> >> What I don't want to see which you are advocating... I don't want to see > >> the end users who do take responsibility, drive well designed vehicles > >> with proper seat belts and safety equipment, stay in their lane, and > >> do not cause accidents held liable for the actions of others. Why should > >> we penalize those that have done no wrong simply because they happen > >> to be a minority? > > > > I agree, on the other hand, what about those people who genuinely didn't > > do anything wrong, and their computer still got Pwned? > > Fiction. > > At the very least, if you connected a system to the network and it got Pwned, > you were negligent in your behavior, if not malicious. Negligence is still > wrong, even if not malice.
So, just so we're clear here, I go to Best Buy, I buy a computer, I bring it home, plug it into my cablemodem, and am instantly Pwned by the non-updated Windows version on the drive plus the incessant cable modem scanning, resulting in a bot infection... therefore I am negligent? Do you actually think a judge would find that negligent, or is this just your own personal definition of negligence? Because I doubt that a judge, or even an ordinary person, could possibly consider it such. ... JG -- Joe Greco - sol.net Network Services - Milwaukee, WI - http://www.sol.net "We call it the 'one bite at the apple' rule. Give me one chance [and] then I won't contact you again." - Direct Marketing Ass'n position on e-mail spam(CNN) With 24 million small businesses in the US alone, that's way too many apples.