From: Reason (reason@exratio.com)
Date: Tue May 21 2002 - 16:38:32 MDT
--> Samantha Atkins
> Reason wrote:
>
> > --> Harvey Newstrom
> >
> >
> >>On Monday, May 20, 2002, at 11:38 pm, Robert J. Bradbury wrote:
> >>
> >>
> >>>Don't anybody ever tell me I didn't tell you so.
> >>>
> >>>Slashdot is reporting that the Kazaa network has been
> >>>hit by its first worm virus:
> >>> http://slashdot.org/article.pl?sid=02/05/20/2022243
> >>>
> >>>
> >>This also points out why spyware is so evil. Not only are they spying
> >>on you, but they are opening up holes into your system and subjecting
> >>you to their security decisions.
> >>
> >
> > Whatever happened to caveat emptor? The evil "they" aren't
> forcing anyone to
>
>
> In an age of exponentially blossoming information requirements
> to come to an informed decision and limited time, "caveat
> emptor" is itself an evil and irresponsible doctrine. No one
> has the time to check everything for themselves. You have to be
> able to trust the experts you deal with. When they act in an
> untrustworthy manner you have to have some recourse and get the
> word out before others get burned.
Caveat emptor includes the use of experts and making sure that your experts
are reputable through the use of trust networks. This isn't novel or new --
chosing doctors or lawyers is done exactly this way. I personally never buy
anything of significant value nor install software on my machines that
hasn't been reviewed a couple of times by groups that I have previously
concurred with. This is only sensible. Why do you feel that there is a right
to forge ahead and not pay for your lack of caution? You seem to expect
others to bear that cost for you -- hardly fair or equitable.
In this modern age, there is no excuse for being unable to locate and make
use of an expert group on any consumer good. The time spent in doing so is
recouped in the lack of later problems. Again, this is nothing new...you do
this when buying a washing machine or TV, so why should you expect not to
have to do it when downloading software that you will spend more time using?
> > install anything that they can't check out, read reviews of, or
> generally
> > act responsibly about. Would you randomly go out and put third
> party wheels
> > on your car without doing at least a little checking? This sort
> of thinking
> > (X is evil because it does something unpleasant or has bad business
> > practices that are completely avoidable with a little
> forethought) is part
>
> Today, much of the bad stuff is not avoidable with just a little
> forethought. In fields outside your expertise it is often not
> avoidable with a LOT of thought. We live under time, energy and
> computational constraints.
I disagree on the effort. Now if you were doing it personally, sure. But
there are experts and trust groups by the handful out there who will make
your life easier. Use the ones you agree with.
Life is complex; you have no natural right to stroll through it paying no
costs. Or rather, you have no natural right to expect "society" (e.g. other
people) to pay the costs you incur.
> > of the modern disease of denial of individual responsibility.
> "They're doing
> > evil, I was lazy/stupid and got eviled, please legislate so I
> can allow my
> > laziness/stupidity to grow in peace."
> >
> This is a lazy, stupid way to view the real world.
Hardly. I'm not the one expecting other people to freely pave the road I
walk for me. Why would I wish to live in a world full of people who are set
on training themelves out of everything that makes them different from my
pet cats?
Reason
http://www.exratio.com
This archive was generated by hypermail 2.1.5 : Sat Nov 02 2002 - 09:14:15 MST