4 ms·
My point was not that there's no reason for cash in real estate. You being up a real scenario, but my point is that the scenario I describe is so common and wel
by hirsin 8y ago
My point was not that there's no reason for cash in real estate. You being up a real scenario, but my point is that the scenario I describe is so common and well known that anyone with some contact with the system would know to bring it up. That the journalist didn't brings the rest of the article into question.
Imagine someone writing that anti-virus brings pain with it, because it has a negative side effect on programs that need to shim and redirect system calls. Yes, it does, because the vast majority of the time that use case is a virus. If that's all they wrote on that front you'd wonder if they really understood computers.
- AnthonyMouse 8y agoBut that's always the argument people who want to ban things present. Bad people are using it. It's implied by the context. The article's point is that good people are using it too and getting rid of it hurts them as well -- or hurts them worse, because criminals have alternatives that are only available if you break the law (or have the margins that come from black market trading). And people do make that argument against antivirus. It detects things that aren't viruses and not things that are. Half the non-tech people with Windows PCs have antivirus and twelve pieces of malware installed at the same time. So if it has high cost and low effectiveness then why have it?