Quote:
Originally Posted by AlexanderHanff
It doesn't really matter to be honest. the main point is that Kent saying only 1% of users will experience this is simply not a convincing argument. They haven't offered any data to support this claim, it seems like they just plucked it out of thin air.
Furthermore, even if it is 1% or 0.1% or 0.01% it is still too many, why should -any- users have to suffer degradation of service or loss of service in the case of the infinite loop (which is what Kent was referring to when he said 1%)?
Alexander Hanff
|
To me it shows that Kent has spun yet another lie. Say to Joe Public a very small number and they'll think it's no big deal
If it is easy to demonstrate that the number is much larger, and the Webwise/Phorm security browser breach happens on every new site visited and then every 3 days after that - it doesn't sound so good.
But I am sorry to admit I don't understand most of the legal discussion going on in this thread - so my point is probably not relevant
