Microsoft wants to put infected PCs in rubber room.

[goldengoose]

That would leave about 3 computers on the internet. Hmmmmmm.......

 

[Zidane24]

Just one question.

Can my rubber room be padded?

Rubber gets cold...I hope its heated

 

[CarlTR6]

Definitely a big NO! As someone posted above, it might be be OK if it were 100% error free. Hmm, maybe a $1000.00 payment to the owner for each false positive? That would be motivation to be error free.

 

[neo101]

My previous post was deleted about this along with several others. What if the authorities start deliberately infecting servers/pc's of people they dont like?
It's a way of cutting off information sharing > Censorship!

 

[gladson1976]

Would this apply to web servers too
Since most of the malware/spyware come from the internet, why not cut out the root instead of the branches ?

 

[yodno4759]

What a brilliant idea! Punishing careless people for the buggy m$ operating system and application software.

 

[RST101]

Why punish the end user?

Surely the blame must lie with the site it came from and like gladson say's why not target the root of the problem instead of skimming the surfaces.

It could never be implemented anyway but what a crazy crazy idea.

 

[Lanthus20]

sounds really stupid.

First of all it's not their computer to take.
Second what if they get it wrong and it's not infected
Third where would the money come from? I doubt Microsoft would pay for it themselves.

 

[madtownidiot]

Quarantine infected computers and servers that spread malware.. hmmmm ..that would mean no more ask.com, yahoo, aol, the entire country of North Korea... yeah.. right.. it will never happen

 

[Grimmjow]

Who owns the internet, Micro$oft? What about freedom of choice? We (guys that are using Windows OS), we'll need to install AV software that will phone home if finds something, and will lock our access to the net for greater good? What about online tech support? Or we will have access just to them...Or I will have to call them by phone from my country and spent like a lot of money for that call...prisoners in our homes... What is this, dictatorship?
Huh, yea, right...

 

[Zen00]

Maybe instead of cutting off all internet access, it shunts you off to a "walled garden" area where you have limited access to content, nothing that you can infect, and access to tech support for removing the viruses.


The time when this would be most damaging would be at the beginning, when millions of computers are infected. If we were to flip the world today, and have all but a few computers virus free, I think we'd be singing a different tune. The reason we have strong opinions on this is because it's a strong subject that is a big problem. We want a safe internet, but are we willing to pay the price for it?

 

[madtownidiot]

That would leave about 3 computers on the internet. Hmmmmmm.......

and all running linux

 

[gladson1976]

Maybe instead of cutting off all internet access, it shunts you off to a "walled garden" area where you have limited access to content, nothing that you can infect, and access to tech support for removing the viruses.


The time when this would be most damaging would be at the beginning, when millions of computers are infected. If we were to flip the world today, and have all but a few computers virus free, I think we'd be singing a different tune. The reason we have strong opinions on this is because it's a strong subject that is a big problem. We want a safe internet, but are we willing to pay the price for it?

As I said earlier, wouldn't it be more prudent and easier to isolate the sites that distribute all the malware/spyware/viruses.
If the sites that distribute are shunted off to a "walled garden" area where they have limited/no access to content, then there will be nothing that they can infect.

 

[Zen00]

Microsoft just managed to successfully shut down a bot net using the law. Maybe if the government legal system wasn't so overflowing, we could push through a mass of lawsuits that would shut down all the major nets.

 

[HJA]

Microsoft just managed to successfully shut down a bot net using the law. Maybe if the government legal system wasn't so overflowing, we could push through a mass of lawsuits that would shut down all the major nets.

The problem is people will get malware or what ever even if you warn them. Send out 10,000 emails saying click here. You will get the nastiest PC virus known or win $10,000. How many do you think will open it.....I know a few that would.

 

[zone23]

Who owns the internet, Micro$oft? What about freedom of choice? We (guys that are using Windows OS), we'll need to install AV software that will phone home if finds something, and will lock our access to the net for greater good? What about online tech support? Or we will have access just to them...Or I will have to call them by phone from my country and spent like a lot of money for that call...prisoners in our homes... What is this, dictatorship?
Huh, yea, right...

I thought Google owned the internet.

 

[MiguelAngelXP]

of course it's a very bad idea!!!!!! , is that MS executive stoned???

 

[Element]

Punish the stupid internet user who doesn't know any better but pays a lot of people's salaries. From the computer company they bought the PC from, to the ISP, to the tech who fixes and cleans the machine.

OR

Punish the overseas writers of virus's with tougher international laws, tougher laws on the servers that push out these virus's?

Hmm I'd rather punish the party responsible for the infection rather than someone who's just dumb and got infected. Besides I have seen sites that push a virus and they don't even know it, through an ad. It's not always the site who is behind the virus push, it goes a lot deeper. Heck I remember when Personal Antivirus was RAMPANT taking thousands of peoples $49.95 to clean their machines, when they just infect themselves further and then distribute the virus themselves. Was it their fault for getting the virus, somewhat but not 100%, what was important was developing the proper scanning tools and software to remove it.

Bottom line, they are on crack if they think this will actually go through.

 

[seekermeister]

I find it eerie that on threads of this kind, that after the initial dust settles, that there always seems to be those who would contemplate any system based on any flavor of the nonsense proposed by MS. It is not reasonable to expect everyone to understand the situation sufficiently to ensure 100% elimination of viruses, trojans, etc. If it were that simple, why doesn't MS design an OS that eliminates the possibility of their existence in the first place? Or why doesn't Google detect sources of infection and eliminate those websites in their search returns?

This and their comment about raising an internet tax seems to me to be similar to the tactics used by politicians who "leak" or chooses some underling to make a public statement, to see how it flies. Personally, I do not want to see anything of this sort even get off the ground. MS has absolutely no interest in public welfare, they are simply posturing themselves in a position of greater power and influence than they now have. They already have greater power than they can handle as it is.

 

[andyparks]

i think ms need putting in a rubber room