hi gab! you know i dont understand even the basis in computer, but you sure do! i stumbled on this after all the rufus over trump shooting and i'm interested in knowing if it is indeed suspicious or if whatever he talks about in computer language is true. related to the bluescreenbog shutdown from yesterday.
He raises some very interesting points, I myself had also found the event somewhat suspicious.
In addition to what Tim points out, many have pointed out many ways in which this incident could be prevented. Allegedly the reason it wasn't caught is because the "blank file" that was sent was not included in the testing setup, and that this was a extraordinary circumstance.
I'm not really in the position to give large corporations the benefit of the doubt, so in my opinion CAPA process findings for publicly traded corporations should be freely made available to the public.
I'll be giving my detailed thoughts in the premium portion of Cyber Fix coming out on Monday.
I knew you would know something! I may not be wise in computer, but i am wise in man judging value. And you my friend, got an awesome worthfull value in tech and in moral virtue. Thanks again fellow truthseeker freedom kingdom maker 🙏
"But, and this is a huge but, Qubes will not be free software because it is a security OS."
THE QUESTION:
In my limited understanding, just because an OS is proprietary does not mean it is more secure than a open source or free software OS. That is my understanding. I maybe confused. So your thoughts and insights will be appreciated.
Thanks, ~wm
PS
> Serenum to discuss his attempt at resolving some of these issues from the ground up.
REPLY: I watched your interview with Sam Smith.
In the late 1970s or early 1980s I was sorely tempted to become a programmer. It is addicting to have a problem which you cannot let go of until you have solved it.
It is that very addiction that gave me pause. I ended up not being a programmer. ( I am not saying I would have been good. I would have been able to hold a job programming)
> It is clear now more than ever that we don’t just need great programmers, but we also need more people to take these issues seriously, and that can’t happen if the solutions are too difficult to use.
REPLY: I couldn't agree more and that is why I support fsf.org. Nevertheless we need to take ownership of our security and not of load it to any third party.
I don't believe making software propriety makes it more secure. But skilled developers and security experts are non-trivial to find, fund and trust. I can definitely imagine why for individuals with a high trust circle, the costs of open collaboration may seem too high.
Ironically signal is more or less in the same boat because the expected usage is to run through their servers (which helps against metadata snooping) but has it's own downsides.
Anyone who thinks that these apps are safe from the government are delusional they were all conceived and created by the CIA and other agencies so criminals and those with privacy concerns would use them thinking that they were secure..
Even taking all of what you've said there at face value:
There are tons of reasons to care about security before worrying about being safe from government. Devices get lost/stolen and malware can be a problem for even ordinary people.
I agree that there does need to be a lot of effort on rebuilding solutions from the ground up in a verifiable way that encourages open engagement.
hi gab! you know i dont understand even the basis in computer, but you sure do! i stumbled on this after all the rufus over trump shooting and i'm interested in knowing if it is indeed suspicious or if whatever he talks about in computer language is true. related to the bluescreenbog shutdown from yesterday.
https://rumble.com/v57o2yt-why-does-the-blood-on-trumps-face-look-just-like-the-crowdstrike-logo-world.html
write me back with your opinion on that info pls. when ya got time for pro pa gan da =) hehe
He raises some very interesting points, I myself had also found the event somewhat suspicious.
In addition to what Tim points out, many have pointed out many ways in which this incident could be prevented. Allegedly the reason it wasn't caught is because the "blank file" that was sent was not included in the testing setup, and that this was a extraordinary circumstance.
I'm not really in the position to give large corporations the benefit of the doubt, so in my opinion CAPA process findings for publicly traded corporations should be freely made available to the public.
I'll be giving my detailed thoughts in the premium portion of Cyber Fix coming out on Monday.
I knew you would know something! I may not be wise in computer, but i am wise in man judging value. And you my friend, got an awesome worthfull value in tech and in moral virtue. Thanks again fellow truthseeker freedom kingdom maker 🙏
Hi Gabriel,
Good day. I have never asked this question of anyone. I ask it now to you hoping you can help me think about it better.
From https://forum.qubes-os.org/t/does-qubes-meet-the-gnu-fsdg/7734
"But, and this is a huge but, Qubes will not be free software because it is a security OS."
THE QUESTION:
In my limited understanding, just because an OS is proprietary does not mean it is more secure than a open source or free software OS. That is my understanding. I maybe confused. So your thoughts and insights will be appreciated.
Thanks, ~wm
PS
> Serenum to discuss his attempt at resolving some of these issues from the ground up.
REPLY: I watched your interview with Sam Smith.
In the late 1970s or early 1980s I was sorely tempted to become a programmer. It is addicting to have a problem which you cannot let go of until you have solved it.
It is that very addiction that gave me pause. I ended up not being a programmer. ( I am not saying I would have been good. I would have been able to hold a job programming)
> It is clear now more than ever that we don’t just need great programmers, but we also need more people to take these issues seriously, and that can’t happen if the solutions are too difficult to use.
REPLY: I couldn't agree more and that is why I support fsf.org. Nevertheless we need to take ownership of our security and not of load it to any third party.
I don't believe making software propriety makes it more secure. But skilled developers and security experts are non-trivial to find, fund and trust. I can definitely imagine why for individuals with a high trust circle, the costs of open collaboration may seem too high.
Ironically signal is more or less in the same boat because the expected usage is to run through their servers (which helps against metadata snooping) but has it's own downsides.
Catching up on old posts here. Don’t mind me lurking.
Anyone who thinks that these apps are safe from the government are delusional they were all conceived and created by the CIA and other agencies so criminals and those with privacy concerns would use them thinking that they were secure..
Even taking all of what you've said there at face value:
There are tons of reasons to care about security before worrying about being safe from government. Devices get lost/stolen and malware can be a problem for even ordinary people.
I agree that there does need to be a lot of effort on rebuilding solutions from the ground up in a verifiable way that encourages open engagement.