Camelot One
Premium,MVM
join:2001-11-21
Sarasota, FL
clubs:
| Just not needed
I agree that spyware is a annoying, but on the flip side, do we really want Congress deciding what a programmer HAS to put in their application? Wouldn't this just use a hot button issue to pave the way for more Congress mandated software requirements?
I really don't think anything needs to be done. I have no spyware on my system, and on the rare chance it does find its way in piggybacked to something else, it gets removed. It isn't that hard. Stupid people deserve what they get, don't legislate us all to the lowest common denominator.
--
AMD XP2500+ @2300mhz/ Asus A7N8X Deluxe rev 1.04/ 2x 512Mb Kingston HyperX PC3500/ WD 120Gb on serial/ Gainward GF4 4600/ Enermax 465P-VE/Custom water cooler |
|
bokamba
Chengdu Rocks
Premium
join:2002-04-05
Falls Church, VA
 ·Verizon Online DSL
| Just because people don't know how to use a computer well doesn't mean they deserve to be spied upon. I can get rid of spyware, but I don't know how to thwart a wiretap; does that mean I deserve to have that happen to me?
Programmers need to be responsible when creating applications that have the potential to degrade people's privacy. |
|
cyberthugin
join:2002-03-12
Kew Gardens, NY | reply to Camelot One
I agree with you on the lowest common denominator part, probably some dumb aol users complaining to congress about spyware and shitz. |
|
Varangian
join:2002-12-08
Collinsville, IL
|  Back in the 70s..
We used to have a mandatory HS course called consumer education.
They told us about credit, interest, lying merchants, and many of the pitfalls of operating in a caveat emptor environment.
Perhaps we can usurp a little time from " daddy's boyfriend" and teach the kids about all the scum waiting for them on the internet? |
|
Voyager2K2
join:2001-10-04
Wayne, PA
 ·Verizon FIOS
| Best Advice I Found Was @ BBR
Always choose "prompt" for Download signed ActiveX controls.
It's a pain to click "yes" but it closes the barn door to these scumbags.
That still leaves Java open to abuse.
I have always a problem with Java. The security it offers just plain sux.
Another big step M$ has taken to to dissallow pop-ups in the next service pack of IE 6. |
|
Camelot One
Premium,MVM
join:2001-11-21
Sarasota, FL
clubs:
| reply to bokamba
Re: Just not needed
said by bokamba  :
I can get rid of spyware, but I don't know how to thwart a wiretap; does that mean I deserve to have that happen to me?
If you tried to install a free device that would allow you to make free long distance calls, and in the fine print it said "this also includes a wire tap" then yes, you absolutely deserve to have a tap on your line.
Spyware doesn't just magically appear. Now if we were talking about only tracking cookies, I would have a different view, but in general Spyware is the free software version of a free -ad-banner- supported website. If I have to go the extra mile, and use a pop-up stopper to get the site for free...fine. Don't require me to pay for it. The internet costs money, and I would rather it be paid for out of the advertisers pockets than mine.
--
AMD XP2500+ @2300mhz/ Asus A7N8X Deluxe rev 1.04/ 2x 512Mb Kingston HyperX PC3500/ WD 120Gb on serial/ Gainward GF4 4600/ Enermax 465P-VE/Custom water cooler |
|
bokamba
Chengdu Rocks
Premium
join:2002-04-05
Falls Church, VA
·Verizon Online DSL
| You're right that it doesn't magically appear, but the install dialogs are often vague or misleading, so even careful people like me have installed spyware without realizing it. They need to be up front about the fact that the software you're installing will hit you with ads or send information back to its creator. |
|
ArchAngel21x
MacFan Pro
Premium
join:2001-10-28
Lincoln, NE | Good Work
I just wanted to chime in and say I thought that was a great interview. I hope to see more of these in the future. |
|
The Folsom
Kindly Shut Your Noise Hole.
Premium
join:2003-01-31
Yucaipa, CA
·Verizon FIOS
| Fine print
If it has too much fine print, the answer is "NO". If the fine print is too small, the answer is "NO". If the fine print is too confusing or filled with too many "legal" looking words, the answer is "NO".
Keep it simple, and I will read it. If I agree, I will click to that effect. If not... The installer goes in the recycle bin.
That's how they get you. Get you reading this "literature" that you finally get bored and scroll to the bottom and click "I Agree"... Then you get a dose of popups, targeted ads and flash bullsh!t...
Adware just isn't worth it to me.
"NO".
--
I once accidentally spilled spot remover on my dog and he disappeared. Take a look at these sites: »www.prepaidlegal.com/info/kfolsom (Pre-Paid Legal Memberships)»www.prepaidlegal.com/go/kfolsom (Business Opportunity)»www.folsomtech.com |
|
SeVeReD
join:2001-02-24
Oceanside, CA
| easy to see it and easy to remove it
BBR sounds much more concerned and understanding of the spyware situation then the CDT. CDT seems to just be saying people just need to be educated about spyware...hmmm
All I want is when a program is running on my computer I want to be aware of it, and if I don't want said program running, I want to be able to EASILY REMOVE it...
and not have it return when i reboot my computer.\
definition of spyware is... a program not easily seen to be running, and a bitch to remove once found. |
|
Varangian
join:2002-12-08
Collinsville, IL | SeVeReD: just go for the Bone Saw!
this is one place where the civil war's medical techniques are perfect: Amputate!! |
|
TheNerdShow
join:2003-11-16
Anchorage, AK
2 edits | reply to bokamba
Re: Just not needed
If you suspect you are running spyware, the intelligent thing to do is look and see for yourself. Most windows machines will let you view the task list by pressing ALT-CTRL-DEL. From there it is a simple matter of ending-task on those beasties, and searching the web for uninstall instructions. We've made this process even easier!
--Programmer & Consultant. Author of SafeTasks |
|
bokamba
Chengdu Rocks
Premium
join:2002-04-05
Falls Church, VA | I know that. Most people don't. I think I've accidentally installed spyware in one instance. |
|
SanJoseNerd
Premium
join:2002-07-24
San Jose, CA
| Standardize the License Terms
One of the main problems is that you never know what to expect in a software license agreement. Much spyware "disclosure" is buried deep inside lengthy license agreements that nobody ever reads and that few users would understand even if they did read.
In most consumer transactions, this is not allowed. For example, when a product is advertised as having "a one-year limited warranty" you know what you're getting. There may well be a page of fine print, but you don't have to read it to understand that if the product breaks within a year you can return it for free repair. In fact, any provision within the fine print that sharply deviates from ordinary consumer expectations would be struck down by the courts as unenforceable.
Before spyware came along, consumer software was well on its way to standard license agreements. I remember in the early days of the PC, different software companies put out significantly different license agreements, and there was much debate about what users could do, couldn't do, or had a right to expect to be able to do, with the software they purchased. But over time, the industry and the public developed a tacit understanding of what was appropriate and expected when software was purchased. This was great progress, a sign of the industry maturing, which made both customers and vendors much more willing to buy and sell software.
But now spyware has undone all that progress. Suddenly, you can't know what you're getting unless you plow through endless fine print, and sometimes not even then. This is bad for everyone. I personally have declined to use software just because I didn't know the vendor well enough to be certain they wouldn't embed some sort of spyware. This sort of consumer uncertainty, which is rapidly growing, will ultimately make it much tougher to sell software and therefore hurt the industry.
What we need is some way to return to days of just a few years ago, when consumers could install software, even free versions and trial versions, and be confident that they know what they're getting. This can only happen with some sort of standardization of software licenses. Whether this should be done by law, or in some other way, I don't know. |
|
