On 6/9/2010 12:17, Joe Greco wrote: >>>> 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.
One can argue (and I will) that there is indeed some culpability because the buyer bought the cheapest version of everything and connected it to a negligent provider's system. -- Somebody should have said: A democracy is two wolves and a lamb voting on what to have for dinner. Freedom under a constitutional republic is a well armed lamb contesting the vote. Requiescas in pace o email Ex turpi causa non oritur actio Eppure si rinfresca ICBM Targeting Information: http://tinyurl.com/4sqczs http://tinyurl.com/7tp8ml
