More developers mean a lot of would-be-nice-to-have tasks get implemented, instead of just the absolutely-must-have tasks. If you want to call this "additional complexity", that's fine. The rest of the world call them "features".
Nope, if the would-be-nice-to-have "features" make the system less stable or harder to use some of us call would call them "bugs".
Please speak for only yourself and don't pretend you speak for the "rest of the world". We are perfectly capable of speaking for ourselves.
Well seeing as I can't see what is at the link anyway it because I am not a twit, err, have a Twitter account, it does not seem fair to blame Google for your fail.
I am not one of the losers with a Facebook account either, why not post it on G+ so I can see what you are ranting about?
Diversity is simply the latest code word for anti-white male.
LOL White Males are doing it to themselves! Come on, just look at the list of White males acting anti-socially, among them:
- the entire group of White males running for President as a Republican (blowhard Donald Trump leads that list)
-a whole bunch of mass murderers: Charles Manson, Charles Whitman, Timothy McVeigh, Dick Cheney
- a lot of global "political" leaders to numerous to list, starting with Vladimir Putin and Josef Stalin in Russia and Adolf Hitler in Germany
If you White males want people to not be against you then you White males need to quit acting like the world revolves around you all. You need to quit fucking over non-White people just because we make you uncomfortable.
Not sure why people are picking on poor Amazon, this bias towards White males extends industry-wide in the IT field. For example take a look at Rackspace Hosting's senior leadership team:
100% White, 95% White male. This in Bexar County Texas, which is 60% Hispanic. Maybe if they have a little more diversity in the senior leadership team their stock price would not be sucking so much:
Down $15 in three months, if I was a RAX stockholder I would be asking a lot of questions about why the senior leadership team is all-White.
If their stock price had gone up $15 then nobody would give a rat's ass but giving White males a pass just because they are White males when they are driving down the price of the company's stock is just plain bad business.
This example really tells you a lot about the state of "diversity" in IT these days...
You obviously don't know biology -- monoculture is a bad thing in agriculture. It is also bad socially, for proof just look at the US Republican party.
For example, there is a bicycle manufacturer that has added the warning to their bikes of "Not to be consumed" all because some F-N moron apparently decided to try and eat one of their bikes, and then sued the company because they didn't tell him not to.
Citation please? And pretty please, use a mainstream media source and not some right-wing crank website.
Don't want to eat GE crops? There are only 8 species of food crop that are GE; if doing five minutes of research are so hard then perhaps you don't care that much anyway.
You know what would really help consumers a lot? If there were LABELS to tell which were GE crops and which weren't. Why are you so anti-consumer on this issue?
I'll believe you care about 'knowing what's in your food' and not just fearmongering when you demand all other methods of crop improvement (which most people outside of plant & agricultural science [that's you] don't even know about) be labeled and demand labeling for the hows, whys, and benefits of what has been genetically engineered.
Great idea! LABEL ALL THE THINGS!
Maybe when you give me a reason to suspect genetic engineering, instead of arbitrarily singling it out, I'll ignore all the safety data that shows no problems. So, lets talk biochemistry; what is it you find uniquely suspicious about genetic engineering, and be as specific as possible.
No let's talk "all the safety data that shows no problems" instead. Citation please?
So you write a post slandering the flawless safety record of GE crops, reflecting the multitude of misinformation on the internet, then wonder why farmers and seed companies don't want them labeled? Gee, I can't imagine why.
And again, concerning the "the flawless safety record of GE crops", citation please? It would be nice to know that in this imperfect world a single pool of perfection exists: GE crops.
Also how do we know that in the past a farmer has not been crushed/suffocated by a pile of GE crops? Given the number of farm accidents annually world-wide the odds are good that GE crops have been involved in at least one farm accident.
But of course we would never find out about the linkage given the industry's fear of "Killer GE Crop" headlines...
(Anyone with two braincells to rub together would know what landing your contraception on the white house lawn would get you nabbed by guys in black vans in full view of press cameras)
The White House would most likely freak out if everybody started landing condoms and birth control pills on their lawn!
In Texas, the value of the property will generally control the level of the offense. The higher the value of the vehicle, the higher the range of punishment for the vehicle theft.
An inexpensive vehicle theft, (under $1500), is punished as a misdemeanor punishable by up to a year in county jail.
I have traced my family history back hundreds of years. Not a single ancestor within the past three hundred years owned a slave.
Also are you sure that NOBODY In your family owned slaves? Let's see, 300 years is 10 generations, going back to the mid-Seventeenth century. That is 2046 possible ancestors going back "to around the time of the English Civil War and to the early days of British settlement in North America":
Your claim that NONE of your of your ancestors owned slaves is simply unsupportable. First of all you would have to have perfect records kept during wars, revolutions, famines, epidemics, etc. Second unless you are seriously inbred you have family from all over the globe, which complicates tracing one's family history immensely.
I refuse to be punished for the acts committed by individuals over 100 years ago, especially as those acts were not committed by my ancestors.
Meanwhile you take advantage of the system of White privilege that the slave-holding families built, so you are indirectly benefiting from slavery in spite of your dubious claim your family NEVER owned slaves. Must be nice to be White in the US.
I have long stated that Affirmative Action is broken. I applaud its desire to fix a real problem, but the net effect is reverse discrimination. Best qualified is best qualified whether male, female, black, blue, brown, yellow, white, or orange.
Your ignorance on political history is stunning, but that is unsurprising, seeing how your veil slips when you use the word "Democrat" as an adjective.
Throughout history, which of the two dominant political parties at any given time would correspond to today's "righ" and "left" has shifted many times, with the last significant shift corresponding to Nixon's adoption of the "Southern Strategy" in 1968, 47 years ago. Your contention that segregationists were "overwhelmingly Democrat over the past century" turns on all of three years and hasn't been true for the lifetimes of the vast majority of Slashdot readers.
But hey, gotta keep those disingenuous right-wing talking points going, don't we.
I am a socialist (Barack Obama is closer to Dwight Eisenhower and Gerald Ford than me) and you are basically correct but I wanted to comment on a couple of points:
1. You are partially correct about shifts in the electorate, they are called "realigning elections" but the last one most people agree on was Ronald Reagan's election in 1980.
Wikipedia speculates that Bill Clinton's and Barack Obama's elections were of the realigning type but I disagree because the swing to the left in those elections did not persist and the electorate has swung back to the right since then while Reagan's realignment was more lasting.
2. By the time John F. Kennedy was elected the Democratic Party was already on left nationally but many parts of the Southern US (including Texas) only had one party, the Democratic Party. As such the Democratic Party covered both ends of the spectrum but overall in the South the Party leaned to the right due to the conservatism of the White Protestants that ruled (and still rule) the South.
Richard Nixon's Southern Strategy was an attempt to split the Democrats in the South, and it worked for him. By the time Jimmy Carter (who was a Southerner himself) was elected the conservatives had already become disenchanted by the Democratic Party and had switched to the Republican Party. But one needs to remember that before the rise of the Republican Party in the South there were a fair number of White Protestant racists who supported segregation in the Democratic Party because there was no other place for them to go.
Also don't forget that in many progressive places like New York and Boston there were a lot of racist White Protestants that voted Democratic until Reagan. They also became disenchanted by the Democratic Party because of its emphasis on civil rights for minorities and they too became Republicans because they felt more comfortable with their fellow White racists in the Republican Party.
While I agree that Faux News and their ilk may be twisting the truth and making false narratives into talking points the only way the Left can fight those false narratives is to be totally honest, which includes admitting that the Democratic Party has been racist in the past. As long as in the present Democrats keep supporting racial equality and diversity it will eventually serve as an impetus for any racists remaining in the Democratic Party to finally become Republicans.
* With an Android device, the manufacturer outright abandons updating the phone the moment their next handset is on sale. (Samsung seems to be the worst about this, but, even Google has done it to stock Nexus phones.)
One word: CyaongenMod
I only upgraded my Samsung Vibrant to a Samsung Note 2 because I wanted 4G and a bigger screen. CyanogenMod gave the Vibrant whole new lease on life plus no crappy Samsung or t-Mobile apps. I'd like a new Samsung Note 4 but I will probably put CyanogenMod on my current phone and use it for another year.
Too bad I can't do that the iPhone 4 work made me buy when they paid for my phone line. I hated both AT&T and the iPhone so I told work to stop paying for my phone. About the best I can do is sell it cheap to some iTard...
So all your web browsing is under webuser, how do you refer to web manuals while using an application as user?
Notice I said a separate webuser for porn surfing. I don't usually have issues with websites containing tech info infecting my PCs, but that will could change in the future.
Personally I find application manuals on the box itself are usually pretty useless. When I need that sort of info I will 'su -' to the regular user and use elinks to search the internet. If I really need to see the pretty pictures I will run a VNC session as the regular user and connect to that.
SSHing to a Linux box and tunneling a VNC session to my local desktop also works great on Windoze. For those times I am stuck on a Windoze PC that has net access I always carry a copy of putty and vncviewer on a USB flash drive.
Unless of course, the script has an exploit to give itself root access - which plenty of such are frequently being patched.
Very true, I glossed over the whole exploit gaining root access thing because the hypothetical webuser should not have root or sudo access. If the webuser could possibly click on an exploit to activate it then they really should not have any sort of root access. Why would a user who only exists to surf porn on the web need that sort of access anyway?
As far as taking advantage of a buffer overrun to gain root access, that is a crappy programming problem that can affect any OS, not just Linux. if you are that worried about that problem then run Linux in a VM and have no important data either on the VM or on the VM's host. If you do get compromised then you can revert to a prior snapshot. You can copy the compromised VM for further forensic study before you revert if that kind of thing interests you.
Contrary to the OP's assertion I think that the OS you run absolutely matters. I would use a reverted Linux VM for further porn surfing without a second thought. With Windows if you have a special VM and host for porn surfing then it would probably be OK too if it was on an isolated porn surfing VLAN. Otherwise you run the risk of Windows reaching out to other Windows boxes and doing a drive-by and infecting those too. If you are that paranoid about security then it probably would not hurt to use an isolated porn surfing VLAN for your Linux VMs too.
Of course I am only referring to criminals trying to exploit your boxes. Once you start talking about state actors working under the auspices of a nation's government then everything goes out your Windows (pun intended).
You could air-gap any boxes you want to protect but then then that information can become pretty useless to you because it is hard to access when you need it. And air-gaps (as well as fine-grained access controls) will not prevent INSIDERS from compromising your systems, which makes me wonder why more criminals don't try bribing insiders to accomplish their nefarious ends like governments have been known to do in the past.
Umm... last time I checked, I admit it has been a while, pretty much the same is possible in Windows.
This is how flamewars begin. If you are really talking about the problem being users (which I agree with) then you need to keep it general and you do not need to reference ANY operating systems.
As for the racist bit, if you read the line to the end you'd have noticed the reason why it doesn't matter. Please do so next time and save me the need to point out the obvious.
I did not call you a racist, I only implied you were not being truthful. You need to learn how to parse what you read better.
As far as the truth, you keep referring to individual operating systems when it sounds like you are trying to say they don't really matter. If they don't really matter then why do you keep mentioning them?
In order to get your ideas across better you need to improve your English writing skills (i.e., don't say stupid shit like you are not trying to start a flamewar). If you are not trying to start a flamewar then it should go without saying (i.e., it should be "obvious").
And yes, the operating system does matter. You are only looking at Linux usage on the desktop, how many servers run Linux? If you add them into the total Linux usage then then the "market" is pretty big. Linux servers can get compromised too, in fact the only Linux boxes running AV these days tend to be servers.
Anecdotally none of the friends who I set up with Linux (and NO antivirus) for surfing porn have gotten owned, so I would say contrary to your assertion the OS you run DOES matter.
As for "but it's more secure because you don't need root for every shit": The current big thing, cryptolocker, would work just as well on Linux. It needs no special privileges, all it needs is to run as the current user to encrypt all of the current user's documents and hold them for ransom.
Hmmm... You have a regular user called user who has their docs in/home/user. You surf the web with a different user, say webuser, who has their docs in/home/webuser. If webuser is dumb enough to run a script that encrypts/home/webuser what has the hacker accomplished?
They haven't touched anything in/home/user. You can log in as root and run: 'rm -rf/home/webuser' then 'mkdir/home/webuser'. Copy a few files from/etc/skel then run 'chown -r webuser:webuser/home/webuser' and you are back in business. Or you can run 'userdel -r webuser' and 'useradd-d webuser' and you are good to go.
Either way whoever encrypted webuser's files just wasted their time with very little to show for it as the problem can be easily fixed by you at the cost of just a couple of minutes of your time.
Also just about every Linux user I know has good backups of their documents. If you happen to be stupid enough to get your home directory encrypted and you don't have good backups then you probably shouldn't be using a computer much less using Linux.
I don't want to start the flamewar of whether Linux is more secure than Windows.
Yeah right. Every single racist I have met has told me "I am not a racist". Just because someone claims something is true that does not necessarily mean that that something is actually true.
In a sense, it's almost unfair (DISCRIMINATION!) to pretend everyone is equal and the same....to expect them all to sit in a classroom or office and get along when some people are at a drastic chemical disadvantage in such environments.
Only on Slashdot can someone be brazen enough to equate egalitarianism with 'DISCRIMINATION' (there I fixed the spelling for you).
Must be OPPOSITE DAY and I missed the memo or something.
Slashdot Mirror
More developers mean a lot of would-be-nice-to-have tasks get implemented, instead of just the absolutely-must-have tasks. If you want to call this "additional complexity", that's fine. The rest of the world call them "features".
Nope, if the would-be-nice-to-have "features" make the system less stable or harder to use some of us call would call them "bugs".
Please speak for only yourself and don't pretend you speak for the "rest of the world". We are perfectly capable of speaking for ourselves.
k thx bye
Yes, and it'd be nice if it wasn't so hidden.
http://lmgtfy.com/?q=does+freebsd+have+a+package+manager
Yes, the first link returned by a Google search is an absolutely brilliant place to hide information!
[Looks at first link]
Man, who would have ever thought of looking in the FreeBSD documentation for information about FreeBSD?
[head explodes]
Then they need to do this for ALL copyright works. So coping a line in newspaper would be equally valuable.
It DOES apply to ALL copyrighted works but there are exceptions. You should look up "Fair Use" sometime:
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Fair_use
Stupid Google+ integration problem apparently: http://slashdot.org/~wilsonmar...
Well seeing as I can't see what is at the link anyway it because I am not a twit, err, have a Twitter account, it does not seem fair to blame Google for your fail.
I am not one of the losers with a Facebook account either, why not post it on G+ so I can see what you are ranting about?
Diversity is simply the latest code word for anti-white male.
LOL White Males are doing it to themselves! Come on, just look at the list of White males acting anti-socially, among them:
- the entire group of White males running for President as a Republican (blowhard Donald Trump leads that list)
-a whole bunch of mass murderers: Charles Manson, Charles Whitman, Timothy McVeigh, Dick Cheney
- a lot of global "political" leaders to numerous to list, starting with Vladimir Putin and Josef Stalin in Russia and Adolf Hitler in Germany
If you White males want people to not be against you then you White males need to quit acting like the world revolves around you all. You need to quit fucking over non-White people just because we make you uncomfortable.
Not sure why people are picking on poor Amazon, this bias towards White males extends industry-wide in the IT field. For example take a look at Rackspace Hosting's senior leadership team:
http://www.rackspace.com/en-us/about/leadership
100% White, 95% White male. This in Bexar County Texas, which is 60% Hispanic. Maybe if they have a little more diversity in the senior leadership team their stock price would not be sucking so much:
http://finance.yahoo.com/q/hp?s=RAX
Down $15 in three months, if I was a RAX stockholder I would be asking a lot of questions about why the senior leadership team is all-White.
If their stock price had gone up $15 then nobody would give a rat's ass but giving White males a pass just because they are White males when they are driving down the price of the company's stock is just plain bad business.
This example really tells you a lot about the state of "diversity" in IT these days...
You obviously don't know biology -- monoculture is a bad thing in agriculture. It is also bad socially, for proof just look at the US Republican party.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Monoculture
You cluelessness about libertarians is typical of those who don't want to understand personal responsibility because it scares them.
If anyone is clueless it is the libertarians. Name one country with a libertarian government that actually works. You can't because none exist.
This is what happens when Ayn Rand fanbois decide to start a community based on their "ideals":
http://www.addictinginfo.org/2014/09/15/libertarian-utopia-styled-after-ayn-rand-book-spectacularly-falls-apart-almost-immediately/
Selfishness is NOT a virtue...
The only thing wrong with Texas is that it's full of Texans.
Not Austin. Austin doesn't contain any Texans; it's filled with damnyankees.
LOL seeing as how Austin is 35% Hispanic if this was true it would be full of Puerto Ricans instead of Mexican Americans.
Source: US Census http://quickfacts.census.gov/qfd/states/48/4805000.html
For example, there is a bicycle manufacturer that has added the warning to their bikes of "Not to be consumed" all because some F-N moron apparently decided to try and eat one of their bikes, and then sued the company because they didn't tell him not to.
Citation please? And pretty please, use a mainstream media source and not some right-wing crank website.
Don't want to eat GE crops? There are only 8 species of food crop that are GE; if doing five minutes of research are so hard then perhaps you don't care that much anyway.
You know what would really help consumers a lot? If there were LABELS to tell which were GE crops and which weren't. Why are you so anti-consumer on this issue?
I'll believe you care about 'knowing what's in your food' and not just fearmongering when you demand all other methods of crop improvement (which most people outside of plant & agricultural science [that's you] don't even know about) be labeled and demand labeling for the hows, whys, and benefits of what has been genetically engineered.
Great idea! LABEL ALL THE THINGS!
Maybe when you give me a reason to suspect genetic engineering, instead of arbitrarily singling it out, I'll ignore all the safety data that shows no problems. So, lets talk biochemistry; what is it you find uniquely suspicious about genetic engineering, and be as specific as possible.
No let's talk "all the safety data that shows no problems" instead. Citation please?
So you write a post slandering the flawless safety record of GE crops, reflecting the multitude of misinformation on the internet, then wonder why farmers and seed companies don't want them labeled? Gee, I can't imagine why.
LOL according to the law you can only slander humans beings and not inanimate objects. http://dictionary.law.com/Default.aspx?selected=1969 BZZT try again!
And again, concerning the "the flawless safety record of GE crops", citation please? It would be nice to know that in this imperfect world a single pool of perfection exists: GE crops.
Also how do we know that in the past a farmer has not been crushed/suffocated by a pile of GE crops? Given the number of farm accidents annually world-wide the odds are good that GE crops have been involved in at least one farm accident.
But of course we would never find out about the linkage given the industry's fear of "Killer GE Crop" headlines...
(Anyone with two braincells to rub together would know what landing your contraception on the white house lawn would get you nabbed by guys in black vans in full view of press cameras)
The White House would most likely freak out if everybody started landing condoms and birth control pills on their lawn!
There is no non-felonious murder or car theft.
Wrong, at least for car theft in Texas:
In Texas, the value of the property will generally control the level of the offense. The higher the value of the vehicle, the higher the range of punishment for the vehicle theft.
An inexpensive vehicle theft, (under $1500), is punished as a misdemeanor punishable by up to a year in county jail.
http://criminal-law.freeadvice.com/criminal-law/white_collar_crimes/vehicle-theft.htm
geo ip block lists to block china russia and some other countries at the firewall and viola peace on the network.
Now that you mention it some sweet, sweet viola music would go well with a peaceful network :-)
I have traced my family history back hundreds of years. Not a single ancestor within the past three hundred years owned a slave.
Also are you sure that NOBODY In your family owned slaves? Let's see, 300 years is 10 generations, going back to the mid-Seventeenth century. That is 2046 possible ancestors going back "to around the time of the English Civil War and to the early days of British settlement in North America":
https://thewildpeak.wordpress.com/2012/03/04/how-many-ancestors-do-you-have/
Your claim that NONE of your of your ancestors owned slaves is simply unsupportable. First of all you would have to have perfect records kept during wars, revolutions, famines, epidemics, etc. Second unless you are seriously inbred you have family from all over the globe, which complicates tracing one's family history immensely.
I refuse to be punished for the acts committed by individuals over 100 years ago, especially as those acts were not committed by my ancestors.
Meanwhile you take advantage of the system of White privilege that the slave-holding families built, so you are indirectly benefiting from slavery in spite of your dubious claim your family NEVER owned slaves. Must be nice to be White in the US.
I have long stated that Affirmative Action is broken. I applaud its desire to fix a real problem, but the net effect is reverse discrimination. Best qualified is best qualified whether male, female, black, blue, brown, yellow, white, or orange.
There is no such thing as "reverse racism":
http://everydayfeminism.com/2014/10/history-of-black-white-relations/
I guess "best qualified" is why Whites dominate in the CEO suite:
http://www2.ucsc.edu/whorulesamerica/power/diversity_among_ceos.html
It also must be the reason that the US Congress does not look like the US racially:
http://www.washingtonpost.com/blogs/the-fix/wp/2015/01/05/the-new-congress-is-80-percent-white-80-percent-male-and-92-percent-christian/
It also must be why there has not been a noticeable rise in minorities in the Forbes 400 Richest Americans list:
http://gawker.com/5645917/the-forbes-400-a-demographic-breakdown
All I can say is I really want to get some of whatever you are smoking!
Your ignorance on political history is stunning, but that is unsurprising, seeing how your veil slips when you use the word "Democrat" as an adjective. Throughout history, which of the two dominant political parties at any given time would correspond to today's "righ" and "left" has shifted many times, with the last significant shift corresponding to Nixon's adoption of the "Southern Strategy" in 1968, 47 years ago. Your contention that segregationists were "overwhelmingly Democrat over the past century" turns on all of three years and hasn't been true for the lifetimes of the vast majority of Slashdot readers.
But hey, gotta keep those disingenuous right-wing talking points going, don't we.
I am a socialist (Barack Obama is closer to Dwight Eisenhower and Gerald Ford than me) and you are basically correct but I wanted to comment on a couple of points:
1. You are partially correct about shifts in the electorate, they are called "realigning elections" but the last one most people agree on was Ronald Reagan's election in 1980.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Realigning_election
Wikipedia speculates that Bill Clinton's and Barack Obama's elections were of the realigning type but I disagree because the swing to the left in those elections did not persist and the electorate has swung back to the right since then while Reagan's realignment was more lasting.
2. By the time John F. Kennedy was elected the Democratic Party was already on left nationally but many parts of the Southern US (including Texas) only had one party, the Democratic Party. As such the Democratic Party covered both ends of the spectrum but overall in the South the Party leaned to the right due to the conservatism of the White Protestants that ruled (and still rule) the South.
Richard Nixon's Southern Strategy was an attempt to split the Democrats in the South, and it worked for him. By the time Jimmy Carter (who was a Southerner himself) was elected the conservatives had already become disenchanted by the Democratic Party and had switched to the Republican Party. But one needs to remember that before the rise of the Republican Party in the South there were a fair number of White Protestant racists who supported segregation in the Democratic Party because there was no other place for them to go.
Also don't forget that in many progressive places like New York and Boston there were a lot of racist White Protestants that voted Democratic until Reagan. They also became disenchanted by the Democratic Party because of its emphasis on civil rights for minorities and they too became Republicans because they felt more comfortable with their fellow White racists in the Republican Party.
While I agree that Faux News and their ilk may be twisting the truth and making false narratives into talking points the only way the Left can fight those false narratives is to be totally honest, which includes admitting that the Democratic Party has been racist in the past. As long as in the present Democrats keep supporting racial equality and diversity it will eventually serve as an impetus for any racists remaining in the Democratic Party to finally become Republicans.
cash strapped cities not allowed to raise taxes
In the US most political subdivisions are allowed to raise taxes, the problem is that they choose not to.
Sorry, man, those guys are only winning because sheeple voted for them.
FTFY
Where did this word "bendy" come from?
I remember first hearing it on Friends: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=nJTvzenS_uc
* With an Android device, the manufacturer outright abandons updating the phone the moment their next handset is on sale. (Samsung seems to be the worst about this, but, even Google has done it to stock Nexus phones.)
One word: CyaongenMod
I only upgraded my Samsung Vibrant to a Samsung Note 2 because I wanted 4G and a bigger screen. CyanogenMod gave the Vibrant whole new lease on life plus no crappy Samsung or t-Mobile apps. I'd like a new Samsung Note 4 but I will probably put CyanogenMod on my current phone and use it for another year.
Too bad I can't do that the iPhone 4 work made me buy when they paid for my phone line. I hated both AT&T and the iPhone so I told work to stop paying for my phone. About the best I can do is sell it cheap to some iTard...
So all your web browsing is under webuser, how do you refer to web manuals while using an application as user?
Notice I said a separate webuser for porn surfing. I don't usually have issues with websites containing tech info infecting my PCs, but that will could change in the future.
Personally I find application manuals on the box itself are usually pretty useless. When I need that sort of info I will 'su -' to the regular user and use elinks to search the internet. If I really need to see the pretty pictures I will run a VNC session as the regular user and connect to that.
SSHing to a Linux box and tunneling a VNC session to my local desktop also works great on Windoze. For those times I am stuck on a Windoze PC that has net access I always carry a copy of putty and vncviewer on a USB flash drive.
Unless of course, the script has an exploit to give itself root access - which plenty of such are frequently being patched.
Very true, I glossed over the whole exploit gaining root access thing because the hypothetical webuser should not have root or sudo access. If the webuser could possibly click on an exploit to activate it then they really should not have any sort of root access. Why would a user who only exists to surf porn on the web need that sort of access anyway?
As far as taking advantage of a buffer overrun to gain root access, that is a crappy programming problem that can affect any OS, not just Linux. if you are that worried about that problem then run Linux in a VM and have no important data either on the VM or on the VM's host. If you do get compromised then you can revert to a prior snapshot. You can copy the compromised VM for further forensic study before you revert if that kind of thing interests you.
Contrary to the OP's assertion I think that the OS you run absolutely matters. I would use a reverted Linux VM for further porn surfing without a second thought. With Windows if you have a special VM and host for porn surfing then it would probably be OK too if it was on an isolated porn surfing VLAN. Otherwise you run the risk of Windows reaching out to other Windows boxes and doing a drive-by and infecting those too. If you are that paranoid about security then it probably would not hurt to use an isolated porn surfing VLAN for your Linux VMs too.
Of course I am only referring to criminals trying to exploit your boxes. Once you start talking about state actors working under the auspices of a nation's government then everything goes out your Windows (pun intended).
You could air-gap any boxes you want to protect but then then that information can become pretty useless to you because it is hard to access when you need it. And air-gaps (as well as fine-grained access controls) will not prevent INSIDERS from compromising your systems, which makes me wonder why more criminals don't try bribing insiders to accomplish their nefarious ends like governments have been known to do in the past.
Umm... last time I checked, I admit it has been a while, pretty much the same is possible in Windows.
This is how flamewars begin. If you are really talking about the problem being users (which I agree with) then you need to keep it general and you do not need to reference ANY operating systems.
As for the racist bit, if you read the line to the end you'd have noticed the reason why it doesn't matter. Please do so next time and save me the need to point out the obvious.
I did not call you a racist, I only implied you were not being truthful. You need to learn how to parse what you read better.
As far as the truth, you keep referring to individual operating systems when it sounds like you are trying to say they don't really matter. If they don't really matter then why do you keep mentioning them?
In order to get your ideas across better you need to improve your English writing skills (i.e., don't say stupid shit like you are not trying to start a flamewar). If you are not trying to start a flamewar then it should go without saying (i.e., it should be "obvious").
And yes, the operating system does matter. You are only looking at Linux usage on the desktop, how many servers run Linux? If you add them into the total Linux usage then then the "market" is pretty big. Linux servers can get compromised too, in fact the only Linux boxes running AV these days tend to be servers.
Anecdotally none of the friends who I set up with Linux (and NO antivirus) for surfing porn have gotten owned, so I would say contrary to your assertion the OS you run DOES matter.
As for "but it's more secure because you don't need root for every shit": The current big thing, cryptolocker, would work just as well on Linux. It needs no special privileges, all it needs is to run as the current user to encrypt all of the current user's documents and hold them for ransom.
Hmmm... You have a regular user called user who has their docs in /home/user. You surf the web with a different user, say webuser, who has their docs in /home/webuser. If webuser is dumb enough to run a script that encrypts /home/webuser what has the hacker accomplished?
They haven't touched anything in /home/user. You can log in as root and run: 'rm -rf /home/webuser' then 'mkdir /home/webuser'. Copy a few files from /etc/skel then run 'chown -r webuser:webuser /home/webuser' and you are back in business. Or you can run 'userdel -r webuser' and 'useradd-d webuser' and you are good to go.
Either way whoever encrypted webuser's files just wasted their time with very little to show for it as the problem can be easily fixed by you at the cost of just a couple of minutes of your time.
Also just about every Linux user I know has good backups of their documents. If you happen to be stupid enough to get your home directory encrypted and you don't have good backups then you probably shouldn't be using a computer much less using Linux.
I don't want to start the flamewar of whether Linux is more secure than Windows.
Yeah right. Every single racist I have met has told me "I am not a racist". Just because someone claims something is true that does not necessarily mean that that something is actually true.
In a sense, it's almost unfair (DISCRIMINATION!) to pretend everyone is equal and the same....to expect them all to sit in a classroom or office and get along when some people are at a drastic chemical disadvantage in such environments.
Only on Slashdot can someone be brazen enough to equate egalitarianism with 'DISCRIMINATION' (there I fixed the spelling for you).
Must be OPPOSITE DAY and I missed the memo or something.