**CHRIS**

Glad to see you were just poking fun. I agree with you that only one available OS for the end user when they purchase new machines is a sad state of affairs.

Linux seems to have missed the whole virus issue, but and I do mean BUT, Linux machines can be dangerously susceptible to hackers who will take advantage of open mail servers etc. I have seem my fair share of distros in the past where this has been an issue. Not the biggies like fedora, but still... I like that Linux allows me to configure everything manually. I use Slackware 11. I like that there are so many different ways of doing things. It takes someone with knowhow to configure a Linux machine to be safe and I guess the vendors are trying to sell a product that just does everything when its turned on. What they dont seem to care about is will it continue to do everything in one year's time.

Well case closed, I guess we are in agreement then. Lets all have a good new year and make heaps of money doing the things we love and even more doing the things we dont like so much... :)

**David**
The issue here is not so much about the "people" who use the internet, but the monoculture operating system they are handed when the purchase a PC.
My 75 year old mum knows NOTHING about the internet, viruses, spyware etc. But beacuse I gave her a PC setup with Linux, she doesnt need to! :)
Oh, and making money from cleaning up windows pc's is not that much of my business - I was just poking fun :)

I think to provide a certain order on the net, you would have to start at the start and rebuild one from scratch.

I think the question is, if there was a 'law' for being on the net, who is going to enforce it?

**CHRIS**
There is nothing wrong with making money through helping others with problems they have. But forcing folks to spend their well earned dosh on your services based on a perceived future problem they may have is venturing both into the realms of science fiction.

We can not predetermine that people will make mistakes. Remember the film, "Minority Report?" The pre-crime laws led to the downfall of a "free" society.

My question then Chris, just who are we protecting by enforcing installs of Anti-malware and Anti-virus and firewall software. Are we really protecting the end users or are we protecting the vendors of the software by increasing sales of their products or are we protecting YOU - the support guy who gets to install all this stuff.

Really we should be educating folks and letting them learn by their mistakes. It only takes one virus that deletes all ones photos to force one into learning their lesson.

Hey! But some of us make our living off the dumbasses!
If everyone was as clever as the readers of this blog I'd lose lotsa work...
Viruses/spam/spyware/windoze reinstalls keep me nicely busy thanks! :)

I agree Geoff - let's go build our own internet...with black jack, and hookers!

Im not so sure about the comment that ISP's should make it obligatory to install anti-malware or anti-virus software before being allowed online.

What if:
1. the particular brand of anti-virus software is considered by the consumer to be an unacceptable solution?
2. The antivirus software brings the machine to a snails pace because its so heavy on resources such as cpu cycles or RAM?
3. What if one simply feels (as I do) that the ISP service should be as unobtrusive as possible. I consider my connection to the internet to be an essential service just like the electricity supply to my house and by extension my PC and Router.

Ultimately ISP's, IF they were to be involved at all, should be taking steps to PROTECT their customers from malware and spam rather than forcing their customers to comply. ISP's should be held responsible for the proliferation of spam. Telstra and Xtra both have anti spam filters and they are VERY effective.
Most offices, mine included, has anti spam filters at the email exchange / gateway so the end users are less exposed.

When we switched to ADSL this year, (used to be with Woosh! previously Walker Wireless but switched when we relocated) we could not get our server to successfully receive email. We host our own mailserver and webserver. Turns out that BY DEFAULT!!! any XTRA connection comes with Port 25 closed. We lost 3 days of emails before anyone at Xtra bothered to tell us. What a nightmare that was! ISP's should allow transparent connections to their customers and if customers wish to opt in to ISP oversight on their connections they can do so for an EXTRA fee at their OWN expence.

The whole drivers license alegory is a little short sighted. What about the danger of peer to peer and copyrights infringments. The internet is less linked to the car that we need to be licensed to drive. Its more the motoway we drive on. One doesnt need a license to drive on a motorway per se. Only to drive the car. See what I mean?

Leave the Internet open to the rest of us who know what we are doing.

I dont think that assuming everyone is dumb and playing big brother based on that assumption is very 21st Century. Or are we following the world trend of becomming more and more reliant on those bigger and more powerful than us to make our decisions for us.

Dave Latham.

c'mon geoff
thats not like you at all
tests will make f all differance (just like roads,
the more licenced drivers,
the safer the roads will be)
people are normally stupid
same with internet
testing is not the answer

Totally agree with Geoff on this one. I have always said to my other mates that people should have a license before they get on the net. You can have all the firewalls, anti virus/spyware etc in the world on your PC, but if you don't have common sense like Geoff said, you are DOOMED!!!

The ISPs could do more in this regard.
They could give out CDs with an assortment of anti-malware which they *must* install before being allowed to login.
Then the login process would also need to run a program that checks if they are running these processes and keeping reasonably up to date with signature files. There would be a warning if they dropped too low with their protection, and if not rectified within 10 days they would be blocked.

Sadly, Geoff, I have to agree with you fully. Sometimes I just wish that natural selection played a more active role in Internet use...

Dave