Death to the Virus (writer)

If you think it is still cool to program a virus and unleash terror on the computing world, think again. If NY Time columnist John Tierney has his way, he would make the buggers walk the green mile and fry them alive. After Sven Jaschan was convicted for creating the Sasser worm with a relatively light sentence (21-month suspended sentence and 30 hours of community service), Tierney was rightly incensed and made the case that “society might benefit more from executing a virus writer than from giving a lethal injection to a murderer”. After all the economic argument for handing out the death penalty was to prevent future economic damage to the society, he argues:

“It is worth more to execute a worm writer than it is to execute a killer. He estimates that the benefit of executing a murderer is roughly $100 million, the value of the about 10 murders prevented by the deterring effect of an execution. Viruses and the like cost the $50 billion a year, Landsburg writes. If a single execution of a virus write could deter just one-fifth of 1 percent of all that malicious coding for just one year, the world would gain the same $100-million benefit we earn by executing a killer.”

Of course, he takes the extreme way out. Viruses have become a serious menace to the society but no one has died yet. Although I once nearly died when my data was wiped clean by a virus. My tech spiritual guru (tech support) admonished me instead for failing to back up my data. So it is my fault that my data was erased, and not the bugger virus-writer’s. It is almost like scolding the girl for dressing skimpily and getting raped (I seem to come up with weird analogies lately). But as I understand it, virus writers will flourish as long as it is cool to bring down a company’s website or steal someone’s electronic data. Most of them are simply teenage pranksters trying to prove a point; uber-geeks whose talents could be utilized some place else more constructively. I don’t know about the law but if you wipe out my data, I seriously can kill (hackers, I am just kidding; tussi great ho! Whew! that was close).

On the other hand, Tierney has a lighter side too; he suggests an even worse punishment for virus-writers: “working 16-hour days answering helpdesk inquiries in an AOL chatroom using an uncool nickname like KoolDude.” What punishments can you suggest?


Related Posts

  1. And, now another Olympic Moment
  2. Why I write
  3. Polio in Indonesia…again!

  • http://lifeisalemon.blogspot.com Squared

    Though I respect NYT more than other news sources, sometimes they just do as badly as indiatimes.

    Had it not been for the virus-writers, Microsoft would have probably become even more evil than what it is now. At least, due to security issues with Microsoft products, people are a bit aware of alternatives, if not buying them.

    And some times, people just deserve the ill-effects of viruses. If they had not clicked on those goddamn links, exes and other such stuffs, spammers and virus writers wouldnt have had the incentive to keep going on creating piles and piles of that shit. Apparently, its working upto some extent thanks to some really dumb behavior of general public.

    I aint complaining about the virus-creator. Not me.

  • http://ipatrix.com Patrix

    Squared, I don’t hate them much either unless of course they take me down then all hell breaks loose. Like Steven Johnson says, everything bad is good for you; I guess as long as there are suckers in this world, virus-writers will keep software companies on their toes.

  • Vipul Anand

    Boy oh Boy,

    Since you chose to walk on the streets, you deserve to be run over; since you chose to eat, you deserve to be poisoned!! Some logic.

  • http://www.vulturo.com Saket Vaidya

    I don’t quite agree with you Patirx

    The ideas is – If you live in a house, you should guard it – If you own a computer you should know how to protect it

    If you click on those exes and pifs in email attachments, or happily click on “I Agree” on ActiveX dialog boxes without even bothering to see what it is – you don’t deserve to use a computer in the first place

  • http://fingeek.blogspot.com fingeek

    Hullo? A computer is pretty much an appliance, not very different from a cellphone or a toaster or a microwave. Anybody who deliberately sabotages its operation is guilty of a crime. Saket’s argument here is very much like the “Girl asked for it because she was dressed skimpily” one used for rape.
    The need to guard a computer against viruses arises because there are virus writers out there in the first place. Just like the need for home security systems arose because there are burglars out there.
    And the other argument is as specious as saying “Burglars are good, because they keep the cops efficient and the people vigilant”.
    Sometimes, very important data is lost, and the economic costs are pretty huge. I believe the crime is as serious as a break-in, and the punishment should be similar. No-body absolves a teenage prankster when he robs someone, so why use that excuse for hackers and virus writers?

  • gaurav

    Death penalty for a break in ….. ???

    (What are guys smoking now – a – days)

  • http://ipatrix.com Patrix

    Interesting discussion!

    Saket, however I have to disagree with you. The break-in will also be considered wrong regardless whether I choose to safegaurd my computer or not.

    The point I observed in the NY Times article was that is economic harm comparable to physical harm? The death penalty is suggested as a detterent for murder but it hasn’t succeeded so why would it succeed for dissuading virus-writers?