... it is usually the USER's stupidity that has caused a catastrophe. Windows can't control itself, a user must guide it. And when that user is not experienced, windows cannot protect itself, therefore creating a security hazard.
"Well, the average computer user is going to pick dancing pigs over security any day. And we can't expect them not to." (http://www.schneier.com/essay-031-ft.txt)
Bruce's comment is directed to everyone that has or aspires to have any influence on form and function of systems and applications. Let's not blame users for not having the broad and deep knowledge needed to make the right decisions all the time. Blame system architects, applications developers and the PHB that disregard security as first-class system property. We presently do a poor job of managing complexity in things for which we are paid to know expertly. If you read/., consider yourself to be somehow responsible for what happens, and work to make it happen less.
This story ws covered on NPR last week (at least in the LA area). The reporter explained to the clueless what OSS was and the benefit of putting more cops on the street with the money saved. She then moved on talk about the "TCO" of going OSS, as if the status quo had none. Evidently coached (or brainwashed or funded) by MS or the reseller for the city.
I'd be amazed if LA were to switch. Pleased, but amazed.
Slashdot Mirror
This story ws covered on NPR last week (at least in the LA area). The reporter explained to the clueless what OSS was and the benefit of putting more cops on the street with the money saved. She then moved on talk about the "TCO" of going OSS, as if the status quo had none. Evidently coached (or brainwashed or funded) by MS or the reseller for the city.
I'd be amazed if LA were to switch. Pleased, but amazed.