Obviously, since this technology hadn't existed before, Microsoft hadn't anticipated that some folks would hijack the API and use it to get people to install software that will spy on them. You can't plug holes in a bucket you haven't made yet!
I disagree. Being a long-time developer, I remember when ActiveX came out and what it took to make a control "marked safe for scripting". It was simply marking it by the control's developer as safe for scripting! C'mon now, it doesn't take a Phd to figure out that arbitrary code running with local-COM control rights (socially engineered or unwittingly enabled) *will* be used at some point for malice.
I do agree with you that "... it's just too easy to fool people in the digital world..." However, there must be responsibilty for technology created/deployed and therein, I believe, Microsoft failed miserably. I mean, if a lowly developer such as myself could see the implications, how could veteran architects within Microsoft's R&D not?
The problem is, we already do subscribe to the folly of ownership in the most significant computer-based aspect: commercial software. IIRC, it is not uncommon for companies to have in their EULA's snippets which state "exclusive use licensing" being granted for the consumer, yet ownership is reserved by the company.
Don't get me wrong, I'm not in favor of this style of business. It's just that, perhaps, the **AA groups are taking a page from our own industry.
Slashdot Mirror
I disagree. Being a long-time developer, I remember when ActiveX came out and what it took to make a control "marked safe for scripting". It was simply marking it by the control's developer as safe for scripting! C'mon now, it doesn't take a Phd to figure out that arbitrary code running with local-COM control rights (socially engineered or unwittingly enabled) *will* be used at some point for malice.
I do agree with you that "... it's just too easy to fool people in the digital world..." However, there must be responsibilty for technology created/deployed and therein, I believe, Microsoft failed miserably. I mean, if a lowly developer such as myself could see the implications, how could veteran architects within Microsoft's R&D not?
Can you imagine a beowulf cluster of these? :-D
Elain from Seinfeld: "You mean, like a sweater?" :-D
The problem is, we already do subscribe to the folly of ownership in the most significant computer-based aspect: commercial software. IIRC, it is not uncommon for companies to have in their EULA's snippets which state "exclusive use licensing" being granted for the consumer, yet ownership is reserved by the company.
Don't get me wrong, I'm not in favor of this style of business. It's just that, perhaps, the **AA groups are taking a page from our own industry.