems like a BIG step in the wrong direction. Imagine what kinds of software and logic innovations we would be missing out on, if a computer scientist trashed his work files for fear of criminal prosicution? We don't murder gun manufacturers when a shooting takes place, therefore it would be foolish to propose that a programmer be killed for writing a program that is used irresponsibly by someone else, or even to propose that a user be violently punished for using a peice of software maliciously. I can use SMS (a useful remote administration tool used by many businesses to automate and remotely perform administration tasks) to spy on people, crash systems, and steal information. Does that mean SMS's author should be held accountible? SMS, after all, is nothing but a trojan with a large footprint.