Was this a rebuttal? Because aside from your point about infrastructure (which is easy to find guidance about in most areas without involving VCs), it sounds like you're supporting my assertion.
Being in Silicon Valley makes sense if your goal is to obtain VC money. If your goal is to make a successful tech business, though, Silicon Valley hasn't been the place to be for a very long time.
I spent years working for a computer security firm who kept live malware for investigation and testing purposes. All live malware was restricted to a single room with very limited access and no network connectivity. Even if you were allowed access, it was forbidden to bring any devices (including any storage devices or even your personal cellphone) into it or to take any such devices out.
Never once has any malware escaped from that lab. I assume that the University of Florida handles this stuff in a similar way.
In fact it is a complicated and expensive thing if you lose all your keys to the car.
That's a serious problem. Those keys with embedded transponders already make it difficult and expensive to even make a copy of your key for storage. It seems crazy to make that situation even worse.
I like to think of it as a good value in that if it costs me that much, it costs the criminals that much as well.
Fair enough. Obviously, I take the opposite point of view. It dramatically reduces the value of the vehicle to me, and is a strong reason to avoid purchasing such vehicles.
You didn't even read my criticism carefully enough to find out that I accused of having not put any effort into understanding what I said
Of course I did. Stop being silly.
Where does the imagined freedom "not being spied upon" end and "you can record whatever you want in public" begin?
You see, was that so hard? Now I'll provide the response that I already provided: this isn't about balancing the freedoms between citizens. This is about the limits of governmental power.
It would be more productive if you actually explained your thought process rather than just imply that I'm an idiot. How can I learn what I have wrong if you're unwilling to teach me?
That means if you try to steal the car, you will need to tear out the ECU and replace it with a completely brand new factory fresh one, or a used one that comes with the original keys. Rather more complicated and quite expensive.
This implies that losing your existing keys would also be complicated and quite expensive to recover from as well. If that's the case, I would actively avoid such a system. I've never had my car stolen, but I've had to replace keys a few times in my life.
Of course it is -- I hope I didn't imply that I thought otherwise. It's your financial life, you can do as you wish with it. I still think it's pretty nutty, though.
But many people will have less personal satisfaction with what the serviceable car has to offer.
Well, yes, that's why it's called a "serviceable" car. The point is that the serviceable car is temporary. It's what you drive while you're accumulating enough money to buy a better car.
Outside is some rare circumstances, going into real debt to buy a new car seems crazy to me. It's unnecessarily sacrificing your standard of living in the medium to long term for the sake of immediate gratification.
I have borrowed money to buy temporary serviceable cars, but only if I can pay it off in two or three payments. If I can't do that, then I can't afford the car I'm looking at.
I'll stop bashing GMO foods when GMO foods stop being used as the means to legally ensure that there can be no such thing as self-sustaining food production.
If the prosecutor can't establish where evidence came from, it's not admissible.
That's why prosecutors obfuscate where evidence comes from through the miscarriage of justice that is known as "parallel construction." That way, they can use the evidence without the legal risk of it being excluded.
This is why I avoid using public transport. I started avoiding it when they installed those video surveillance systems. Including audio surveillance just makes using it that much more objectionable.
These types of stats are gathered using the user agent string in a http request, not from ads.
I spoof my User Agent string to make my machines look like Windows running Firefox, to get around those idiotic websites that insist on altering behavior according to your browser or OS, so I'm pretty sure that my machines were not correctly counted.
I don't know what you'll take as "proof", nor why you demand it so, considering that the original comment provided none for its assertions either, but here's my take:
#1: Nonsequitor. Yes, SystemD is being forced on people in a way that many consider unacceptable. No, this won't affect Linux adoption to any measurable degree.
#2: That's an opinion that is not universal. Also, it ignores that there are many UIs that are not Gnome or KDE and are hard to distinguish from Windows. There is great variety here, people can select the UI that they get along best with.
#3: This is true, gaming support is terrible (although I think the reason he gives is very misleading). This is improving, but remains an issue. OTOH, I know many Linux gamers who run Windows in a VM for the games they can't run natively, and are happy with that.
#4: This is false. I've been using OpenOffice and Libre for many years in an office environment, exchanging files with MS Office users frequently, and this hasn't been as issue at all for years. It is true, however, that the open source versions of these sorts of applications do not work identically to the Office products and require relearning some habits. But that are equally functional and usable.
#5: While it is true that no security is perfect and there will always be breaches -- even in the Linux world -- I'm not sure how this truth decreases the chances of Linux adoption, given that it is at least equally true for all alternatives, including Windows.
#6: False. It is easier to get answers to questions about Linuxy things than for any other OS I use. Even if you're too timid to ask questions on expert and hobbyist sites, you can still pay cash money to get professional support.
#7: False. While that sort of thing does happen, it doesn't happen as frequently as he implies -- and when it does, it is generally not a large disruption. Personally, I've had just as much problem with this sort of thing in the Windows world as in the Linux world, so I don' t know how this is a differentiator.
#8: I honestly don't know what he's talking about here. This sort of thing happened a lot in the old days, but I can't remember it happening with any of my machines for a few years now.
#9: False.
#10: False, and an odd criticism. Most Linux users I know who have multiple machines run a single distro on all of them. The main distros support nearly everything, there is no need to have certain distros for certain kinds of machines.
#11: False. In the main distros, all telemetry in the OS and core utilities is optional, unlike Windows 10. It is also well documented and easy to disable. Naturally, if you're talking about applications written by random developers, it's up to the developer how this is handled -- but at least in Linux it's easy to simply firewall off any and all applications you don't trust.
I see 10-20 year old computers in use all the time. "Obsolete" equipment doesn't evaporate, it gets refurbished and resold to people who can't or don't want to afford the latest and greatest.
Most of those computers run Win 7, but a substantial number run Linux.
Slashdot Mirror
Didn't Obama count as a liberal?
No. Obama is a left-leaning centrist.
This move was completely expected. Congress is in favor of the maximum amount of spying that they can get away with.
Was this a rebuttal? Because aside from your point about infrastructure (which is easy to find guidance about in most areas without involving VCs), it sounds like you're supporting my assertion.
Being in Silicon Valley makes sense if your goal is to obtain VC money. If your goal is to make a successful tech business, though, Silicon Valley hasn't been the place to be for a very long time.
I spent years working for a computer security firm who kept live malware for investigation and testing purposes. All live malware was restricted to a single room with very limited access and no network connectivity. Even if you were allowed access, it was forbidden to bring any devices (including any storage devices or even your personal cellphone) into it or to take any such devices out.
Never once has any malware escaped from that lab. I assume that the University of Florida handles this stuff in a similar way.
You beat me to it!
This sounds like old-school tech. The larger question is: why hasn't everyone been using tripwire systems for years already?
In fact it is a complicated and expensive thing if you lose all your keys to the car.
That's a serious problem. Those keys with embedded transponders already make it difficult and expensive to even make a copy of your key for storage. It seems crazy to make that situation even worse.
I like to think of it as a good value in that if it costs me that much, it costs the criminals that much as well.
Fair enough. Obviously, I take the opposite point of view. It dramatically reduces the value of the vehicle to me, and is a strong reason to avoid purchasing such vehicles.
You didn't even read my criticism carefully enough to find out that I accused of having not put any effort into understanding what I said
Of course I did. Stop being silly.
Where does the imagined freedom "not being spied upon" end and "you can record whatever you want in public" begin?
You see, was that so hard? Now I'll provide the response that I already provided: this isn't about balancing the freedoms between citizens. This is about the limits of governmental power.
It would be more productive if you actually explained your thought process rather than just imply that I'm an idiot. How can I learn what I have wrong if you're unwilling to teach me?
I said nothing that implied removing any rights from anyone. I'm talking about restricting government action.
That means if you try to steal the car, you will need to tear out the ECU and replace it with a completely brand new factory fresh one, or a used one that comes with the original keys. Rather more complicated and quite expensive.
This implies that losing your existing keys would also be complicated and quite expensive to recover from as well. If that's the case, I would actively avoid such a system. I've never had my car stolen, but I've had to replace keys a few times in my life.
But it is kind of, my choice, you know.....
Of course it is -- I hope I didn't imply that I thought otherwise. It's your financial life, you can do as you wish with it. I still think it's pretty nutty, though.
But many people will have less personal satisfaction with what the serviceable car has to offer.
Well, yes, that's why it's called a "serviceable" car. The point is that the serviceable car is temporary. It's what you drive while you're accumulating enough money to buy a better car.
Outside is some rare circumstances, going into real debt to buy a new car seems crazy to me. It's unnecessarily sacrificing your standard of living in the medium to long term for the sake of immediate gratification.
I have borrowed money to buy temporary serviceable cars, but only if I can pay it off in two or three payments. If I can't do that, then I can't afford the car I'm looking at.
Damn, I can't wait until this horrible election is over with and we can stop getting political comments on every damned story.
Sure, but that doesn't address the issue.
I'm clearly getting increased safety in a real way.
That's not as clear to me as it is to you, but regardless...
What freedom does this actually reduce?
Personally, I think that the freedom to act without being spied on counts as a real freedom.
I'll stop bashing GMO foods when GMO foods stop being used as the means to legally ensure that there can be no such thing as self-sustaining food production.
I would much prefer to live free in a dangerous world than to live safely in an unfree world.
If the prosecutor can't establish where evidence came from, it's not admissible.
That's why prosecutors obfuscate where evidence comes from through the miscarriage of justice that is known as "parallel construction." That way, they can use the evidence without the legal risk of it being excluded.
This is why I avoid using public transport. I started avoiding it when they installed those video surveillance systems. Including audio surveillance just makes using it that much more objectionable.
(On my desktop as well as mobile devices)
These types of stats are gathered using the user agent string in a http request, not from ads.
I spoof my User Agent string to make my machines look like Windows running Firefox, to get around those idiotic websites that insist on altering behavior according to your browser or OS, so I'm pretty sure that my machines were not correctly counted.
I don't know what you'll take as "proof", nor why you demand it so, considering that the original comment provided none for its assertions either, but here's my take:
#1: Nonsequitor. Yes, SystemD is being forced on people in a way that many consider unacceptable. No, this won't affect Linux adoption to any measurable degree.
#2: That's an opinion that is not universal. Also, it ignores that there are many UIs that are not Gnome or KDE and are hard to distinguish from Windows. There is great variety here, people can select the UI that they get along best with.
#3: This is true, gaming support is terrible (although I think the reason he gives is very misleading). This is improving, but remains an issue. OTOH, I know many Linux gamers who run Windows in a VM for the games they can't run natively, and are happy with that.
#4: This is false. I've been using OpenOffice and Libre for many years in an office environment, exchanging files with MS Office users frequently, and this hasn't been as issue at all for years. It is true, however, that the open source versions of these sorts of applications do not work identically to the Office products and require relearning some habits. But that are equally functional and usable.
#5: While it is true that no security is perfect and there will always be breaches -- even in the Linux world -- I'm not sure how this truth decreases the chances of Linux adoption, given that it is at least equally true for all alternatives, including Windows.
#6: False. It is easier to get answers to questions about Linuxy things than for any other OS I use. Even if you're too timid to ask questions on expert and hobbyist sites, you can still pay cash money to get professional support.
#7: False. While that sort of thing does happen, it doesn't happen as frequently as he implies -- and when it does, it is generally not a large disruption. Personally, I've had just as much problem with this sort of thing in the Windows world as in the Linux world, so I don' t know how this is a differentiator.
#8: I honestly don't know what he's talking about here. This sort of thing happened a lot in the old days, but I can't remember it happening with any of my machines for a few years now.
#9: False.
#10: False, and an odd criticism. Most Linux users I know who have multiple machines run a single distro on all of them. The main distros support nearly everything, there is no need to have certain distros for certain kinds of machines.
#11: False. In the main distros, all telemetry in the OS and core utilities is optional, unlike Windows 10. It is also well documented and easy to disable. Naturally, if you're talking about applications written by random developers, it's up to the developer how this is handled -- but at least in Linux it's easy to simply firewall off any and all applications you don't trust.
I see 10-20 year old computers in use all the time. "Obsolete" equipment doesn't evaporate, it gets refurbished and resold to people who can't or don't want to afford the latest and greatest.
Most of those computers run Win 7, but a substantial number run Linux.
Electrolytic capacitors have a limited life span and will eventually, inevitably fail whether they're used or not.