idiocy in people, is not necessarily dependent upon their education.
i know plenty of people that i would consider experts in the field, that have had little or no college background. and... on the other hand... plenty that actually graduated with majors in the field, and/or masters... and i have to question exactly who their professors were.
although most dont want to think it... there is such thing as a "stupid college graduate".
True, but the thin grey line as far as liability goes... is just that. a thin grey line. microsoft has enough power, money, and pull, to get away with a slap on the wrist for even the largest issues. it would take one hell of an isp to tackle that project.
even with the eula, it might be easier to tackle this from an "end user" aspect. band a massive group of people together (that were actually stupid enough to PURCHASE a copy of one of their OS's) and tackle it from a class action stance. when word gets out to the john and jane doe's that 1) they might get some money out of this, and 2) they might get some sort of promise or attempt at making what they had purchased secure.... then there could be a fairly large group forming to jump in line.
but again... it all boils down to this: what is that going to solve? microsoft has more money than god... and all a large lawsuit would do to them, would be to either make the cost of their software go up even further, which would jack the price of pre-fab computers up, which would cause sales to go down, which would cause hardware manufacturers to slow R&D.... (see where i am going with this? good. i'll stop then.) or, would make them spend what would be chump change to microsoft, to pay it off monetarily. in the end... you are still going to be left with a pile of crap for an operating system, and just enough money to buy a coke.
the eual could be stretched or pulled in either direction to use in either argument. the end user argrees that they wont do a, b, c or d, and that the software company is not liable for x, y, and z. however, had the user known that said software would allow a violation of their rights as a us citizen, and a compromise of their privacy and personal information... they might not have purchased this software. there are plenty of holes in the eula... it would just take a good attorney to exploit them... wait... that sounds familiar.
i was wondering the same.
i have to say though... i am glad crap like this happens. everytime it does, it makes it that much easier to turn another friend over to linux. you get them hooked... they never go back. its like crack-rock.
Slashdot Mirror
idiocy in people, is not necessarily dependent upon their education.
i know plenty of people that i would consider experts in the field, that have had little or no college background. and... on the other hand... plenty that actually graduated with majors in the field, and/or masters... and i have to question exactly who their professors were.
although most dont want to think it... there is such thing as a "stupid college graduate".
True, but the thin grey line as far as liability goes... is just that. a thin grey line. microsoft has enough power, money, and pull, to get away with a slap on the wrist for even the largest issues. it would take one hell of an isp to tackle that project.
even with the eula, it might be easier to tackle this from an "end user" aspect. band a massive group of people together (that were actually stupid enough to PURCHASE a copy of one of their OS's) and tackle it from a class action stance. when word gets out to the john and jane doe's that 1) they might get some money out of this, and 2) they might get some sort of promise or attempt at making what they had purchased secure.... then there could be a fairly large group forming to jump in line.
but again... it all boils down to this: what is that going to solve? microsoft has more money than god... and all a large lawsuit would do to them, would be to either make the cost of their software go up even further, which would jack the price of pre-fab computers up, which would cause sales to go down, which would cause hardware manufacturers to slow R&D.... (see where i am going with this? good. i'll stop then.) or, would make them spend what would be chump change to microsoft, to pay it off monetarily. in the end... you are still going to be left with a pile of crap for an operating system, and just enough money to buy a coke. the eual could be stretched or pulled in either direction to use in either argument. the end user argrees that they wont do a, b, c or d, and that the software company is not liable for x, y, and z. however, had the user known that said software would allow a violation of their rights as a us citizen, and a compromise of their privacy and personal information... they might not have purchased this software. there are plenty of holes in the eula... it would just take a good attorney to exploit them... wait... that sounds familiar.
i was wondering the same. i have to say though... i am glad crap like this happens. everytime it does, it makes it that much easier to turn another friend over to linux. you get them hooked... they never go back. its like crack-rock.