Think of all of the patrons who never got to read that book because of this evil evil man!
A New York Times article titled Attack of the Zombie Computers Is Growing Threat talks about botnets and other malicious programs that use a person’s computer for uses, often illegal, of hackers and kiddie-scripters. The article talks, in very inflammatory language, about how security is easily compromised.
I just find it amusing how it mischaracterizes a lot of things; it suggests IRC(which it takes a lot of effort to vaguely explain, and spells it I.R.C.) is an integral part of a lot of hacking efforts, which really it’s not, and laughably suggests that people buy pirated/illegal software on online auctions. If someone is getting illegal software, they’re getting it off of some kind peer-to-peer service, IRC, newsgroups, or bittorrent, all assuming that it isn’t self-built with open source tools. It would be completely moronic to suggest people, at least knowingly or intelligently, buy pirated software.
Again, the mass public cannot handle simple facts about the reality of the technology they use because they are not willing or capable to actually understand it, and again a media outlet caters to this ignorance.
If people aren’t willing to learn about the technology, why would they think they would want to know how their lack of knowledge makes them vulnerable?
SYDNEY, Jan 4 (Reuters Life!) – An Australian bank has apologized for issuing a credit card to a cat after its owner decided to test the bank’s identity security system.
Time to buy some kitty litter 🙂
Image from xkcd.com
To so many people, their computer and technological affiliations are becoming a way of life, a basis for their identity. Mac vs. PC vs. *nix/*BSD, Internet Explorer vs. Firefox vs. Opera.
It’s not about the quality of the technology, it’s about making oneself feel superior through the competition of technology. We, as individuals, don’t even have a real stake in the battle, but because of our use and affiliation with it we end up feeling compelled to defend it as to justify our own past decisions.
If you’re a ___-fanboy and identified, in one way or another, as such then it means you consider the well-being of whatever ___ as important to your own well-being and sense of worth. To defend your viewpoint, then, much to the annoyance of other people who don’t want to hear about how ___ is so great a thousand times, is for the sake of your own self-esteem.
But seriously, stop, because I’m not putting your self-esteem over my own sanity.