We have a government mandated military. Most governments do. What keeps them from using it to enforce it's will?
Then the guys at McAfee or Norton can use this to curtail infections because they now have access to more computers, whereas right now they only have access to those willing to pay for their stuff.
My point was that if we can keep in checks and balances from the military from being abused, we can do the same for national computer security.
1) Security online is an international problem. One government cannot solve the problem, even it were a good idea.
2) Your arguments comparing this to the military are fundamentally flawed. The US military has its basis in the Constitution, and has been refined by many further laws/acts over the course of US history. That structure is what keeps them in line. No such structure exists for your proposal.
2) My point is that such a structure can be created for my proposal too. Simply letting the government contract out to multiple private corporations, or providing subsidies for antiviral software, is one way to prevent "big brother" from controlling computers.
Then you have the issue of unmaintained systems. Most machines friends give me to fix already have a virus scanner bt are still infected.
No, as already said this is not a funding problem it is an education one.
Free trial. See for yourself.
It's a whole lot of work to do so. Govts are lazy. Waging war on their people is hard work, so they tend to avoid it.
"Misusing" equipment or information is easy, so they do it.
Remember "Joe the Plumber"? As soon as he hit the news, various govt flunkies were rummaging through govt databases looking for dirt and releasing it to the press. (And, in at least one case, they either made up stuff or didn't know the law.)
And no, they don't do that as a matter of course whenever someone is on TV.
And yes, Repubs are probably no better. That's why we can't fix these things by voting for different people - we have to take away their toys.