Facts are not copyrighted, so this is not relevant. If anything, trying to enforce copyright would encourage "creative interpretation" of Facebook posts by such "investigators".
On a desktop/home is more important than/bin. This is exactly what Linux cheerleaders don't get. They are thinking at the kernel level. X.org crashed ? Who cares ! As long as I can execute uptime and get a good number, the rest is irrelevant.
Home directory can be safely backed up and restored in minutes, and should not contain anything executable in the first place -- it should be mounted with noexec option unless the user is interested in development. While out of the box Ubuntu won't do that for you, it's easily doable.
The whole system can not have an easy recovery procedure or simple workaround against executable content -- once there is a suspicion that anything is modified, you have to have known clean system, and your backup has to bring OS and applications into the condition that allows all updates since the moment of backup to be applied, and all un-committed state has to be cleanly restored or discarded to maintain consistency. Windows user, no matter how knowledgeable, can't fix that on something as complex as Windows desktop with various third-party software installed.
App armour is broken shit because you rely on app developers or distro maintainers to secure their own apps rather than the OS actually securing it by default.
Apparmor is independent of the OS security, it prevent applications' security bugs from causing problems with something application is allowed to do according the OS security model. Such mechanism, if implemented, has to be configured per-application, and would be meaningless otherwise.
Nobody is going to maintain rules for every single app.
Distributions maintainers do a pretty good job at this, and users or administrators can add their own rules whenever necessary.
I guess given the limited apps on Linux its probably maintainable at present scale.
Your guess is wrong...
Which is cute.
...and your arrogance is misplaced. Debian and Ubuntu maintain their repositories better than anyone anywhere maintained any collection of software.
Got a serial printer?
For at least 20 years there are no serial printers in production.
Guess what?! Lets deny CUPS access to/dev/ttyUSB. Yay.. more security!! Perfect for grandma !!
If grandma managed to install a serial printer, I am sure, she can edit/etc/apparmor.d/usr.sbin.cupsd file that lists, among other things, devices accessible by cupsd. At very least, Linux has common driver model that allows multiple incompatible devices to be handled by one program using the same, actively maintained code. To support an obsolete printer in Windows, one would have to go to a warez site, and download something that was last updated in 1996.
Untrue. Facts tell us that Linux has had MORE security bugs than the NT kernel in recent times. But hey.. don't worry about facts just go on with your propaganda.
What the Hell are you talking about? Windows security is mostly plagued by problems that would have nothing to do with kernel -- if not for the fact that they stem from the fact that Windows does not have efficient and secure IPC mechanisms. Windows still can't provide an efficient interface to anything without exposing guts of all objects and data structure through it -- if bad security implementation won't break this, someone's illiteracy in data structures handling, or bad, object-leaking algorithm, definitely will. That's what would happen if Unix had only shared memory and TCP sockets, with thick layers of fluff designed to make such a system usable.
Most Linux bugs wouldn't be even considered bugs in Windows -- they are local denial of service and occasional privilege escalation (none of which are actually in kernel). There usually isn't anything more than suspicion of exploitability before the bug is fixed. On Windows, no one would raise an eyebrow for anything less than remote compromise with administrator access, with proof of concept exploit delivered to Microsoft doors.
Why would a person with "crappy credit score" a potential security risk? A person with $2000 of debt on his remaining $3000 credit card, for whom some tiny credit union canceled his second credit card after some internal error, and a mortgage check was once delayed in the mail will have an awful credit score (67% debt! Default! Major delinquency!), but would any of this motivate someone to commit a serious crime?
Oh, for fuck sake, hairyfeet! Why don't you claim that your glorious masters will make Windows for Arduino, and therefore everyone should cease all development lest they will be wiped from the face of Earth by Windows 8 Arduino Edition? Your task is to discourage all development on non-Windows platforms, work on it, dammit!
So the Soviets denounced Stalin - after the damage was done. Then they did some more damage, even if not quite to the vast level done by Stalin.
In 1956. How much stuff happened in the world since 1956? How many tyrannical rulers emerged and fallen, and various atrocities happened under Capitalism between 1956 and 1992, and how does it compare with USSR history over the same time?
After the Soviets "nationalized" property, all income and consumption was prescribed by the state.
That's bullshit. Executive branch of the government handled whatever private companies and their owners handle under Capitalism. As far as economy was concerned, it had no more power than what wealthy people and organizations have anywhere else. It also was the government, so obviously it had power given to the government, too, however other than concentration of power within the same organization, it was nothing special.
It had a side benefit of reducing corruption -- as long as high-ranking officials lived the most comfortable life available, and their power was limited by the system in which they participated, they had no incentive to mess with their subordinates on behalf of somewhere else. All corruption was at the bottom.
That is robbery from top to bottom. That there was "no legal framework" for owning the products of one's own labor, or determining those products, is just the institutionalizing of robbery.
This is your problem with Communist doctrine, and there is no rational reason for it other than "but Capitalism is NATURAL!!!". Unless you can demonstrate that over the last three and a half decades of USSR everyone was harmed at the same extent as a victim of robbery, your claims are baseless.
104 thousand people, or whatever the true number outside the official counts, is a very large amount killed.
Not killed, that's the maximum total number of people who were there at a time. About 15 thousands were killed over about a decade of war -- again, nothing special and not in any way different from other countries' losses in current wars and invasions of comparable nature. Certainly not "a generation" in a country of more than 250 millions people.
This discussion is going nowhere. You're lying, throwing around invalid trollery (like raising Iraq), moving the goalposts, touting nonsense. Which is exactly what I'd expect from someone working from the Soviet model.
You have just claimed that numbers I have given as total number of people are numbers of dead. All accusations you have just made, should be applied to you, not me.
You're creepy.
I am not "creepy", I am challenging your beliefs, that happen to be based on nothing but propaganda.
Goodbye.
Goodbye my ass. You are in the last generation raised on a thick soup of anti-Communism fed to you from all forms of mass media. Even your own helpful propaganda workers switched from right-wing rhetoric vs. anything related to left-wing politics toward Christian rhetoric against anything related to Islam. In 20 years, anti-Communist and anti-Socialist propaganda that amounts to "BUT STALIN'S ATROCITIES!!!!!" would sound just about as effective as anti-US propaganda that amounts to "BUT LYNCHED NEGROS!!!" in 1980's.
I'm sure that if you rely on Soviet propaganda, Stalin wasn't so bad,
Have you even read what I have said in the very message you are replying to? Communist Party officially denounced Stalin, its own propaganda followed that line.
and after him everyone was safe from robbery by their Soviet government.
Robbery? What robbery? Stalin was a murderer. "Robbery" as in nationalization of all means of production was a Communist policy and has nothing to do with Stalin -- once it was done in 20's, one couldn't lose it in USSR because it was not possible to "own" or "obtain" it in the first place, there was no legal framework for it. Personal property, no matter how excessively large, was quite safe, it was just not possible to own land, factories, companies, etc.
The US is increasingly Soviet in its tyrannies and theft. But even the oil corps can't hold a candle to the Soviets, including through the 1980s where they sent a generation to kill and die in Afghanistan.
Generation? Really? The maximum was 104 thousands people. US now has about the same in Afghanistan, or twice of that number if you count both Iraq and Afghanistan.
America's Afghanistan war isn't nearly as ruinous to our people.
It isn't nearly ruinous to your politicians. For people in general it's much worse because you have your whole economy dependent on such wars.
Though there is a race to the bottom, the Soviets set the record through most of their 7 decades.
Race to the bottom in what? Murder? I would love to see such a race.
A program running as user, does not survive rebuilding the user's directory. And with proper security (such as apparmor) it is confined to its own (not even user's) files.
On Windows, compromise anything and you have compromised everything -- privilege escalation is a given.
(including the victims of intentionally created famine).
Hey, let's claim every disaster to be the work of people you don't like! Worked great for Inquisition!
You don't know shit about Soviet Union.
If you won't rely on propaganda workers such as Conquest and fiction such as Solzhenitsyn, you will discover Stalin is responsible for about 2 millions deaths. What is bad, but nowhere close to idiocy you are parroting. Stalin also died in 1953, and his policies were denounced in 1956.
What followed (60's, 70's and 80's) was certainly superior to what I see in US now -- certainly there were assholes in power, but no one lived in fear of being thrown out of his home because someone on top decided that messing with finances or moving production abroad will get him a bonus, 0.001% of the harm that it would cause to everyone else.
It would be a great solution to stop parroting idiotic right wing talking points. Government regulation is a great idea if the government does not consist of people who tell everyone how terrible government is.
A tiny percentage of population is on corporations' boards of directors and in other similar positions of power. A much greater percentage of population is psychopaths. If it's more likely for a psychopath to be there rather in any other place, then those positions are occupied almost exclusively by psychopaths.
Since they have no incentive to make a profit, they usually don't have any incentive to run thing efficiently either.
Incentives no longer work, anyway. The only reason, any progress happens at all, is that smart people would die of boredom otherwise. This is the only thing that motivates me and everyone I know.
Which is basically what you get with municipal run companies
This is a situation where Socialism gets leftovers from Capitalism.
So he was "under pressure from himself" to become rich and famous, but not to be honest or even a decent human being. I hope, he will die in a fire. Or move to US.
First and foremost, Microsoft is not entitled to anything -- neither "selling shit", nor being immune to other people's hostility toward it. If it seeks to destroys whole areas and branches of software development, it's everyone's right to defend those areas against those attacks.
Second, Microsoft seeks power over users, and the whole free software movement is against giving such power to anyone, least of all notorious abusers such as Microsoft. Deal with it.
Third, Microsoft's actions are nowhere close to ones of any honestly operating business. They were convicted monopoly abusers when last time anyone bothered to investigate them, and Microsoft behavior now is not any better than it was then.
Fourth, and most important -- what you posted is a Microsoft standard talking point. You either work for Microsoft, or stupid enough to parrot their copy/paste marketing. Either way, shut up (and optionally die in a fire).
Even if Microsoft, against all expectations, produced a usable OS, it still must be destroyed, because Microsoft always cuts off all possible directions of progress unless Microsoft is in full control of them.
Slashdot Mirror
Dude- that guy taking pictures of those kids in a park would get you arguing for privacy in a heart beat.
It didn't until that stupid pedophile scare started.
Facts are not copyrighted, so this is not relevant. If anything, trying to enforce copyright would encourage "creative interpretation" of Facebook posts by such "investigators".
Do you seriously believe that having a credit card debt equal to two-weeks salary would in any way affect someone's willingness to do that?
If anything, you posting this on Slashdot says more about your suitability for such a job (hi, NSA! nice to see you googling here!)
On a desktop /home is more important than /bin. This is exactly what Linux cheerleaders don't get. They are thinking at the kernel level. X.org crashed ? Who cares ! As long as I can execute uptime and get a good number, the rest is irrelevant.
Home directory can be safely backed up and restored in minutes, and should not contain anything executable in the first place -- it should be mounted with noexec option unless the user is interested in development. While out of the box Ubuntu won't do that for you, it's easily doable.
The whole system can not have an easy recovery procedure or simple workaround against executable content -- once there is a suspicion that anything is modified, you have to have known clean system, and your backup has to bring OS and applications into the condition that allows all updates since the moment of backup to be applied, and all un-committed state has to be cleanly restored or discarded to maintain consistency. Windows user, no matter how knowledgeable, can't fix that on something as complex as Windows desktop with various third-party software installed.
App armour is broken shit because you rely on app developers or distro maintainers to secure their own apps rather than the OS actually securing it by default.
Apparmor is independent of the OS security, it prevent applications' security bugs from causing problems with something application is allowed to do according the OS security model. Such mechanism, if implemented, has to be configured per-application, and would be meaningless otherwise.
Nobody is going to maintain rules for every single app.
Distributions maintainers do a pretty good job at this, and users or administrators can add their own rules whenever necessary.
I guess given the limited apps on Linux its probably maintainable at present scale.
Your guess is wrong...
Which is cute.
...and your arrogance is misplaced. Debian and Ubuntu maintain their repositories better than anyone anywhere maintained any collection of software.
Got a serial printer?
For at least 20 years there are no serial printers in production.
Guess what?! Lets deny CUPS access to /dev/ttyUSB. Yay.. more security!! Perfect for grandma !!
If grandma managed to install a serial printer, I am sure, she can edit /etc/apparmor.d/usr.sbin.cupsd file that lists, among other things, devices accessible by cupsd. At very least, Linux has common driver model that allows multiple incompatible devices to be handled by one program using the same, actively maintained code. To support an obsolete printer in Windows, one would have to go to a warez site, and download something that was last updated in 1996.
Untrue. Facts tell us that Linux has had MORE security bugs than the NT kernel in recent times. But hey.. don't worry about facts just go on with your propaganda.
What the Hell are you talking about? Windows security is mostly plagued by problems that would have nothing to do with kernel -- if not for the fact that they stem from the fact that Windows does not have efficient and secure IPC mechanisms. Windows still can't provide an efficient interface to anything without exposing guts of all objects and data structure through it -- if bad security implementation won't break this, someone's illiteracy in data structures handling, or bad, object-leaking algorithm, definitely will. That's what would happen if Unix had only shared memory and TCP sockets, with thick layers of fluff designed to make such a system usable.
Most Linux bugs wouldn't be even considered bugs in Windows -- they are local denial of service and occasional privilege escalation (none of which are actually in kernel). There usually isn't anything more than suspicion of exploitability before the bug is fixed. On Windows, no one would raise an eyebrow for anything less than remote compromise with administrator access, with proof of concept exploit delivered to Microsoft doors.
Why would a person with "crappy credit score" a potential security risk? A person with $2000 of debt on his remaining $3000 credit card, for whom some tiny credit union canceled his second credit card after some internal error, and a mortgage check was once delayed in the mail will have an awful credit score (67% debt! Default! Major delinquency!), but would any of this motivate someone to commit a serious crime?
Oh, for fuck sake, hairyfeet! Why don't you claim that your glorious masters will make Windows for Arduino, and therefore everyone should cease all development lest they will be wiped from the face of Earth by Windows 8 Arduino Edition? Your task is to discourage all development on non-Windows platforms, work on it, dammit!
So the Soviets denounced Stalin - after the damage was done. Then they did some more damage, even if not quite to the vast level done by Stalin.
In 1956. How much stuff happened in the world since 1956? How many tyrannical rulers emerged and fallen, and various atrocities happened under Capitalism between 1956 and 1992, and how does it compare with USSR history over the same time?
After the Soviets "nationalized" property, all income and consumption was prescribed by the state.
That's bullshit. Executive branch of the government handled whatever private companies and their owners handle under Capitalism. As far as economy was concerned, it had no more power than what wealthy people and organizations have anywhere else. It also was the government, so obviously it had power given to the government, too, however other than concentration of power within the same organization, it was nothing special.
It had a side benefit of reducing corruption -- as long as high-ranking officials lived the most comfortable life available, and their power was limited by the system in which they participated, they had no incentive to mess with their subordinates on behalf of somewhere else. All corruption was at the bottom.
That is robbery from top to bottom. That there was "no legal framework" for owning the products of one's own labor, or determining those products, is just the institutionalizing of robbery.
This is your problem with Communist doctrine, and there is no rational reason for it other than "but Capitalism is NATURAL!!!". Unless you can demonstrate that over the last three and a half decades of USSR everyone was harmed at the same extent as a victim of robbery, your claims are baseless.
104 thousand people, or whatever the true number outside the official counts, is a very large amount killed.
Not killed, that's the maximum total number of people who were there at a time. About 15 thousands were killed over about a decade of war -- again, nothing special and not in any way different from other countries' losses in current wars and invasions of comparable nature. Certainly not "a generation" in a country of more than 250 millions people.
This discussion is going nowhere. You're lying, throwing around invalid trollery (like raising Iraq), moving the goalposts, touting nonsense. Which is exactly what I'd expect from someone working from the Soviet model.
You have just claimed that numbers I have given as total number of people are numbers of dead. All accusations you have just made, should be applied to you, not me.
You're creepy.
I am not "creepy", I am challenging your beliefs, that happen to be based on nothing but propaganda.
Goodbye.
Goodbye my ass. You are in the last generation raised on a thick soup of anti-Communism fed to you from all forms of mass media. Even your own helpful propaganda workers switched from right-wing rhetoric vs. anything related to left-wing politics toward Christian rhetoric against anything related to Islam. In 20 years, anti-Communist and anti-Socialist propaganda that amounts to "BUT STALIN'S ATROCITIES!!!!!" would sound just about as effective as anti-US propaganda that amounts to "BUT LYNCHED NEGROS!!!" in 1980's.
But charity should be discouraged. It does what government is supposed to do with taxes, but only focuses on most PR-friendly kinds of spending.
I'm sure that if you rely on Soviet propaganda, Stalin wasn't so bad,
Have you even read what I have said in the very message you are replying to? Communist Party officially denounced Stalin, its own propaganda followed that line.
and after him everyone was safe from robbery by their Soviet government.
Robbery? What robbery? Stalin was a murderer. "Robbery" as in nationalization of all means of production was a Communist policy and has nothing to do with Stalin -- once it was done in 20's, one couldn't lose it in USSR because it was not possible to "own" or "obtain" it in the first place, there was no legal framework for it. Personal property, no matter how excessively large, was quite safe, it was just not possible to own land, factories, companies, etc.
The US is increasingly Soviet in its tyrannies and theft. But even the oil corps can't hold a candle to the Soviets, including through the 1980s where they sent a generation to kill and die in Afghanistan.
Generation? Really? The maximum was 104 thousands people. US now has about the same in Afghanistan, or twice of that number if you count both Iraq and Afghanistan.
America's Afghanistan war isn't nearly as ruinous to our people.
It isn't nearly ruinous to your politicians. For people in general it's much worse because you have your whole economy dependent on such wars.
Though there is a race to the bottom, the Soviets set the record through most of their 7 decades.
Race to the bottom in what? Murder? I would love to see such a race.
A program running as user, does not survive rebuilding the user's directory. And with proper security (such as apparmor) it is confined to its own (not even user's) files.
On Windows, compromise anything and you have compromised everything -- privilege escalation is a given.
(including the victims of intentionally created famine).
Hey, let's claim every disaster to be the work of people you don't like! Worked great for Inquisition!
You don't know shit about Soviet Union.
If you won't rely on propaganda workers such as Conquest and fiction such as Solzhenitsyn, you will discover Stalin is responsible for about 2 millions deaths. What is bad, but nowhere close to idiocy you are parroting. Stalin also died in 1953, and his policies were denounced in 1956.
What followed (60's, 70's and 80's) was certainly superior to what I see in US now -- certainly there were assholes in power, but no one lived in fear of being thrown out of his home because someone on top decided that messing with finances or moving production abroad will get him a bonus, 0.001% of the harm that it would cause to everyone else.
If it wasn't for the ubiquitous nature of Windows these guys would be making their malware of other OS.
And they would fail on all other systems, anyway. Other systems have bugs. Windows is insecure, and this insecurity is unfixable by design.
What other possible solutions are there?
It would be a great solution to stop parroting idiotic right wing talking points. Government regulation is a great idea if the government does not consist of people who tell everyone how terrible government is.
US incarceration rate is above 1% already. Maybe they are just locking up the wrong people?
A tiny percentage of population is on corporations' boards of directors and in other similar positions of power. A much greater percentage of population is psychopaths. If it's more likely for a psychopath to be there rather in any other place, then those positions are occupied almost exclusively by psychopaths.
Since they have no incentive to make a profit, they usually don't have any incentive to run thing efficiently either.
Incentives no longer work, anyway. The only reason, any progress happens at all, is that smart people would die of boredom otherwise. This is the only thing that motivates me and everyone I know.
Which is basically what you get with municipal run companies
This is a situation where Socialism gets leftovers from Capitalism.
Ballmer and other idiots are firmly at the helm, Microsoft finally has a good chance destroying itself without any outside help.
So he was "under pressure from himself" to become rich and famous, but not to be honest or even a decent human being. I hope, he will die in a fire. Or move to US.
market volatility
Have you ever seen a price history of a dotcom after its IPO? It makes April 2000 look like a time of stability and prosperity.
Nope.
No I'm not a Microsoft employee.
Yes, you are. If you are not Microsoft employee, you work for some astroturfer-for-hire outfit that works for Microsoft.
First and foremost, Microsoft is not entitled to anything -- neither "selling shit", nor being immune to other people's hostility toward it. If it seeks to destroys whole areas and branches of software development, it's everyone's right to defend those areas against those attacks.
Second, Microsoft seeks power over users, and the whole free software movement is against giving such power to anyone, least of all notorious abusers such as Microsoft. Deal with it.
Third, Microsoft's actions are nowhere close to ones of any honestly operating business. They were convicted monopoly abusers when last time anyone bothered to investigate them, and Microsoft behavior now is not any better than it was then.
Fourth, and most important -- what you posted is a Microsoft standard talking point. You either work for Microsoft, or stupid enough to parrot their copy/paste marketing. Either way, shut up (and optionally die in a fire).
No, it's not.
Even if Microsoft, against all expectations, produced a usable OS, it still must be destroyed, because Microsoft always cuts off all possible directions of progress unless Microsoft is in full control of them.
I have not proposing anything in this discussion at all
s/proposing/proposed/
No, it's supposed to be a turtle furry.