Conversation

Notices

1. Embed this notice
   翠星石 (suiseiseki@freesoftwareextremist.com)'s status on Monday, 19-Dec-2022 16:01:51 JST 翠星石

   • CyberSpook??
   @cyberspook >Same for OpenBSD, these guys are great.
   Those guys love to install proprietary software without asking, that's not what I would call "great".
   
   >User freedom without security and privacy is a suicide.
   What are you on about? rms used a time-sharing system with others with no security at MIT and the system worked just fine.
   
   Security is a convenience feature really.
   
   
   What most people fail to realize is that you possibly cannot have security with proprietary software - as the proprietary part will always end up compromising you.
   
   If you want security, the only possible way to achieve it is to build a strong foundation of only free software and build from there.
   • Embed this notice
     翠星石 (suiseiseki@freesoftwareextremist.com)'s status on Monday, 19-Dec-2022 18:52:26 JST 翠星石

     in reply to

     • CyberSpook??
     @cyberspook >A local network is a different use case, we are connected to the Internet now.
     I've read of a shared system without security that was connected to the internet.
     It was soon found that if you added a command to crash to system, vandals (connected over dial up) would soon get bored and do something useful instead.
     
     >complete security solutions for convenience sake (the reason why antiviruses are so popular)
     The whole concept of antivirus's is very strange to me.
     You attempt to mitigate the problems of proprietary malware being run by running a "trusted" piece of proprietary malware?
     
     Hmm, maybe I should add the signatures of ever single piece of proprietary software to clamav.
     
     >a secure proprietary system is better.
     "secure proprietary" is a huge oxymoron.
     Alexandre Oliva likes this.
   • Embed this notice
     CyberSpook?? (cyberspook@soc.redeyes.site)'s status on Monday, 19-Dec-2022 18:52:28 JST CyberSpook??

     in reply to

     Those guys love to install proprietary software without asking, that’s not what I would call “great”.

     Yeah, sure, but OpenBSD almost doesn’t have proprietary software. I dunno why they keep those bits. But with HyperbolaBSD we will have a 100% libre system.

     rms used a time-sharing system with others with no security at MIT and the system worked just fine.

     A local network is a different use case, we are connected to the Internet now. Obviously local computers are more trustworthy.

     Security is a convenience feature really.

     I partially agree with you. Certainly, people always gravitate towards complete security solutions for convenience sake (the reason why antiviruses are so popular). But security is still needed, especially when your communication isn’t restricted to your local network. So while libre software is more important, security is at least the close second. That does not mean that a secure proprietary system is better. That means that a secure libre system is better.