Path: utzoo!utgpu!news-server.csri.toronto.edu!rutgers!cs.utexas.edu!wuarchive!kuhub.cc.ukans.edu!mlab2
From: mlab2@kuhub.cc.ukans.edu
Newsgroups: comp.sys.mac.misc
Subject: Re: A modest proposal...
Message-ID: <27068.274fb96a@kuhub.cc.ukans.edu>
Date: 25 Nov 90 18:30:34 GMT
References: <~W|^{Z|@rpi.edu>
Organization: University of Kansas Academic Computing Services
Lines: 48

In article <~W|^{Z|@rpi.edu>, Garance_Drosehn@mts.rpi.edu (Garance Drosehn) writes:
> References:<1990Nov19.033747.29163@ux1.cso.uiuc.edu> <27013.27483646@kuhub.cc.ukans.edu> <1990Nov20.171542.8779@cunixf.cc.columbia.edu> <
> In article <9720@jarthur.Claremont.EDU> 
>            wilkins@jarthur.Claremont.EDU (Mark Wilkins) writes:
>> In article <1990Nov20.171542.8779@cunixf.cc.columbia.edu> 
>> >- You have no control over the extent of this virus.
>> >- You have no control over future modification of this virus.
>> >- You introduce another variable into problems people may have.
>> >- You cannot repair viruses with it.
>> >- Given that it's copying itself over and over, there are a number of
>> >   opportunities for corruption.
>> 
>> 
>>   What if it gives the user an opportunity to refuse?  Throws up an
>> informational dialog and lets the user choose whether to install it?
>> Provides a means by which to remove it if it causes trouble?
>> 
>>   I think that if people were aware of such a thing it might not be so 
> bad,
>> as long as they were given the chance to refuse infection by such an
>> anti-virus virus.
>> 
>>   I'm not necessarily posing this question seriously, but do you think 
> this
>> might lighten some of the ethical difficulty?
> 
> I think it's a bad idea.  I think it's also unethical to be mucking around 
> with other peoples disks and files, even to "protect" them.
> 
> Garance_Drosehn@mts.rpi.edu

I agree that the whole concept (even) is unethical to consider.  I do not
'rationalize' it, I merely proposed it.  Personally?  It occurs to me that this
MAY be the way of the future.  I agree, I don't like it the idea at all. 
Consider however the trend:
 computer user interface --> friendlier (serving less sophisticated users)
 computer operating system --> more complex (from the programmers perspective - 
                               friendlier for the user implies a degree more
                               complexity to attain this friendliness)

I would suggest that viruses will persist.  I would also suggest that viruses
of more and more sophistication (given the platform and a sort of Darwinistic
selectivity) will proliferate.  I would finally suggest that anti-viral
inncouations (so to speak) perhaps in the form of a counter-virus, may very
well be in store for the future of computers.  Call me a prophet of doom or
such, I don't advocate these practices, I merely consider.

john calhoun