Reaching for a metaphor
|
| Author | Content |
|---|---|
| dinotrac Oct 24, 2006 9:46 AM EDT |
I've encountered a few people who have seen stories (often second-hand pass throughs from a Microsoft-certified VAR). The message they get is that, well, they're the same. Linux is getting off a little easy now because there aren't enough users to interest the bad guys, etc, etc. Trouble is, non-technical people can grasp that idea more easily than they can grasp counter-arguments. On top of that, Americans are statistical nincompoops. Most of us are so bad with numbers we won't even try to discern meaning in them. That sad reality could drive a lifetime of wailing and rants, but I'm too old to start on that one now. I wonder if a crime metaphor might work better: By and large, more crime take place in poor neighborhoods than in rich neighborhoods. Logically, criminals should go to rich neighborhoods because that's where the money and things worth fencing live. Not only that, rich folks tend to make great victims: whatever else the good life does, it doesn't tend to harden you for dealing with street thugs. But - Criminals tend to vicitmize the poor because they tend to live in the same neighborhood. It's convenient. Sadly, police coverage also tends to lag the need in poor neighborhoods. Street lighting may be inferior, alleys may be prevalent (at least in urban areas), etc. So, rich neighborhoods are less convenient and more dangerous for criminals, in spite fo the rich supply of good victims. Linux is a rich neighborhood. Many Linux boxes are servers, and servers have a lot more to offer than most desktops. Linux, however is less convenient and better protected. When an exposure is discovered, the "police" swoop in quickly and close the vulnerability. Bad things can happen to Linux just like bad things can happen in good neighborhoods. However, just as some areas are safe to walk through and others aren't, some OS's are safe to run and others aren't. |
| Bob_Robertson Oct 24, 2006 9:56 AM EDT |
Criminals also prefer disarmed victims, and the "don't worry, we'll do it for you" attitude of Microsoft software does remind me of victim disarmament. A Linux system demands just a little bit more personal responsibility from the user/adminstrator, by its nature. I think that raises the "barrier to entry" for a computer virus to infect Linux. It may be only a little bit more difficult, but they're _all_ just that little bit more difficult, at least. While I fully expect viral attacks to effect Linux systems, I believe they will tend to be short lived and isolated. There won't be the infinite and wide-spread corruption of consumer Windows boxes that we all know and loath. For instance, the Win2K box my wife uses is locked up again. AGAIN. This will be 5 times reinstalling Win2K, mostly because of viruses, in the last two months. Pathetic. |
| tuxchick2 Oct 24, 2006 10:06 AM EDT |
Bob, but don't you know that Windows is quite secure-able, and if you get infected it's your fault? :P |
| jdixon Oct 24, 2006 2:42 PM EDT |
Bob: > This will be 5 times reinstalling Win2K, mostly because of viruses, in the last two months. What virus scanner are you running? AVG for Windows is actually pretty good, and it's free for home use. Or there's ClamWin and Guarddog, if you prefer an open source solution. |
| Scott_Ruecker Oct 24, 2006 3:40 PM EDT |
Quoting:Some of you may not care about this very real and fundamental difference, but I'd argue that you should. A lot of you can simply, intuitively, "feel" this honesty. It comes in strange forms -- in editorial comments, in the way talkbacks are moderated -- in the very real consideration of the advertisers on the site. Quoting:Speaking of my own bias; It's heavily tilted for obvious reasons; I firmly believe in FOSS as a long-term solution to a host of technological problems. Yeah, that may on the surface sound very contradictory -- but in actuality there's an honesty involved that's sorely missing in the context of supposed "Mac" security in any CNN article (for example). No surprise, I'm admittedly a Linux bigot -- one willing to tell it like I see it from my own point of view. I am the same as you, opinionated about Linix. I don't mind reading an author that I know is opinionated as long as the opinions are theirs and not sold to the highest bidder. Whether I agree with them or not I want to know what they think, not what they are told to write. Paul, you missed the most obvious one..MSNBC!! ;-) |
| dcparris Oct 24, 2006 5:09 PM EDT |
> ...opinionated about Linix Ah Linix, the Lost Minix! :-p > ...as the opinions are theirs and not sold to the highest bidder I prefer to do both - write my opinion and sell it to the highest bidder. I write it. You name your price. In fact, the sky is the limit. I have quite a few opinions for sale. Just name your price, Scott. Oh, you mean when I write my opinions _after_ the buyer names the price! |
| Scott_Ruecker Oct 24, 2006 5:44 PM EDT |
Linix? oh man..you got me. and again, yes after they pay you. :-) I'm with you, anybody want to buy my opinions? You can't tell me what to write but I will write down what I think and sell it to you. Now that's not a bad tag line, huh? |
| Bob_Robertson Oct 25, 2006 11:38 AM EDT |
Quoting:What virus scanner are you running? AVG for Windows is actually pretty good, and it's free for home use. Something in Chinese, I think it's Norton Antivirus. I'm not the one who put it there. I was able to run Knoppix, get the network going, mount C: and run housecall.trendmicro.com to clean out the infection, then the machine booted and ran just fine. Here's a salute to my forethought of formatting the disks in FAT32 rather than NTFS. |
Posting in this forum is limited to members of the group: [ForumMods, SITEADMINS, MEMBERS.]
Becoming a member of LXer is easy and free. Join Us!