Goons? I've talked to some pretty helpful people at Dell. To characterize everyone as goons tells me you have some sort of issue with Dell that runs deeper than a missing EULA.
My company uses Dell exclusively for our servers. I haven't ever, at any time, worked for Dell.
The manager was wrong - I'll give you that. To give Dell, as a whole, a bad rap isn't justified.
I'll agree that I made an assumption. But, betting that Dell only ships EULAs with every other PC is not a good bet.
Once again, you're saying that the customer CAN'T read the agreement. There were other options.
Look, all I'm saying is that this sort of thing is no big deal. You're calling me a sheep over something minute in scale. To treat Dell like they're evil over some line workers forgetfullness (NOT Dell strategy), is just grossly out of perspective.
You're acting as if Dell had intent... Dell provides licenses on a regular basis to it's customers. Just because one or two boxes slipped by without licenses, something that is bound to happen, that doesn't constitute ill will on Dell's part.
To say that "you cannot read" the license is not true. The guy could get the license elsewhere.
Yes, this is a royal pain for Dell. You, and others, are trying to make Dell look bad for a routine occurence (something that probably happens to 99% of manufacturers).
But then again, this is a clear case of success envy. Many of you hate Dell just as you hate Microsoft, and you'll try your hardest to find anything wrong.
I'm all for reading the EULA. I'm NOT saying that I'm against reading the contract.
I AM saying that he could've downloaded the EULA from somewhere else, just like Dell told him. That is, if he wanted to make it work...
The manager clearly made a bad decision NOT to send a replacement. He could've at least checked into it. I don't agree with that, however, DELL is NOT directly to blame for not providing the license. Dell IS directly responsible for putting apathetic souls in charge of things.
All of this is moot, because this guy just wants to gripe. If he's competent enough to put up a website, then he's competent enough to grab the EULA from elsewhere. Not to mention, I don't truly believe he wanted to read the thing anyway.
This is a classic case of people finding something to bitch about instead of bettering the situation. There's a lot of this that goes on here at Slashdot. Many here think they are big thinkers, but some are also big gripers.
There are more important things in the news. This is equivalent to someone saying they can't turn on their TV because the remote control doesn't have batteries. It's either laziness or flat out stupidity.
It makes not difference if you're running Red Hat. You've got to know how to use Red Hat to make it secure. Just like you have to know that applying patches is part of making Windows secure.
The very fact that you way you're willing to hang the virus writer too means that it's not 100% on Bill Gates. So what's your argument?
The problem here, is you've got haters... You've got so many people that hate Microsoft just for the sake of hating Microsoft. I guess hating Microsoft is sexy right now. Maybe it's because Windows is the ruling OS?
Linux is not one big cohesive product like Windows, and it's not backed by a single corporation like Microsoft. Why attack something that's decentralized? Not enough visibility or gain...
You said "The accumulated wealth of Bill Gates and Microsoft should be used to compensate the victims of his crimes." Your true colors showed a little bit before you took a step back into legal talk.
If you really want to get legal, there is no case. There is no malice, Microsoft doesn't purposefully try to harm it's customers. There is no intent. The best case would be negligence, but that can't be shown either. Microsoft may very well be doing everything in it's power to fix problems. They certainly release patches, usually well ahead of time. Microsoft can't be sued for lazy admins.
But then again, you weren't speaking literally were you? You just thought you would spew some idealistic garbage... I completely understand.
You weren't to blame in the truck scenario other than a little bit of negligence. I would venture to say at least 80% of people would've agreed with your assesment, that the truck wasn't worth the trouble of fixing the lock. Wouldn't you say that the person who put your truck in gear is the bad guy? After all, if he didn't put the truck in gear it wouldn't have ended up in a lawn. Sure, you could've prevented it, but that doesn't make the attacker right. Even if you had the lock fixed, the attacker still could have broken a window to get in.
We can't continue to just write off these bad people. It's time that cyber crimes be punished just like other crimes. There's no way software, buildings, or cars are 100% secure. The whole situation is a function of ease and reward. If ease of doing it is great or percepted reward is great, then immoral people will find a way to inflict damage for their own purposes. In the slammer case, the virus writer got a rush from causing what I'm sure is billions in damage. Maybe he'll be exalted in his little anarchist community.
I agree that Microsoft should fix their software. I don't think that's possible without a rewrite though... The software encompasses too much for one person to get their head around. If one person can't understand it, how can one person, or even a small group of people, hold others accountable? This is precisely why Bill Gates is not 100% to blame. Gates doesn't code the actual software. He has input on the strategic level, but he can't MAKE programmers code correctly. He can't double-check their work either - checking 1% of the code would be a full time job. So how can Gates be 100% accountable? He is only one person in management at the company. I wonder how many managers Microsoft has anyway...
At least Microsoft release patches. If the patches are applied then the problem is solved. Any good admin will keep up with the patches. Sure it's a royal pain in the ass, but that's why they call it a job.
So, all of this is why I believe Gates isn't 100% to blame. I think Gates is about.01% of the problem, and who knows, maybe Gates really WANTS to fix the software. Maybe it's just too damn big to be feasible.
Things you learned in 1972 don't apply as much in the world of 2003. Good principles are still useful, I'm not saying preventing buffer over runs is bad, but the way of thinking in 1972 isn't the best way to be thinking.
I can see your eye for an eye argument, but it's too simplistic. NOTHING is that simple when it comes to companies such as Microsoft. Imagine the impact that Microsoft has on the world... You may be inclined to argue due to your selective bias, but I'm sure Microsoft software can be directly correlated to positive economic growth. Yeah, let's kick down the economy some more by putting Microsoft out of business - that's a sound plan. Quit trying to punish achievement. The whole problem here, is that people would rather blame Microsoft for the world's problems than fix them. Take some initiative or get out of the way. Don't just sit around and gripe - it's unproductive.
Got a virus hoax forward from my own mother the other day. I've told her time and time again never to open attachments she's unsure about, always depend on virus software instead of "helpful" people spreading the word, and ditch AOL. I still got the damn jdbgmgr forward.
She still forwards, still uses AOL, etc. The same applies for my users at work. I mean what the Hell, these people ask me every week about this stuff. Over and over again. I'm getting to the point where I don't even TRY to explain things anymore. I'm just a broken record saying "delete the e-mail". I'm going to start screaming "LART!!!" before long and I won't be gentle >:)
100% of the blame for all of this damage rests on Bill Gates.
So the virus writer is completely off the hook. 100% on Bill Gates? You really want to pin 100% of the blame on ONE man? That's assanine and very narrow sighted.
The accumulated wealth of Bill Gates and Microsoft should be used to compensate the victims of his crimes
So when are we going to hold the virus writers accountable?!? These freaks are basically terrorists. They are obviously ideological purists whose only purpose is to cause harm. Sure, they THINK they are doing good by pointing out the holes, but what they don't realize is that they're just causing damage and pissing people off.
There's always going to be software holes and idiots who don't patch them. Some people need to remove the stick from their ass and come down to earth a little bit. We can't just wish that everyone will run a perfect setup (there's no such thing anyway). It'll never happen.
When are we going to start treating the techno-terrorists like the criminals that they are?
Slashdot Mirror
Goons? I've talked to some pretty helpful people at Dell. To characterize everyone as goons tells me you have some sort of issue with Dell that runs deeper than a missing EULA.
My company uses Dell exclusively for our servers. I haven't ever, at any time, worked for Dell.
The manager was wrong - I'll give you that. To give Dell, as a whole, a bad rap isn't justified.
I'll agree that I made an assumption. But, betting that Dell only ships EULAs with every other PC is not a good bet.
Once again, you're saying that the customer CAN'T read the agreement. There were other options.
Look, all I'm saying is that this sort of thing is no big deal. You're calling me a sheep over something minute in scale. To treat Dell like they're evil over some line workers forgetfullness (NOT Dell strategy), is just grossly out of perspective.
You're acting as if Dell had intent... Dell provides licenses on a regular basis to it's customers. Just because one or two boxes slipped by without licenses, something that is bound to happen, that doesn't constitute ill will on Dell's part.
To say that "you cannot read" the license is not true. The guy could get the license elsewhere.
Yes, this is a royal pain for Dell. You, and others, are trying to make Dell look bad for a routine occurence (something that probably happens to 99% of manufacturers).
But then again, this is a clear case of success envy. Many of you hate Dell just as you hate Microsoft, and you'll try your hardest to find anything wrong.
I'm all for reading the EULA. I'm NOT saying that I'm against reading the contract.
I AM saying that he could've downloaded the EULA from somewhere else, just like Dell told him. That is, if he wanted to make it work...
The manager clearly made a bad decision NOT to send a replacement. He could've at least checked into it. I don't agree with that, however, DELL is NOT directly to blame for not providing the license. Dell IS directly responsible for putting apathetic souls in charge of things.
All of this is moot, because this guy just wants to gripe. If he's competent enough to put up a website, then he's competent enough to grab the EULA from elsewhere. Not to mention, I don't truly believe he wanted to read the thing anyway.
This is a classic case of people finding something to bitch about instead of bettering the situation. There's a lot of this that goes on here at Slashdot. Many here think they are big thinkers, but some are also big gripers.
There are more important things in the news. This is equivalent to someone saying they can't turn on their TV because the remote control doesn't have batteries. It's either laziness or flat out stupidity.
Sorry, but this is smallish...
People like this just make life difficult for everyone else. So some Dell tech forgot to put the damn license agreement in the box - BFD.
This person doesn't want to read the license. He wants to cause trouble.
Why did this make Slashdot anyway? This is "news"?!?
It makes not difference if you're running Red Hat. You've got to know how to use Red Hat to make it secure. Just like you have to know that applying patches is part of making Windows secure.
The very fact that you way you're willing to hang the virus writer too means that it's not 100% on Bill Gates. So what's your argument?
The problem here, is you've got haters... You've got so many people that hate Microsoft just for the sake of hating Microsoft. I guess hating Microsoft is sexy right now. Maybe it's because Windows is the ruling OS?
Linux is not one big cohesive product like Windows, and it's not backed by a single corporation like Microsoft. Why attack something that's decentralized? Not enough visibility or gain...
You said "The accumulated wealth of Bill Gates and Microsoft should be used to compensate the victims of his crimes." Your true colors showed a little bit before you took a step back into legal talk.
If you really want to get legal, there is no case. There is no malice, Microsoft doesn't purposefully try to harm it's customers. There is no intent. The best case would be negligence, but that can't be shown either. Microsoft may very well be doing everything in it's power to fix problems. They certainly release patches, usually well ahead of time. Microsoft can't be sued for lazy admins.
But then again, you weren't speaking literally were you? You just thought you would spew some idealistic garbage... I completely understand.
You weren't to blame in the truck scenario other than a little bit of negligence. I would venture to say at least 80% of people would've agreed with your assesment, that the truck wasn't worth the trouble of fixing the lock. Wouldn't you say that the person who put your truck in gear is the bad guy? After all, if he didn't put the truck in gear it wouldn't have ended up in a lawn. Sure, you could've prevented it, but that doesn't make the attacker right. Even if you had the lock fixed, the attacker still could have broken a window to get in.
.01% of the problem, and who knows, maybe Gates really WANTS to fix the software. Maybe it's just too damn big to be feasible.
We can't continue to just write off these bad people. It's time that cyber crimes be punished just like other crimes. There's no way software, buildings, or cars are 100% secure. The whole situation is a function of ease and reward. If ease of doing it is great or percepted reward is great, then immoral people will find a way to inflict damage for their own purposes. In the slammer case, the virus writer got a rush from causing what I'm sure is billions in damage. Maybe he'll be exalted in his little anarchist community.
I agree that Microsoft should fix their software. I don't think that's possible without a rewrite though... The software encompasses too much for one person to get their head around. If one person can't understand it, how can one person, or even a small group of people, hold others accountable? This is precisely why Bill Gates is not 100% to blame. Gates doesn't code the actual software. He has input on the strategic level, but he can't MAKE programmers code correctly. He can't double-check their work either - checking 1% of the code would be a full time job. So how can Gates be 100% accountable? He is only one person in management at the company. I wonder how many managers Microsoft has anyway...
At least Microsoft release patches. If the patches are applied then the problem is solved. Any good admin will keep up with the patches. Sure it's a royal pain in the ass, but that's why they call it a job.
So, all of this is why I believe Gates isn't 100% to blame. I think Gates is about
Things you learned in 1972 don't apply as much in the world of 2003. Good principles are still useful, I'm not saying preventing buffer over runs is bad, but the way of thinking in 1972 isn't the best way to be thinking.
I can see your eye for an eye argument, but it's too simplistic. NOTHING is that simple when it comes to companies such as Microsoft. Imagine the impact that Microsoft has on the world... You may be inclined to argue due to your selective bias, but I'm sure Microsoft software can be directly correlated to positive economic growth. Yeah, let's kick down the economy some more by putting Microsoft out of business - that's a sound plan. Quit trying to punish achievement. The whole problem here, is that people would rather blame Microsoft for the world's problems than fix them. Take some initiative or get out of the way. Don't just sit around and gripe - it's unproductive.
She still forwards, still uses AOL, etc. The same applies for my users at work. I mean what the Hell, these people ask me every week about this stuff. Over and over again. I'm getting to the point where I don't even TRY to explain things anymore. I'm just a broken record saying "delete the e-mail". I'm going to start screaming "LART!!!" before long and I won't be gentle >:)
Who are the big kids? Who defines who the big kids are? You?
Indefinitely? NOTHING runs indefinitely, NOTHING... Not even Linux.
So the virus writer is completely off the hook. 100% on Bill Gates? You really want to pin 100% of the blame on ONE man? That's assanine and very narrow sighted.
The accumulated wealth of Bill Gates and Microsoft should be used to compensate the victims of his crimes
That's just a little communist don't you think?
If Windows is sooo irrelevant and terrible, then don't use it. You don't even have to talk about it. Why the big deal?!?
Microsoft users don't sit around and bitch about Linux all the time. There ARE things to bitch about you know... Every OS has it's bad points.
There's always going to be software holes and idiots who don't patch them. Some people need to remove the stick from their ass and come down to earth a little bit. We can't just wish that everyone will run a perfect setup (there's no such thing anyway). It'll never happen.
When are we going to start treating the techno-terrorists like the criminals that they are?