geek, nowhere in that article is there anything but a vague implication that malware or viruses are even remotely involved. All we know is the guy took his laptop to get it fixed because
he thought he had a virus- a self-proclaimed computer newbie. I know people who think that if their icons are in the wrong place they got a virus. The entire article has
nothing to do with malware, viruses, or infections of any kind, and everything to do with social engineering. Your entire argument is a post-hoc fallacy.
And next you wile tell me that guns have nothing to do with murder,
Yes. that will be exactly what I tell you. guns have nothing to do with murder just as ropes have nothing to do with people being hanged. Are you trying to place responsibility on inanimate objects or something? Guns can't kill people unless somebody is holding it. Making guns inaccessible will certainly reduce the amount of people injured or killed by them, but it doesn't begin to address the social issues underlying why that happens in the first place. All of this is a straw man argument erected on your part, of course.
therefore we should let everybody have as many guns as they might want.?
since you are in the U.S, I will go by the fact that to my understanding your constitution pretty much says that. Other countries differ, including my own, but that's largely irrelevant since again this entire thing is a irrelevant argument you've created to try to divert my attention from the original issues.
And people who have computers are never stupid?
Non-sequitor.
And if other people get a virus is will not hurt you? Really?
irrelevant.
And you will never never get any kind of virus, Trojan or worm on your PC? Really?
Having an Anti-virus is not even close to a guarantee that you won't get infected. I haven't had a infection, or any unidentifiable process or service since I switched from Windows XP. the new UAC and security systems implemented by Vista and 7 that so many people like to complain about are to prevent the most common infection vector- the user. Of course if you go ahead and allow them anyway it's not very effective, but that's no different then with AV programs.
And your PC has never crashed? And you think that would never have anything to do with a Malware attack?
The only crashes I've had in the recallable past were caused by video card issues.
Hey, are you the same person that said there was no such thing as a DNS attack?
There isn't. It's called DNS poisoning. Perhaps you should use the proper terminology, then maybe your non-sequitor straw man arguments will have some relevance.
As I stated earlier, the problem is larger than what you can imagine. Somehow, there is a popular thought that anything computer related just can not readily become harmful to people. "After all, they are silicon, we are carbon. They can never hurt us."
None of this has even a remote relevance to the anything you said previously.
And yes, if there were not computers, criminals would still exist.
Wow. I totally didn't know that. thanks for enlightening me. (That was sarcasm, by the way)
Many kinds of Malware are spread by computers that function well. Any PC could infect a number of others over any kind of low security connection.
That doesn't even make sense. Yes, the idea of many forms of malware(specifically, worms/ worm hybrids) is to spread through networks. I fail to see the relevance, however. You then facilitate your argument by adding in the concept of a low security connection, and then you imply that in order to combat these worms and viruses we need to have a strong defense of AV programs. Of course, the concept of preventative medicine and actually
not having a low security connection didn't for some reason occur to you. Additionally, any form of malware, any kind of infection, will have a process appear, in either windows or linux systems. Sure, rootkits can be used to hide them, but in order for the rootkit to get there (as with the malware) another program needs to install it. Is it possible through exploits? yes, probably. but again, that's all pretty redundant on account of the fact that it's also possible to get past AV programs. your idea of basically living in a padded room and being wrapped in about 20 layers of straight jackets is anything but a workable methodology to use a computer.
Malware is a tool of a criminal mind. Having tools to identity Malware helps everybody to avoid some scams. No, not all scams. So if we can not stop criminals, we should just give up? Not me. And nether should you. Or anybody. Do not cave in, keep up the fight!
what the *censored* are you talking about? We are talking about Anti-
VIRUS programs, not Anti-malware programs. they are not one and the same.
Additionally, as I noted about 3 times so far (and additionally with my references to how irrelevant your various arguments here are), wether the person in the article had a virus or not is
entirely irrelevant to the rest of the story. For all we now it was a expository created by the author of the article. For all we know the entire article is a fabrication. Listening to your constant ranting about how everybody should be on their guard at all times because that abandoned kitten that you found on your doorstep 4 years ago could be infested with biological malware that rewrote it's base code and changed it's instintive behaviour to create a photographic memory of your facebook account details makes me realize that there is a large portion of the population that would consider themselves "tech savvy" who apparently could not tell a disk file from a pair of weasels.
