"it seems to me that a person ought to be responsible with what's done with his property."
I think in a practical sense this is never going to happen. If you lend someone your car you are responsible and will get sued if they kill someone. The type of lawsuit and even criminal charges might depend on whether you knew of their capacity at the time to commit a crime or fitness to drive. Important distinction with cars and guns. With both you know they can be dangerous. (In the case of a gun you know even more so obviously.) There is not the same widespread knowledge or even possibility with the internet for harm along the lines of death because of use of an internet connection. Although I'm sure it's happened a few times (harassment or planning terrorism.)
As far as the requirement to lock down a network that also is not going to happen as you well know in a world that chooses "football" or "123456" for a password not to mention key loggers and viruses. Simply not the same as keeping your gun in a gun safe or knowing your neighbor is drunk and shouldn't drive your car.
"and if our laws demanded that this be do-able even by somebody's mom, then I think manufacturers would address that usability problem."
I think there is quite the demand from users to not have constant viruses, infections and hacking of computer networks (as well as embarrassment to both the software and hardware industries and to high profile websites.) Do you really think that this can be achieved with "beyond a reasonable doubt" standards so that someone's mom can have secure wifi in her house? I don't. I get calls every day from people who type domain names into the google search box instead of the browser bar.
I think in a practical sense this is never going to happen. If you lend someone your car you are responsible and will get sued if they kill someone. The type of lawsuit and even criminal charges might depend on whether you knew of their capacity at the time to commit a crime or fitness to drive. Important distinction with cars and guns. With both you know they can be dangerous. (In the case of a gun you know even more so obviously.) There is not the same widespread knowledge or even possibility with the internet for harm along the lines of death because of use of an internet connection. Although I'm sure it's happened a few times (harassment or planning terrorism.)
As far as the requirement to lock down a network that also is not going to happen as you well know in a world that chooses "football" or "123456" for a password not to mention key loggers and viruses. Simply not the same as keeping your gun in a gun safe or knowing your neighbor is drunk and shouldn't drive your car.
"and if our laws demanded that this be do-able even by somebody's mom, then I think manufacturers would address that usability problem."
I think there is quite the demand from users to not have constant viruses, infections and hacking of computer networks (as well as embarrassment to both the software and hardware industries and to high profile websites.) Do you really think that this can be achieved with "beyond a reasonable doubt" standards so that someone's mom can have secure wifi in her house? I don't. I get calls every day from people who type domain names into the google search box instead of the browser bar.