3 ms·
> Its extraordinarily easy to assume that everything is broken Just like it's easy to assume that everything is fine. Both are fallacies where personal experie
by pdkl95 10y ago
> Its extraordinarily easy to assume that everything is broken
Just like it's easy to assume that everything is fine. Both are fallacies where personal experience is projected on everyone.
This is why it's important to have the choice to use or not use automatic updates. You cannot centrally manage the incredible complexity of all possible PC configurations and use cases; the decision about when to install updates needs to be made locally (which includes the option of deferring that choice to the vendor).
- kyriakos 10y agoEven if you could disable updates how would you know which will cause problems to your particular setup?
- roadnottaken 10y agoYou don't, but you know if you have time to deal with an issue or if you're in the middle of a critical task and can't take the risk. Nothing worse than being in the midst of a high-pressure/stress event and being forced to update.
- noobermin 10y agoYou act as if people should prioritize downloading security updates over actually being able to reliably use their computer. For many people, they want to use their machine first before worrying about security. And as another sibling commenter mentioned, what about crunchtimes, are those the best times to figure out what works and doesn't?
- jjnoakes 10y agoIf ISPs blocked internet access to compromised machines until they were clean, as I think they should, people would care a whole lot more about keeping up to date. As it stands now, people don't see the problems they are causing (sending spam, participating in botnets, etc), so of course they don't care. But they should.
- jlgaddis 10y agoI work for an ISP. I would love to be able to do this. All that would happen, though, is that the customers would loudly complain until either a) we turned them back on or b) they switched to another ISP. We don't even monitor or check for such compromised machines anymore, however (other than my periodic scans for open DNS resolvers, NTP servers, devices with an SNMP community string of "public", and so on).
- runamok 10y agoWe are almost in a world with 1 Terabit ddos attacks from IoT devices. It scares me but ISP level blocking needs to come yesterday... http://arstechnica.com/security/2016/09/botnet-of-145k-cameras-reportedly-deliver-internets-biggest-ddos-ever/ http://arstechnica.com/security/2016/09/botnet-of-145k-camer...
- RandomOpinion 10y ago>You act as if people should prioritize downloading security updates over actually being able to reliably use their computer. That's because they quite obviously should. An unsecured machine quickly becomes part of a botnet for spamming or DDoS attacks and is, in legal terms, a nuisance; see https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Nuisance https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Nuisance. Neither the infrastructure nor law has quite caught up to penalize individuals for this yet but I wouldn't be surprised to it happen within the next few decades as legislators finally catch up with technology.
- tunap 10y agowell, if application was on the end users' terms you could test on a dedicated machine not in general service. Or, you could wait until the initial batch releases' beta testers work out bugs & MS makes corrections for the subsequent, fixed releases.
- addicted 10y agoThey aren't equivalent fallacies. When everything is fine people are far less likely to report it than when something is broken.