You didn't turn anything around. You listed protected classes and a basis of core beliefs. The Huckabee thing was a protest of her actions and behavior for constantly lying to the people and being an enabler for the dotard, with absolutely zero regard for her race, color, Creed, etc.
I'm torn here. On the one hand your question is easily answered by countering that your assumption involves a spherical cow. In a perfect world your argument is correct. In the subset of the world that is the management world... Not so much. On the other hand I'm glad this is happening as the longer it takes for Trump's decisions to have very visible negative consequences the more we will pay in the long run.
You must be very young / inexperienced. Throughout the history of high technology many predictions fell short while in other areas there has been rapid advancement that nobody anticipated. While their predictions didn't hold up in this case there is no reason why it couldn't have happened. You seem to be saying that anyone who had hopes and faith in a technology that didn't take off as hoped is a rabid technology fanboi. That is ridiculous.
Heartbleed is a perfect example of a problem that was only found because it was Open Source. You want to cry "look how long it took (to work)" as some argument that it didn't happen.... and again, that is stupid. The point is it was found and fixed, and that only happened because it was open source. I didn't waste my time reading the rest of the drivel you wrote. Either you are a troll or you lack the facilities to understand this simple concept.
Dont be snarky about something you don't even understand. What I said is that there is a way but it involves being able to change the file(s) on the server that hold the checksums as well as the actual package(s). It is an extremely secure method, which is why you almost never see a story about an official repo being compromised.
I guess the irony escapes you that you are claimimg something doesn't work in a story about it actually working. Nobody said Open Source will be free of bugs and malware; the fact is that Open Source leaves open opportunities to get better that closed source doesn't have. This is just one example of the Open Source model working in a way closed source simply can't.
That is a ridiculous thing to say. Use of non-official packages / software is *always* a risk, and everything you are claiming is some kind of Achilles heal is actually the tools that help mitigate that risk. They work quite well and have been working well over a decade.
You shouldn't do it for the official / non user repos because that check gets performed automatically by the package management tool so it would be redundant.
People aren't going to waste their time when they know any malicious code will be discovered quickly and there is a high chance their name will be spread far and wide on the blackball circuit.
I see you are confused about how software and Open Source work, even though you are posting on a story of it actually happening. Each individual doesn't have to inspect their own copy. Just one qualified person is all it takes, then everyone benefits from the improved security that results from identifying and correcting the issue. I know... I know... this technology stuff is *SO* confusing!
I always love hearing from the idiots who say that bugs / malicious code that gets found shows that Open Source doesn't have the advantage that more bugs will be found. I wonder if y'all are really that stupid.
So I guess nobody told you, but "savage" was an accurate description of Native Americans circa the 1700s. I agree many would be upset, but it would be in the "contemporary tradition" of people getting upset at facts that clash with their carefully constructed facade of "alternative facts."
There is an important take away here. It has taken Microsoft 9 months to get to the point where something trivial that was mostly complete in October of last year is now ready to be announced as still not ready. The amazing thing is that anyone uses their shit products anymore.
Do you have any proof of this? I always thought that the whole paid shill thing was just a joke meme. It seems like if this was really a thing we would have more than unsubstantiated accusations to show for it.
Slashdot Mirror
In this case a lack of pictures is proof it didn't happen.
2000 people is essentially nobody at internet scale.
You better hope everyone doesn't start refusing service to idiots or you'll starve.
You didn't turn anything around. You listed protected classes and a basis of core beliefs. The Huckabee thing was a protest of her actions and behavior for constantly lying to the people and being an enabler for the dotard, with absolutely zero regard for her race, color, Creed, etc.
I'm torn here. On the one hand your question is easily answered by countering that your assumption involves a spherical cow. In a perfect world your argument is correct. In the subset of the world that is the management world ... Not so much. On the other hand I'm glad this is happening as the longer it takes for Trump's decisions to have very visible negative consequences the more we will pay in the long run.
Ah yes... Good old "Windows for Warehouses" ... which, let's face it, is where Windows belongs.
You must be very young / inexperienced. Throughout the history of high technology many predictions fell short while in other areas there has been rapid advancement that nobody anticipated. While their predictions didn't hold up in this case there is no reason why it couldn't have happened. You seem to be saying that anyone who had hopes and faith in a technology that didn't take off as hoped is a rabid technology fanboi. That is ridiculous.
Heartbleed is a perfect example of a problem that was only found because it was Open Source. You want to cry "look how long it took (to work)" as some argument that it didn't happen .... and again, that is stupid. The point is it was found and fixed, and that only happened because it was open source. I didn't waste my time reading the rest of the drivel you wrote. Either you are a troll or you lack the facilities to understand this simple concept.
Dont be snarky about something you don't even understand. What I said is that there is a way but it involves being able to change the file(s) on the server that hold the checksums as well as the actual package(s). It is an extremely secure method, which is why you almost never see a story about an official repo being compromised.
I guess the irony escapes you that you are claimimg something doesn't work in a story about it actually working. Nobody said Open Source will be free of bugs and malware; the fact is that Open Source leaves open opportunities to get better that closed source doesn't have. This is just one example of the Open Source model working in a way closed source simply can't.
That is a ridiculous thing to say. Use of non-official packages / software is *always* a risk, and everything you are claiming is some kind of Achilles heal is actually the tools that help mitigate that risk. They work quite well and have been working well over a decade.
You shouldn't do it for the official / non user repos because that check gets performed automatically by the package management tool so it would be redundant.
People aren't going to waste their time when they know any malicious code will be discovered quickly and there is a high chance their name will be spread far and wide on the blackball circuit.
I see you are confused about how software and Open Source work, even though you are posting on a story of it actually happening. Each individual doesn't have to inspect their own copy. Just one qualified person is all it takes, then everyone benefits from the improved security that results from identifying and correcting the issue. I know ... I know... this technology stuff is *SO* confusing!
I always love hearing from the idiots who say that bugs / malicious code that gets found shows that Open Source doesn't have the advantage that more bugs will be found. I wonder if y'all are really that stupid.
You would have to be a man to understand ... And you misspelled DarlingBoob.
No, it can't.
Nice example to exemplify my point... Thanks!
So I guess nobody told you, but "savage" was an accurate description of Native Americans circa the 1700s. I agree many would be upset, but it would be in the "contemporary tradition" of people getting upset at facts that clash with their carefully constructed facade of "alternative facts."
That's weird. I would have expected it would be because you do things like randomly repeating words in a way that makes the sentence nonsensical :-)
Turn in your geek card in the unlikely event one was ever issued to you in the first place.
There is an important take away here. It has taken Microsoft 9 months to get to the point where something trivial that was mostly complete in October of last year is now ready to be announced as still not ready. The amazing thing is that anyone uses their shit products anymore.
Do you have any proof of this? I always thought that the whole paid shill thing was just a joke meme. It seems like if this was really a thing we would have more than unsubstantiated accusations to show for it.
You make a good point. They screwed the pooch on that one. They should have been more accurate and portrayed him as the Antichrist.
A feeling isn't a fact. You might *feel* that it would let the attacker in as well, but the fact is it wouldn't.