I know that, in England, the townies have got together and banned the gentle country folk from hunting foxes. Just as many foxes will die, but that’s apparently all right – the poor things will be less terrified if they’re hunted by mistake and then shot than if they’re just hunted and then torn to pieces. I still don’t see how the outcome is different for the fox, but that’s probably just me.
I guess it’s just as important not to go hunting firefoxes – after all, the Mozilla Website says this of their wonderful browser: “built with your security in mind, Firefox keeps your computer safe”. Mozilla,of course, is telling the truth – so I really can’t work out why there are multiple vulnerabilities in Firefox (and Thunderbird and Mozilla). Of course, those vulnerabilities are all cured by upgrading to the latest version, but in what way is that different from what we get with Bill Gates’ product?
Does the fact that the Mozilla foundation has a page for its security advisories indicate that they know that the statement on their home page is not absolutely true, or do I just have a different idea of what my computer safety might look like (using a browser that doesn’t have vulnerabilities would be it) than the Mozilla foundation appears to have?
I think we should be told.
