RadioEar Posted February 11, 2005 Report Share Posted February 11, 2005 (edited) well, this question is just a try to get a discussion started. Someone mentioned in "should roots' hands' be tied?" that people who can't maintain a computer shouldn't own one. I've been thinking about this... Are computers weapons? Computers could cause lots of destruction - you could argue that even civilian planes can do so too, but pilots' licenses and everything regulate them...drivers need licenses to drive, and farmers need licenses to use ammonium nitrate. (computers as in PCs, don't count microcontrollers) Computers in the hands of ignorant users are dangerous. Discuss. :) <{POST_SNAPBACK}> I voted everybody, geeeesh! "Computers in the hands of ignorant users are dangerous." Well... actually the most experience users are the most dangerous, you know the big time coders, the guys that know systems inside and out, are the most dangerous. They (some of them) are the hackers and writers of viruses that cause all the trouble with anything that has something to do with computers. The average "Joe" sitting at his own computer at home or in the office doesn’t pose much of a problem... only to his own machine. The system of licensing (obtain a right) to control a product or an action, good or bad, is a system of regulatory graft Edited February 11, 2005 by RadioEar Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Havin_it Posted February 11, 2005 Report Share Posted February 11, 2005 I'm with Sean on this one. I think we are seeing computers of all breeds getting closer to being secure and idiot-proof out of the box, but that responsibility needs to be taken more seriously by not just the OS vendors but the stores and manufacturers too. Remind me, when exactly did XP SP1 come out? Quite a while before I got my laptop, I'm pretty certain. But when I fired it up, it was in vanilla SP1 condition - cue about 100MB worth of Win updates. At least now, with boxes shipping with SP2 installed, there's _slightly_ less risk of being 0wn3d in minutes, but hey, another week, another vulnerability... Is it too much to ask for the shop to keep their systems bang up to date? Right now I doubt if the PFY who serves me at PC World even comprehends how frequently Win updates come out. They seem to love assessing the punter's personal knowledge to work out how bad they can fleece them, why not temper that with enough compassion to hand out a couple of basic safety tips if thought necessary? That, plus a mere paragraph about common-sense good practice in the Quickstart guide, would stop a lot of folks becoming botnet bitches and a pain in my royal ass. The shops would surely benefit here too, as they wouldn't have Joe Blow back in their face two days later wailing 'It broke itself!!' We already can be really elitist with ol' Joe just thanks to our immense knowledge, but let's not make the elite a gated community! Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
arthur Posted February 11, 2005 Author Report Share Posted February 11, 2005 I voted everybody, geeeesh! "Computers in the hands of ignorant users are dangerous." Well... actually the most experience users are the most dangerous, you know the big time coders, the guys that know systems inside and out, are the most dangerous. They (some of them) are the hackers and writers of viruses that cause all the trouble with anything that has something to do with computers. The average "Joe" sitting at his own computer at home or in the office doesn’t pose much of a problem... only to his own machine. The system of licensing (obtain a right) to control a product or an action, good or bad, is a system of regulatory graft <{POST_SNAPBACK}> yeah, but as an analogy which is safer: a kid at the wheels of a 200-horsepower sports car or an experienced race driver? your argument that who knows the system inside out are the most dangerous is a very very old argument - there are numerous examples that both prove and disprove that, but the question is at what scale? what percentage? And you say that home machines don't pose much of a problem...where do you think DDoS attacks causing millions in damage come from? food for thought. :) Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
RadioEar Posted February 11, 2005 Report Share Posted February 11, 2005 yeah, but as an analogy which is safer: a kid at the wheels of a 200-horsepower sports car or an experienced race driver?A computer is not a race car... you can not die from your computer. Unless, you’re talking about some apocalyptic event involving computers at which the danger was made by the “in-the-know” person or persons, not the computer illiterate or the common “Joe”. In besides, the hacker has to know system, know how to reach all the "back doors" in that system, the "holes" if you will. your argument that who knows the system inside out are the most dangerous is a very very old argument - there are numerous examples that both prove and disprove that, but the question is at what scale? what percentage?Yes it is an old argument but we had a student hack our network some time ago and he showed the network administrater the "holes" he was able to enter. He was learning about that system and was exploring a little. No doubt the admin "sealed" the "holes". And you say that home machines don't pose much of a problem...where do you think DDoS attacks causing millions in damage come from?arthur; who does all the hacking and virus writing? Certainly not the everyday "joe", it takes somebody who knows how to do it. :D Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
jlc Posted February 11, 2005 Report Share Posted February 11, 2005 cracker/phrackers = bad hackers = good Media has spun the terms into what they wanted, ;-) Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
reb2 Posted February 11, 2005 Report Share Posted February 11, 2005 cracker/phrackers = badhackers = good Media has spun the terms into what they wanted, ;-) <{POST_SNAPBACK}> not just the media, on the ntlworld (ISP) website i noticed the term "hacker" referring to cracker! i notified ntl about this very point and their reply was.......... "the word "hacker" has become the standard descriptive term to mean a person who hacks in to a machine to cause damage". i replied with... "but a cracker is the bad guy/gal, a hacker hacks code to improve it!!! ntl is perpetuating the incorrect message and should get their facts correct and stop advertising the incorrect terminology after all you are the isp (and you should know better), and your less educated users will just blindly believe what you state (and in this case you are incorrect)! this was two years ago, i still await the reply!! roflmao Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
jlc Posted February 11, 2005 Report Share Posted February 11, 2005 this was two years ago, i still await the reply!! You'll probably be waiting longer than 2 years :D Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Darkelve Posted February 11, 2005 Report Share Posted February 11, 2005 who should own computers? The answer is easy: Micro$oft! Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
JeffSmdk Posted February 12, 2005 Report Share Posted February 12, 2005 (edited) Everyone should be allowed to own a computer. It's all about freedom. Nobody should be denied something as wonderful as a computer just because they are perceived as a "dumb noob". The malware problems associated with the ignorance of noobies is more due to the lack of training/awarenes, and to that swiss-chees-security-house-of-cards-sorry-@ss-excuse-for-an-OS Windows. Seriously, Windows is flat out a terrible design - default admin accounts, the registry, ActiveX, the GUI occupying the same memory space as the kernel, Internet Explorer being tied in with the kernel, dll hell, hodge-podge API, flemsy file structure, and many other design flaws ... are all legitimate, sound technical reasons for Windows being a Cracker's paradise. This is not anti-MS zealotry, it's technical fact. MS basically threw together an OS, stealing from other people's ideas, and it was desined to be quick to market and gain the dominant position it enjoys today, rather than being secure and robust. "Good enough" has always been the MS mantra. Don't let the Windows apologists convince you that Windows security problems are due to it being "the big target", or because of noobie ignorance. Those are lame excuses. Unix was originally designed for in house use for AT&T, by the brightest minds in the industry, to be a secure, industrial strength, efficient, multi user OS that could withstand the rigors of the world's largest consumer of information technology (AT&T). It had since been fully optimized through colaboration with universities, and then released as a multi platform commercial OS to run the largest of servers and super computers. Then GNU/Linux was/is a free, open source re-implimentation of that rock solid design. The result is a kernel that operates in it's own memory space, separate shells and GUI, no registry and only separate config files in different locations, a solid file system, separate user accounts with no root access and only write/execute access to their own files, clean, elegant modularity, and the list goes on. So after my overly long post, it boils down to computing problems not being due to ignorant noobies, but very bad design in Windows. The Unix, or Unix-like platform is the best thing we've got. Edited February 12, 2005 by JeffSmdk Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Havin_it Posted February 12, 2005 Report Share Posted February 12, 2005 Everyone should be allowed to own a computer. ... You have, with this knowledgeable and detailed post, practically assassinated your own argument. Knowing as much as you do, I'm willing to bet that any Windows boxes in your care are seldom troubled by cracking/virii. I'm now wondering whether the question should be 'who should own which computers?' To which my considered response would be: - For your first computer, while Ma & Pa are still doting on you with lots of cash, get a Mac and (allegedly) never worry much about security. - When you've gotten your head round the Mac, got bored one day and started poking under the hood and want more, get a Linux box. - Forty years later, when you're a Linux guru with a full understanding of OS and networking security, do something really brave and get Windows. Guidance Counsellor Banana has spoken Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
JeffSmdk Posted February 13, 2005 Report Share Posted February 13, 2005 Everyone should be allowed to own a computer. ... You have, with this knowledgeable and detailed post, practically assassinated your own argument. Knowing as much as you do, I'm willing to bet that any Windows boxes in your care are seldom troubled by cracking/virii. Guidance Counsellor Banana has spoken <{POST_SNAPBACK}> Actually, my intention was to demonstrate that a good design, like Unix, gives the noobie theluxury of being ingnorant without it being dangerous, and does not require someone with my knowledgeto be safe. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Havin_it Posted February 13, 2005 Report Share Posted February 13, 2005 Valid point, but would you in good conscience sell a n00b a box preinstalled with ANY current distro and not expect them back two days later wailing "NOTHING WORKS!" ? Windoze can drive experienced (read:weary) people into the arms of Linux, but it coddles n00bs in a way Linux can't match right now. Linux to the demanding beginner with no real desire to learn high-level computing theory just to get their modem working, can just as easily drive them into the arms of Windows. (Or Macs if they've gained anything from the experience, though that would mean a hardware change..) Sorry this is probably veering OT. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
jlc Posted February 13, 2005 Report Share Posted February 13, 2005 In case anyone cares, my wife says I shouldn't own a computer :chessy: Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
bvc Posted February 13, 2005 Report Share Posted February 13, 2005 are you kidd'n?...I say I shouldn't own a computer Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
jlc Posted February 13, 2005 Report Share Posted February 13, 2005 :P Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Join the conversation
You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.
Note: Your post will require moderator approval before it will be visible.