Replying to LO30923 --
HelLO Edward, dear readers,
I've always problems with why questions, perhaps also because i
personally do not assume intentionality. Large systems, like
MicroSoft, but also our bodies, are "victims" of viral attacks because
they "are". I also assume that large - success to the successful -
systems are - or were - themselves "viral" and therefore tend to
create their own counterforce. Later - when looking back - one might
think - and many a CEO wil say - that because there has been a causal
relation there was also an intentionality. But that - in my opinion -
is not true. In hindsight, it might look like that, but when somebody
is proven right, (s)he was most probably misunderstood too. And
someone who is understood, will be proven wrong. It has happened to
almost all uf us.
While writing this the thought comes up that it is the same with
religious belief systems: these too have this reproductive capability.
They too always generate their own "virusses". They are called
heretics or schismatics, but - when successful, meaning that they've
grown to a size were they've become vulnerable themselves - they try
to remain "accepted" and start to thrash out other heretics and
schismatics. Religious systems - when established - also try to
"protect" themselves by "firewalls" - can you name a few - and
anti-virus software. Sometimes they even try - and succeed - to use
public law to enforce anti-viral measures. Like trying to prevent
teaching of the theory of evolution on schools - or - nowadays in Iran
- excluding people from governement because the are not of the right
faith (= they carry infected thoughts).
Rick, this might be also the answer to your question: MicroSoft hacked
CP/M (another old operating system, the first time i saw MS-DOS i
said: "now this is a bad clone of CP/M" ) and the Macintosh interface
(Windows - duuuuh, the first time i saw i said, you might better buy a
Macintosh ) - and not to mention WordStar, 123-something and
Dbase-any-number. You see, i've been right and proven wrong again and
again. You cann't have it all: AND a succesfull viral programm - here
you have to use the other's weaknesses - AND resistance to virtal
attacks - here you'll have your own weakness. In my experience the one
"lucky" decision by Gates was to use the largest system at that moment
(IBM's anual profits were then bigger than the turn over its largest
competitor) as a host for its viral programm: QDOS (Quick and Dirty
Operating System). It was smartly inside this new innocent looking
contraption called PC, the P meaning PERSONAL - so who is complaining
of lack of networking compatibility - which was going to be fabricated
as .... clones. Now, clone, is just another word for virus the size of
the host. What I do not believe is that what has happened has been
planned, scheduled, foreseen or intended. (In fact Gates used to run a
very large Mac softwarehouse and wanted Apple to let its machine being
cloned). It is just short time action-reaction-trial-&-error that -
with hind-sight - looks like this. And - not very supprising - this
is true for the whole - evolutionary - world we're living in.
Thanks for trying,
Jan
Edward Rogosky wrote:
>You know, we might use this e-mail problem to draw us into a systems
>thinking piece about not merely the how? but the why?
>
>Why is Microsoft targeted? Why SCO in America?
>Are these people the 21st Century form of Luddites? or Sabot-throwers? Why?
--Drs J.C. Lelie (Jan, MSc MBA) facilitator mind@work
mind@work VOF - ondersteuning besluitvorming van groepen LOGISENS - bedrijfsverbetering
tel.: + 31 (0)70 3243475 mob.: + 31 (0)65 4685114 (auto) web.: http://www.mindatwork.nl/
Learning-org -- Hosted by Rick Karash <Richard@Karash.com> Public Dialog on Learning Organizations -- <http://www.learning-org.com>
"Learning-org" and the format of our message identifiers (LO1234, etc.) are trademarks of Richard Karash.