80% or more of Linux uses that have argued about the privacy, security and open source aspects about computing have not attempted to and or do not have the technical knowledge to personally audit their operating systems kernel and all of its applications.
You try and force people to eat shit by calling it a free lobster dinner that you just have to raise the lobster first but you didn't even set the stones in your own tank.
It is pretty funny how people keep going on and on about auditing yet only a tiny fraction of them have the ability and willingness to actually do it. They just trust that someone else has done it for them.
So /g/ just tries to ignore OP and derail the thread everytime they're called out?
Makes sense. Bet someones gonna try to argue against that/further derail the thread with more shitposting.
>calls other people weaboos
OP doesn't have a valid argument. Just because most Linux users do not have the technical knowledge to do serious audits does not invalidate their argument.
Yes. IT DOES. If you can't audit your code and understand that it's safe, then its just as safe as windows. Because you can't yourself determine that what you're using does exactly and only what you want, then you're in the gray zone of not knowing what your operating system does. The only thing you know is what you were told.
You going to cry reddit faggot? You going to cry like a little bitch? Kek, go back to reddit because you don't belong here.
Lets assume that about 1000 independent developers in the world have inspected each line of Linux source code. Proprietary, closed source code (like win) has been investigated by no independent expert. So how many times is Linux more secure than Windows? 1000/0=..
No, that's nonsense. You put blind faith into somebody you never met in order to gain your trust and use their product. You're just as likely to be lied to.
Checked and this
That's why independent audits exist.
This line of argumentation will always fail because audits are a possibility and do happen regularly to the linux kernel and other high profile FOSS. Meanwhile, none of this ever happens to Windows.
I'm not going to sit here an read through every line of source code for my OS and every application on it. That is simple unfeasible. I have to trust that open source means enough people have looked at it and none of them have found anything unsafe.
Hah! I'm a skinny weeb
Suck it, reddit trash!
So I cant drive a car because im not a mechanic?
Linux is like a car. You can open the hood and check its parts to see if its safe. If you dont know shit about cars you get someone to check it for you. You also get tools like flashing lights to indicate if something is wrong.
Windows is also car. But you cant open the hood, you cant check if the parts are alright. You just have to assume it is.
Cars are not operating systems. You can plug in systems to a car to do full diagnostics on them and find out what's wrong. Right under the steering wheel. You can also do this with Windows to diagnose problems.
But much like you can't edit most of the windows files, you can't just go into a car and start tampering around with breaking shit. It's made the way it is for a reason.
If your analogy held true, then a fabricated part from my basement would suffice as a replacement for each component in the car.
78.9% of all statistical data said in a conversation is without a doubt made up on the spot. In fact if you add decimals it sounds even more convincing, like this bullshit I just wrote.
The point is the difference in attitude of the people who sold you the car. One intentionally welded down the hood in order to prevent you, the owner of the car, to look into car. You are intentionally prevented from exchanging parts . In the other car, the hood is open available for you. Now you might say, "I'm not a mechanic, I can't possibly look into a car" and that's missing the point. You should go find a trusted mechanic to help you achieve these kinds of technical matters. Car owners don't need any mechanical skill to tinker with their cars and computer users don't need any programming skill to tinker with software.
>80% or more of Linux uses that have argued about the privacy, security and open source aspects about computing have not attempted to and or do not have the technical knowledge to personally audit their operating systems kernel and all of its applications.
Even if they haven't, those things are still true about Linux.
In all fairness they wouldn't be able to audit Windows 10 either. Might as well go with the freedom option.
HAVE not ARE.
I understand your point. But why would I trust an independent mechanic when I could take it back to my dealer for warranty issues instead of relying on some nobody with a high school locational degree? Or if I get lucky a very well respected and franchised mechanic?
I'd rather receive reliable, quality updates from Microsoft, a single producer of my product, than to have to search for hours about fixing minor issues like screen resolution and nvidia drivers. Might work easier in Ubuntu but even that is criticized as the amazon botnet.
Buy a car and get it serviced regularly by a trusted dealer or buy a car and be forced to learn at least a moderate amount of mechanics.
But then you're entirely dependant on the sole provider to do the maintenance of your product. They may very well lie to you in their interest, and you won't be able to cross check with an independant third party.
>But why would I trust an independent mechanic when I could take it back to my dealer for warranty issues instead of relying on some nobody with a high school locational degree? Or if I get lucky a very well respected and franchised mechanic?
Once again, the difference is in the **attitude of the company who sold you the car**. Everybody knows for a fact that when you buy and own a car, that car should be yours to do pretty much anything with (for matters that don't involve running on the public road). If I want to turn my Honda Civic into a drag machine, Honda doesn't punish me for doing so. I don't need to ask permission from Honda or the dealer. Now I would lose my warranty if I had one but I don't really consider that a punishment. If I learn and share some knowledge about my Civic, nobody's going to sue me for sharing that knowledge.
Proprietary software is different. When I have the software running on my computer, I am explicitly forbidden to look into it. If I do take the time to study the proprietary software then share the knowledge I learn, I can be liable for copyright infringement. Whenever there is a problem in the software, the only person that can possibly help me is the owner of the software and even then they help me because they choose to help me. I'm completely out of luck if they are unable to help me. Once again, the difference is in the attitude. I refuse to support companies who are so hostile to me.
If you enjoy getting serviced at a car dealer, that's great. The problem is when only a "properly registered" mechanic has special permission from the manufacturer to look into the car. If this is the case, then I cannot get an independent third party to give me their assessment because that independent third party doesn't have permission from the manufacturer to look into the car.