You wiped a computer because of spyware? What would you say if someone wiped their Linux box because Mozilla would not start.
...Good Lord, I almost shot coffee from my nostrils when I read that line. That's a really horrible example, since Mozilla isn't embedded in the freaking Linux kernel. Not to mention the fact that *nix users are typically not all constaly running around like insane little demigods on their own systems. Even if spyware did make it onto a user profile, it'd be trivial to clean up. Not at all like spyware on a Windows box, which is like a fox in a hen house. You may get rid of it eventually, but often the damage has already been done.
Once a rootkit is in place, the results of spyware scans done fromt he infected system are tainted and cannot be trusted. I've seen things like this in the wild, and even a live distro with captive NTFS couldn't fix it.
...that is the question. As somebody who's actually deployed many Linux systems for Joe Sixpack, I can say with a great deal of honesty that when you tell them that they can't break the system as long as they're not in root, they damn well don't log into root unless it's for something important. Most users are afraid of breaking their systems anyway, so if they see a clear cut divide between what's safe and what isn't, most will willingly choose to err on the side of safety. As a result, I've never seen any of those boxes compromised in any way.
Call me a troll, but I think that if Linspire wants to try and be a "better Windows", they're going to find that you can't beat the original, no matter how crappy it may be. On the other hand, if they strive to be a "more consumer palletable Linux", they should probably consider actually addressing Linux's weak points rather than ignoring its strong ones (like security).
My question is simply this: is it that we should be should be 'unwinding' our minds with ironically mindless, repetitive and predictible content on TV? Or rather that we should allow our minds to 'gently uncoil', if you will, by reading, listening to intellectually stimulating music, and by light interaction with others (e.g. Slashdot)? Which sounds more soothing to you?
I won't even pretend that I should or even can tell you or anybody else how to spend their free time. But I can attest to the fluctuations in my own life caused by watching TV as opposed to more classical forms of entertainment. I must tell you, there's a big difference between watching an hour of Law & Order and kicking back with a beer or a coffee and reading some decent literature. Even if the book sucks, you're still using your mind without straining yourself too much.
Well thank God for that. As far as I'm concerned, the trusted computing initiative is the beginning of the end for freedom in computing, and perhaps even freedom of speech itself. I know this may sound like a 'tinfoil hat' post, but the whole idea of trusted computing (trusted by whom?) makes me highly uneasy.
I haven't RTFA (who can, it was/.'ed almost instantly), but this sounds a bit like a segway into trusted computing -- or paladium, or whatever MS is calling it. I would love to believe they'd get the clue and go OSS, but with the amount of sugar-daddy financial pull MS has with our government officials, I just can't put any hope in that theory.
Pride comes before the fall, or so they say. We (when I say 'we', I mean the entire FOSS community) need to remain vigilant, perhaps more so than ever. This $50,000,000 Microsoft bullet, fired indirectly at Linux through a Saturday night special called SCO, may prove to be a mere test shot. 50 million may seem like a lot, but it's cash that could get lost in Gates' couch. If they're willing to use those obviously underhanded and thinly-veiled methods of eradicating Linux, they'll almost certainly go much farther. We cannot afford to let our guard down, as our enemy is prone to sucker-punching. We must address real problems with Linux if and when they arise, and pursue innovation over mere equivalency. After all, the only way to truly overcome a product so widespread as Windows is to render it totally, painfully and obviously obsolete.
Alright, I love GNOME as much as the the next guy. But the plain old default GTK widgets... they're just plain fugly. In my mind, that's one of the single biggest (and aguably most retarded) things that's holding GNOME back. Why have ugly widgets by default? There are plenty of ugly interfaces out there. Why should GNOME be one of them?
Slashdot Mirror
Once a rootkit is in place, the results of spyware scans done fromt he infected system are tainted and cannot be trusted. I've seen things like this in the wild, and even a live distro with captive NTFS couldn't fix it.
More on rootkits: http://www.theinquirer.net/?article=21326
...that is the question. As somebody who's actually deployed many Linux systems for Joe Sixpack, I can say with a great deal of honesty that when you tell them that they can't break the system as long as they're not in root, they damn well don't log into root unless it's for something important. Most users are afraid of breaking their systems anyway, so if they see a clear cut divide between what's safe and what isn't, most will willingly choose to err on the side of safety. As a result, I've never seen any of those boxes compromised in any way.
Call me a troll, but I think that if Linspire wants to try and be a "better Windows", they're going to find that you can't beat the original, no matter how crappy it may be. On the other hand, if they strive to be a "more consumer palletable Linux", they should probably consider actually addressing Linux's weak points rather than ignoring its strong ones (like security).
-AT
My question is simply this: is it that we should be should be 'unwinding' our minds with ironically mindless, repetitive and predictible content on TV? Or rather that we should allow our minds to 'gently uncoil', if you will, by reading, listening to intellectually stimulating music, and by light interaction with others (e.g. Slashdot)? Which sounds more soothing to you?
I won't even pretend that I should or even can tell you or anybody else how to spend their free time. But I can attest to the fluctuations in my own life caused by watching TV as opposed to more classical forms of entertainment. I must tell you, there's a big difference between watching an hour of Law & Order and kicking back with a beer or a coffee and reading some decent literature. Even if the book sucks, you're still using your mind without straining yourself too much.
-AT
Well, you could always start calling yourselves "Snowland". Hey, it worked for Iceland!
Well thank God for that. As far as I'm concerned, the trusted computing initiative is the beginning of the end for freedom in computing, and perhaps even freedom of speech itself. I know this may sound like a 'tinfoil hat' post, but the whole idea of trusted computing (trusted by whom?) makes me highly uneasy.
I haven't RTFA (who can, it was /.'ed almost instantly), but this sounds a bit like a segway into trusted computing -- or paladium, or whatever MS is calling it. I would love to believe they'd get the clue and go OSS, but with the amount of sugar-daddy financial pull MS has with our government officials, I just can't put any hope in that theory.
Pride comes before the fall, or so they say. We (when I say 'we', I mean the entire FOSS community) need to remain vigilant, perhaps more so than ever. This $50,000,000 Microsoft bullet, fired indirectly at Linux through a Saturday night special called SCO, may prove to be a mere test shot. 50 million may seem like a lot, but it's cash that could get lost in Gates' couch. If they're willing to use those obviously underhanded and thinly-veiled methods of eradicating Linux, they'll almost certainly go much farther. We cannot afford to let our guard down, as our enemy is prone to sucker-punching. We must address real problems with Linux if and when they arise, and pursue innovation over mere equivalency. After all, the only way to truly overcome a product so widespread as Windows is to render it totally, painfully and obviously obsolete.
Alright, I love GNOME as much as the the next guy. But the plain old default GTK widgets... they're just plain fugly. In my mind, that's one of the single biggest (and aguably most retarded) things that's holding GNOME back. Why have ugly widgets by default? There are plenty of ugly interfaces out there. Why should GNOME be one of them?