The Ghost In The Machine wrote:
> In comp.os.linux.advocacy, Hadron <hadronquark@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote
> on Sat, 22 Mar 2008 00:34:42 +0100
> <fs1gml$cvt$1@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>:
>> The Ghost In The Machine <ewill@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx> writes:
>>> In comp.os.linux.advocacy, [H]omer
>>>> Shouldn't it be up to the /users/ as to what software, if any,
>>>> runs on /their/ computers.
>>>
>>> That's just so 80's.
>>
>> Did you read what this "utility" did? It allowed the loading of non
>> trusted code into the kernel.
"Non trusted" by /whom/ exactly?
Is there some particular reason why I, or anyone else, should trust
Microsoft, but not other vendors?
Indeed, I've found considerably /more/ reason to /not/ trust Microsoft:
http://slated.org/windows_by_stealth_the_updates_you_dont_want
http://slated.org/vista_is_worlds_most_expensive_spyware
>> Duh!
Yes Rhonda, you are an idiot.
> And who manages the trusting?
That would be /us/, the users, on /our/ computers.
I think Rhonda and MS both need to research the meaning of "trust".
http://www.lafkon.net/tc/
--
K.
http://slated.org
.----
| 'When it comes to knowledge, "ownership" just doesn't make sense'
| ~ Cory Doctorow, The Guardian. http://tinyurl.com/22bgx8
`----
Fedora release 8 (Werewolf) on sky, running kernel 2.6.23.8-63.fc8
22:16:26 up 94 days, 19:52, 5 users, load average: 0.31, 0.28, 0.27
|
|
