There's a rule at work here. It's the result of a drunken hookup between Clarke's Third Law and Poe's Law.
"Any post on Slashdot, advanced or not, is indistinguishable from sarcasm."
NYCL's friend has a point, as my analogy was an exaggeration and it expressed a viewpoint which he does not agree with -- See his other posts on the topic for more.
I stand by my original point. According to Brian Benchoff's article, FTDI's new driver is being distributed automatically via Windows Update and it causes damage to devices which use FTDI USB IDs but which are not authentic FTDI chip, rendering them unusable with any computer by permanently resetting their USB Product ID to zero. While I believe that FTDI has every right to protect their name and the reputation of their products, producing malware designed to damage or destroy competing products is overstepping their authority, and whoever authorized this may want to read up on the Computer Misuse Act and ask themselves a few questions about what they are doing.
Here's one. "Am I engaging in 'an act which causes an unauthorized modification of the contents of any computers' with the intent of 'causing a modification of the contents of any computer' which may 'impair the operation of any computer', 'prevent or hinder access to any program or data held in any computer' or 'impair the operation of any such program or the reliability of any such data'?" If the answer to this is yes, then the Home Office would like to have a word with you.
The correct response to this is one which FTDI had already made earlier. They changed their official drivers to not work with fake chips. Being clearer about the cause of the problem would have been nice (The new drivers only returned zeros, no matter what the faux-232 reported, leaving end users wondering what had gone wrong), this was a reasonable and proportionate response. Going from that to distributing vigilante malware crossed the line.