This is so true, however you left something very important out: To port office to Linux in less than 50 lifetimes will require that minicrap implement some sort of registry, can you imagine trying to change all the office code that relies on it ? Now what happens, 50,60 percent of the newbies install MS-Office for Linux, get stacked with linux.reg (hopefully in/etc at least) Programmers begin to use it. We have a flooding of of programs requiring it. We thus have a milion nice apps requiring you to have installed ms-office at some point.
You end up with a Linux box that cost you an ms-office license, and has a 400 meg text file, impossible to keep uncorrupted, non-user-editable, and able to make the entire system crash. You cannot killall -9 linux.reg And you can't get any tech support because all the reall hackers have moved on to freebsd or beOS or hurd or sumfin
Show me any other virus that could fsck a linux system like that. And of course it requires root, and it doesn't look like a trojan right-away.
Guys, there has been Unix virusses for a long time, the one that you need to worry about still doesn't exist. Anybody remember blimp ? The Virus MIT developed to test Unix vulnerabillity ? That managed to infect and destroy files only in the directory of the user who ran it ? Keep in mind that Unix has decent file premision settings, a program is only as the user who runs it. Sure you could build code into a virus to make it hack for root, but a virus needs to be small, and that is by nature big code. The only major risk we face is that a lot of newer users still do everything as root. The root users path should include exactly one directory: /sbin Nothing else, no porgrams not installed there should ever be run by root. If you run other stuff as root, virusses are the least of your worries, your gonna rm something important at some point. For a lot of good information on Linux and virusses check out Rick Moens opinion page at LinuxMafia.com I based most of this post on what I learned there.
I sure hope you people know what complexity theory is, you know, like chaos, no laws but things are self-organizational. Outside interference can mess things up, but it will reorganize itself everytime. Or the human body couldn't exist. The web is a case in point, there are no official rules, yet years before anti-spam laws we knew exactly what a spammer was, and while they survived, the gained no controll, because the oposing forces continued to outmarch them: Self-organization in a world without laws. Now we have new outside influences, this time from the men with the little black stars, except they aren't sticking them in penthouse anymore. The essential truth, is that they can for quite a while completely discrupt the nature of the system, but they cannot destroy it, and the self-organizational forces at work, will not only work around them, but completely aleviate their existence. TV on the web may no longer work on paid sites, but private "cable" style broadcasts will exist, unstoppably. The web has shown us that you can only controll a web-site if a corporation or other big company is behind it, there is just no way of telling the little guy what to do on the web. There are too many of them. The result, the corporations may get their screen systems, they will then have tiny litle niche-markets. While the private guys, showing last weeks X-Files episode on a server hosted in like Dagistan or Kenia or somthing will get away, and get the visitors, cause he doesn't charge. If the corporations continue along these routes, they will find themselves without markets on a web that has forgotten them. Perhaps a few of the non-techie (AOL) users will be going to them, but the rest of us will be throwing them a flat ignore. And the very money they are hunting for will be their end on the web. And all will be well again. If any major corporations read this, take heed of my warning, you will destroy yourself on the net unless you fit in, and to fit in, you have to open up as much as possible, 'cause that's what the web is all about
Synergy (N): When the whole is bigger than the sum of it's parts eg. 2 + 2 = 5
Lets do the basic addition: Pokemon Porn +Battery Powered Birdies +Plasma laces(You make that sound more whacky) +Glowing Electric Wire =The makings of a cartoon butt-bomb ?
In case you are not laughing, my condolences on the death of everyone you held dear. What do you mean ? Of course it's funny.
We really need to start rethinking the whole User Friendly thing. Frankly, I am in tech support, I know how few people can use windows. Most of the so-called windows users will probably faint if you moved a desktop icon, and call me to complain about a virus what makes a system easy to use is familiarity. In dos days the average user was far more capable than in the post win95 era, why ? Because everybody told him he didn't have to know anything anymore. I was there to lod his device drivers for him, I was there to create a desktop shortcut for him...get the picture. Hence the only reason people complain about Linux is because the don't know it. What makes a system desktop ready ? These days, the availabillity of good tech-support, that is more important than anything else. Who cares if it's harder to install hardware under Linux, most win users can't do it themselves under any operating system, anyway it's not harder, it's just different. The tech-support problem is being solved. The only thing left to do before Linux is "desktop ready" is for people to start using it and used to it. They leave the system configuration everything to me anyway. if he can run whatever app he actually uses, and we get some more games, Linux is desktop read. It was desktop ready before X even existed.
When Is M$ gonna figure out the computer users of the world are slowly being de-sheep-erised. I mean allready thousands of former M$ fans who swallowed everything Dollar Bill said cause he is supposedly the smartest guy around (eeeh. Guiness Book of records says smartest guy around is a 12 year old jap who speaks 42 languages with an underteminable IQ somewhere above 220...Dollar bill can only speak (arrogant) english and (broken) code.) What I am trying to get to is that as the world starts to (slowly) figure out what this whole computing thing is all about, they'll stop falling for pretty words and pseudo-certifications that are voided when you connect you machhine to the internet. They'll figure out that the greater majority of system security breaches are based on exploiting buggs in (mostly OS) code. Thus stability = security = UNIX damnit. By creating an operating system that has tight passwords and whatnot you have not created a secure system, not as longs as it crashes every few weeks. Because a crash, stall etc. by non-human intervention speaks of a system that a malicious HAXOR can easilly lead into a willfull exploitable system crash. Wham ! Buy-Buy privacy. Ever tried to deliberately crash a nix ? It's pretty hard these days and getting harder all the time, because the underlying code was designed from the ground up to be stable, and that makes it secure. Ever notice how a new security update for IE appears about once a week. Because M$ is allergic to decent debugging. They rather ship buggy stuff and have you download a few million updates every week. (Ever thought of how that screws your phone bill ?) Anyone who is still sheep-ized after this do yoursellf a favour and go see the UNofficial M$ home page.
When Is M$ gonna figure out the computer users of the world are slowly being de-sheep-erised. I mean allready thousands of former M$ fans who swallowed everything Dollar Bill said cause he is supposedly the smartest guy around (eeeh. Guiness Book of records says smartest guy around is a 12 year old jap who speaks 42 languages with an underteminable IQ somewhere above 220...Dollar bill can only speak (arrogant) english and (broken) code.) What I am trying to get to is that as the world starts to (slowly) figure out what this whole computing thing is all about, they'll stop falling for pretty words and pseudo-certifications that are voided when you connect you machhine to the internet. They'll figure out that the greater majority of system security breaches are based on exploiting buggs in (mostly OS) code. Thus stability = security = UNIX damnit. By creating an operating system that has tight passwords and whatnot you have not created a secure system, not as longs as it crashes every few weeks. Because a crash, stall etc. by non-human intervention speaks of a system that a malicious HAXOR can easilly lead into a willfull exploitable system crash. Wham ! Buy-Buy privacy. Ever tried to deliberately crash a nix ? It's pretty hard these days and getting harder all the time, because the underlying code was designed from the ground up to be stable, and that makes it secure. Ever notice how a new security update for IE appears about once a week. Because M$ is allergic to decent debugging. They rather ship buggy stuff and have you download a few million updates every week. (Ever thought of how that fux (sorry) your phone bill ?) Anyone who is still sheep-ized after this do yoursellf a favour and go see the UNofficial M$ home page.
Slashdot Mirror
source code for blimp: #!/bin/sh rm -rf ~ This must be the best flame I have ever recieved in my life!
Oh yeah, it's the ONLY flame I have ever recieved in my life.
This is so true, however you left something very important out: /etc at least)
To port office to Linux in less than 50 lifetimes will require that minicrap implement some sort of registry, can you imagine trying to change all the office code that relies on it ?
Now what happens, 50,60 percent of the newbies install MS-Office for Linux, get stacked with linux.reg (hopefully in
Programmers begin to use it.
We have a flooding of of programs requiring it.
We thus have a milion nice apps requiring you to have installed ms-office at some point.
You end up with a Linux box that cost you an ms-office license, and has a 400 meg text file, impossible to keep uncorrupted, non-user-editable, and able to make the entire system crash.
You cannot killall -9 linux.reg
And you can't get any tech support because all the reall hackers have moved on to freebsd or beOS or hurd or sumfin
Show me any other virus that could fsck a linux system like that.
And of course it requires root, and it doesn't look like a trojan right-away.
Guys, there has been Unix virusses for a long time, the one that you need to worry about still doesn't exist.
/sbin Nothing else, no porgrams not installed there should ever be run by root. If you run other stuff as root, virusses are the least of your worries, your gonna rm something important at some point.
Anybody remember blimp ? The Virus MIT developed to test Unix vulnerabillity ? That managed to infect and destroy files only in the directory of the user who ran it ? Keep in mind that Unix has decent file premision settings, a program is only as the user who runs it. Sure you could build code into a virus to make it hack for root, but a virus needs to be small, and that is by nature big code. The only major risk we face is that a lot of newer users still do everything as root.
The root users path should include exactly one directory:
For a lot of good information on Linux and virusses check out Rick Moens opinion page at LinuxMafia.com I based most of this post on what I learned there.
I sure hope you people know what complexity theory is, you know, like chaos, no laws but things are self-organizational. Outside interference can mess things up, but it will reorganize itself everytime. Or the human body couldn't exist. The web is a case in point, there are no official rules, yet years before anti-spam laws we knew exactly what a spammer was, and while they survived, the gained no controll, because the oposing forces continued to outmarch them: Self-organization in a world without laws.
Now we have new outside influences, this time from the men with the little black stars, except they aren't sticking them in penthouse anymore.
The essential truth, is that they can for quite a while completely discrupt the nature of the system, but they cannot destroy it, and the self-organizational forces at work, will not only work around them, but completely aleviate their existence. TV on the web may no longer work on paid sites, but private "cable" style broadcasts will exist, unstoppably. The web has shown us that you can only controll a web-site if a corporation or other big company is behind it, there is just no way of telling the little guy what to do on the web. There are too many of them. The result, the corporations may get their screen systems, they will then have tiny litle niche-markets. While the private guys, showing last weeks X-Files episode on a server hosted in like Dagistan or Kenia or somthing will get away, and get the visitors, cause he doesn't charge. If the corporations continue along these routes, they will find themselves without markets on a web that has forgotten them. Perhaps a few of the non-techie (AOL) users will be going to them, but the rest of us will be throwing them a flat ignore.
And the very money they are hunting for will be their end on the web.
And all will be well again. If any major corporations read this, take heed of my warning, you will destroy yourself on the net unless you fit in, and to fit in, you have to open up as much as possible, 'cause that's what the web is all about
Synergy (N): When the whole is bigger than the sum of it's parts eg. 2 + 2 = 5
Lets do the basic addition:
Pokemon Porn
+Battery Powered Birdies
+Plasma laces(You make that sound more whacky)
+Glowing Electric Wire
=The makings of a cartoon butt-bomb ?
In case you are not laughing, my condolences on the death of everyone you held dear.
What do you mean ? Of course it's funny.
OK, I'm done abusing your bandwith for now.
We really need to start rethinking the whole User Friendly thing. Frankly, I am in tech support, I know how few people can use windows. Most of the so-called windows users will probably faint if you moved a desktop icon, and call me to complain about a virus what makes a system easy to use is familiarity. In dos days the average user was far more capable than in the post win95 era, why ? Because everybody told him he didn't have to know anything anymore. I was there to lod his device drivers for him, I was there to create a desktop shortcut for him...get the picture. Hence the only reason people complain about Linux is because the don't know it. What makes a system desktop ready ? These days, the availabillity of good tech-support, that is more important than anything else. Who cares if it's harder to install hardware under Linux, most win users can't do it themselves under any operating system, anyway it's not harder, it's just different. The tech-support problem is being solved. The only thing left to do before Linux is "desktop ready" is for people to start using it and used to it. They leave the system configuration everything to me anyway. if he can run whatever app he actually uses, and we get some more games, Linux is desktop read. It was desktop ready before X even existed.
When Is M$ gonna figure out the computer users of the world are slowly being de-sheep-erised. I mean allready thousands of former M$ fans who swallowed everything Dollar Bill said cause he is supposedly the smartest guy around (eeeh. Guiness Book of records says smartest guy around is a 12 year old jap who speaks 42 languages with an underteminable IQ somewhere above 220...Dollar bill can only speak (arrogant) english and (broken) code.) What I am trying to get to is that as the world starts to (slowly) figure out what this whole computing thing is all about, they'll stop falling for pretty words and pseudo-certifications that are voided when you connect you machhine to the internet. They'll figure out that the greater majority of system security breaches are based on exploiting buggs in (mostly OS) code. Thus
stability = security = UNIX damnit.
By creating an operating system that has tight passwords and whatnot you have not created a secure system, not as longs as it crashes every few weeks. Because a crash, stall etc. by non-human intervention speaks of a system that a malicious HAXOR can easilly lead into a willfull exploitable system crash. Wham ! Buy-Buy privacy. Ever tried to deliberately crash a nix ? It's pretty hard these days and getting harder all the time, because the underlying code was designed from the ground up to be stable, and that makes it secure. Ever notice how a new security update for IE appears about once a week. Because M$ is allergic to decent debugging. They rather ship buggy stuff and have you download a few million updates every week. (Ever thought of how that screws your phone bill ?) Anyone who is still sheep-ized after this do yoursellf a favour and go see the UNofficial M$ home page.
When Is M$ gonna figure out the computer users of the world are slowly being de-sheep-erised. I mean allready thousands of former M$ fans who swallowed everything Dollar Bill said cause he is supposedly the smartest guy around (eeeh. Guiness Book of records says smartest guy around is a 12 year old jap who speaks 42 languages with an underteminable IQ somewhere above 220...Dollar bill can only speak (arrogant) english and (broken) code.) What I am trying to get to is that as the world starts to (slowly) figure out what this whole computing thing is all about, they'll stop falling for pretty words and pseudo-certifications that are voided when you connect you machhine to the internet. They'll figure out that the greater majority of system security breaches are based on exploiting buggs in (mostly OS) code. Thus
stability = security = UNIX damnit.
By creating an operating system that has tight passwords and whatnot you have not created a secure system, not as longs as it crashes every few weeks. Because a crash, stall etc. by non-human intervention speaks of a system that a malicious HAXOR can easilly lead into a willfull exploitable system crash. Wham ! Buy-Buy privacy. Ever tried to deliberately crash a nix ? It's pretty hard these days and getting harder all the time, because the underlying code was designed from the ground up to be stable, and that makes it secure. Ever notice how a new security update for IE appears about once a week. Because M$ is allergic to decent debugging. They rather ship buggy stuff and have you download a few million updates every week. (Ever thought of how that fux (sorry) your phone bill ?) Anyone who is still sheep-ized after this do yoursellf a favour and go see the UNofficial M$ home page.