What a silly article. You could have just summarized the whole thing into one sentence, "i know lots about virus-writer stereotypes, and a few old-school titles and names. i'm cooler than you"...oh wait, that's two sentences. You make fun of the course, but you don't bring up any points about it, you just make up absurd scenarios that are barely related to the topic, then make fun of those.

university courses aren't there to make you into a philosopher, phsychologist, biologist, etc. they're there to cover material that is related to those fields...if all physicists were boring, it would not be a requirement of a physics course to teach the students how to be boring, it would be to teach physics...so yes, maybe the average virus writer has these certain personality traits that you bring up, but what does that have to do with a course that teaches about computer viruses? personally i think this course sounds really cool. it's lame that it turned into such a publicity stunt, but there's a lot of neat scientific material in virusland. and contradictory to the points you make, there is a hell of a lot more to viruses than outlook worms.

obviously the point of this article was to make you sound cool, not to make a point...i can't believe securityfocus publishes your crap...

[ reply ]

Link to this comment: http://www.securityfocus.com/comments/columns/164/20269#20269