The administrator determines how secure an OS is, not the OS itself. OpenBSD is the definitive "secure OS", but one of it's biggest warnings during the install is that it's secure until you play with it, what you do after that can compromise the security.
As an administrator and a software developer, this just seems like a bunch of bullshit made-up stastistics by a bunch of people who don't know the slightest about security or programming in general. After all, they address Apache like it's a part of Linux, but gloss over the fact that Apache runs on Windows, too... People just don't use it (en masse) because it's not the best choice on windows for many reasons.
Bugs happen. A security hole is a grave bug indeed, but it's just another bug. If the hole were intentional, it would be a different thing.
Quality Assurance and robust design practices prevent bugs, not marketing or architecture or anything else. While design practices do include architecture. It's easy to write a shell script which is bug free:
-- cut -- #!/bin/sh -- end cut --
One could say this is a "robust design practice". It doesn't need to do anything, so it doesn't. Get it?:)
MS has gone far in improving themselves, as it seems they're at a point where relying on their marketing over their integrity as software developers (one could say that marketing in the context of integrity is an oxymoron) is not working for them anymore.
To aid understanding of the conclusion, Linus's "World Domination" has already been achieved, just making sure we're still in power is the important thing.:)
After all, are you interested in better software or the complex equivalent of "mine's better than yours"? For those of you who want to keep singing the praises of Amazon and Google, keep in mind that eBay and Hotmail both make liberal use of IIS for it's features, but they don't put it on the front line, either.
OS X uses the same services that Linux can use, so the vulnerability comparison would be at the kernel layer for the most part, which is generally a pointless comparison.
I admire your maturity in this situation, but I should let you know that my post was intended to display an example with the actual viewpoint being secondary in nature.
A simple, oft-repeated scientific adage of, "Every action has an equal and opposite reaction" could describe my original argument - pretty damned hard to argue with. Everything else was just "syntactic sugar". The argument was worded carefully to avoid the most glaring logical fallacies but leave enough in to draw a crowd.
Seriously, how can I argue against bias with an obvious bias against indymedia? It's non-sensical at best. But nope, no one bothered to point that out.
Knowing this couldn't be defeated by defending indy media, I waited for it to happen. The answer was simple and it was to take my own point and direct it at me, which he finally did after realizing that he had degenerated into baseless name-calling. I would like to think that I did echo a viewpoint which a good portion of people do share, whether or not our self-appointed target feels the need to believe it, or the viewpoint has any base in truth itself.
I was just surprised the name calling started so early, it amazed me that I was labelled a fascist before I could even clarify my views. Really, is it that hard to ask a question before you make an assumption?
To get overly philosophical, "Free Speech" is only protected as long as all recipients of that speech agree to protect it. Sexual Harrassment is an example of "free speech" that is not protected. The twisting of the relatively simple conclusion that "all speech is free - the consequences aren't", as if you have some right to degrade others because the law tells you that you can disturbs me deeply. The law may keep you in line but nothing but yourself will keep you accountable to the effect you make on society.
You refuse to acklowedge definiton 2 and, you claim that I am oversimplifying? And then you make another assumption.
THIS IS FUNNY. YHBT, dumbshit. You are so indoctrinated and convinced your position is correct that you are incapable of admitting defeat, even on the most pedantic of topics.
Really, only Rush Limbaugh and Howard Stern have cajones as big as yours. Please get over your overcomplicated version of "you started it".
If you called this "journalism", I could sue you for slander. No no, seriously, and I would win. But I'm not a fascist.:)
You butchered the definition of bigot, which forced that comment. Inference based on facts isn't your strong point, is it? (note, that without facts it's merely an assumption)
You keep making accusations that are not true about my person, and then using them as a basis to make your counter argument. I never, ever have given you a reason to think that my use of "liberal" is in the political sense, but you keep insisting that I have, citing that one quote but giving no others (other than my objection to Indy Media, which you cite as a politically liberal organization, not me) as defense.
You obviously missed the second definition of fascist, A reactionary or dictatorial person. Apparently the problem isn't that you can't click, but that you can't read. Technically my argument that you are a fascist is correct (definition 2), and yours is incorrect (definition 1). But oh well, you're just going to spout your trash at me again which amounts to "I am right and you are wrong, but I can't prove it", a common mantra amongst fact-manipulators.
But you sure can write. Keep dictating that I'm a fascist, please, it makes your fascism all that more interesting. Besides, you brought it up.:)
Which is truthful of course, with obvious evidence by these posts.
Friends let friends vote however they fucking want out of respect for their right to choose. Friends don't call people fascists when they defend that right.
It's not that, it really is all about the interruptions. It's also nice to walk to the corner store when I need something to eat, as big business complexes are normally located next to restaurants or stores with much more expensive food. Apply this to having to run some task during the day that could not normally be completed from work and it's the same thing. I'm also generally more productive at home, and I think the above justification has a lot to do with it.
That said, when necessary I know when it's time to walk away from the computer. As a programmer, separating "life" from "work" is only effective if you are not thinking about the job you're doing, which is almost never the case. Some of my greatest epiphanies happen when I am nowhere near a computer (toilet, shower, bar).
Oh yeah, now that I've destroyed all your credibility, I should let you in on something.
I am registered Democrat, saw F 9/11 opening night, and consistently vote for drug legalization reform, all things, which I am unfortunately forced to stereotype on, I bet you agree with. So keep babbling like you grew up with me and know my opinions, bigot.
You are confusing the word liberally , in the sense of definition 2, with the sense of definition 1d. What you read into my post is not my problem.
Also, since you seem to have more authority than webster's, merriam-webster, and oxford, could you please tell me how fascist, as defined by the link here is wrong? According to that definition, you are being the fascist.
(I was hoping you would reply so I could say just that, you pompous idiot.)
I doubt that's the reason, but you do make a good point, if unintentionally.
Engineers aren't apt to unionize or exercise the rights of their union because, for the most part they are treated well.
However, as those in california certainly know, when grocery store employees go on strike, it's just as or much more devastating to the company and the people who depend on the services of that company than if a sysadmin went on strike.
Actually, until recently most companies could have a sysadmin go on strike and it won't effect anything until something bad happened. Smart companies have support contracts and documentation processes to make a sysadmin strike truly ineffective.
I didn't address the fact that I don't have to consume it.
Unfortunately I wish that was the case. But the group that follows indy media (as evidenced here), is insistent, far beyond the level of activism, to shove it down my throat.
Personally, I enjoyed it because in many ways, they are an abusive organization hell-bent on imposing their views on those they don't like. They show no respect for those who do not accept their agenda, and this thread is a glaring example of that reality.
I never even said Indy Media was "liberal". Heck, I didn't even allude to it, but you spend half your post using that as a basis to call me a "fascist". And you have the balls to make the assumption that I'm backing up? Heck, I never put my foot out there in the first place, you just keep trying to drag my leg.
Yes, I am a "fascist". fascist fascist fascist.
I get a strong feeling you have no fucking idea what "fascist" means, you just know it's a bad word.
Here, I'll give you a bad word: bigot, because that's what you're acting like right now, which expresses the viewpoint I addressed in my original post.
.... and one that the software industry hates to accept.
If you like the advertising for a game or any other commercial software, pirate it.
Play with it, figure out it's capability to meet your needs. See if it "lives up to the hype".
If you like it, don't just leave it on your drive, go out, buy a copy, get the manual and a hard copy, and reward the developer for a job well done.
If you don't like it, delete it.
Of course, the last two paragraphs never really get addressed - some people keep software they don't like around to give to others, others keep software they do like to save money.
But until commercial software figures out that giving full-featured demos with reasonable time limits is the only way to advertise software, or embraces the concept of "try before you buy" by eliminating draconian copy protection schemes and hoping society will weed out the the abusers, it will continue.
Case in point, I bought "The Sims 2" two months ago for my wife, and after trying to get SafeDisc 3 to cooperate with her aging CD-ROM drive, I got a couple of tools to mask the features of the copy protection and gave her virtual drive images. We won't be buying any of the additions if they contain SafeDisc 3 as a result.
And there's no way the BSA, SPA, or any other organization will be able to stop it.
Since a couple of apparent geniuses who couldn't counter my argument with more than a comment about fascism, and the wonderful moderation system has punished me for having a viewpoint not in line with the slashbots, I'll explain.
Indy Media is not journalism. Call it what you want, activism, philosophy, whatever, it's not journalism.
Their right to free speech is protected, as with all free speech. However, regardless how many people choose to go blind trying to comprehend this observation, free speech is not without consequence. I'm sure the indy media can address this because they often comment on issues like sexism and sexual harassment, both things that can get you in trouble at the work place with consequences that can effect you at a higher level than just losing your job. Of course, that's not free speech, right?
So, if you want to call me a fascist, fine, but you are wrong. No one said you can't speak, just that you might want to consider the consequences of your actions, legal or not. Jon Stewart went on CrossFire the other day (covered here) and publically berated the show's hosts, a consequence of their actions that had no legal holding whatsoever.
Bias is the reflection of an opinion which is tainted by moral conviction. If I say, "killing innocents is bad", am I biased against the military? Not really. Each situation is examined and this statement is applied, killing innocents may be necessary or accidental. Of course, this comment isn't about any of that, so I'll let you get yourself whipped up into an even deeper fervor by not commenting on my actual belief in those scenarios.
As for your 'fascism' comment, I'll let you read the other reply I made, evidenced here.
Your argument is either indicative of your ignorance or your bias, I can't tell which.
Apparently you missed the part where I pointed out that they do, indeed have the right to say what they want.
It's a fact of life bud. Call that cop a "pig" and while he may not be able to do much about it directly, you're going to be in some deep shit if you don't have all your ducks in a row and you've tickled his ribs.
I didn't say it was right, or that I approved it because it stifled free speech, I said it was a consequence to exercising it.
A true fascist response would have been to never let indymedia get going in the first place, which is evidenced by history.
Of course, you probably stopped right about the time you figured out this was a negative post to Indy Media and knee-jerked your way through a comment.
Frankly, I'm enjoying it if only because IndyMedia just got a first-hand case of what liberally running their mouth can get you if you don't cover your ass.
What's even more funny is the fact that nothing was shoved in their face (at least publically) to make them shut up about it, so they're doomed to do it again.
IM has a right to express their viewpoint and I'm not suggesting that discontinue, but there are always consequences of exercising "the right to free speech", whether they be legal of nature or not, and maybe, just maybe, IM just got a wake up call.
That and I'm sick of them labelling the biased ravings of some guy that is quick to criticize the system but has no experience in it as journalism.
If you question my quickness, a former acquintance that I know either writes for or knows a heck of a lot of IM "journalists" because he shoves their viewpoint in my face every time a topic comes up, as if they were the prophet of society as a whole. I hear about when GWB misses the toilet after getting up at 3AM to take a leak, complete with "Humor". (hint: watermelon and fried chicken jokes are funny to racists, doesn't mean they're funny to everyone else)
Fox is bad, but at least they have some modicum of accountability, in the form of the stock market. IM has none other than the laws regarding personal attacks in the countries they post in, and adherence to that is dubious at best.
Blanket statement disclaimer: yes, I'm sure some IM articles have merit, but in my experience those that do are in short doses in the article itself, which speaks as a whole of the service. I also want to note that it's the bias I have the problem with, not the concept.
For starters, if you're having this problem today, either you need to inspect your hardware or upgrade your OS. All problems with the commercial software model aside, using Windows 95 or 98 is no defense against having a current OS.
No one in their right mind runs an unpatched sendmail 8.10 bare to the net, and the same lesson applies to your complaints. I can't really say I've had any major problems with XP, but I know that people have, and I'll leave it at that.
As the son of a mechanic, I don't think you realize how flawed your argument really is.
If your handbrake fails, your power brakes may still work, eg., if the chain is broken. Your "idiot lights" (yes, that's what mechanics call them, and for good reason) often will break long before your engine will give up the ghost, and if your ears aren't tuned to recognize the noise (or if you have one of those ultra-quiet "luxury" cars - you know, the ones that require extremely expensive and overly-often maintenance checks), you're going to throw a rod regardless.
On an operating system, there is one system for everything. Sure, if X11 crashes your system won't crash, but OpenOffice will, and hopefully you've saved because that rock-solid kernel isn't going to help you get the last 20 pages of your term paper back.
Windows architecture, especially NT architecture, is built around the same concepts but deeply abstracted from the user. The Mac and other UNIX clones expose more, but the concept is still the same, the shell is separated from the application and the lower level interface to the hardware. It's pathetically dated tech, maybe in 30 years we'll all be using Plan9 and laugh at Microsoft.
This is a patently simple software bug, and no amount of checks and balances at design time would have corrected it.
As in the automotive world, when design fails to eliminate something before it's integrated, Quality Assurance takes over. QA is much more robust in AE and is still "voodoo science" in the software world, which I think mostly has to do with the multitude of avenues that a program can screw up in. By design and in reality, the paths that an auto can screw up in comparison to the paths a piece of software can screw up have a large margin between the numbers. Consider that that a commercial software project normally has LOC in the millions, add in all the software required to build it, and it should be pretty apparent. I'm not even going to touch on the hardware side, as chips have plenty of bugs themselves.
And if there's a analogue in the Automotive Engineering world of pushing a law of physics so far that it inverts itself, I'd love to hear it so I can drop this argument. The internals of the x86 architecture are pretty much the physics of software and well, aren't to be argued against unless the argument is to change architectures, which in today's age doesn't really solve the problem.
Slashdot Mirror
... especially nowadays.
:)
:)
The administrator determines how secure an OS is, not the OS itself. OpenBSD is the definitive "secure OS", but one of it's biggest warnings during the install is that it's secure until you play with it, what you do after that can compromise the security.
As an administrator and a software developer, this just seems like a bunch of bullshit made-up stastistics by a bunch of people who don't know the slightest about security or programming in general. After all, they address Apache like it's a part of Linux, but gloss over the fact that Apache runs on Windows, too... People just don't use it (en masse) because it's not the best choice on windows for many reasons.
Bugs happen. A security hole is a grave bug indeed, but it's just another bug. If the hole were intentional, it would be a different thing.
Quality Assurance and robust design practices prevent bugs, not marketing or architecture or anything else. While design practices do include architecture. It's easy to write a shell script which is bug free:
-- cut --
#!/bin/sh
-- end cut --
One could say this is a "robust design practice". It doesn't need to do anything, so it doesn't. Get it?
MS has gone far in improving themselves, as it seems they're at a point where relying on their marketing over their integrity as software developers (one could say that marketing in the context of integrity is an oxymoron) is not working for them anymore.
To aid understanding of the conclusion, Linus's "World Domination" has already been achieved, just making sure we're still in power is the important thing.
After all, are you interested in better software or the complex equivalent of "mine's better than yours"? For those of you who want to keep singing the praises of Amazon and Google, keep in mind that eBay and Hotmail both make liberal use of IIS for it's features, but they don't put it on the front line, either.
OS X uses the same services that Linux can use, so the vulnerability comparison would be at the kernel layer for the most part, which is generally a pointless comparison.
Then DO YOUR PART to INVESTIGATE what you PURCHASE before you BITCH about SOMETHING YOU'VE ALREADY SUPPORTED.
Seriously. If it's a subscription game, just cancel your account, quit buying carpet and sending it to them and buy a pair of shoes.
Jeff,
I admire your maturity in this situation, but I should let you know that my post was intended to display an example with the actual viewpoint being secondary in nature.
A simple, oft-repeated scientific adage of, "Every action has an equal and opposite reaction" could describe my original argument - pretty damned hard to argue with. Everything else was just "syntactic sugar". The argument was worded carefully to avoid the most glaring logical fallacies but leave enough in to draw a crowd.
Seriously, how can I argue against bias with an obvious bias against indymedia? It's non-sensical at best. But nope, no one bothered to point that out.
Knowing this couldn't be defeated by defending indy media, I waited for it to happen. The answer was simple and it was to take my own point and direct it at me, which he finally did after realizing that he had degenerated into baseless name-calling. I would like to think that I did echo a viewpoint which a good portion of people do share, whether or not our self-appointed target feels the need to believe it, or the viewpoint has any base in truth itself.
I was just surprised the name calling started so early, it amazed me that I was labelled a fascist before I could even clarify my views. Really, is it that hard to ask a question before you make an assumption?
To get overly philosophical, "Free Speech" is only protected as long as all recipients of that speech agree to protect it. Sexual Harrassment is an example of "free speech" that is not protected. The twisting of the relatively simple conclusion that "all speech is free - the consequences aren't", as if you have some right to degrade others because the law tells you that you can disturbs me deeply. The law may keep you in line but nothing but yourself will keep you accountable to the effect you make on society.
Please don't confuse "situational ethics" with a poorly formed or incomplete ethic.
Don't make me do to you what I did to your buddy above. It's not cost-effective for me and insulting for you.
I should probably cite that, regarding the "you deserve what you get" as the whole FUCKING POINT of my original argument.
Everything else is your assumption.
God, I've been waiting for quite some time for you to say just that.
:)
It's good that it took around 10 posts to figure that out, but says a lot about your bias.
"Friends don't let friends vote Bush" provides no indication that you are giving anyone a choice. In practice, I have found that I am right.
That said, many Bush supporters are just as bad, and I ferry them to the circular bin just as I have with you.
You refuse to acklowedge definiton 2 and, you claim that I am oversimplifying? And then you make another assumption.
THIS IS FUNNY. YHBT, dumbshit. You are so indoctrinated and convinced your position is correct that you are incapable of admitting defeat, even on the most pedantic of topics.
Really, only Rush Limbaugh and Howard Stern have cajones as big as yours. Please get over your overcomplicated version of "you started it".
If you called this "journalism", I could sue you for slander. No no, seriously, and I would win. But I'm not a fascist. :)
:)
You butchered the definition of bigot, which forced that comment. Inference based on facts isn't your strong point, is it? (note, that without facts it's merely an assumption)
You keep making accusations that are not true about my person, and then using them as a basis to make your counter argument. I never, ever have given you a reason to think that my use of "liberal" is in the political sense, but you keep insisting that I have, citing that one quote but giving no others (other than my objection to Indy Media, which you cite as a politically liberal organization, not me) as defense.
You obviously missed the second definition of fascist, A reactionary or dictatorial person. Apparently the problem isn't that you can't click, but that you can't read. Technically my argument that you are a fascist is correct (definition 2), and yours is incorrect (definition 1). But oh well, you're just going to spout your trash at me again which amounts to "I am right and you are wrong, but I can't prove it", a common mantra amongst fact-manipulators.
But you sure can write. Keep dictating that I'm a fascist, please, it makes your fascism all that more interesting. Besides, you brought it up.
Which is truthful of course, with obvious evidence by these posts.
Friends let friends vote however they fucking want out of respect for their right to choose. Friends don't call people fascists when they defend that right.
It's not that, it really is all about the interruptions. It's also nice to walk to the corner store when I need something to eat, as big business complexes are normally located next to restaurants or stores with much more expensive food. Apply this to having to run some task during the day that could not normally be completed from work and it's the same thing. I'm also generally more productive at home, and I think the above justification has a lot to do with it.
That said, when necessary I know when it's time to walk away from the computer. As a programmer, separating "life" from "work" is only effective if you are not thinking about the job you're doing, which is almost never the case. Some of my greatest epiphanies happen when I am nowhere near a computer (toilet, shower, bar).
Haha. Dude, you're about due for your rabies shot.
Or is that the ranting of a man who's had his leaning tower of pride ripped out from under him? I can't tell.
Oh yeah, now that I've destroyed all your credibility, I should let you in on something.
I am registered Democrat, saw F 9/11 opening night, and consistently vote for drug legalization reform, all things, which I am unfortunately forced to stereotype on, I bet you agree with. So keep babbling like you grew up with me and know my opinions, bigot.
You are confusing the word liberally , in the sense of definition 2, with the sense of definition 1d. What you read into my post is not my problem.
Also, since you seem to have more authority than webster's, merriam-webster, and oxford, could you please tell me how fascist, as defined by the link here is wrong? According to that definition, you are being the fascist.
(I was hoping you would reply so I could say just that, you pompous idiot.)
Also, I think you are confusing truth with propaganda.
Sure you want to continue arguing your point?
I doubt that's the reason, but you do make a good point, if unintentionally.
Engineers aren't apt to unionize or exercise the rights of their union because, for the most part they are treated well.
However, as those in california certainly know, when grocery store employees go on strike, it's just as or much more devastating to the company and the people who depend on the services of that company than if a sysadmin went on strike.
Actually, until recently most companies could have a sysadmin go on strike and it won't effect anything until something bad happened. Smart companies have support contracts and documentation processes to make a sysadmin strike truly ineffective.
I didn't address the fact that I don't have to consume it.
Unfortunately I wish that was the case. But the group that follows indy media (as evidenced here), is insistent, far beyond the level of activism, to shove it down my throat.
No, you're reading something into it.
Personally, I enjoyed it because in many ways, they are an abusive organization hell-bent on imposing their views on those they don't like. They show no respect for those who do not accept their agenda, and this thread is a glaring example of that reality.
I never even said Indy Media was "liberal". Heck, I didn't even allude to it, but you spend half your post using that as a basis to call me a "fascist". And you have the balls to make the assumption that I'm backing up? Heck, I never put my foot out there in the first place, you just keep trying to drag my leg.
Yes, I am a "fascist". fascist fascist fascist.
I get a strong feeling you have no fucking idea what "fascist" means, you just know it's a bad word.
Here, I'll give you a bad word: bigot, because that's what you're acting like right now, which expresses the viewpoint I addressed in my original post.
Now go away and think about how you've acted.
.... and one that the software industry hates to accept.
If you like the advertising for a game or any other commercial software, pirate it.
Play with it, figure out it's capability to meet your needs. See if it "lives up to the hype".
If you like it, don't just leave it on your drive, go out, buy a copy, get the manual and a hard copy, and reward the developer for a job well done.
If you don't like it, delete it.
Of course, the last two paragraphs never really get addressed - some people keep software they don't like around to give to others, others keep software they do like to save money.
But until commercial software figures out that giving full-featured demos with reasonable time limits is the only way to advertise software, or embraces the concept of "try before you buy" by eliminating draconian copy protection schemes and hoping society will weed out the the abusers, it will continue.
Case in point, I bought "The Sims 2" two months ago for my wife, and after trying to get SafeDisc 3 to cooperate with her aging CD-ROM drive, I got a couple of tools to mask the features of the copy protection and gave her virtual drive images. We won't be buying any of the additions if they contain SafeDisc 3 as a result.
And there's no way the BSA, SPA, or any other organization will be able to stop it.
s/software/favorite digital medium of choice/g;
Since a couple of apparent geniuses who couldn't counter my argument with more than a comment about fascism, and the wonderful moderation system has punished me for having a viewpoint not in line with the slashbots, I'll explain.
Indy Media is not journalism. Call it what you want, activism, philosophy, whatever, it's not journalism.
Their right to free speech is protected, as with all free speech. However, regardless how many people choose to go blind trying to comprehend this observation, free speech is not without consequence. I'm sure the indy media can address this because they often comment on issues like sexism and sexual harassment, both things that can get you in trouble at the work place with consequences that can effect you at a higher level than just losing your job. Of course, that's not free speech, right?
So, if you want to call me a fascist, fine, but you are wrong. No one said you can't speak, just that you might want to consider the consequences of your actions, legal or not. Jon Stewart went on CrossFire the other day (covered here) and publically berated the show's hosts, a consequence of their actions that had no legal holding whatsoever.
Does it make sense now?
Bias is the reflection of an opinion which is tainted by moral conviction. If I say, "killing innocents is bad", am I biased against the military? Not really. Each situation is examined and this statement is applied, killing innocents may be necessary or accidental. Of course, this comment isn't about any of that, so I'll let you get yourself whipped up into an even deeper fervor by not commenting on my actual belief in those scenarios.
As for your 'fascism' comment, I'll let you read the other reply I made, evidenced here.
Your argument is either indicative of your ignorance or your bias, I can't tell which.
It sounds like I pushed a button. :)
Apparently you missed the part where I pointed out that they do, indeed have the right to say what they want.
It's a fact of life bud. Call that cop a "pig" and while he may not be able to do much about it directly, you're going to be in some deep shit if you don't have all your ducks in a row and you've tickled his ribs.
I didn't say it was right, or that I approved it because it stifled free speech, I said it was a consequence to exercising it.
A true fascist response would have been to never let indymedia get going in the first place, which is evidenced by history.
Of course, you probably stopped right about the time you figured out this was a negative post to Indy Media and knee-jerked your way through a comment.
Frankly, I'm enjoying it if only because IndyMedia just got a first-hand case of what liberally running their mouth can get you if you don't cover your ass.
What's even more funny is the fact that nothing was shoved in their face (at least publically) to make them shut up about it, so they're doomed to do it again.
IM has a right to express their viewpoint and I'm not suggesting that discontinue, but there are always consequences of exercising "the right to free speech", whether they be legal of nature or not, and maybe, just maybe, IM just got a wake up call.
That and I'm sick of them labelling the biased ravings of some guy that is quick to criticize the system but has no experience in it as journalism.
If you question my quickness, a former acquintance that I know either writes for or knows a heck of a lot of IM "journalists" because he shoves their viewpoint in my face every time a topic comes up, as if they were the prophet of society as a whole. I hear about when GWB misses the toilet after getting up at 3AM to take a leak, complete with "Humor". (hint: watermelon and fried chicken jokes are funny to racists, doesn't mean they're funny to everyone else)
Fox is bad, but at least they have some modicum of accountability, in the form of the stock market. IM has none other than the laws regarding personal attacks in the countries they post in, and adherence to that is dubious at best.
Blanket statement disclaimer: yes, I'm sure some IM articles have merit, but in my experience those that do are in short doses in the article itself, which speaks as a whole of the service. I also want to note that it's the bias I have the problem with, not the concept.
For starters, if you're having this problem today, either you need to inspect your hardware or upgrade your OS. All problems with the commercial software model aside, using Windows 95 or 98 is no defense against having a current OS.
No one in their right mind runs an unpatched sendmail 8.10 bare to the net, and the same lesson applies to your complaints. I can't really say I've had any major problems with XP, but I know that people have, and I'll leave it at that.
As the son of a mechanic, I don't think you realize how flawed your argument really is.
If your handbrake fails, your power brakes may still work, eg., if the chain is broken. Your "idiot lights" (yes, that's what mechanics call them, and for good reason) often will break long before your engine will give up the ghost, and if your ears aren't tuned to recognize the noise (or if you have one of those ultra-quiet "luxury" cars - you know, the ones that require extremely expensive and overly-often maintenance checks), you're going to throw a rod regardless.
On an operating system, there is one system for everything. Sure, if X11 crashes your system won't crash, but OpenOffice will, and hopefully you've saved because that rock-solid kernel isn't going to help you get the last 20 pages of your term paper back.
Windows architecture, especially NT architecture, is built around the same concepts but deeply abstracted from the user. The Mac and other UNIX clones expose more, but the concept is still the same, the shell is separated from the application and the lower level interface to the hardware. It's pathetically dated tech, maybe in 30 years we'll all be using Plan9 and laugh at Microsoft.
This is a patently simple software bug, and no amount of checks and balances at design time would have corrected it.
As in the automotive world, when design fails to eliminate something before it's integrated, Quality Assurance takes over. QA is much more robust in AE and is still "voodoo science" in the software world, which I think mostly has to do with the multitude of avenues that a program can screw up in. By design and in reality, the paths that an auto can screw up in comparison to the paths a piece of software can screw up have a large margin between the numbers. Consider that that a commercial software project normally has LOC in the millions, add in all the software required to build it, and it should be pretty apparent. I'm not even going to touch on the hardware side, as chips have plenty of bugs themselves.
And if there's a analogue in the Automotive Engineering world of pushing a law of physics so far that it inverts itself, I'd love to hear it so I can drop this argument. The internals of the x86 architecture are pretty much the physics of software and well, aren't to be argued against unless the argument is to change architectures, which in today's age doesn't really solve the problem.
On unions, I've never, ever heard of a group of engineers going on strike. If it's happening it's got a pretty tight muffler on it.