[Off Topic] Re: Linux security

Alan McKinnon alan at linuxholdings.co.za
Tue May 2 03:20:59 UTC 2006


On Monday 01 May 2006 14:30, Michael Richter wrote:
> > > Windows
> > > is available to anybody with a half a brain cell to spare.
> >
> > Of course, it could be argued that Linux is now also available to
> > the similarly endowed.
>
> It could, I guess, but not very successfully.  There's too many
> calls for "open a CLI and type the following Mystic
> Incantations<tm>" when problems are reported. 

I often wonder where this meme about the cli comes from. What inherent 
factor in the command line suddenly turns it into a beast from hell? 
It's just a way to give the computer an instruction. "Click Start, 
click Programs, click Internet Explorer" translates exactly to "type 
firefox &". Click this checkbox, select that item translates exactly 
to "--<optionname>=<option value>"

A child can understand this (mine does). The only difference is 
there's no GUI with lots of bling giving endless tons of mostly 
useless visual feedback. The one advantage to a GUI is a sane 
developer can put all the options on the screen, as opposed to having 
them all on a man page, which is displayed somewhere else.

Remember that Xerox developed GUIs to be an aid to manipulating 
documents - a configuration tool was never part of the Star project

> Often the Mystic 
> Incantations<tm> in question are not readily found by reading
> available documentation -- you have to go deep into design docs or,
> worse, source code to figure them out.  (ALSA, I'm looking at you
> here.)

ALSA never troubled me much (my hardware's ideas of what to call it's 
controls still baffles me though). I do have endless battles with 
Gnome though. An for an interesting challenge there's always Wine

> > I snipped all the (very interesting) material you've exchanged
> > with Alan because most of it sailed several kilometres over my
> > head. in my usual fashion, I'm adding some rather generalised
> > musings to the discussion...
>
> That's what happens when grognard geeks recognise each other and
> start conversing, I'm afraid.  I'm getting the impression that
> Alan's about the same age as me with the same breadth of
> experience, but with overlapping sets.  We have lots to talk about.
>  ;-)

If you've been around since '76 I think you have 10 years on me :-)

> > I compare the easy availablity of powerful computing to the
> > general populace with allowing a 17 year-old to drive around town
> > in a Ferrari; potentially dangerous without adequate training.
>
> Well, that's an almost-apt analogy.  The problem, however, is that
> focus on "powerful computing".  The overwhelming majority of
> end-users will use the following on their computers:
>
>    - a word processor;
>    - a spreadsheet;
>    - a web browser;
>     - email;
>    - instant messaging;
>    - music and video;
>    - games.
>
> That's about it.  And most users will only use a subset of even
> that short list.  The "more power" meme comes from geeks (who have
> a legitimate need for it) and marketroids (who also have a
> legitimate need for us to buy more power -- it makes them money). 
> But for most things that an average user will use the seven things
> up there give it all.

I think your focus is wrong. The power doesn't come from the number of 
arbitrarily categorized apps they use, it comes from the amount of 
communicating and sharing of information they do with the computer.

Take a browser - it's not "just browsing" - the word 'just' doesn't 
belong there. The browser is their portal to whatever is on the other 
end of the wire, whether that's file sharing, music, flash, on-line 
shopping, registering for any of 1000s of things (that used to need a 
phone call or a visit in person), kids homework research. 

Saying those 7 functions are limiting is a bit like saying you and I 
are constrained in our communication because we only use English 
despite the many other languages out there we could use.

[snip]

> I don't.  People should not have to be molded to the machine.  The
> machine should be molded to the people.  That's been my creed since
> I started this long, dark path to my current level of cynicism and
> hatred.  :-)

Then we'd better get busy and start making moldable machines :-)

-- 
If only you and dead people understand hex, 
how many people understand hex?

Alan McKinnon
alan at linuxholdings dot co dot za
+27 82, double three seven, one nine three five




More information about the ubuntu-users mailing list