3 ms·
I 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.
by synnik 17y ago
I 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.
- chrischen 17y ago1) I agree. Unfortunately a unified human government is not in the near future, but having one whole country, especially one as well connected as the United States, secure itself can cut into the power of botnets or viruses. The US can also set an example, for other countries to adopt. (This is all assuming that distributing anti-viral software by the gov't can keep up with self-propagating viruses). 2) My point is that such a structure can be created for my proposal too. Simply letting the government contract out to multiple private corporations, or providing subsidies for antiviral software, is one way to prevent "big brother" from controlling computers.