«

In article <bhe8gp$4bj$>, E. Scrooge wrote...
> Going by the average media computer geek cars are recalled if there's a
> chance of the cars being damaged from an attack by some other bastard.
> LOL
>
Aren't they talking about door locks that don't work in this case?

"colinco" <> wrote in message
news:...
> In article <bhe8gp$4bj$>, E. Scrooge wrote...
> > Going by the average media computer geek cars are recalled if there's a
> > chance of the cars being damaged from an attack by some other bastard.
> > LOL
> >
> Aren't they talking about door locks that don't work in this case?

Because they were smashed off by a criminal...

"colinco" <> wrote in message
news:...
> In article <bhe8gp$4bj$>, E. Scrooge wrote...
> > Going by the average media computer geek cars are recalled if there's a
> > chance of the cars being damaged from an attack by some other bastard.
> > LOL
> >
> Aren't they talking about door locks that don't work in this case?

Cars with door locks are still broken into. In some cases some people don't
even lock their cars, or they will hard a spare key on the car somewhere.
Not all cars have car alarms as standard either, one could say that car
manufacturers should be fitting the latest and best car alarm as well.
In a lot of cases if a person is killed while driving a car, that's just
simply bad luck. Only so much can be done to try to prevent it. Car
manufacturer recalls have covered many things over the years, but not damage
by another party. You don't even need to use the doors to get into a
convertible.

If you damage your cars computer tough luck. On one model you could jump
start it, then find that a few months later the mem-cal in the computer has
crapped out. There has been a recall where they found water could run down
into a car computer over by a kick panal, sealer had to be applied to
provent it.
Modern computers cases should have filters on them to let the air in but not
the damn dust that gets sucked in with it.

E. Scrooge

"Nathan Mercer" <nathan@4757979!!!SPAMSUCKS****mcs.co.nz> wrote in message
news:Jsy_a.115438$...
>
> "colinco" <> wrote in message
> news:...
> > In article <bhe8gp$4bj$>, E. Scrooge wrote...
> > > Going by the average media computer geek cars are recalled if there's
a
> > > chance of the cars being damaged from an attack by some other bastard.
> > > LOL
> > >
> > Aren't they talking about door locks that don't work in this case?
>
> Because they were smashed off by a criminal...

What's been happening with computer viruses for years is nothing short of
straight out vandalism, no different than some idiot rubbing a coin along
the side of a car or smashing the outside mirrors off just to be a pain in
the arse.
The worse case would be your average car bomber, and it's not likely that
any car recall is going to ever try to prevent it. Same with some bugger
putting sugar in your fuel tank, the idiots behind the viruses are much the
same in trying to do as much damage as possible.]

And here we see a damn thick computer geek on the TV Breakfast show this
morning trying to compare car recalls to some bugger that's trying to damage
someone else's software and computer.

E. Scrooge

"Nathan Mercer" <nathan@4757979!!!SPAMSUCKS****mcs.co.nz> wrote in message
news:Jsy_a.115438$...
>
> "colinco" <> wrote in message
> news:...
> > In article <bhe8gp$4bj$>, E. Scrooge wrote...
> > > Going by the average media computer geek cars are recalled if there's
a
> > > chance of the cars being damaged from an attack by some other bastard.
> > > LOL
> > >
> > Aren't they talking about door locks that don't work in this case?
>
> Because they were smashed off by a criminal...

What's been happening with computer viruses for years is nothing short of
straight out vandalism, no different than some idiot rubbing a coin along
the side of a car or smashing the outside mirrors off just to be a pain in
the arse.
The worse case would be your average car bomber, and it's not likely that
any car recall is going to ever try to prevent it. Same with some bugger
putting sugar in your fuel tank, the idiots behind the viruses are much the
same in trying to do as much damage as possible.]

And here we see a damn thick computer geek on the TV Breakfast show this
morning trying to compare car recalls to some bugger that's trying to damage
someone else's software and computer.

E. Scrooge

"Nathan Mercer" <nathan@4757979!!!SPAMSUCKS****mcs.co.nz> wrote in message
news:Jsy_a.115438$...
>
> "colinco" <> wrote in message
> news:...
> > In article <bhe8gp$4bj$>, E. Scrooge wrote...
> > > Going by the average media computer geek cars are recalled if there's
a
> > > chance of the cars being damaged from an attack by some other bastard.
> > > LOL
> > >
> > Aren't they talking about door locks that don't work in this case?
>
> Because they were smashed off by a criminal...

What's been happening with computer viruses for years is nothing short of
straight out vandalism, no different than some idiot rubbing a coin along
the side of a car or smashing the outside mirrors off just to be a pain in
the arse.
The worse case would be your average car bomber, and it's not likely that
any car recall is going to ever try to prevent it. Same with some bugger
putting sugar in your fuel tank, the idiots behind the viruses are much the
same in trying to do as much damage as possible.]

And here we see a damn thick computer geek on the TV Breakfast show this
morning trying to compare car recalls to some bugger that's trying to damage
someone else's software and computer.

E. Scrooge

"E. Scrooge" < (remove eye)> wrote in message
news:bhecqj$7pc$...

LOL
If I didn't have damn trouble trying to send that through the server for
some reason before.

E. Scrooge

Nathan Mercer wrote:
> "colinco" <> wrote in message
> news:...
>
>>In article <bhe8gp$4bj$>, E. Scrooge wrote...
>>
>>>Going by the average media computer geek cars are recalled if there's a
>>>chance of the cars being damaged from an attack by some other bastard.
>>>LOL
>>>
>>
>>Aren't they talking about door locks that don't work in this case?
>
>
> Because they were smashed off by a criminal...
>
>
Faulty weak design by Microsoft, fair and square.
No weaselling out of that Nathan.

In article <rCA_a.115569$>, "Nathan Mercer" <nathan@4757979!!!SPAMSUCKS****mcs.co.nz> wrote:
>"lily" <> wrote in message
>news:Rlz_a.11314$...
>> >>>Going by the average media computer geek cars are recalled if there's a
>> >>>chance of the cars being damaged from an attack by some other bastard.
>> >>>LOL
>> >>
>> >>Aren't they talking about door locks that don't work in this case?
>> >
>> > Because they were smashed off by a criminal...
>> >
>> Faulty weak design by Microsoft, fair and square.
>> No weaselling out of that Nathan.
>
>Yes, and the problem was fixed almost a month ago now.
>Its still illegal criminal activity to write programs that comprimise
>peoples computers

I didn't think it was illegal to do this ... in many places at least. Isn't
this one of the examples of technology getting well ahead of the legal and
ethical arguments ? ... otherwise how is spam still legal ?

Bruce

--------------------------------------------------------------------
Oook !
NOTE remove the not_ from the address to reply. NO SPAM !

On Thu, 14 Aug 2003 11:53:59 +1200, "Peter Kenyon"
<> wrote:

>When software manufacturers find out about a vulnerability in one of their
>products, normally (if they are any good) a patch is issued and made
>available for free.
>
>Is that not the equivalent of replacing a faulty door lock or car alarm?

Read yesterday's Aardvark to get my perspective on the matter:

http://aardvark.co.nz/daily/2003/0813.shtml

In short, Microsoft's attitude is the equivalent of responding to the
design fault in your new car's electronic door locking system by
sending you a letter saying "you can come over and pick up the new
parts but you'll have to fit them yourself or pay an expert to do it"

That would never happen in the auto-industry because consumers would
be outraged. Unfortunately, in the world of Big Bill, we've come to
accept such tactics as normal.

--
you can contact me via http://aardvark.co.nz/contact/