Re: so, how would you justify giving users security? [was: Re: botted hosts]

[Gadi Evron <ge () linuxbox org>]

J.D. Falk wrote:
> On 04/04/05, Gadi Evron <ge () linuxbox org> wrote: 
>
>
> > Most people won't care about their "freedom" if they can do whatever 
> > they want by asking for it. Most users want Web, Mail and IM. Three 
> > things. How are any of these guys who could easily get their privileges 
> > (and your responsibilities) back again even going to guess that some big 
> > right is being taken away? They have complete freedom and x9000 more 
> > safety. They can even sign a paper stating exactly that.
> >
> > So, costs savings on bandwidth and support. Less net abuse. Ouch - less 
> > demand on AV sales? Run the numbers people.
>
>
>         Problem is, this conversation is mostly taking place amongst
>         geeks -- and most of us geeks /do/ want open access.  So the gut
>         reaction is "oh shit, I won't be able to run my personal mail
>         server at home anymore!" even though the consumers of consumer-
>         grade services don't know how to do that, and don't care.

Okay, as a geek; do you want to be on an ISP where you will get scanned 
1000 times a minute or just twice?

As a geek, do you want service-on-demand or just getting all the lusers 
around you roaming free with phasers?

As a geek, do you not want the Internet to still be here *completely* 
OPEN and FREE in the future?

Lastly, I suppose that as a geek ISP, one might want to sell more 
bandwidth. After all, the more sh*t that goes through the tubes the 
bigger tubes people buy.

Between spam, spyware and worms, not to mention scans ad attacks, I 
suppose that a large percentage of the Internet already is pay-for-junk?

        Gadi.