1. This site uses cookies. By continuing to use this site, you are agreeing to our use of cookies. Learn More.

News Microsoft moots digital healthcare tax

Discussion in 'Article Discussion' started by CardJoe, 3 Mar 2010.

  1. CardJoe

    CardJoe Freelance Journalist

    Joined:
    3 Apr 2007
    Posts:
    11,343
    Likes Received:
    292
  2. DarkFear

    DarkFear New Member

    Joined:
    14 Oct 2003
    Posts:
    271
    Likes Received:
    1
    I'm sorry no, I'm not paying because some idiot doesn't have the common sense to NOT get his/hers/its PC infected with crapware in the first place.

    Common sense people! Stay out of sites that can install malware on your PC. Lacking that (and I suspect that would be a rather significant portion of “average” PC users) install an antivirus/malware program or get someone to do it for you.
     
  3. faugusztin

    faugusztin I *am* the guy with two left hands

    Joined:
    11 Aug 2008
    Posts:
    6,859
    Likes Received:
    247
    Microsoft should finance it themself, they get enough money from licences.
     
  4. RichCreedy

    RichCreedy Hey What Who

    Joined:
    24 Apr 2009
    Posts:
    4,699
    Likes Received:
    172
    education would be better, i try to educate my customers, i make sure they have at least the basic protection.

    i advise my customers to set 2 different profiles, 1 for the adults, and a limited 1 for the kids

    i advise them to scan their computers with antivirus, and antimalware software, i advise them to at least check windows update the second tuesday of every month. etc etc
     
  5. Neogumbercules

    Neogumbercules New Member

    Joined:
    14 Aug 2004
    Posts:
    2,464
    Likes Received:
    29
    Well that's a pretty terrible idea.
     
  6. yuusou

    yuusou Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    5 Nov 2006
    Posts:
    1,975
    Likes Received:
    266
    I say yes! If Linux and Mac users don't pay, or pay the percentage of linux and mac computers that are infected. LOL!

    Naaaaa, just kidding. I've never heard such a terrible idea. It's up to us nerdier people to help out the less tech-aware. Also it's up to the computing department in companies to not get their companies PCs infected... DUH!
     
  7. RichCreedy

    RichCreedy Hey What Who

    Joined:
    24 Apr 2009
    Posts:
    4,699
    Likes Received:
    172
    isp's could do more than they currently do, they could advise their customers that the amount of traffic on their network is caused by the customer having adware/spyware issues

    they could block known adware/spyware networks.
     
  8. l3v1ck

    l3v1ck Fueling the world, one oil well at a time.

    Joined:
    23 Apr 2009
    Posts:
    12,945
    Likes Received:
    17
    I could understand ISP's blocking access for infected PC, but there's no way people would pay a tax, especially people who pay for AV software and those who don't use Windows.
     
  9. Kúsař

    Kúsař regular bit-tech reader

    Joined:
    23 Apr 2008
    Posts:
    317
    Likes Received:
    4
    We work for ISP who disconnects such PCs from internet. People than have to "clean" their PC and make a call to ISP to get their PC connected to internet again. If it happens 3 times per month they have to pay for reconnecting. It actually makes these people do something about it and most of them buy a decent antivirus...unless they've got some "expert" friend who installs cracked antivirus infected with some deluxe malware and make them spend more money on reconnecting than on legal AV software :D ...
     
  10. Guest-16

    Guest-16 Guest

    You already pay for the fact that people smoke, drink too much, don't exercise, drive badly or have kids knowing they will be ill from genetic diseases like asthma etc

    /devils advocate.
     
  11. Delphium

    Delphium Eyefinity enabled

    Joined:
    18 Mar 2007
    Posts:
    1,406
    Likes Received:
    35
    I could potenitaly understand a model of malware insurance perhaps, where by the users can rock up to their local comp shops and get a system checkover and clean, I do not however agreee with a taxation, as a nerd I already find myself fixing other poeples machines just like the vast quantity of readers here, so I would be displeased if I have to pay a compulsory tax to cover the cost of the failings by numpties whom have a lack of common sense. Education is key, lets say if this was in place and a user got infected, they would take to the comp shop and the tech staff their would simply scan it using software, software that would be more than likely readily aviable to the public already, so again, why not just educate the users on these softwares and best practices.
     
  12. CharlO

    CharlO Member

    Joined:
    21 Oct 2009
    Posts:
    97
    Likes Received:
    1
    Sooo you should be paying to clean the pcs of the people who uses Windows, download viruses and open the photos from last night! They're wild! Check them out. malicious.com/picwild0164.jpg.exe!!??
     
  13. Arkanrais

    Arkanrais New Member

    Joined:
    14 Jul 2007
    Posts:
    406
    Likes Received:
    5
    bigboobs.exe
    yaaaaaayyyyWHAT?!
     
  14. iPEarl

    iPEarl I have a Mouse in my Purse!

    Joined:
    8 Apr 2008
    Posts:
    12
    Likes Received:
    0
    I wanna Infect him with all sorts of crap and watch him go die in hell... Like the worst possible slow way of death for this old Fart
     
  15. eddtox

    eddtox Homo Interneticus

    Joined:
    7 Jan 2006
    Posts:
    1,296
    Likes Received:
    15
    This would probably be cheaper and more effective than existing AV's in the long run. You say we shouldn't have to pay a tax, but most people pay more on AV suites than the tax would be. Maybe this should be done with the tax money from ISP's, though.

    As for saying that it's MS's fault, come on now. Yes, there are security issues with windows, but the vast majority of infections happen because users are uneducated/greedy/cheap etc.

    If you drive your car through a bed of nails and get a flat tyre, it's not Michelin's fault.

    As long as the company has made/continues to make reasonable efforts to maintain/improve the security of its products, all is fine. The main reason Linux/Macs/ARM don't have as much malware as Windows/x86 is because they have a much smaller user base.

    I would wager that most of the users on this forum, for example, run their windows/x86 based PC's for months or even years without getting viruses/malware. Therefore, it is possible, therefore, there is at least some user-component to most infections, therefore Microsoft isn't solely responsible and shouldn't have to foot the whole bill.
     
  16. thehippoz

    thehippoz New Member

    Joined:
    19 Dec 2008
    Posts:
    5,780
    Likes Received:
    174
    yeah at least he's trying.. the problem is big

    I was ranting about the average pc user the other day.. they really do need something that's idiot proof and fast like kaspersky- something that does it's job without any configuration

    alot like gaming today =] the end user isn't the same as it was years back.. we could record demos and trade small demo files like in quake- allowed you to edit pov in editors.. today the console crowd can barely work a nice ui, they just want to play (can't wait to smash those buttons).. we don't see nice bucktooth features anymore

    same thing with the people on the botnet.. they just use it for certain tasks and don't want/care to configure anything.. if we could somehow figure a way to protect those machines (force integrating av into windows update sounds like a good plan) with options for better users to do whatever they want.. it can only help imo

    the tax part.. who knows what that's all about- like mentioned we get over taxed for almost everything
     
  17. leexgx

    leexgx CPC hang out zone (i Fix pcs i do )

    Joined:
    28 Jun 2006
    Posts:
    1,350
    Likes Received:
    8
    99% of Fake ware or botnet software that gets installed is there Own fault for letting it install even under XP you norm get at least 1-2 warnings under Vista or win7 you get 2-4 warnings (i am takeing the pop up blocker into account as well the run save cancel warning and windows UAC prompt )

    Microsoft should not foot the bill for User fault actions, with Vista and win7 i call the UAC the do you wish to install this virus button Yes/No (most click Yes......), the User should Foot the bill not every one els when they do things that they should not do

    at some point i may start to offer protected services for some of my customers, the admin account will be passworded and they have 2 limited accounts with Full UAC turned on

    i have seen some ISPs that do that not sure who thought,
    funny thought as most would not do that even if it was cracked anti-virus, most fake antivirus software have payloads that can stay hidden for an week or so then they turn back on, and Norton 2010 does not detect every thing nor do other companys (do not start flames about what anti-virus is best please or i report it) malwarebytes and spybot seem to pick stuff up months before anti-virus software's Should be detecting them more so norton as it has norton insight 2.0 (like av.exe it inserts it self into the exe path so if you remove av.exe you can no longer run exe programs)

    most anti virus should make it far more easier to report virus file's faster (like if you scan one file it should give you the option to remove it and then report it)


    like the other day i just got an pc back on the internet (not virus related) and just as i was going to leave he was about to open an DHL virus nearly taken his head off as he was about to press RUN so had to stop him, did not want to waste 1 more hr having to remove that as well
     
  18. shanky887614

    shanky887614 New Member

    Joined:
    13 May 2009
    Posts:
    203
    Likes Received:
    0
    this tax is going to be useles everyone knows antivirus programs dont protect you from virueses the best most can o (if they dont have a firewall or sanbox) is remove them so this is just worthless

    just get soemthing like comodo that when set up properly will stop all viruses or malware in tracks
     
  19. thehippoz

    thehippoz New Member

    Joined:
    19 Dec 2008
    Posts:
    5,780
    Likes Received:
    174
    yeah leex.. for the average user the uac is way over their head.. if you know what your doing, you'll never see the prompt come up (use task scheduler and combo with vb scripts to load trusted software at login)

    and software has gotten better, correctly written software doesn't need to trip uac and that leaves you with installers, trojans/virus.. and installers are a one time thing
     
  20. shanky887614

    shanky887614 New Member

    Joined:
    13 May 2009
    Posts:
    203
    Likes Received:
    0
    actually uac isnt that great, it dosnt stop every thing thats why im a firm believer that on top of every antvisus/anti malware program you should have a hips (host-based intrusion protection system) this then stops all viruses and malware from working and infecting important files and this works even if it dosnt detect its a virus

    for example my hips pop's up evertime a program tries to edit a system file or registry file (unless i set program to trusted during install or later) and the reason this works so well is becasue it treats all programs as untrusted untill you tell it otherwise
     
Tags: Add Tags

Share This Page