What software do you feel paranoid about?

[pylkko]

Microsoft sponsors Linux and also Debian.

Don't you mean supports? Giving us money is one thing. Giving us code is entirely different. And if that code is open source, I'm ok with that.

No, I mean as in Microsoft sponsoring (with real money) DebConf 2017... for example. Also Microsoft hand down the money and devices for some of Debians servers, I believe. Microsoft is a Linux Foudantion member and therefore not only sponsors Linux but also has a say in it's development. Some one also said here that they don't trust big players like Google and Facebook. Well guess who are the other major sponsors of Linux?


https://www.linuxfoundation.org/announc ... n-platinum
https://www.debian.org/mirror/sponsors
https://debconf17.debconf.org/sponsors/

[No_windows]

If you are really paranoid about microsoft, like some seem to be, I wonder what you think about the fact that Microsoft sponsors Linux and also Debian.

Microsoft sponsors Debian specifically?

[dasein]

If you are really paranoid about microsoft, like some seem to be, I wonder what you think about the fact that Microsoft sponsors Linux and also Debian.

Microsoft sponsors Debian specifically?

Translation: "I am too farqing lazy to click a link when provided one."

Clarification of @pylkko's point re: servers: MSFT does indeed maintain a Debian mirror. (Again, available by clicking the link he provided.)

[Bulkley]

About 52% of Internet users are bots. We can be assured that a lot of those bots are malicious. With that in mind, the software we use cannot be depended on for 100% security. Our biggest threat is our own behaviour.

[marcetm]

Everything!!! I'm not a programmer nor a developer so I don't know what is exactingly happening with every single thing I do on my Pc. I feel like I have to trust in the developers or the people who is compiling the programs to put them in the repositories. well maybe it's an act of faith. I guess it's better not thinking about it.

[Bulkley]

I guess it's better not thinking about it.

It is better that you do think about it. There are too many bots and people who want to take advantage of you to ignore the problem. Nobody expects you to be an expert but you should learn some Internet street smarts. There are several threads on this forum on basic security and browser security.
_________________________________

Back in the theme of this thread, I try to avoid Flash wherever possible. Flash is out dated and not necessary for most online video. I have come to suspect any site that insists that I have it.

[No_windows]

Microsoft sponsors Debian specifically?

Translation: "I am too farqing lazy to click a link when provided one." :roll

I didn't see any link, in the post I quoted, and you can stop being such a troll any time now.

[MARKMENTAL]

Skype, Discord or any proprietary VoIP stuff.

[Bulkley]

Skype, Discord or any proprietary VoIP stuff.

+1. As a side note, in my house we have more technical problems with Skype than all other software combined. Why all my relatives insist on it is beyond me.

[MARKMENTAL]

Skype, Discord or any proprietary VoIP stuff.

+1. As a side note, in my house we have more technical problems with Skype than all other software combined. Why all my relatives insist on it is beyond me.

Skype is a nightmare, such an awful piece of software. Fortunately for me my relatives prefer email

[sjukfan]

If you are really paranoid about microsoft, like some seem to be, I wonder what you think about the fact that Microsoft sponsors Linux and also Debian.

There's different kinds of paranoia. Microsoft giving money to Linux and Debian is clearly for their own economical winnings and not because they're a bunch of nice dudes. Same kind of paranoia can be applied to anything Facebook and Pokémon Go (they will profit in some way from all that gps data). But when Microsoft opensource code I don't mind it, because I know that code will be checked for lack of security. They are still doing it for economical winnings though.

[pylkko]

yeah, but I meant the argument more from this perspective: some people complain that MS ruins everything and that selling closed-source proprietary stuff is wrong. Ok, nice and all except that when MS hands down money to Linux and Debian that money is gained by these "unethical means" that those same people are protesting against by using Debian. Obviously Microsoft's aim is to profit from this, given that they develop Debian-based OS's. But that is not intersting, what is is that you are using a OS that would not be possible as it is right now without monetary support that comes from Windows sales (and other suposedly diabolic stuff). So, anyone that sees Microsoft et alii using a business model that is entirely wrong and unethicnal should in some sense not want to benefit personally from that unethical stuff. So, shouldn't the people that want to completely resign from the unethical methods that these large companies use then use a BSD or Minix or maybe FreeDOS?

[dasein]

By that logic, impoverished AIDS patients in Africa should decline life-saving treatment because W.H. Gates III is paying for it.

[debiman]

Ok, nice and all except that when MS hands down money to Linux and Debian that money is gained by these "unethical means" that those same people are protesting against by using Debian.

my use of linux is not a protest against anything.
it is for something, not against.
it is for a global community of open-minded computer users, developers etc.
and more...

microsoft being a member of the linux foundation or donating to debian is something to be paranoid about, as per thread title.
it is all too common that "donating" in the business world includes "gaining power"...

[pylkko]

By that logic, impoverished AIDS patients in Africa should decline life-saving treatment because W.H. Gates III is paying for it.

I think your analogy fails here, primarily because there are alternatives in the OS situation, whereas there are really no alternatives in the AIDS medication situation. And even so, the analogy would work only in the case that the impoverished AIDS patient had a strong moral commitment against Bill Gates or modern medicine or whatever. And in that case it would be quite easy to claim that if someone really really does not believe in modern medication, then they should decline it eve if it means death.

And so it could be claimed (to play the devil's advocate) that people that hate corporate influence should avoid Linux entirely. And it definitely could be said that if you truly believe in something, then you should be willing to suffer in order to achieve it. Actually, it is commonly thought that how much you are willing to suffer is a direct indication of how strong your "faith" in the matter is.

But it is not uncommon that people want to "eat the cake and have it too". That is renounce Google, MS, Facebook etc. but still be able to use Linux and not some other community-made free-of-corporate-influence alternative OS/kernel (GNU mach/Libre Linux/GuixSD/HelenOS) with possibly poor hardware support and not as good performance metrics.

In a way there is really nothing wrong with wanting to eat the cake and have it too. There is also nothing wrong in complaining or preaching something that you do not practice, because life is often not that black and white. But I think it is good at least realize this and also realize that in stead of just being reactive about the problem you can try to be "proactive" so to speak (that word really is a crime against language) and explore other alternatives.

But at the end of the day, the question I wanted to ask was whether any people here on this board feel that Linux has already gone too far into the mainstream corporate business world or not.