Linus torvalds on security • Hacker News Board

Re: Linus torvalds on security

#61

Post by batista » Wed, Feb 29, 2012, 3:37 AM UTC

javert wrote: post #39

batista wrote: post #37

Earlier quoted context omitted.

This is not supposed to elicit laughs; it's supposed to emphasize his point. Of course, I know that. Not all jokes are there to elicit laughs --unless one is a clown or a stand-up comedian. It's a joke in the sense that it's not meant seriously. As, in, if somebody DID kill himself following his advice, Linus would be genuinely upset, sad, and most of all surprised.

You need to look up the definition of "joke" before you insult Americans in general and call them "9 year olds" based on an incorrect usage of that term. Telling someone to commit suicide, even if not meant literally, because of a technical disagreement, should not be (in my opinion) considered acceptable in any culture. Unless it's just an established colloquialism of everyday speech, as maybe it is for Finns. I don…

You need to look up the definition of "joke" before you insult Americans in general and call them "9 year olds" based on an incorrect usage of that term.

I did. Have you? Definition #2 from Mirriam-Webster: "something not to be taken seriously".

Telling someone to commit suicide, even if not meant literally, because of a technical disagreement, should not be (in my opinion) considered acceptable in any culture.

You know what they say about opinions. Lots of people the world over enjoy the occasional colorful comment, and do not get their knickers tied up in a knot (UK-ism meaning they are not annoyed) when non PC language is used. Hell, lots of cultures the world over think political correctness itself as silly and/or prudish.

Re: Linus torvalds on security

#62

Post by astrodust » Wed, Feb 29, 2012, 4:09 AM UTC

DarkShikari wrote: post #9

The worst part is that this kind of thing actually makes security worse. If you force people to bypass security to do ordinary tasks, and train them to constantly enter the root password for everything, you don't actually have any security. It's like the password policy that's so impractical that everyone sticky-notes passwords to their monitors, or the Vista UAC.

Too many alerts like that and you're all "Yeah, yeah, whatever, 123123abc here you go".

Re: Linus torvalds on security

#63

Post by waxjar » Wed, Feb 29, 2012, 4:25 AM UTC

thetroll wrote: post #60

donniezazen wrote: post #49

I find it funny, how effortlessly Linus trashes people.

same here. Linus is a man with strong opinions, so i guess the kind of language he uses helps reflects that. and i find it funny that people get upset so much over it. some "political correctness" crap. look, you don't control what other people say or does, but you can control how that affects you. if you're going to seriously get upset about someone telling you to "kill yourself", you should get yourself a psychiatr…

I find that a weak excuse. If you were to dine in an expensive restaurant, where one of their guests talked really loudly on his cell phone all night, disturbing the other guests, you wouldn't expect the waiter to tell you to "just ignore it" or "just don't be disturbed". At least I wouldn't.

Re: Linus torvalds on security

#64

Post by huhtenberg » Wed, Feb 29, 2012, 4:32 AM UTC

mhurron wrote: post #47

huhtenberg wrote: post #22

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Don't get started on Windows. Just don't. You know that UAC prompt you get when running setup.exe for an IM client? Ever wondered why there's an UAC prompt in the first place? Because Windows assumes that setup.exe needs admin privileges (unless .exe explicitly states that it doesn't). This piece of engineering doesn't even have a concept of ~/bin. In fact, there is/was an official W7 guideline that said that all pro…

The official installation path for Windows being Program Files is no different than the expected installation for the majority of .deb or .rpm files being /usr. In both cases, you can't install software with its default assumption as a unprivileged user. The defaults on both Windows and basically every Linux distribution assume software installs are done by a privileged account. You can install to c:\Users\%USERNAME%…

Windows is far more riddled with malware and spyware than Linux distros, their users are far more ignorant than the Linux crowd, so having %ProgramFiles% default to a system directory is substantially worse and damaging than letting apt-get (that can't even be run without root privileges) default to /usr. Take a look at a list of predefined paths available on Windows [1]. It doesn't have anything even approximating ~/bin. At the very least they could've said - "here, use %UserProgramFiles% if need be", but they just don't care. And if you try and install into C:\Users\...\Program Files, you will quickly be mis-detected as malware or spyware. Unless you are Chrome, which you are probably not. So, yeah, Windows is really hopeless.

[1] http://msdn.microsoft.com/en-us/library/windows/desktop/bb76...

Re: Linus torvalds on security

#65

Post by nessus42 » Wed, Feb 29, 2012, 4:59 AM UTC

waxjar wrote: post #63

thetroll wrote: post #60

Earlier quoted context omitted.

same here. Linus is a man with strong opinions, so i guess the kind of language he uses helps reflects that. and i find it funny that people get upset so much over it. some "political correctness" crap. look, you don't control what other people say or does, but you can control how that affects you. if you're going to seriously get upset about someone telling you to "kill yourself", you should get yourself a psychiatr…

I find that a weak excuse. If you were to dine in an expensive restaurant, where one of their guests talked really loudly on his cell phone all night, disturbing the other guests, you wouldn't expect the waiter to tell you to "just ignore it" or "just don't be disturbed". At least I wouldn't.

If you're in a fancy restaurant, what are you doing reading Linus's Google+ posts, rather than enjoying your meal?

Re: Linus torvalds on security

#66

Post by antoncohen » Wed, Feb 29, 2012, 5:12 AM UTC

Fedora had this problem last time I used it, things like adding printers prompted for the actual root password (according the docs Fedora 16 still prompts for the root password). Ubuntu (and Mint) got it right. There are privilege groups that can be set so things like adding printers and wifi networks don't ask for a password. For things the user doesn't have privileges for, if they are an admin it will prompt for their user password (sudo-style) instead of the root password.

As Linus said, the SUSE and Fedora way makes it hard to deploy in a business setting where you want users to be able to administrate their own machines but you don't want them to have the root password.

Re: Linus torvalds on security

#67

Post by beedogs » Wed, Feb 29, 2012, 5:42 AM UTC

javert wrote: post #2

... please just kill yourself now I don't think someone who actually knows what it's like to experience suicidal thoughts would ever say something like that to people in a technical/professional context. There is something to be said for the "tough love" Linux culture, but IMO, language as extreme as what I just quoted is just not acceptable. For me, this is crossing the line from "Linus has an interesting and entert…

...really? I use hyperbole like that all the time on the Internet, and I really don't consider myself "mentally disturbed".

That's a pretty bold accusation to be making of people who simply typed some shit on the Internet.

Re: Linus torvalds on security

#68

Post by beedogs » Wed, Feb 29, 2012, 5:45 AM UTC

icebraining wrote: post #51

javert wrote: post #31

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I'm not talking about comedians, for pete sake. I'm talking about software development in a professional context.

So why are you talking about professional context on a story about a post in a personal profile on a social network?

Apparently people in the public eye are not allowed to have personal opinions.

Re: Linus torvalds on security

#69

Post by beedogs » Wed, Feb 29, 2012, 5:46 AM UTC

mongol wrote: post #10

javert wrote: post #2

... please just kill yourself now I don't think someone who actually knows what it's like to experience suicidal thoughts would ever say something like that to people in a technical/professional context. There is something to be said for the "tough love" Linux culture, but IMO, language as extreme as what I just quoted is just not acceptable. For me, this is crossing the line from "Linus has an interesting and entert…

Yes I agree. And it is like every other quote from Linus contains similar exaggregations. I think it is his biggest weakness.

If the use of hyperbole you find discomforting, on his own personal blog, is his biggest weakness, then I'd say he's doing pretty well, as a human being.

Re: Linus torvalds on security

#70

Post by flomo » Wed, Feb 29, 2012, 6:02 AM UTC

mongol wrote: post #10

javert wrote: post #2

... please just kill yourself now I don't think someone who actually knows what it's like to experience suicidal thoughts would ever say something like that to people in a technical/professional context. There is something to be said for the "tough love" Linux culture, but IMO, language as extreme as what I just quoted is just not acceptable. For me, this is crossing the line from "Linus has an interesting and entert…

Yes I agree. And it is like every other quote from Linus contains similar exaggregations. I think it is his biggest weakness.

This type of 'edgy' language was very popular back on Usenet in the 1990s, and the Linux kernel mailing list never really got away from it. Very much a Generation X thing - Kill yourself, they're smoking crack, those retards, kick em in the nuts, etc etc, yawn.