Internet Security- Christopher Guerrero

     Computers allow users to create and use just about anything. However, there always comes a time when someone has to mess up something beautiful. In Zittrain's textbook, we read how Robert Morris Jr. created what is now called as the first internet worm. Essentially, this worm although harmless, created a gateway for many others to create more and more internet worms that can wield either no harm to other users, or complete computer malfunction. Zittrain, and Timothy Lee of Ars Technica argue that it is the computers main function that allow it to have such a great flaw. The computer, meant to have only a generative output for users, allows for any information to come in. Hence, viruses and worms created by other users can be made and therefore allowed to enter systems. To the untrained user, worms and other malware can enter a system completely undetected and as mentioned before, can wield a wide variety of damage. Lee focuses mainly on the argument of whether or not it is now time for a less generative machine to be presented to us. We constantly see this battle right before our eyes in the clash of the computer mega-companies: Windows and Apple. Windows is a bit more versatile in its computer-to-user system allowing a much more vast  array of options for the computer to process. Metaphorically, it is the garden without a gate. Apple on the other hand, has grown a huge amount of trust with its users for its incomparable security, as Apple has been known to carry a significant less amount of viruses on its hardware when compared to Windows. However, many users are not aware that it is through locking the computer that they sell to you down to a limited feature, that this extra security is now possible. After the company completely chooses what should or should not run on your device (also known as locking it), or by setting up a long and painful application process for app designers, your device is now what Apple calls it to be. Lee and Zittrain find themselves in this mid-stance of whether it is a corporation such as Apple's attack on our freedom as computer users, or if it is indeed the smarter choice to make. Zittrain makes the intelligent observation that there are many more worms that infect computers each day than most of us are aware of. With computer technology being left to experts (hence, why they are called experts), most users can not self maintain a computer themselves. Therefore, for many users, a garden gatekeeper would be much more suitable for their uses.
      I, among with all of us today, find myself trying to choose a side in this battle for what computer is best for me. Not being a huge computer whiz myself, I feel as if a locked down computer would be more suitable for most people out there. I don't design applications for computers or phones, I'd rather have them provided for me. I won't download one million apps for my phone. I can do just fine with ten or twenty. I'd rather pay the extra 300 dollars to ensure that I'm getting a much higher quality, and most likely longer lasting device, than to have a little more freedom . That way, I see that the closed locked  down devices are made more for the consumers, while the open wide internet is made more for producers. It's a little hard to have faith in others these days, and most people don't have the intentions for helping out others by creating better programs for you. Unfortunately, when we're out there downloading programs, chances are, someone is trying to trick you. I think I'll just stay in the locked garden instead.