Even if the obscurity argument made sense, which it doesn't, how many remote attacks have you EVER heard of a) being attempted and b) being successful in bruteforcing a root password? Any security this might add (and I'll argue it adds NONE) is wiped out and then some by the danger of giving full root access to any exploit that can compromise a user account.
So with the security argument well out of the way, sudo exists for only two reasons. 1) to inconvenience the people who would even know what a root account was in the first place, 2) to show just how little respect the ubuntu developers have for their users' intelligence.
When the user interface is restrictive and cumbersome to use, as it is with apps infected with the gnome-controlled gtk. They're a nightmare to use and fill several niches that everyone seems to have conceded, particularly the gimp.
You didn't even address my question. Read it again and give it another shot. What I want to know is how is that safer since the account currently in use will ALWAYS be more likely to be compremised than one not in use. There are simply far more user-based vectors of attack.
Users doing stupid stuff to their own machines will be pretty limited since none of the n00bs will even know that root exists, much less how to access it. Obviously this ignores the insane exception that is Linspire.
I'm a lot more concerned about desktop diversity. We already see way too much of a lean in favor of gnome because the big money backs it. An army of average-windows-user-level Linux n00bs who not only use gnome because it was fed to them and they don't know better, but believe it is actually the "right" way to do things, is a very, very frightening thought indeed.
Remind me again how sudo is supposed to be safer than having a root account? Seems to me that it's going to be a LOT easier to compremise a user's account and then effortless to escalate to root using sudo than it would be to to directly attack the root account that in general will not be in use.
How is this anything other than the old security through obscurity argument, only even more poorly thought out?
Before you all go cheering this Dell deal as a "win" for "Linux" remember that it is, in fact, not a win for Linux. It is a win for Ubuntu (if even that), and is very well a loss for Linux in general. The prospect of a large (even relatively) number of new users coming to think that gnome is the "right" way to do things because they didn't know any better than to take what they were fed is also very disturbing.
Especially since Google is probably the single largest user of Linux in the world. Did they ever fix all the problems with Google Earth on Linux? Like the itsy bitsy font that you can't read at decent resolutions or the crashing?
Take away power from an illegitimate president and the unqualified clowns he appoints the positions of power? Only thing I can see wrong with that is that they're not limiting him enough and they won't have the balls to impeach his judicial appointees and undo the other damage he has done to our government and nation.
You are un-American, and I'd go as far as to say a traitor, for suggesting this is just "partisan politics."
From TFA: "The Free Software movement is dead. Linux doesn't exist in 2007. Even Linus has got a job today." Controversial statements from the head of Microsoft's Linux Labs, Bill Hilf.
They purposefully left the last sentence out of the summary to drive hits. This guy's just another paid microsoft shill. Nothing to see here, move along.
Well it does seem that things that go in vaginas do make good pejoratives. So I think I'll call him cucumber. Unless he's being a real coke bottle instead.
Isn't there a survival horror game that employs such a mechanic? I guess, from descriptions since I've never gotten around to tracking down a copy and playing it, the perspective switches to that of your attacker or something like that. I forget what it's called though.
I think it'd also be safe to say that if you were playing a game with a party or squad of some sort and the camera were being held by someone in the party that isn't under your direct control that this would be 2nd person. Like if you had a Vietnam shooter game where the camera was being held by a war photographer or something. Now that I'm writing it, that'd be kind of cool. Especially when something explodes nearby and he turns to look at it just as you come under fire!
I never said all, I said most. I think it's more than reasonable to say that most people who love Halo have had limited or no experience playing FPS games previous to playing Halo. Of course there are exceptions, but they are in a severe minority. It's pretty obvious from talking to people who like Halo that their love of the game almost without exception increases with their ignorance of the genre. I believe an objective study would back this up and I'm prepared to undertake it if someone wants to fund the project.
It's also a possibility that they just have no experience playing FPS on a PC, where basically all good FPS games are released. Either way, it's a lack of perspective on the history of the genre that allows them to make the ridiculous claim that Halo is good, let alone great or groundbreaking or any of the other absurdities they use.
This phenomenon is almost identical to that surrounding the FF7 fanaticism. At least in the US, and probably Europe as well. I'm not sure what can account for the Japanese obsession with it, since they clearly should know better (and do given their preference for Dragon Quest), but I'm not sure anyone is really supposed to understand Japanese tastes even some of the time, to say nothing of all the time.
A) We're talking modern Bungie. That being "microsoft presents Bungie." I would have thought anyone who had played Marathon or Myth and then Halo would have realized that the Bungie of old is long gone.
B) I was referring to the Bob Ross analogy. You would know this if you...
C) Learn to read.
Who said you can't like Marathon and respect Bungie's history but hate what they've become? Read just about any of my comments on the topic of Bungie and you'll see a healthy respect for their previous work, even if it wasn't always the most revolutionary it was still pretty good and introduced new ideas where it could.
For what it's worth I don't particularly like half-life either, and I hate valve as a company. Their coding quality is shit (there's a reason their games get hacked so much), their company ethic (getting owned for running beta outlook is ridiculous, as is putting out a game every 7 years and living off the poorly compensated work of volunteers), and Gabe Newell is a fucking idiot.
That being said, and boring story aside, half-life provided an excellent platform for modding, the Worldcraft editor valve bought was also excellent in the pre-Unreal2 world, the vanilla deathmatch was well balanced one-on-one (as in I'm 2-0 life time at it, so it must be awesome!), and TFC owned.
And I realize that you can read and just jumped to a conclusion.
Yeah, I liked Marathon. Not the most original game either, but it had some neat things going on (first with dual wielding, if I'm not mistaken) and was fun. And the first two Myth games (the ones made by Bungie if I'm not mistaken) actually were pretty innovative at the time and were fun to play.
But both of those were made a long time ago, definitely not this century. Now all Bungie makes as Halo, which I don't find to be a particularly good game. It's decent, maybe even a whole half-step up from mediocre, but that's about it. I'd say 5.4, tops. As a purely co-op game it does a lot better, though, since there is sadly just about no competition on that level.
They never heard of FF6, Chrono Trigger, or just about every other game made by Squaresoft either. The popularity of FF7 is very similar to that of Halo though. Most people who love FF7 had never really played a console RPG (or any RPG for that matter) and for most who love Halo it was similarly their first FPS. Of course there's probably the same argument out there ready to be made about all of us who don't think that highly of those games, but obviously I'm going to disagree.
Bungie is more like a guy doing paint-by-numbers on cable access. I'd say either a valve or an Epic are the Bob Ross of the industry. They both do pretty damn nice work within established bounds but show the watchers at home how to do it themselves, at least enough to make a mess in the living room.
Halo isn't even particularly good. The multiplayer is rather uninspired, filled with tiny levels, uninteresting weapons, a pitiful player cap, and run-of-the-mill game modes. The single player is simply horrid with some of the most lazy, pedestrian level design ever put in a game that lasted more than a week outside the bargain bin.
The fact that Miyamoto, clearly one of the most inspired game designers to ever live, even bothered to compare his work to theirs should be more than they could ever want. From their game designs they clearly don't deserve that much respect.
Maybe Miyamoto should start up a "hardcore" FPS game, though. Because even if it were the worst game he'd ever designed it'd still mop the floor with anything Bungie has put out this century.
It's probably because they're three lanes wide, weigh six tons, and get about five-miles-per-gallon highway. Doesn't hurt that they're ugly and most people who drive them drive like dicks.
Slashdot Mirror
Even if the obscurity argument made sense, which it doesn't, how many remote attacks have you EVER heard of a) being attempted and b) being successful in bruteforcing a root password? Any security this might add (and I'll argue it adds NONE) is wiped out and then some by the danger of giving full root access to any exploit that can compromise a user account.
So with the security argument well out of the way, sudo exists for only two reasons. 1) to inconvenience the people who would even know what a root account was in the first place, 2) to show just how little respect the ubuntu developers have for their users' intelligence.
I was kind of hoping we'd be past the use of fossil fuels in our cars by 2020, oh well.
When the user interface is restrictive and cumbersome to use, as it is with apps infected with the gnome-controlled gtk. They're a nightmare to use and fill several niches that everyone seems to have conceded, particularly the gimp.
You didn't even address my question. Read it again and give it another shot. What I want to know is how is that safer since the account currently in use will ALWAYS be more likely to be compremised than one not in use. There are simply far more user-based vectors of attack.
Users doing stupid stuff to their own machines will be pretty limited since none of the n00bs will even know that root exists, much less how to access it. Obviously this ignores the insane exception that is Linspire.
Exactly, this is going to (if it goes anywhere at all) push gnome use to the detriment of all Linux desktop users.
You are trying to install new software. [Allow] [Cancel]
I'm a lot more concerned about desktop diversity. We already see way too much of a lean in favor of gnome because the big money backs it. An army of average-windows-user-level Linux n00bs who not only use gnome because it was fed to them and they don't know better, but believe it is actually the "right" way to do things, is a very, very frightening thought indeed.
Remind me again how sudo is supposed to be safer than having a root account? Seems to me that it's going to be a LOT easier to compremise a user's account and then effortless to escalate to root using sudo than it would be to to directly attack the root account that in general will not be in use.
How is this anything other than the old security through obscurity argument, only even more poorly thought out?
Before you all go cheering this Dell deal as a "win" for "Linux" remember that it is, in fact, not a win for Linux. It is a win for Ubuntu (if even that), and is very well a loss for Linux in general. The prospect of a large (even relatively) number of new users coming to think that gnome is the "right" way to do things because they didn't know any better than to take what they were fed is also very disturbing.
Especially since Google is probably the single largest user of Linux in the world. Did they ever fix all the problems with Google Earth on Linux? Like the itsy bitsy font that you can't read at decent resolutions or the crashing?
Did he try to make you his bitch or get you to "Suck It Down!"?
Well they can't very well call it the "War on Pirates" because everyone knows that pirates are fucking sweet and would want to be on their side.
Take away power from an illegitimate president and the unqualified clowns he appoints the positions of power? Only thing I can see wrong with that is that they're not limiting him enough and they won't have the balls to impeach his judicial appointees and undo the other damage he has done to our government and nation.
You are un-American, and I'd go as far as to say a traitor, for suggesting this is just "partisan politics."
He's obviously smoking the good stuff if he thinks windows runs 67% of the world's servers.
From TFA: "The Free Software movement is dead. Linux doesn't exist in 2007. Even Linus has got a job today." Controversial statements from the head of Microsoft's Linux Labs, Bill Hilf.
They purposefully left the last sentence out of the summary to drive hits. This guy's just another paid microsoft shill. Nothing to see here, move along.
Well it does seem that things that go in vaginas do make good pejoratives. So I think I'll call him cucumber. Unless he's being a real coke bottle instead.
Isn't there a survival horror game that employs such a mechanic? I guess, from descriptions since I've never gotten around to tracking down a copy and playing it, the perspective switches to that of your attacker or something like that. I forget what it's called though.
I think it'd also be safe to say that if you were playing a game with a party or squad of some sort and the camera were being held by someone in the party that isn't under your direct control that this would be 2nd person. Like if you had a Vietnam shooter game where the camera was being held by a war photographer or something. Now that I'm writing it, that'd be kind of cool. Especially when something explodes nearby and he turns to look at it just as you come under fire!
I never said all, I said most. I think it's more than reasonable to say that most people who love Halo have had limited or no experience playing FPS games previous to playing Halo. Of course there are exceptions, but they are in a severe minority. It's pretty obvious from talking to people who like Halo that their love of the game almost without exception increases with their ignorance of the genre. I believe an objective study would back this up and I'm prepared to undertake it if someone wants to fund the project.
It's also a possibility that they just have no experience playing FPS on a PC, where basically all good FPS games are released. Either way, it's a lack of perspective on the history of the genre that allows them to make the ridiculous claim that Halo is good, let alone great or groundbreaking or any of the other absurdities they use.
This phenomenon is almost identical to that surrounding the FF7 fanaticism. At least in the US, and probably Europe as well. I'm not sure what can account for the Japanese obsession with it, since they clearly should know better (and do given their preference for Dragon Quest), but I'm not sure anyone is really supposed to understand Japanese tastes even some of the time, to say nothing of all the time.
A) We're talking modern Bungie. That being "microsoft presents Bungie." I would have thought anyone who had played Marathon or Myth and then Halo would have realized that the Bungie of old is long gone.
B) I was referring to the Bob Ross analogy. You would know this if you...
C) Learn to read.
Who said you can't like Marathon and respect Bungie's history but hate what they've become? Read just about any of my comments on the topic of Bungie and you'll see a healthy respect for their previous work, even if it wasn't always the most revolutionary it was still pretty good and introduced new ideas where it could.
For what it's worth I don't particularly like half-life either, and I hate valve as a company. Their coding quality is shit (there's a reason their games get hacked so much), their company ethic (getting owned for running beta outlook is ridiculous, as is putting out a game every 7 years and living off the poorly compensated work of volunteers), and Gabe Newell is a fucking idiot.
That being said, and boring story aside, half-life provided an excellent platform for modding, the Worldcraft editor valve bought was also excellent in the pre-Unreal2 world, the vanilla deathmatch was well balanced one-on-one (as in I'm 2-0 life time at it, so it must be awesome!), and TFC owned.
And I realize that you can read and just jumped to a conclusion.
Yeah, I liked Marathon. Not the most original game either, but it had some neat things going on (first with dual wielding, if I'm not mistaken) and was fun. And the first two Myth games (the ones made by Bungie if I'm not mistaken) actually were pretty innovative at the time and were fun to play.
But both of those were made a long time ago, definitely not this century. Now all Bungie makes as Halo, which I don't find to be a particularly good game. It's decent, maybe even a whole half-step up from mediocre, but that's about it. I'd say 5.4, tops. As a purely co-op game it does a lot better, though, since there is sadly just about no competition on that level.
Of course not, have you never played it? Mario goes UP in it, not around!
They never heard of FF6, Chrono Trigger, or just about every other game made by Squaresoft either. The popularity of FF7 is very similar to that of Halo though. Most people who love FF7 had never really played a console RPG (or any RPG for that matter) and for most who love Halo it was similarly their first FPS. Of course there's probably the same argument out there ready to be made about all of us who don't think that highly of those games, but obviously I'm going to disagree.
Bungie is more like a guy doing paint-by-numbers on cable access. I'd say either a valve or an Epic are the Bob Ross of the industry. They both do pretty damn nice work within established bounds but show the watchers at home how to do it themselves, at least enough to make a mess in the living room.
Halo isn't even particularly good. The multiplayer is rather uninspired, filled with tiny levels, uninteresting weapons, a pitiful player cap, and run-of-the-mill game modes. The single player is simply horrid with some of the most lazy, pedestrian level design ever put in a game that lasted more than a week outside the bargain bin.
The fact that Miyamoto, clearly one of the most inspired game designers to ever live, even bothered to compare his work to theirs should be more than they could ever want. From their game designs they clearly don't deserve that much respect.
Maybe Miyamoto should start up a "hardcore" FPS game, though. Because even if it were the worst game he'd ever designed it'd still mop the floor with anything Bungie has put out this century.
It's probably because they're three lanes wide, weigh six tons, and get about five-miles-per-gallon highway. Doesn't hurt that they're ugly and most people who drive them drive like dicks.
You forgot "and middling quality" on that list of things people pay for from apple.
Fanboys, flame away. My karma can take it.