Separate names with a comma.
Discussion in 'Indie Business' started by soniCron, Sep 20, 2006.
Interesting related story... Seeking a Safer Internet
"Censorship" implies they squelched access to the site. They didn't do that.
Check a dictionary before you chastise my lexicon:
censor - To remove or suppress
suppress - To reduce the incidence or severity of
Save the 3rd grade vocabulary lessons for GameDev.net.
I have a program called HideWindow on my website that's been tagged by various antivirus and anti-spyware vendors as malware. Avast flagged it as a trojan until I demanded they correct such a false allegation, and they responded by changing its classification to "hack tool". It is unfortunate that hackers have used it to distribute malicious scripts, because the program itself is designed for legitimate purposes. Hidewindow uses the Win32 API, so any programmer familiar with the API could write software to run hidden programs in a matter of minutes. Why not focus on the actual scripts instead of legitimate tools that might be used for unlawful purposes? That kind of thing really gets on my nerves.
Fighting malware is an admirable goal, but paranoid warnings are not the solution. I'd rather see the law punish the distribution of malware as it punishes the distribution of viruses. At least then we'd have a well-defined standard rather than the various and sometimes broad standards employed by individual anti-malware companies.
I watched a good documentary recently focussing on the topic "What if Google turned evil".
The basic concern was that if we let one central body (however benevolent) control the bulk of information flow then we are basically begging for trouble in the long term. I wish I could recall the title, as it was well worth viewing and was directly in line with Daniel's concerns.
Is it this, David?
I don't know why a lot of people is worried about the google global info domination because alexa still puts google on no.3 and we can allways count on MS (no.2) to save us from this monopoly
I am trying to say ... that it's hard to talk of monopoly if there are 3 big players there. And top of net is still so dynamic that if someone becomes "evil" or dumb another one can quickly take his place... just the example of google shows that... another one is youtube vs. google videos where AFAIK you-tube came out of nowhere and kicked his ***
Hey, nice researching, err... Googling Yes - that's the one.
Alas, it appears that this censorship is causing problems...
I think good arguments are being made on both sides. I'm having a hard time agreeing/disagreeing with either.
So, instead I'll spin it in a direction that no one has gone yet. Maybe this is a Lawyer created idea...
John Doe wants to download the latest and greatest game, for free. He does a "gameXYZ cracked" google search and then clicks on the warez link... wham! His computer is infected to the point of non-functioning. He could look at the situation in one of three ways: 1) his own fault for being stupid, 2) sue the unknown hidden warez site, 3) sue the gazillion dollar Google corporation for causing him to 'destroy' his machine. At least here in the sue-happy US, I'm afraid many would choose #3 if given the option.
Maybe this is the internet equivalent to the label that comes on hairdryers that warn you to not use it while still in the shower.