Re: Bios programming...

[dk <dk () pwarchitects com>]

Matt Marooney wrote:
{snip}
> I'll disregard the troll comment as this
> is the first time I've NEEDED to post anything to this list.  I've been
> reading it for years now.  Thanks.

Aww then, you really have no excuse for this post Matt. It's off-topic 
and the scope of your "problem" covers too much ground. :)

That said: I think you need get off a mailing list, throw down some hard 
cash, hire a EET and someone that can /really/ write code for an OS, 
*PROM chips, embedded systems, etc. But I think this is a rather 
involved scenario that is gonna take a lot to provide a real working 
solution, so I hope you have some funding and patients. Just go hit up a 
hungry DeVry/ITT grad or something if you need a shoe-string budget.

While you do sound sincere Matt -- though a bit naive, if you don't mind 
me saying -- I think the business model for this device is morally & 
socially bankrupt and sets a bad precedent all around. I don't care if 
other people have done it already, it doesn't make it right (see precedent).
I question any ethics of monitoring a person, even with their leave & 
even if it is for an *evil* addiction. They obviously don't have good 
judgment about the consequence of their actions to begin with, no? Why 
do we assume that they are of sound mind about the choice of giving this 
type of consent?

In a light hearted tone:
	This sounds much like all the variety of exercise equipment that is 
pandered out to Fat Americans who just want a quick fix to their 
problem. A but later the expensive machine ends up sitting in a garage, 
unused, until it's thrown away & the person remains fat.

In a heavier tone:
	I ask you to please, _please_ question who you are working for and how 
else they could use this after you are gone. Swords cuts both ways Matt, 
as I'm sure you know. Would you like this used against you to stop you 
from practicing religion online? Politics? What if the technology gets 
exported and helps a regime to monitor it's citizens to maintain control?

Anyway. I think this is the wrong solution to the actual problem. I 
would much rather these clients spend money on a good psychoanalyst than 
some half-baked technological chastity-belt solution. Especially if this 
money is derived from Tax's. The problem lies WITHIN THE PERSON, not 
within the device delivering the porn. Do you have hard stats that this 
approach really works for the client and community? Or do you just want 
to profit off of their problems while believing you are helping?
It smacks of like letting a recovering Alcoholic keep beer in his/her 
house, but with some $3000 filter on the lid to only provide H20 when 
drank? AA would be cheaper and more effective.

--
dk
_______________________________________________
Full-Disclosure - We believe in it.
Charter: http://lists.netsys.com/full-disclosure-charter.html