[CamperBob2]

That's a ridiculous analogy. What if vaccines really did have a high probability of causing autism? Would you still argue that they should be mandatory?

How about if there not only was no FDA approval process for the vaccines, but the pharma company itself didn't bother testing them?

Because that's Windows Update in a nutshell. Every couple of months somebody breaks into my house in the middle of the night, even though I locked my doors and windows and posted a no-trespassing sign, and pokes me with a needle... and I'm supposed to just sit there and take it in the name of "security."

[derefr]

Two separate issues: if you first agree that herd immunity from an infinite stream of "zero-day pandemics" would require daily vaccinations, then you would turn around and demand that there be laws about what these vaccinations must be composed of, and how they be tested, to de-risk them as much as possible.

Imagine what the FDA already does, and then imagine that they were verifying a drug that would be given to every person in the country. There'd be a crazy strenuous verification system for that.

[CamperBob2]

Imagine what the FDA already does, and then imagine that they were verifying a drug that would be given to every person in the country. There'd be a crazy strenuous verification system for that.

And that's a big part of the problem. Not only is there no 'FDA' to test these patches -- nor should there be -- but the manufacturer evidently doesn't test them either. They fired their QA personnel a few years ago, so that's now our (unpaid) job as users.

Even worse, there are some indications that this particular bug was discovered and reported by insider program members and actively ignored by the company.

Windows Update is apparently the team where Microsoft employs their B- and C-level players and managers. That's not OK. If you're going to insert yourself forcefully into everyone's critical path, you'd better know what you're doing.