You're saying Debian is secure because there is a centrally controlled repository of software. Vista requires signed kernel-level drivers and you'd say that Microsoft is cutting out open-source developers.
No, a community controlled repository like Debian's is verifiable and something anyone can trust. M$ has cut off everybody, as usual, not just free software developers. It is not verifiable and is usually proved nasty.
Are you advocating Microsoft create it's own software repositories, vet all submissions to make sure they are not malware, and only allow windows to install software from those repositories?
Yes. As usual, the only acceptable thing for Microsoft to do is to unconditionally surrender their codebase and release it GPL. They may, after that, vet their own distribution with better efficiency than they currently do. Even then, it would take years for people to build trust in it.
If it isn't, like the last piece of software I installed on my Ubuntu box, then you are left to download a.deb and install it with dpkg. Now, if I write some nasty little app that turns your box into a spambot, roll it into a deb and put it up on a website as "Cool_new_gaim_smileys.deb", what is going to stop little Johnny from downloading and installing it?
"apt-get search smiley", followed by "apt-get install gaim-themes" works great and so does the GUI equivalent, so Johny gets what he wants without having to trust a net nasty like yourself. Contrary to M$ opinion, Johny is not stupid.
Well no, they don't all have perl and python installed. They don't have the same directory structure by a long shot and that has kernel module implications. They don't all run samba by choice, though they may have clients, and sshd is not installed by default on most. They may or may not be running xorg, but the configurations will be different. Many have their own kernel versions and compiles. The only way you could think anything else is to have never done any real work on as much as one distribution. The differences are easy for a human to navigate, but difficult for a worm - and this is why there is not a Linux Monoculture and one of the reasons there are no gnu/Linux hosted worms of any significance.
Could you imagine that quote in a scientific paper, or a reputable magazine article? No. It screams "nutjob", regardless of what the person is trying to say and/or the truth within it.
No, I can't imagine any reputable journal publishing anything having to do with M$'s secret sauce code.
Being outside of that, I'm free to say whatever I want about the tin-horns who are busy calling free software "a cancer", "communist" and all that jazz. No respect has been earned and none is paid.
Someone who thinks they are a douche-bag defines fix
fix/fiks/ noun, 28. Informal. a repair, adjustment, or solution, usually of an immediate nature. And now that I've done my douche-bag move for the day
I was talking about fixing your computer and internet security. If any of the six click installs available are not immediate enough, I'm not sure what is. No one can fix Windoze because it's not free. If it was free, it would look like... gnu/linux by now.
That depends on your perspective. If you are Bill Gates, or drugged or both, you might think it's not fair M$ is blamed for all the M$ born malware that threatens the internet and every machine on it. If you are anyone else, you're dumbfounded the authors bothered to run Vista at all. It's funny how people keep doing the same thing and expecting different results. It's not surprising M$ results make people angry, but it is surprising people keep listening to them and giving their software a fair chance to fall on it's face.
The details in the article are pretty irrefutable. Eris's journal entry is not a bad summary if you don't have time to read further than the second paragraph.
If a thirteen year old wants to download smileys for their IM client, the kid is going to do it. If the software has spyware, then that spyware would do what it takes to open up or break the system. It's pretty damn hard to code against human behaviour.
What, there's spyware in the Debian repositories? Call Perens, now! Oh wait, false alarm from someone projecting Windoze problems onto free software. Never mind, Gaim, kde's IM client, and all the other IM clients that already have smileys, do not actually contain malware, nor do any of the other user contributed and community verified packages of artwork. Oh dear, that makes life very hard for malware authors.
I'll give you a little hint about the specifics - if you go read the article you can see the author going through all the details of how easy it is to screw a Vista user and why - he compares them to free software browsers and OS because none of those problems exist there! Free software is not like the deceptive and broken crap M$ makes.
I know, I know, you are only pretending to be ignorant. That's OK, I like answering easy questions.
Diversity is the only solution to internet security. The user gains immediate security in the short term. The community gains security in the long term as weak platforms are eliminated and can no longer be used to attack strong ones. Everyone wins when the monoculture ends. Free software provides both transparency and a diversity of hard targets. Confronted with rising costs, criminals will go back to their usual meat space businesses.
Yes, the message itself is paid misdirection from Microsoft. The number one bullshit message in this thread is that the poll was stuffed. About a dozen well moderated posts claim as much, but the chances are remote.
... expect Dell to be the last major OEM not shipping Linux.
You think? I'm not sure anymore. Just a few weeks ago Michael Dell stood up with Vint Cerf and admitted 1 in 4 M$ computers is part of a botnet. Now his company is publicizing customer demand for Linux. If he was interested in toeing the M$ party line, he would have suppressed the results. The odds are Dell is moving away from being a M$ vassal.
2007 is the year of Linux. Vista sucks, is not selling and the revolt is on. It's about time!
No, I think this was Linux flavors A, S, T, R, O, T, U, R, F. I would guess this is a push by some pro-Linux webpage for publicity.
That comment cuts both ways. Microsoft has a long history of astroturf, so you would expect the requests to be M$ BS if people were doing that. All of it is dwarfed by actual customer demand where it exists. Give it some time and M$ will have a few M$ powered botnets target it, but the cat is out of the bag now - people really do want free software.
If I could implant all my media devices with a unique-to-me identifier and then transfer any content I have paid for *from any source* to any of my devices then I'd be happy with such DRM. Trouble is, this implies all companies with a vested interest in DRM cooperating and the system actually working.
It's not just impossible, it's an undesirable loss of control. For any DRM to work you have to surrender your ability to copy files. Each and every time you try, the DRM would have to check and grant you permission. Any limit you put onto the power of that copy is arbitrary and won't really protect the user from abuse. Imagine you could restrict the copy control to files of a particular type in a particular location. For this to work, each time you tried to copy or move a file the computer would have to make sure your file was not of that type or in that location. Further restrictions could be added at any time, so you should never accept even the mildest set.
Until that time, I am forced to live in a [DRM world where I can't copy between devices]
That's only true if you buy into DRM systems, so don't give up while things are looking good. Right now, you can buy commercial music on CDs, and most music on players still gets there that way. You can also get more free music than you can ever listen to at archive.org or magnatune.com, which should be good for music sales by the artists there. If enough people reject DRM, DRM won't happen because people making money will all be DRM free. That is why the majors are all thinking hard about it.
The ultimate dream here is greed. DRM is about control by a few big dumb companies who want to "transition from physical to digital distribution" with their broadcast monopoly intact. Without lots of bad laws, that's the really impossible dream.
Indeed. The irony when more-or-less communist regimes adopt free market solutions like open source while supposedly capitalist countries revel in state-granted monopoly production is palpable.
Using the fruits of free markets by Communists is not really unusual. Tyrants pillage whatever they can. The Soviet Union routinely coppied western designs, which you could call an adoption of free market solutions. I'm looking at this as more of a case of Castro wanting to be the Bill Gates of Cuba than him wanting to be RMS.
What's unusual is the willingness of people in supposedly free markets to surrender control of their information by using non free software. Government protection and promotion of non free software, even when combined with market manipulation by M$, does not really explain the continued dominance of non free software. Free software offers all classes of computer owners both lower costs through competition of suppliers and more control of their work. It is surprising that companies like Verizon and Viacomm do not follow the lead of companies like IBM, Chrysler and Lowes. It's even more surprising that more individuals have not sought out free software. In the case of a big dumb company, bad decisions can be forced from above.
Things are fortunately changing. As Vista shows, there's also a performance hit to slavery. This performance difference may finally create enough free software demand to loosen M$'s vendor lock and things will be downhill from there.
Tell your kids you were only respecting their privacy after they are anally raped by a pedophile, you utter dumb fuck.
The funny thing is, that's exactly the kind of fear M$ is selling the service on. They are trying to ride the "shark attack" media blitz of fear. Well, it would be funny if it were not so counter productive.
When you treat your kids like criminals you do real harm to their trust in you and their own dignity. Those are exactly the things they need in abundance if they ever are approached by a pervert. If they don't trust you, they can't get help. If they have low self esteem, they will put up with abuse and think it's normal.
That register article is so good, I think I'll journal it up and see if I can't work it into another front page article you M$ paid turds hate, insightful commentary that shows M$ and non free crap in it's correct light.
switch to Vista now.... Then you could search your kids stuff if you wanted, but if you didn't want to treat them like a 'criminal' it is easier to just use the parental controls so you know they aren't into crap an 8 year old shouldn't get into even accidentally.
Wow, that way I'd not only get a system I can't trust because it has a wiretap "feature" I'd also put M$ blinders on my kids. Do parental controls do like Steve and "brainwashed" them from iPod to Zune?
I've got my kids brainwashed: You don't use Google, and you don't use an iPod.
Like I want that man controlling anything that has anything to do with my kids.
Wiretapping is not a feature you can really turn on or off.
You should not trust people who conspire with you to violate others. Reading through your kid's stuff is a violation of their trust. The people who gave you this tool don't have any respect for your kids or you. They are likely to read through your stuff without waring too.
The new and improved Spotlight will even offer some unique parental monitoring capabilities because you can remotely search your kids' computers if you suspect they're downloading files illegally or saving files that you feel are inappropriate.
I'm supposed to treat my kids like criminals now? No unmonitored phone conversations, mail and all of that? Publisher's profits are more important than my family's privacy and dignity? No thanks, my house is not a jail. I have respect for the people who live here and my visitors.
It's stuff like this that keeps me away from non-free software, regardless of how difficult publishers and non free software companies would like to make my life. I'm not going to trust my life to software that comes with wiretapping as a feature. If Apple lacks respect for my kids, what kind of respect will they have for me? Well, not much considering the restrictions they put into unFairPlay and their OS in general. Apple can keep their pretty laptops and DRM crippled music players to themselves. Make no mistake, this is just one more step in removing your rights, and the future will be worse with non free software.
My wife and my kids get root on their computer. It's theirs, not mine, and what they do with it is their business. No one is downloading music and movies here because it's easier for us to get free stuff at archive.org and netflicks. They are free to share what they want and keep the rest to themselves. Anything more invasive than that, outside evidence of real wrong doing, is for paranoid control freaks.
Respect has to go both ways. If I don't have it for them, they won't have it for me.
Hi, Twitter! Good to see you. Farming with this account again, after you managed to get eight Troll mods in a row with your main one, eh? I was very impressed at that, good going! Anyway, to business, we can't sit around here, chatting about 'old times', eh?
Hello to you too. Don't have enough mod points to nuke more than one account at a time? Awwwww, so sad. Things might not go the way your corporate masters want. It's funny how a few people with a little time on their hands can show up billions of dollars worth of marketing bullshit.
But, sadly, what they're doing appears to be legal, so perhaps the ire ought to be directed at what makes it legal, rather than shooting the messenger (dammit:-).
In this case, the messenger is also the guilty party. M$ is one of the largest proponents of software patents and other bogus "IP" laws.
The reason you should be outraged is that they now own your code. Without any further effort than paying off a bunch of lawmakers and lawyers, they have secured an income on.... everything. They also grant themselves the power to shut down projects they don't like. Make no mistake, a little control for M$ is total control when it gets in the way of your software freedoms. Long after Vista bombs in the market place, M$ will be profiting from your work and using it to cause you further harm in any way they please.
This is why anti-patent language in GPL 3 is so important and why everyone should support it. The true cost of supporting M$ though judicial extortion will only be revealed if we hang together. The internet itself would not function without GPL'd code. Laws will change if suddenly that code is unavailable.
I'm nowhere near a fanboy for Microsoft (quite the opposite, if you read my posting history)
I will do exactly that. See you in half an hour or so.
Thanks for the numbers, but I'd like a link that works, or instructions on how to find that report. It would be nice to think that less than 0.1% of all gnu/linux machines were part of a botnet, but the 0.3% market share is about 20x lower than what it should be.
the statistics used also seem to show that 24% of Linux machines are also part of botnets?
No, they show that 0.092% of Linux machines are in a botnet, if we can trust the poster. His link to marketshare did not work but his numbers were:
OS Market Share(Percent) Botnet(Percent)
Windows 93.87 23.47
Mac 5.67 1.42
Linux 0.37 0.09
Other 0.09 0.02
The way you want to look at it, the botnet numbers should add to 100%. They don't, so the numbers don't mean what you want them to.
If you want to be usefull you could find a working link, preferably from a site that shows Linux market penetration at something more realistic than 0.37%.
Slashdot Mirror
You're saying Debian is secure because there is a centrally controlled repository of software. Vista requires signed kernel-level drivers and you'd say that Microsoft is cutting out open-source developers.
No, a community controlled repository like Debian's is verifiable and something anyone can trust. M$ has cut off everybody, as usual, not just free software developers. It is not verifiable and is usually proved nasty.
Are you advocating Microsoft create it's own software repositories, vet all submissions to make sure they are not malware, and only allow windows to install software from those repositories?
Yes. As usual, the only acceptable thing for Microsoft to do is to unconditionally surrender their codebase and release it GPL. They may, after that, vet their own distribution with better efficiency than they currently do. Even then, it would take years for people to build trust in it.
If it isn't, like the last piece of software I installed on my Ubuntu box, then you are left to download a .deb and install it with dpkg. Now, if I write some nasty little app that turns your box into a spambot, roll it into a deb and put it up on a website as "Cool_new_gaim_smileys.deb", what is going to stop little Johnny from downloading and installing it?
"apt-get search smiley", followed by "apt-get install gaim-themes" works great and so does the GUI equivalent, so Johny gets what he wants without having to trust a net nasty like yourself. Contrary to M$ opinion, Johny is not stupid.
Well no, they don't all have perl and python installed. They don't have the same directory structure by a long shot and that has kernel module implications. They don't all run samba by choice, though they may have clients, and sshd is not installed by default on most. They may or may not be running xorg, but the configurations will be different. Many have their own kernel versions and compiles. The only way you could think anything else is to have never done any real work on as much as one distribution. The differences are easy for a human to navigate, but difficult for a worm - and this is why there is not a Linux Monoculture and one of the reasons there are no gnu/Linux hosted worms of any significance.
Could you imagine that quote in a scientific paper, or a reputable magazine article? No. It screams "nutjob", regardless of what the person is trying to say and/or the truth within it.
No, I can't imagine any reputable journal publishing anything having to do with M$'s secret sauce code.
Being outside of that, I'm free to say whatever I want about the tin-horns who are busy calling free software "a cancer", "communist" and all that jazz. No respect has been earned and none is paid.
If you truly believe that to be true, then why did you only recommend a set of linux distros?
There's enough diversity of system and module settings in that list for the majority of home and business use. Free software is like that.
Someone who thinks they are a douche-bag defines fix
fix /fiks/ noun, 28. Informal. a repair, adjustment, or solution, usually of an immediate nature. And now that I've done my douche-bag move for the day
I was talking about fixing your computer and internet security. If any of the six click installs available are not immediate enough, I'm not sure what is. No one can fix Windoze because it's not free. If it was free, it would look like ... gnu/linux by now.
Have a little more respect for yourself.
[article is not] fair and balanced.
That depends on your perspective. If you are Bill Gates, or drugged or both, you might think it's not fair M$ is blamed for all the M$ born malware that threatens the internet and every machine on it. If you are anyone else, you're dumbfounded the authors bothered to run Vista at all. It's funny how people keep doing the same thing and expecting different results. It's not surprising M$ results make people angry, but it is surprising people keep listening to them and giving their software a fair chance to fall on it's face.
The details in the article are pretty irrefutable. Eris's journal entry is not a bad summary if you don't have time to read further than the second paragraph.
If a thirteen year old wants to download smileys for their IM client, the kid is going to do it. If the software has spyware, then that spyware would do what it takes to open up or break the system. It's pretty damn hard to code against human behaviour.
What, there's spyware in the Debian repositories? Call Perens, now! Oh wait, false alarm from someone projecting Windoze problems onto free software. Never mind, Gaim, kde's IM client, and all the other IM clients that already have smileys, do not actually contain malware, nor do any of the other user contributed and community verified packages of artwork. Oh dear, that makes life very hard for malware authors.
I'll give you a little hint about the specifics - if you go read the article you can see the author going through all the details of how easy it is to screw a Vista user and why - he compares them to free software browsers and OS because none of those problems exist there! Free software is not like the deceptive and broken crap M$ makes.
I know, I know, you are only pretending to be ignorant. That's OK, I like answering easy questions.
The only story I want to hear about Vista security is what it fixes. We already know what Microsoft broke.
I've been telling you for years and I'll tell you again. The fix is:
Diversity is the only solution to internet security. The user gains immediate security in the short term. The community gains security in the long term as weak platforms are eliminated and can no longer be used to attack strong ones. Everyone wins when the monoculture ends. Free software provides both transparency and a diversity of hard targets. Confronted with rising costs, criminals will go back to their usual meat space businesses.
Don't you mean ridiculou$ ?
Yes, the message itself is paid misdirection from Microsoft. The number one bullshit message in this thread is that the poll was stuffed. About a dozen well moderated posts claim as much, but the chances are remote.
You think? I'm not sure anymore. Just a few weeks ago Michael Dell stood up with Vint Cerf and admitted 1 in 4 M$ computers is part of a botnet. Now his company is publicizing customer demand for Linux. If he was interested in toeing the M$ party line, he would have suppressed the results. The odds are Dell is moving away from being a M$ vassal.
2007 is the year of Linux. Vista sucks, is not selling and the revolt is on. It's about time!
No, I think this was Linux flavors A, S, T, R, O, T, U, R, F. I would guess this is a push by some pro-Linux webpage for publicity.
That comment cuts both ways. Microsoft has a long history of astroturf, so you would expect the requests to be M$ BS if people were doing that. All of it is dwarfed by actual customer demand where it exists. Give it some time and M$ will have a few M$ powered botnets target it, but the cat is out of the bag now - people really do want free software.
If I could implant all my media devices with a unique-to-me identifier and then transfer any content I have paid for *from any source* to any of my devices then I'd be happy with such DRM. Trouble is, this implies all companies with a vested interest in DRM cooperating and the system actually working.
It's not just impossible, it's an undesirable loss of control. For any DRM to work you have to surrender your ability to copy files. Each and every time you try, the DRM would have to check and grant you permission. Any limit you put onto the power of that copy is arbitrary and won't really protect the user from abuse. Imagine you could restrict the copy control to files of a particular type in a particular location. For this to work, each time you tried to copy or move a file the computer would have to make sure your file was not of that type or in that location. Further restrictions could be added at any time, so you should never accept even the mildest set.
Until that time, I am forced to live in a [DRM world where I can't copy between devices]
That's only true if you buy into DRM systems, so don't give up while things are looking good. Right now, you can buy commercial music on CDs, and most music on players still gets there that way. You can also get more free music than you can ever listen to at archive.org or magnatune.com, which should be good for music sales by the artists there. If enough people reject DRM, DRM won't happen because people making money will all be DRM free. That is why the majors are all thinking hard about it.
The ultimate dream here is greed. DRM is about control by a few big dumb companies who want to "transition from physical to digital distribution" with their broadcast monopoly intact. Without lots of bad laws, that's the really impossible dream.
Indeed. The irony when more-or-less communist regimes adopt free market solutions like open source while supposedly capitalist countries revel in state-granted monopoly production is palpable.
Using the fruits of free markets by Communists is not really unusual. Tyrants pillage whatever they can. The Soviet Union routinely coppied western designs, which you could call an adoption of free market solutions. I'm looking at this as more of a case of Castro wanting to be the Bill Gates of Cuba than him wanting to be RMS.
What's unusual is the willingness of people in supposedly free markets to surrender control of their information by using non free software. Government protection and promotion of non free software, even when combined with market manipulation by M$, does not really explain the continued dominance of non free software. Free software offers all classes of computer owners both lower costs through competition of suppliers and more control of their work. It is surprising that companies like Verizon and Viacomm do not follow the lead of companies like IBM, Chrysler and Lowes. It's even more surprising that more individuals have not sought out free software. In the case of a big dumb company, bad decisions can be forced from above.
Things are fortunately changing. As Vista shows, there's also a performance hit to slavery. This performance difference may finally create enough free software demand to loosen M$'s vendor lock and things will be downhill from there.
google has a cache. I'll fix that right away. You trolls are useful after all.
A rude AC taunts:
Tell your kids you were only respecting their privacy after they are anally raped by a pedophile, you utter dumb fuck.
The funny thing is, that's exactly the kind of fear M$ is selling the service on. They are trying to ride the "shark attack" media blitz of fear. Well, it would be funny if it were not so counter productive.
Of course, it's total bullshit. The actual chance of anyone being molested by a computer creep is vanishingly small.
When you treat your kids like criminals you do real harm to their trust in you and their own dignity. Those are exactly the things they need in abundance if they ever are approached by a pervert. If they don't trust you, they can't get help. If they have low self esteem, they will put up with abuse and think it's normal.
That register article is so good, I think I'll journal it up and see if I can't work it into another front page article you M$ paid turds hate, insightful commentary that shows M$ and non free crap in it's correct light.
switch to Vista now. ... Then you could search your kids stuff if you wanted, but if you didn't want to treat them like a 'criminal' it is easier to just use the parental controls so you know they aren't into crap an 8 year old shouldn't get into even accidentally.
Wow, that way I'd not only get a system I can't trust because it has a wiretap "feature" I'd also put M$ blinders on my kids. Do parental controls do like Steve and "brainwashed" them from iPod to Zune?
I've got my kids brainwashed: You don't use Google, and you don't use an iPod.
Like I want that man controlling anything that has anything to do with my kids.
You tell me:
Dude! Don't use the feature if you don't want to.
Wiretapping is not a feature you can really turn on or off.
You should not trust people who conspire with you to violate others. Reading through your kid's stuff is a violation of their trust. The people who gave you this tool don't have any respect for your kids or you. They are likely to read through your stuff without waring too.
From the fine article:
I'm supposed to treat my kids like criminals now? No unmonitored phone conversations, mail and all of that? Publisher's profits are more important than my family's privacy and dignity? No thanks, my house is not a jail. I have respect for the people who live here and my visitors.
It's stuff like this that keeps me away from non-free software, regardless of how difficult publishers and non free software companies would like to make my life. I'm not going to trust my life to software that comes with wiretapping as a feature. If Apple lacks respect for my kids, what kind of respect will they have for me? Well, not much considering the restrictions they put into unFairPlay and their OS in general. Apple can keep their pretty laptops and DRM crippled music players to themselves. Make no mistake, this is just one more step in removing your rights, and the future will be worse with non free software.
My wife and my kids get root on their computer. It's theirs, not mine, and what they do with it is their business. No one is downloading music and movies here because it's easier for us to get free stuff at archive.org and netflicks. They are free to share what they want and keep the rest to themselves. Anything more invasive than that, outside evidence of real wrong doing, is for paranoid control freaks.
Respect has to go both ways. If I don't have it for them, they won't have it for me.
Hi, Twitter! Good to see you. Farming with this account again, after you managed to get eight Troll mods in a row with your main one, eh? I was very impressed at that, good going! Anyway, to business, we can't sit around here, chatting about 'old times', eh?
Hello to you too. Don't have enough mod points to nuke more than one account at a time? Awwwww, so sad. Things might not go the way your corporate masters want. It's funny how a few people with a little time on their hands can show up billions of dollars worth of marketing bullshit.
Keep it up Erris and don't listen to these turds.
I'm nowhere near a fanboy for Microsoft (quite the opposite, if you read my posting history)
A quick Google search does not refute that. Blaming users for Microsoft's abominable security (in 2003) is the only regretable thing I found.
But, sadly, what they're doing appears to be legal, so perhaps the ire ought to be directed at what makes it legal, rather than shooting the messenger (dammit :-).
In this case, the messenger is also the guilty party. M$ is one of the largest proponents of software patents and other bogus "IP" laws.
The reason you should be outraged is that they now own your code. Without any further effort than paying off a bunch of lawmakers and lawyers, they have secured an income on .... everything. They also grant themselves the power to shut down projects they don't like. Make no mistake, a little control for M$ is total control when it gets in the way of your software freedoms. Long after Vista bombs in the market place, M$ will be profiting from your work and using it to cause you further harm in any way they please.
This is why anti-patent language in GPL 3 is so important and why everyone should support it. The true cost of supporting M$ though judicial extortion will only be revealed if we hang together. The internet itself would not function without GPL'd code. Laws will change if suddenly that code is unavailable.
I'm nowhere near a fanboy for Microsoft (quite the opposite, if you read my posting history)
I will do exactly that. See you in half an hour or so.
Thanks for the numbers, but I'd like a link that works, or instructions on how to find that report. It would be nice to think that less than 0.1% of all gnu/linux machines were part of a botnet, but the 0.3% market share is about 20x lower than what it should be.
the statistics used also seem to show that 24% of Linux machines are also part of botnets?
No, they show that 0.092% of Linux machines are in a botnet, if we can trust the poster. His link to marketshare did not work but his numbers were:
OS Market Share(Percent) Botnet(Percent)
Windows 93.87 23.47
Mac 5.67 1.42
Linux 0.37 0.09
Other 0.09 0.02
The way you want to look at it, the botnet numbers should add to 100%. They don't, so the numbers don't mean what you want them to.
If you want to be usefull you could find a working link, preferably from a site that shows Linux market penetration at something more realistic than 0.37%.