No, I don't think Windows is TimeBombed.
No, I don't think Windows is TimeBombed.
I feel drawn to just remove the Ethernet connection from my desktop to turn it into an offline-only machine. It’s enough of a hassle with all the constant Windows intrusions—uploading files, deleting what I don’t want, needing login prompts—and I’m worried about what might be worse than we think. Having a separate laptop for any internet use seems like a safer option. *I understand there are settings to disable some features, but frequent updates seem to reset them. This makes me question whether Windows is compromised. If I disconnect it now, will it still function after 40 years? Or will I eventually see a warning saying “Reconnect to Microsoft now”? Or perhaps a hidden flaw that activates after a certain time and can only be fixed through a Windows Update?* I once used an Autodesk product with a closed firewall for my workflow. Surprisingly, it turned out to be bugged, refusing to run until the latest update arrived.*
We lack certainty. Only a handful of people have access to the original code, and even they won't discuss it publicly. Among Microsoft's problems, your current version from 40 years ahead ranks low for most users. For typical scenarios, you should connect with other devices, as transferring files on such an outdated system will be extremely challenging. Most IT situations require keeping software current, and it seems improbable that they'd prioritize critical systems like MRI machines failing without cause.
I've worked extensively with Windows in highly secure settings, and they often avoid implementing proper kill switches since they don't want to face opposition from far more powerful entities than regular users.
The optimal choice for these issues would be adopting Linux. However, this would require moving to alternative software solutions. This presents a significant challenge. Many productivity tools aren’t available on Linux due to limited user adoption. Conversely, some essential applications don’t support Linux, making it difficult for users to access the available versions. In such scenarios, a Windows environment might offer the most practical option. As Manikyath suggested, it seems there’s still time before this becomes a critical issue, especially considering the widespread use of Windows in medical, military, and industrial settings without internet access.
It seems there might be a misunderstanding. There are no ethical issues preventing MS from using timebombing or killswitching—they’re not blocked by any moral constraints. However, certain sectors could raise concerns.
Currently, many aspects need attention, such as keeping a DJI drone updated to ensure it operates properly. But in that case, the motivation is likely simpler—should a sudden trend lead users to misuse drones, then DJI aims to disable or limit them quickly to protect its reputation. What would MS be trying to achieve? Probably the same goal they have with restricting local accounts to force traffic through their cloud services instead.
they must follow guidelines to stay outside restricted areas, so those zones need refreshing. any link you draw between safety features of a hardware item and users trying to access a local login on a program is completely in your thoughts.