Computer damage almost always translates to dollar figures - and no amount of money is worth an intelligent life. It's amusing to me that these are the same people who are pro-life because they don't believe in taking an innocent life... Especially considering the way viruses sometimes spread incidentally, how can we place all of the blame squarely on the shoulders of the virus writer? Aren't the companies who SELL the bug-infested software at least partially to blame? I think our priorities are a little messed up. Desktop computer usage has become so simple for mundane tasks that people underestimate the importance of properly learning to use their computers. Then they start to depend on them for business. The poor fool who puts infected or porous software on his computer and does not bother to update it or investigate its security flaws needs to take at least a little responsibility for his possession. You can equip a car with seat belts, but the law says you HAVE to wear them. Why not pass a law that requires people to lock down their computers, or else not bitch about getting screwed. If you did everything you could and you were STILL wiped clean - that's a different story? Perhaps we need a new arm of the insurance industry (*smacks own face*) - one that insures people against security breaches, but requires them to take certain precautions. That all said, I agree that there should be crimes and penalties for people who write malicious code - but when you accept for a second that code does exactly what it's told to do - and realize that data doesn't care about itself - how do we separate people who write "malicious" code from a keyboard manufacturer who puts a "delete" key on his keyboard? Do we start going after companies that make it very easy to delete a lot of data at once? How do we define "good code" vs "bad code"? Is intent really all that matters? Then do we arrest people who write code with malicious intent before they release it? If intent is the crime, then we run into thought-crime and the possibility to arrest someone who begins to plan a virus on paper without ever even writing the code. If we go to that extreme, who do we say is allowed to write proof of concept code and is allowed to find fixes? The lines begin to blur - and while I agree and accept that someone needs to take responsibility somewhere along the way, I think it all goes back to software manufacturers simply writing better code. If we demand more, we will find that we get more. Passing the buck and threatening lives has got to be the dumbest solution.
No offense to my brothers over in London - but there were a couple more than 50 people dead in the World Trade Center attacks. 50 lives is 50 lives, and my heart goes out to those who are no longer with us and their families. But to compare the two attacks is like comparing my Aunt's 2kb personal address book getting eaten by a failed pen drive to Wikipedia's database getting sacked by a stray patriot missile. Are both horrible attrocities? Absolutely - but it's certainly not fair to compare the two.
I hope MS doesn't try and copyright "SafeSearch" and make google change the language in their settings. Conversely, I wonder if Google has it copywrit.
Also, Anyone else notice the "Location" setting on MSN? I wonder how this is effecting our "scientific research"
I don't want them doing anything... whenever they touch standards they always mess them up.. this is one they can safely ignore and should steer clear from!
Try not to get confused and think you're using google...
On the third section from the top click "off"
You'll find the "Save" button in the lower right hand corner if you scroll down.
I was going to read through the source code and post a GET link which would turn it off for you... but I'm not about to read through that code at 8:45 in the morning. Sorry, folks.
PS.. I notice there are different language settings.. do you suppose MS will offer translation services?
Try not to get confused and think you're using google...
On the third section from the top click "off"
You'll find the "Save" button in the lower right hand corner if you scroll down.
I was going to read through the source code and post a GET link which would turn it off for you... but I'm not about to read through that code at 8:45 in the morning. Sorry, folks.
PS.. I notice there are different language settings.. do you suppose MS will offer translation services?
I'm no MS supporter, but do you think this might be because the new search engine has been crawling the web for a fraction of the length of time Yahoo and Google have been crawling the web?
I misclicked submit.. would appreciate if the parent were removed.
I'm a perv, so I searched for dirty pictures on MSN much to the same way I do on google. MSN returns nothing dirty, where as Google returns plenty. Meanwhile, google returns plenty, once you turn off safesearch. I looked for safesearch or something similar on MSN, and I have to log in. Google's willing to just set a cookie on my browser. Why should I have to log in? Maybe I want different search results on different computers. Eg: Home/Work Personal/Family etc..
I'm a perv, so I searched for dirty pictures on MSN much to the same way I do on google. MSN returns nothing dirty, where as Google returns plenty. Meanwhile,
Slashdot Mirror
Computer damage almost always translates to dollar figures - and no amount of money is worth an intelligent life. It's amusing to me that these are the same people who are pro-life because they don't believe in taking an innocent life... Especially considering the way viruses sometimes spread incidentally, how can we place all of the blame squarely on the shoulders of the virus writer? Aren't the companies who SELL the bug-infested software at least partially to blame? I think our priorities are a little messed up. Desktop computer usage has become so simple for mundane tasks that people underestimate the importance of properly learning to use their computers. Then they start to depend on them for business. The poor fool who puts infected or porous software on his computer and does not bother to update it or investigate its security flaws needs to take at least a little responsibility for his possession. You can equip a car with seat belts, but the law says you HAVE to wear them. Why not pass a law that requires people to lock down their computers, or else not bitch about getting screwed. If you did everything you could and you were STILL wiped clean - that's a different story? Perhaps we need a new arm of the insurance industry (*smacks own face*) - one that insures people against security breaches, but requires them to take certain precautions. That all said, I agree that there should be crimes and penalties for people who write malicious code - but when you accept for a second that code does exactly what it's told to do - and realize that data doesn't care about itself - how do we separate people who write "malicious" code from a keyboard manufacturer who puts a "delete" key on his keyboard? Do we start going after companies that make it very easy to delete a lot of data at once? How do we define "good code" vs "bad code"? Is intent really all that matters? Then do we arrest people who write code with malicious intent before they release it? If intent is the crime, then we run into thought-crime and the possibility to arrest someone who begins to plan a virus on paper without ever even writing the code. If we go to that extreme, who do we say is allowed to write proof of concept code and is allowed to find fixes? The lines begin to blur - and while I agree and accept that someone needs to take responsibility somewhere along the way, I think it all goes back to software manufacturers simply writing better code. If we demand more, we will find that we get more. Passing the buck and threatening lives has got to be the dumbest solution.
No offense to my brothers over in London - but there were a couple more than 50 people dead in the World Trade Center attacks. 50 lives is 50 lives, and my heart goes out to those who are no longer with us and their families. But to compare the two attacks is like comparing my Aunt's 2kb personal address book getting eaten by a failed pen drive to Wikipedia's database getting sacked by a stray patriot missile. Are both horrible attrocities? Absolutely - but it's certainly not fair to compare the two.
I hope MS doesn't try and copyright "SafeSearch" and make google change the language in their settings. Conversely, I wonder if Google has it copywrit.
Also, Anyone else notice the "Location" setting on MSN? I wonder how this is effecting our "scientific research"
I don't want them doing anything... whenever they touch standards they always mess them up.. this is one they can safely ignore and should steer clear from!
yay for more standards MS can ignore!
Yes, it WOULD kill them to pretty print their source code. IE's parser might not know what to do with it.
To Turn off SafeSearch:
E HP
goto:
http://search.msn.com
click settings:
[Which will bring you to:]
http://search.msn.com/settings.aspx?ru=%2f&FORM=S
Try not to get confused and think you're using google...
On the third section from the top click "off"
You'll find the "Save" button in the lower right hand corner if you scroll down.
I was going to read through the source code and post a GET link which would turn it off for you... but I'm not about to read through that code at 8:45 in the morning. Sorry, folks.
PS.. I notice there are different language settings.. do you suppose MS will offer translation services?
To turn off safesearch:
E HP
goto:
http://search.msn.com
click settings:
[Which will bring you to:]
http://search.msn.com/settings.aspx?ru=%2f&FORM=S
Try not to get confused and think you're using google...
On the third section from the top click "off"
You'll find the "Save" button in the lower right hand corner if you scroll down.
I was going to read through the source code and post a GET link which would turn it off for you... but I'm not about to read through that code at 8:45 in the morning. Sorry, folks.
PS.. I notice there are different language settings.. do you suppose MS will offer translation services?
Underneath where you type in your search query there's a "settings" link... it looks all too fammiliar in my opinion.
I'm no MS supporter, but do you think this might be because the new search engine has been crawling the web for a fraction of the length of time Yahoo and Google have been crawling the web?
I misclicked submit.. would appreciate if the parent were removed. I'm a perv, so I searched for dirty pictures on MSN much to the same way I do on google. MSN returns nothing dirty, where as Google returns plenty. Meanwhile, google returns plenty, once you turn off safesearch. I looked for safesearch or something similar on MSN, and I have to log in. Google's willing to just set a cookie on my browser. Why should I have to log in? Maybe I want different search results on different computers. Eg: Home/Work Personal/Family etc..
I'm a perv, so I searched for dirty pictures on MSN much to the same way I do on google. MSN returns nothing dirty, where as Google returns plenty. Meanwhile,