MS's security chief suggests 'Net tax to clean computer

[JMH]

Microsoft's security chief suggests 'Net tax to clean computers

How will we ever get a leg up on hackers who are infecting computers worldwide? Microsoft's security chief laid out several suggestions today, including a possible Internet usage tax to pay for the inspection and quarantine of machines.
Most hacked PCs run Microsoft's Windows operating system, and the company has invested millions in trying to fight the problem.
Microsoft recently used the court system to shut down the Waledac botnet, introducing a new tactic in the battle against hackers. Speaking at the RSA security conference in San Francisco, Microsoft Corporate Vice President for Trustworthy Computing Scott Charney said that the technology industry needs to think about more "social solutions."

Source -
Microsoft's security chief suggests 'Net tax to clean computers

 

[seekermeister]

Now MS wants the taxpayers to pay for their cost in enforcing WAT.

 

[n0th1n9]

How about we just format all of our computers at once world wide and make it a holiday.

 

[dmex]

More about getting money from Linux, Apple, Unix users, the young and old etc... for fighting the stupidity of the few users who just dont care about viruses on their machine, if they did then they would take measures to remove them.

Education would go further and allot better than a tax because then they might learn something about how to combat the problem themself, a tax would just let people continue to be ignorant. :sarc:

 

[seekermeister]

For anyone that might think that this is a good idea, it should be kept in mind that taxes is how the government controls most things, and the idea of MS and the government joining hands to rule the internet doesn't conjure up a pleasant image.

 

[Adamd]

Talk about asking people just to switch to Linux or Apple then LOL.

No one is going to want to pay just because Windows can get messed up by user error.

I can't support paying at all. If that would be serious then I would considering switching myself. Maybe to that Chrome OS lol.

 

[win7clutz]

I don't think MS or the feds could ever regulate the net... It would revert back to where it started, a bunch of individuals with servers in their closets. Enforcement would be a nightmare and the Internet "Underground" would have the support of the thousands of retailers that are reliant on the billions being made on the net...

Just an opinion...

 

[Adamd]

I don't think MS or the feds could ever regulate the net... It would revert back to where it started, a bunch of individuals with servers in their closets. Enforcement would be a nightmare and the Internet "Underground" would have the support of the thousands of retailers that are reliant on the billions being made on the net...

Just an opinion...

I agree. Just to much money invested in the internet and even more people using it. I think it would be impossible to monitor everything and then you has to ask about privacy as well.

Think how big the internet is and how many people are connected to it. Just not possible.

 

[seekermeister]

I think that MS has proven that it has no interest in anyone's privacy, or the welfare of people in general.

 

[Adamd]

I think that MS has proven that it has no interest in anyone's privacy, or the welfare of people in general.

While I would agree with you if this was years ago but as of today I think they are starting to care a little bit.

Not caring created Vista. While I liked it the general public hated it and by not listening they saw the damage. They seemed to take in what people were complaining about and fixed it up nice for Windows 7.

Now on the privacy issue that is still questionable

 

[seekermeister]

Putting out a better product doesn't demonstrate any caring or conscience, only an interest in their bottom line.

EDIT: It should be taken into account that the bottom line is heavily influence by the amount of control that one obtains. or vice versa, the amount of control determines the bottom line.

 

[win7clutz]

Putting out a better product doesn't demonstrate any caring or conscience, only an interest in their bottom line.

EDIT: It should be taken into account that the bottom line is heavily influence by the amount of control that one obtains. or vice verse, the amount of control determines the bottom line.

Agree, and would further argue that the net is a Monster that no single entity can control...

 

[seekermeister]

Not exactly true. We are on the verge of a one-world government, and that beast wouldn't have a problem with controlling the internet at all.

 

[win7clutz]

Without starting a policical discussion, I don't see the US ever become part of a one-world government. I realize that the "touchy - feely's are wanting to take us there but don't believe it will happen.

 

[seekermeister]

That's fine, I would never attempt to cause you to change your belief, but mine is not going to change either.

 

[win7clutz]

Didn't attempt to change it.... Regards-

 

[neo101]

I don't think MS or the feds could ever regulate the net... It would revert back to where it started, a bunch of individuals with servers in their closets. Enforcement would be a nightmare and the Internet "Underground" would have the support of the thousands of retailers that are reliant on the billions being made on the net...

Just an opinion...

I agree. Just to much money invested in the internet and even more people using it. I think it would be impossible to monitor everything and then you has to ask about privacy as well.

Think how big the internet is and how many people are connected to it. Just not possible.

Why do you think 'they' have produced thousands of acres of 'SERVER' Farms?

Milk cows or pull wool over the eyes of 'sheep'?

 

[dmex]

Why do you think 'they' have produced thousands of acres of 'SERVER' Farms?

Milk cows or pull wool over the eyes of 'sheep'?

More machines, higher taxes, more money

 

[seekermeister]

Why do you think 'they' have produced thousands of acres of 'SERVER' Farms?

Milk cows or pull wool over the eyes of 'sheep'?

Baa.

 

[severedsolo]

if the uk government have their way we're ALREADY getting a broadband tax (or "levy" as they like to call it) to pay for the rollout of "superfast" broadband (read, as fast as it should be but BT were allowed to not bother upgrading their network), IMO a worldwide broadband tax (which is effectively what we're talking about to make this even feasible) isnt going to happen