Don't be so naive... I know quite a few Linux users who don't care much about security and have their boxes directly connected to the internet. I don't know anyone who reads all his/her e-mail as root, though.
Frankly I don't believe it, you, or they are not telling the truth, modern window managers and many X apps are impossible to run as root out of the box. For instance, just to start kde2 as root more tweaking is necessary than just creating user account.
There is no need for oneself to check the source code, I trust the thousands of cryptography
experts out there that do check the code; if they found something wrong they would make it public
Having read your post I don't trust anyone any more. From now on I'll use exclusively open source security apps, and encourage others to do the same by showing them your post.
You don't think anyone is going to notice that their e-mail queue is getting twice as many
messages as it should? Or that logs aren't going to anything strange? That's absurd.
I'll rather use smtp and mail transport agent customized and embedded in the application just in that purpose. Sure I am not the first and the only one who came up with that idea.
the question is: are images on sites intellectual property
Yeah, very few people compare it to classic book libraries, anti-napster lobbyists and similar trash certainly don't. Book libraries are filled with intellectual property. Identical case, different approach. Think why.
I said "Only clueless newbies run GNU/Linux as root if they didn't read a warning during install process of GNU/Linux system." It is different. There is always a warning. Running Linux as user, not as root, is always the very first lesson on GNU/Linux.
Plus why the f*** should you log in as root to install stuff... its not neaded for a desktop.
I didn't say anything about installing desktop.
BTW not all GNU/Linux distributions install GUI by defualt. For instance Debian GNU/Linux distribution installs only basic CLI system and ask if user wants more, for instance GUI environment before proceeding.
If 1/2 users log in as root, they'll have to directly execute a virus to infect a system.
MS$ outlook virii are other storry, they are maybe written because M$ is widespread.
Fun with Apache and fun with other daemons in Unices is nothing new, there were many such attempts, they have limited effect since they use bugs in software only, in *nix it's all about "if this" and "if that", however, in win 3.1, 3.11, 95, 98 and ME users are always "root", and this is the weakness which is mostly exploited in M$ systems. BTW, there is also binary incompatibility in *nix, there is no such damage as in M$ systems.
Anyway, your point is invalid - you make the assumptions that Windows system has no
filesystem security, this is untrue of NT4 and 2000.
M$ windows versions 3.1, 3.11, 95, 98 and ME, the most used M$ systems, have no protected system files.Well valid point.
And you assume that Linux users will actually take advantage of the file permissions inherent in the system - many users run their day to day sessions as root.
Only clueless newbies run GNU/Linux as root if they didn't read a warning during install process of GNU/Linux system.
M$ virus rules. M$ outlook virus rules.
Worms and viruses are not unique to an OS. All OS's can have worms or virii. If you want to
brag about a lack of worms or virii then brag about your Netware servers or your Commodore
64. Unix is too vulnerable to brag about. It's simply that Unix has not yet been exploited as
much.
Nope. Lion and Adore exploit only bugs in only certain versions of software, contrary to virii written for M$ systems. Unix is much less vulnerable than M$ windows, not to mention binary incompatibility, malicious binaries don't work on all Unix or Linux systems, it all discourage virii coders, from technical aspect they can not make such havoc as in M$ systems.
if everyone started using Linux, it would have as many Virius as Windows.
Nope. Technically spreading virii unintentionally like in M$ windows doesn't work in GNU/Linux due to [read/write] file permissions. Also, clicking on a malicious program compiled for Linux won't make any damage to the system since Linux is run from a users account, no way to infect system files because a computer virus needs write permission on system files to replicate. Also, on GNU/Linux system it is hard to spread a virus specific to certain e-mail applications like we are witnessing collosal spreading of Code Red for M$ web server, and other virii written for M$ Outlook, because there is no default email application in GNU/Linux distributions as it is M$ Outlook in M$windows.
As much as i'd like to, i'd hardly call linux 'security based'. unless you were talking aboot
openbsd?
Stable Linux distro can be configured to be as secure as OpenBSD is supposed to be, however, OpenBSD won't help gain security if configuration is moronic.
1) The original Beetle was never discontinued. I think they are still being made and sold in
Mexico or were until a year or two ago.
Only Brazil on whole Earth.
2) They stopped selling it in the US because it's a fartmobile that couldn't meet 70s pollution
regs.
Volkswagen has been discountinued in Europe in late '70 because it was no longer profitable car. Export in Asia and Australia, as well as parts production on those continents were affected. Beatle project was just non-profitable.
Name one "bundled" feature of Windows that you dont find in the typical linux installs or osX? I
Take a look at stocks, and MS cooperatives. M$ dominates, and cooperatives are tuning their hardware to match M$ software. And don't forget M$ competitors, and what happen with most of them, and how their competitors end up. If, for instance, one day OS/X, or someone from Linux branche overtakes OS monopoly, and fill their OS with consumers' most wanted apps as default apps within the OS, the storry will be the same: a trial on missusing monopoly.
What is bad about MS is not always (though often) their technology but their aims. For them it's all about making as much cash as they can and making a decent OS is second to that motive. Consumers are getting sick of having to pay tons of cash for each version/updgrade/patch whatever. When you're a business what you want out of software is workability and not to pay MS for each upgrade that you will hope that will finally solve your network problems.
Volkswagen discountinued their old model "Beatle" because the car was of exceptionally high quality.
You buy Beatle and you don't need a new car for next 20 years. Volkswagen services were doing
minimum work with Beatle, just usual maintainance stuff like testing, changing oil, breaks, bulbs etc. Today if you buy a new VW any model it will last 10 years, after that the car start "eating" money like mad. Think about it. Now, I may agree M$ is not playing fair by charging for patches for their own mistakes(?).
Just think of how crappy all of our linux distro's
would be without all the bundled goodies to go
with it.
There is no such thing as Linux monopoly. Or not yet.
Bundling software with an OS only makes sense.
Of course it does.
One of the main complaints that I always had with Windows was that it didn't come with compilers...... Imagine if they tried to bundle
the compilers with their o.s. Horrors!
Excuse me, but the court did not try to find out if M$ holds monopoly, the court was trying to find out did M$ missused monopoly.
Cyrix is reborn as "VIA C3 800MHz" with 3DNow!(TM) and MMX.I bought a system for my gfriend, it runs on their ITX motherboard, Apollo chipsets and VIA C3 processor. Runs fine.
http://www.viatech.com/jsp/en/products/C3/c3.jsp
I hope it will result in drastically droping Athlons price again. After that they may identify all next versions as "Sweet Kitty" or "Superstitious Postman" or whatever, it may be even better solution instead of confusing consumers by model numbers. I don't care, just drop prices!
How is typing 20+ characters at a command prompt easier than double clicking an icon with your mouse?
Depend... a command line may be aliased and its options/parameters scripted, once and forever or until you change your installation likings.
for instance on my system an alias 'ai file' will retrieve and install a package, alias 'ac file' will retrieve a source and compile overiding defaults. Once the CLI is executed, you may take a coffee break, shower with your girlfriend etc, no need to wait for install-wizards to answer question, there is no such thing, everything is already pre-programmed by a system. That's easy. In Linux terminal (no GUI at all) for instance Debianized Lynx text browser (which is btw also a small file menager and a simple e-mail app) will let root install a.deb self-installing package, just by selecting it and hiting Return. The package also accepts many options to extract only chosen files or/and to overide default install directories, or to check package integrity, file permissions within the package etc.
KDE GUI for Linux does the same thing, it installs
the package by clicking the file on your HD, or by downloading the package from web or ftp. Supurted in KDE are its web browser/file menager and its GUI package menager.
So, you original question "How is typing 20+ characters at a command prompt easier..." may be answered by telling that all command lines no matter how long they are, can be scripted and executed by clicking on a package. Further install process is simpler (and richer in options if you chose to make so) than in M$ windows.
Looks like it's time for someone to invent the physics-defying-star-trek-inertial-damper things then.
That reminds me.. Must send off for that patent.:)
The project cost $800,000 according to that Sacramento guy, just to be destroyed in split of a second. Well smart project. If you invent any dumpers keep it GPL-ed please, or they'll rip us off. Got an affordable health/dental care plan for Joe Avearage ? Where ?
Slashdot Mirror
Ok, sorry for misunderstanding.
Don't be so naive... I know quite a few Linux users who don't care much about security and have their boxes directly connected to the internet. I don't know anyone who reads all his/her e-mail as root, though.
Frankly I don't believe it, you, or they are not telling the truth, modern window managers and many X apps are impossible to run as root out of the box. For instance, just to start kde2 as root more tweaking is necessary than just creating user account.
There is no need for oneself to check the source code, I trust the thousands of cryptography experts out there that do check the code; if they found something wrong they would make it public
Having read your post I don't trust anyone any more. From now on I'll use exclusively open source security apps, and encourage others to do the same by showing them your post.
You don't think anyone is going to notice that their e-mail queue is getting twice as many messages as it should? Or that logs aren't going to anything strange? That's absurd.
I'll rather use smtp and mail transport agent customized and embedded in the application just in that purpose. Sure I am not the first and the only one who came up with that idea.
the question is: are images on sites intellectual property
Yeah, very few people compare it to classic book libraries, anti-napster lobbyists and similar trash certainly don't. Book libraries are filled with intellectual property. Identical case, different approach. Think why.
The chip's cells will need food. Therefore the chip will produce some waste, we'll need odour eliminators. "CountryBouquet air freshener" by AMD.
> Only clueless newbies run GNU/Linux as root
I said "Only clueless newbies run GNU/Linux as root if they didn't read a warning during install process of GNU/Linux system." It is different. There is always a warning. Running Linux as user, not as root, is always the very first lesson on GNU/Linux.
Plus why the f*** should you log in as root to install stuff... its not neaded for a desktop.
I didn't say anything about installing desktop. BTW not all GNU/Linux distributions install GUI by defualt. For instance Debian GNU/Linux distribution installs only basic CLI system and ask if user wants more, for instance GUI environment before proceeding.
If 1/2 users log in as root, they'll have to directly execute a virus to infect a system. MS$ outlook virii are other storry, they are maybe written because M$ is widespread. Fun with Apache and fun with other daemons in Unices is nothing new, there were many such attempts, they have limited effect since they use bugs in software only, in *nix it's all about "if this" and "if that", however, in win 3.1, 3.11, 95, 98 and ME users are always "root", and this is the weakness which is mostly exploited in M$ systems. BTW, there is also binary incompatibility in *nix, there is no such damage as in M$ systems.
Anyway, your point is invalid - you make the assumptions that Windows system has no filesystem security, this is untrue of NT4 and 2000.
M$ windows versions 3.1, 3.11, 95, 98 and ME, the most used M$ systems, have no protected system files.Well valid point.
And you assume that Linux users will actually take advantage of the file permissions inherent in the system - many users run their day to day sessions as root.
Only clueless newbies run GNU/Linux as root if they didn't read a warning during install process of GNU/Linux system. M$ virus rules. M$ outlook virus rules.
What did Lion or Adore cost you????
Worms and viruses are not unique to an OS. All OS's can have worms or virii. If you want to brag about a lack of worms or virii then brag about your Netware servers or your Commodore 64. Unix is too vulnerable to brag about. It's simply that Unix has not yet been exploited as much.
Nope. Lion and Adore exploit only bugs in only certain versions of software, contrary to virii written for M$ systems. Unix is much less vulnerable than M$ windows, not to mention binary incompatibility, malicious binaries don't work on all Unix or Linux systems, it all discourage virii coders, from technical aspect they can not make such havoc as in M$ systems.
if everyone started using Linux, it would have as many Virius as Windows.
Nope. Technically spreading virii unintentionally like in M$ windows doesn't work in GNU/Linux due to [read/write] file permissions. Also, clicking on a malicious program compiled for Linux won't make any damage to the system since Linux is run from a users account, no way to infect system files because a computer virus needs write permission on system files to replicate. Also, on GNU/Linux system it is hard to spread a virus specific to certain e-mail applications like we are witnessing collosal spreading of Code Red for M$ web server, and other virii written for M$ Outlook, because there is no default email application in GNU/Linux distributions as it is M$ Outlook in M$windows.
Not secure as OpenBSD, not matter file permisions, setting UIDs, SUIDs, firewal conf, temp dir, SVGA ? Darn UNIX newbies.
As much as i'd like to, i'd hardly call linux 'security based'. unless you were talking aboot openbsd?
Stable Linux distro can be configured to be as secure as OpenBSD is supposed to be, however, OpenBSD won't help gain security if configuration is moronic.
1) The original Beetle was never discontinued. I think they are still being made and sold in Mexico or were until a year or two ago.
Only Brazil on whole Earth.
2) They stopped selling it in the US because it's a fartmobile that couldn't meet 70s pollution regs.
Volkswagen has been discountinued in Europe in late '70 because it was no longer profitable car. Export in Asia and Australia, as well as parts production on those continents were affected. Beatle project was just non-profitable.
Name one "bundled" feature of Windows that you dont find in the typical linux installs or osX? I
Take a look at stocks, and MS cooperatives. M$ dominates, and cooperatives are tuning their hardware to match M$ software. And don't forget M$ competitors, and what happen with most of them, and how their competitors end up. If, for instance, one day OS/X, or someone from Linux branche overtakes OS monopoly, and fill their OS with consumers' most wanted apps as default apps within the OS, the storry will be the same: a trial on missusing monopoly.
What is bad about MS is not always (though often) their technology but their aims. For them it's all about making as much cash as they can and making a decent OS is second to that motive. Consumers are getting sick of having to pay tons of cash for each version/updgrade/patch whatever. When you're a business what you want out of software is workability and not to pay MS for each upgrade that you will hope that will finally solve your network problems.
Volkswagen discountinued their old model "Beatle" because the car was of exceptionally high quality. You buy Beatle and you don't need a new car for next 20 years. Volkswagen services were doing minimum work with Beatle, just usual maintainance stuff like testing, changing oil, breaks, bulbs etc. Today if you buy a new VW any model it will last 10 years, after that the car start "eating" money like mad. Think about it. Now, I may agree M$ is not playing fair by charging for patches for their own mistakes(?).
Just think of how crappy all of our linux distro's would be without all the bundled goodies to go with it.
There is no such thing as Linux monopoly. Or not yet.
Bundling software with an OS only makes sense.
Of course it does.
One of the main complaints that I always had with Windows was that it didn't come with compilers...... Imagine if they tried to bundle the compilers with their o.s. Horrors!
Excuse me, but the court did not try to find out if M$ holds monopoly, the court was trying to find out did M$ missused monopoly.
Which is the marketing scheme? The faster MHz? Or the better chip????
...
Very cool idea: "The Better Chip I, II, III, IV" etc. Or a marketing scheme with much more impact: "Chip Better Than Theirs I, II, III"
Cyrix and WinChips are dead,dead,dead!
.I bought a system for my gfriend, it runs on their ITX motherboard, Apollo chipsets and VIA C3 processor. Runs fine.
http://www.viatech.com/jsp/en/products/C3/c3.jsp
Cyrix is reborn as "VIA C3 800MHz" with 3DNow!(TM) and MMX
Improving the quality thanks to competition. E viva la competition!
I hope it will result in drastically droping Athlons price again. After that they may identify all next versions as "Sweet Kitty" or "Superstitious Postman" or whatever, it may be even better solution instead of confusing consumers by model numbers. I don't care, just drop prices!
How is typing 20+ characters at a command prompt easier than double clicking an icon with your mouse?
.deb self-installing package, just by selecting it and hiting Return. The package also accepts many options to extract only chosen files or/and to overide default install directories, or to check package integrity, file permissions within the package etc.
KDE GUI for Linux does the same thing, it installs
the package by clicking the file on your HD, or by downloading the package from web or ftp. Supurted in KDE are its web browser/file menager and its GUI package menager.
So, you original question "How is typing 20+ characters at a command prompt easier..." may be answered by telling that all command lines no matter how long they are, can be scripted and executed by clicking on a package. Further install process is simpler (and richer in options if you chose to make so) than in M$ windows.
Depend... a command line may be aliased and its options/parameters scripted, once and forever or until you change your installation likings. for instance on my system an alias 'ai file' will retrieve and install a package, alias 'ac file' will retrieve a source and compile overiding defaults. Once the CLI is executed, you may take a coffee break, shower with your girlfriend etc, no need to wait for install-wizards to answer question, there is no such thing, everything is already pre-programmed by a system. That's easy. In Linux terminal (no GUI at all) for instance Debianized Lynx text browser (which is btw also a small file menager and a simple e-mail app) will let root install a
Looks like it's time for someone to invent the physics-defying-star-trek-inertial-damper things then.
:)
That reminds me.. Must send off for that patent.
The project cost $800,000 according to that Sacramento guy, just to be destroyed in split of a second. Well smart project. If you invent any dumpers keep it GPL-ed please, or they'll rip us off. Got an affordable health/dental care plan for Joe Avearage ? Where ?
Earlier in the thread someone already stated they'll probably provide backup electricity via dial-up :)
LOL
Hey ! I didn't think about it. The idea is provoking quite interesting and shocking thoughts.