mailing list archives
Re: How much longer..
From: Scott Francis <darkuncle () darkuncle net>
Date: Thu, 14 Aug 2003 08:44:35 -0700
On Wed, Aug 13, 2003 at 04:09:05PM -0700, dr () kyx net said:
These kinds of inflated damages estimates are dubious at best.
If you've lost that much productivity, odds are you should be pointing
fingers at inapropriate redundancy and planning/procedures in your
computing facilities and not blaming some toy programs written by kids
with too much time. This kind of financial loss hype/fear-mongering is best
left to politicians, and not technical discussions.
indeed - and yet companies claim these kind of damages, at least publicly,
whenever these worms come along (every month or two, it seems). Two questions
spring to mind: 1) where are these figures coming from, and 2) if they're
accurate, why in the world would a company make the same mistake that cost
them a million bucks last month, again next month? That's the kind of stuff
that gets executives fired (you'd think) ...
(note: the figures I posted were just gathered from publicly available news
sources. We all know how accurate reporters tend to be when covering
technical issues, so take them with a grain of salt. The point of the post
was, there are a great many companies out there throwing good money after
bad, month after month, without seeming to realize it.)
Scott Francis || darkuncle (at) darkuncle (dot) net
illum oportet crescere me autem minui
RE: How much longer.. Ejay Hire (Aug 13)
RE: How much longer.. Dan Lockwood (Aug 13)
RE: How much longer.. Fred Baker (Aug 13)