I wonder if the spam problem could get worse. Or if the spread of viruses and worms could get worse. Or both.
See, last week we had the Blaster worm, followed by a major blackout, followed in short order by the Sobig virus. Pretty bad, right? But at Nicholas Provenzo's blog, The Rule of Reason, I learned that Sobig is the "fastest propagating computer virus ever." He goes on to ask, "What exactly should the punishment be for unleashing a computer virus?" As he relates, David Smith, the creator of the Melissa virus, which did $80 million worth of damage, spent a mere 20 months in federal prison:
A computer virus is a pre-meditated attack on the property of others. 20 months for $80 million in property damage--how about 20 years?
.... You should not be able to destroy mountains of wealth and walk away from your crime in less than two years.
Destroying mountains of wealth? Mr. Provenzo is right, of course, and I'd say that only by strengthening our cultural and legal commitment to property rights will a proper defense against this kind of destruction be possible. Now, I understand that the Sobig virus was distributed with its own email software, so here's why I think that things can get a lot worse than they already are:
Imagine some cretin combining both internet plagues: he writes a destructive virus or worm, and he obtains spam software and delivers it that way. The spam software Massive FX "allows a client to send a billion or so messages per month." That's my fear: worms and viruses delivered by spam software. And I think it's coming, if it's not already here.
As I mentioned here, Eric Scheie at Classical Values came up with a most inventive means of punishment for spammers (go thou and enjoy). I think that respect bordering on reverence for property rights will lead to the most effective solution, and would include restitution as the paradigm for justice. Absent that, though--which I do not foresee coming soon--I'm with Nicholas Provenzo and support long, long prison terms.
Yo Craig,
You told me a while back that the world needs an Objectivist Tony Robbins. I still don't know a damned thing about the guy, but I thought I'd pass this on to you: there's reason to think he's familiar with Rand's ideas, though I don't know to what extent. According to one article on the Mike Mentzer website, he trained with Mr. Mentzer -- and I doubt anybody could go through training sessions with that guy without hearing some of Rand's ideas. If Robbins ever read Mentzer's books, and I dunno why he'd train with him if he hadn't, he *definitely* heard a lot about Objectivism along the way.
Incidentally, I can't speak for the merits of Mentzer's fitness theories, since I have yet to try them out, but his articles are worth checking out for inspiration value alone. I've got his book in the mail as we speak, and intend to give his methods a shot during the semester when I have more time.
Posted by: Matt at August 26, 2003 05:55 AM