6 ms·
There are lots of free anti-virus solutions available. The problem is not availability: it's letting people know that these things exist and then (more importan
by samdk 17y ago
There are lots of free anti-virus solutions available. The problem is not availability: it's letting people know that these things exist and then (more importantly) having them actually take preventative action. The second one is difficult though: it's hard enough to even get people to keep their operating systems up to date (remember Conficker?).
Also, the idea of a distributed country-wide virus scanner is terrifying. Who are the 'good guys'? Do you really want them having access to your computer at any time?
- chrischen 17y agoThat's the main point of a government mandated system. All computers must be sold with one. You have the choice of disabling it of course, but it would be included by default so the computer-illiterate would be protected without further action. They'd also won't become unwilling participants to DDos attacks.
- anamax 17y ago> That's the main point of a government mandated system. All computers must be sold with one. What govt would resist the obvious temptation?
- chrischen 17y agoWe have a government mandated military. Most governments do. What keeps them from using it to enforce it's will?
- samdk 17y agoSpying on your citizens and enforcing martial law are two very different things. The US already (illegally) spies on its citizens. Giving it more ways of doing so is not a good idea.
- chrischen 17y agoWell then the US does not have to do that then. They could just pay for our free McAfee or Norton... A credit perhaps even to allow us to buy it for free with a new computer. Then the guys at McAfee or Norton can use this to curtail infections because they now have access to more computers, whereas right now they only have access to those willing to pay for their stuff. My point was that if we can keep in checks and balances from the military from being abused, we can do the same for national computer security.
- TeHCrAzY 17y agoAnd that's happily another reason why it's a terrible idea. Norton and McAfee are terrible virus scanners (Norton especially)
- ErrantX 17y agoWhy? There are plenty if free and often better systems. And even if the gov funded it why would there be an uptake in use. Then you have the issue of unmaintained systems. Most machines friends give me to fix already have a virus scanner bt are still infected. No, as already said this is not a funding problem it is an education one.
- synnik 17y agoI see two main problems with your arguments: 1) Security online is an international problem. One government cannot solve the problem, even it were a good idea. 2) Your arguments comparing this to the military are fundamentally flawed. The US military has its basis in the Constitution, and has been refined by many further laws/acts over the course of US history. That structure is what keeps them in line. No such structure exists for your proposal.
- anamax 17y ago> We have a government mandated military. Most governments do. What keeps them from using it to enforce it's will? It's a whole lot of work to do so. Govts are lazy. Waging war on their people is hard work, so they tend to avoid it. "Misusing" equipment or information is easy, so they do it. Remember "Joe the Plumber"? As soon as he hit the news, various govt flunkies were rummaging through govt databases looking for dirt and releasing it to the press. (And, in at least one case, they either made up stuff or didn't know the law.) And no, they don't do that as a matter of course whenever someone is on TV. And yes, Repubs are probably no better. That's why we can't fix these things by voting for different people - we have to take away their toys.